HOUSE OF CISTERCIAN MONKS
7. THE ABBEY OF BORDESLEY
Although Worcestershire was so great a Benedictine centre the Cistercians obtained a footing
within it at Bordesley in the middle of the twelfth
century. They came to England in a period of
anarchy and unsettlement, which greatly
affected the progress of the movement and
left a minor trace in the contradictory
charters to the various houses of the Cistercian order. Bordesley abbey was undoubtedly
founded in 1138 (fn. 1) by Waleran de Beaumont,
count of Meulan and Worcester, and a foundation charter to that effect is to be found among
the Hatton manuscripts. (fn. 2) Yet it is difficult to
reconcile this with the fact that the Empress
Maud also gave a charter of foundation and endowment in 1136, stating that by this she and
Henry her son founded and endowed the abbey
of Bordesley 'for the love of God and of
King Henry my father, and Geoffrey count of
Anjou my lord, and the queen my mother,' to
which Waleran de Meulan was a witness. (fn. 3)
When this charter was quoted in an inspeximus
made by Richard II. no mention was made of
any former charter or endowment, but Maud
with her son Henry were looked on as sole
founders. (fn. 4) Moreover, Henry II. in 1157 took
the monastery into his custody, considering himself and his mother the founders. (fn. 5) The only
way to account for these inconsistencies is to
suppose that the real foundation was made by
Waleran in 1138, in which year he is known to
have been in England. (fn. 6) But from 1138 onwards to 1141 he was too fully occupied with
fighting on Stephen's side to carry out his proposed foundation. (fn. 7) After the battle of Lincoln
he forsook the cause of Stephen and joined the
empress, after having made a pilgrimage to
Jerusalem in 1145. (fn. 8) It may well be that it
was not until then that the planned foundation
of Bordesley was remembered, and the count,
now subservient to the empress, gave up his
right as founder to her.
In both charters the endowment was the
same, and included the whole land of Bordesley
(Worcester) and 'Cornehall' (fn. 9) (Worcester) and
Tardebigge (Worcester), the church of Tardebigge, and the whole land of Hollowell (Holloway?). There were also gifts of lands in
Warwick and Worcester made by William and
Stephen de Beauchamp, the bishop of Worcester, the earls of Chester and Warwick, and
a few others. By 1291 the value of their
temporalities was £43 2s. 0d., (fn. 10) while their
spiritualities were valued at £2 15s. 4d. (fn. 11)
The history of the lands of the abbey is to be
found in the long list of grants, confirmations,
and exchanges which took place in the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries. In comparatively few
cases does the monastery seem to have been
involved in the usual quarrels over its right to
its lands, (fn. 12) and never in a serious quarrel. Thus,
although Bordesley was never richly endowed,
its possessions were safe, and by 1535 its temporalities had reached the annual value of
£348 9s. 10½d. (fn. 13)
However, the revenues of Bordesley, as of so
many of the Cistercian houses, depended to a
great extent on its wool-growing, and its
position in the forests of Feckenham and
Arden was favourable for it. Signs of extensive wool-growing by the monks are to be found
in notices of the exportation of their wool to
foreign parts and their dealings with the merchants of Florence. In 1224 Henry III. granted
to the monks of Bordesley that the thirteen sacks
of wool which they had in London should be
transported to foreign parts 'sine impedimento.' (fn. 14)
In 1278 the abbot and convent petitioned in
Parliament concerning an obligation made by a
former Abbot John with some Florentine merchants who had lent him 300 marks of silver,
which the abbot proposed to repay in wool,
forty-two sacks of which were worth 300
marks. The present abbot complained that the
monastery had paid one hundred of the marks
and also the forty-two sacks of wool, so that the
merchants had received twelve sacks of wool to
the good. (fn. 15) There is an interesting note in 1341
of the determination of the abbot and convent to
maintain their rights against unjust taxation.
They pleaded against 'the assessors and collectors
of the wool last granted in that county that
they had tried to levy wool of the abbot's moveable goods therein,' whereas his temporalities
were taxed as annexed to his spiritualities. (fn. 16) A
further stand against excessive taxation was made
in the reign of Henry VII. when William, then
abbot of Bordesley, stood out against 'a double
contribution on the part of the monasteries,' but
the abbot of Stratford wrote to him advising him
'to be conformable to the same and not to run
in danger of censure, and in conclusion be compelled thereto with further cost and little
thank.' (fn. 17)
As a royal foundation Bordesley received many
privileges from the crown. Henry II., as part
founder of the abbey, granted that the monks
should not be impleaded for any of their lands
except before the king; (fn. 18) that they should have
all the villeins and fugitives belonging to their
lands, (fn. 19) and should enjoy their lands without encroachment. (fn. 20) In 1205 John granted that the
monks of Bordesley, 'qui sunt de propria elemosina nostra,' might be quit of toll and all customs
both for the things they bought and the things they
sold. (fn. 21) Rights in the forest of Feckenham,
especially right to make assarts or clearings which
would serve as pasture land for their sheep, must
have been invaluable to the monastery, and were
granted in 1230 by Henry III. (fn. 22) and in 1464 by
Edward IV. (fn. 23) and confirmed by Henry VIII. in
1536. (fn. 24)
Of the internal history of the house in the
twelfth century it is difficult to find any trace.
A visitation of the English Cistercian abbeys is
recorded in 1188, and as a result William, abbot
of Bordesley, resigned, probably on account of
some irregularity, and was succeeded by Richard,
sub-prior of the house. (fn. 25) A brief but fairly detailed description (fn. 26) of the state of the abbey in
1332 shows that at that date there were thirtyfour brethren, inclusive of the abbot, and one
novice, seven lay brothers, and seventeen serving
men, with a very considerable quantity of stock.
The rent of their farms brought in over £45,
and their wool produced nearly £33, the total
receipts amounting to £175 10s. 2d. On the
other hand their expenses and debts came
to £257 18s. 1d., showing a deficit of
£82 7s. 11d., which, however, thanks to debts
paid off and increase of stock, was £55 better
than the previous year. The episcopal registers
give some vague indications of the state of the
house between the thirteenth and fifteeth centuries, but little that is definite. A letter from
the bishop of Worcester on behalf of a novice
of Bordesley imprisoned at Newgate in 1286, (fn. 27)
another letter to the abbot of Bordesley in 1312
acquainting him with the complaint of Alice de
Estach of the grievous wrong she had suffered
from one of the monks, Thomas de Eryngdon,
and of the scandal thereby occasioned, (fn. 28) and a
pardon granted in 1339 to Henry son of William Mason, a monk of Bordesley, for the death
of William de Wandone, monk, (fn. 29) hardly speak
well for the monks, though it is hard to judge by
cases whose very mention goes to prove they
were exceptional; and it is significant that
although Bishop Giffard, ignoring the exemption
of the Cistercians from ordinary visitation, five
times visited the monastery, (fn. 30) he issued no injunctions or adverse report concerning the state of
the house. Again, it is hardly likely that if the
house had not been in good repute the pope
would have made the abbot of Bordesley his
mandatory so often as he did. (fn. 31)
However this may be, there is certainly no
evidence against the house to be found at the
time of the Dissolution. A commission (fn. 32) to visit
certain monasteries of the Cistercian order issued
in 1535 included Bordesley, (fn. 33) but the result is
not known. No further clue to the steps the
commissioners were taking with regard to the
abbey appears until 1538. In the May of that
year Richard Whittington, cellarer of Bordesley,
wrote to Thomas Evaunce (fn. 34) that their father
and master John Day intended to resign, or had
already resigned, the abbey, 'for that he is aged,
impotent, sick, and also not of perfect remembrance.' Further, he desired letters to the lord
Cromwell, and promised to obey Evaunce's advice, surrendering the monastery into the king's
hands, 'trusting in Cromwell for a means of
living.' (fn. 35) On 8 July, 1538, Evaunce wrote
to Cromwell to hurry on the final surrender
since harvest was at hand and the rye would
be fallen in ten days and wheat anon after, and
'the king had better sell the corn standing to the
tenants than in the barn.' (fn. 36) Evidently the abbot
had already made an informal submission, since
Evaunce complained that the abbot 'since his submission' had falsely sold most of the crops to his
servants, but he himself had 'cautioned them
not to meddle.' As for the state of the revenues
of the house, Evaunce stated that the abbot
would leave it £200 in debt, with much of its
timber felled and its 'household implements'
purloined. He therefore advised that a commission should be sent to inquire into the case or a
clause inserted in the commission of suppression. (fn. 37)
On 17 July, 1538, John Day finally surrendered
the abbey with all its possessions into the king's
hands, (fn. 38) and by 31 July the house had been 'defaced and plucked down, and the substance
thereof sold to divers persons without profit or
lucre paid or answered to the king's majesty's
use for the same.' (fn. 39) The authorized sale, however, was not made until 23 September of the
same year. Evidently much of the fabric of the
church and cloisters had been stolen by that
time, since the sale of all the glass and iron that
remained, of the pavement and out-buildings and
of 'one little bell,' only reached just over
seventy shillings. (fn. 40) In October, 1539, the pension list for Bordesley was issued. It shows the
number of the monks as nineteen besides the
abbot, but does not give any particulars as to
their respective offices in the monastery. (fn. 41)
Abbots of Bordesley
William, occurs about 1160. (fn. 42)
Hamo, occurs about 1170. (fn. 43)
William, resigned 1188. (fn. 44)
Richard, elected 1188, (fn. 45) resigned 1199. (fn. 46)
William de Stanley, elected 1199, (fn. 47) died
1204. (fn. 48)
William de Pershore, occurs 1205. (fn. 49)
Philip, occurs 1217, (fn. 50) died 1223. (fn. 51)
Philip, occurs 1244. (fn. 52)
John, occurs about 1273. (fn. 53)
Henry, occurs 1275. (fn. 54)
Thomas Orlecote, elected 1277. (fn. 55)
William de Heyford, elected 1293. (fn. 56)
John de Edveston, elected 1309. (fn. 57)
William de Berkhampstead, occurs 1317 (fn. 58)
and 1319. (fn. 59)
John de Acton, elected 1361. (fn. 60)
John Braderugge, elected 1383. (fn. 61)
Richard, occurs 1384. (fn. 62)
John, occurs 1415. (fn. 63)
Richard Feckenham, occurs 1433. (fn. 64)
John Wykin, occurs 1445. (fn. 65)
William Halford, elected 1452. (fn. 66)
William Bidford, 1460. (fn. 67)
Richard, 1511. (fn. 68)
John Day, occurs about 1519, (fn. 69) surrendered
July, 1538. (fn. 70)
The common seal of Bordesley represents the
coronation of the Virgin in a carved niche with
two trefoiled arches. Below, under another
arch, is an ecclesiastic kneeling to the left in
adoration.
[SIGI]LL': ECL'E: BEATE: MARIE: DE:
BORD[ESLE] (fn. 71)
There are two other seals connected with the
monastery extant—one a seal of an abbot of
Bordesley and the other a seal of Abbot William
Halford. The former represents the abbot
standing on a carved corbel with a pastoral staff
in his right hand and a book in his left.
SIGILL': ABBATIS: DE: BORDESLEY (fn. 72)
The second represents the Virgin standing in a
carved canopy with the Child in her left
hand.
. . . . S: DE: BOR . . . . (fn. 73)