8. THE PRIORY OF STUDLEY
The Benedictine Priory of Studley is mentioned first about the year 1176, when Bernard
of St. Walery granted to the nuns of Studley
half a hide in Horton, (fn. 1) a tithing of Beckley.
The grant was during the time of 'Robert,
sheriff,' no doubt Robert de Turevile, sheriff of
Oxford, 1175-9. It may be that Bernard of St.
Walery, having resigned his patronage of Godstow nunnery to the king about 1175, founded
another nunnery, or as the language of the
charter might suggest, endowed a community of
women, which was already in existence at a spot
called Studley in Bernwood. It is noticeable,
however, that in 1279 his son Thomas was
considered to have been the founder of the
house; (fn. 2) and Dugdale prints a deed by which
the nuns recognize him as their patron, and in
return receive privileges from him. (fn. 3) We may
suggest that the first prioress died after 1195, and
that when it became necessary to elect a successor,
Thomas of St. Walery, the lord of Beckley, was
definitely recognized as the founder; it seems
also as if the site of the nunnery was transferred
to the half-hide in Horton.
The chartulary is unfortunately lost, but the
extracts made from it by Brian Twyne (fn. 4) prove
that Studley was a popular house with the
leading citizens of Oxford, and received liberal
gifts from them. In 1279 Studley held almost
as much property in Oxford as the nuns of
Godstow, though its whole income was far less.
It possessed the church of Seacourt, Berkshire,
in 1200, but for some reason lost it in 1208; (fn. 5)
the church of Ilmer, Buckinghamshire, was
given by Thomas, son of Bernard, before 1205, (fn. 6)
and the church of Beckley by Robert, Count of
Dreux, in 1226; (fn. 7) but this latter was only obtained after a lawsuit with the king and the
Templars. (fn. 8) Afterwards, the nuns resigned the
patronage to Bishop Gravesend 'because by the
weakness (fragilitatem) of our sex, and from
the fact that we do not mix with men, we might
be ignorant who was suitable for the post of
parson,' (fn. 9) but by the ordinance of Hugh Wells,
made in 1230, they took all the tithes of the
hamlet of Horton, and some of the tithes of
Nash. (fn. 10) The most liberal benefactor was Godfrey de Craucumb, no doubt a relation of Alice
de Craucumb, prioress in 1251. He gave the
nuns the two manors of Crowcombe, Somersetshire, and Corsley, Wiltshire, which in 1536
produced more than a third of the income of the
house. (fn. 11) One gift more deserves mention: Henry
de Anna, rector of St. Mildred's, Oxford, gave
rents in Oxford sufficient for each 'of the fifty
nuns belonging to Studley' to have 12d. on his
anniversary. (fn. 12) As the number of inmates was
only nine in 1445 and ten in 1520, and as the
revenues of the house never reached £100, we
are astonished that the nuns were as many as
fifty; but the value of the property bequeathed
indicates that there is no error in the number;
and at Goring, we have another instance of
fluctuations as great. The numbers there
fell from 36 to 7, at Studley from 50 to 10.
In the Taxation of 1291 there is no mention of
Studley; and if from this fact we should guess
that the house was excused through poverty, we
should not be at fault; for in 1292 Michael,
vicar of Hanslope, was appointed master of Studley, at the request of the prioress, to administer
the temporalities and spiritualities. (fn. 13) The next
year and again in 1294 the bishop wrote to the
prioress that the presence of John of Sevekworth, clerk, had brought discredit on the house,
and that he was not to be allowed to abide there
longer. (fn. 14)
When Edmund, earl of Cornwall, died in
1300, the patronage of the priory came into the
hand of the king, with the rest of the honour of
St. Walery. In 1352 the nuns obtained the
appropriation of Beckley church, (fn. 15) and in 1389
'in relief of their poverty' were allowed to acquire two carucates of land in Nash; (fn. 16) two years
later they were allowed to sell 10 marks worth
of timber in their demesne wood 'for the repair
of their house, which is ruinous.' (fn. 17) In 1445, at
the visitation of Bishop Alnwick, there were
nine inmates. There was no fault with the
state of the house: the bishop appointed as their
confessor the vicar of Bicester, forbidding them
to have a scholar of Oxford 'as it is not seemly
that scholars of Oxford should come to the
nunnery.' At the visitation of 1520 the nuns
were ten in all; the income was reckoned at
£84; there were complaints that the brother of
the prioress and his wife stayed within the
monastery; the prioress did not consult the
sisters on important matters; the house was in
debt to the amount of 40 marks. The state of
the house was perhaps less satisfactory than the
record suggests; for the bishop instead of closing
his visitation, adjourned it to another day. At
another visitation, held in Sept. 1530, by Dr.
Rayne, vicar-general of the bishop of the diocese,
the house was found to be in poverty, with debts
amounting to £60; the choir, the dormitory,
and the nave of the church were out of repair;
the number of inmates was 10, but an injunction
was made that it should be increased; the woods
of the priory had been much diminished by the
late prioress and also by 'Thomas, Cardinal
of York, for the construction of his college in the
University of Oxford.' There were complaints
about the food. The nuns said that
they be often tymes served with beffe and no moton
upon Thursday at nyght and Sondays at nyght, and
be served often tymes with new ale and not hulsome;
and we gather from these words and from the
similar remarks of other nuns that beef for supper
was considered to be unwholesome. It was
ordered that no corrody should be given to the
mother of the prioress, until more was known of
her manner of life. (fn. 18) A few months later, when
the bishop had received the report of the visitor,
he sent injunctions to the nuns, that as the monastery was in great debt and the buildings out of
repair, a more economical mode of living was to
be adopted, with fewer servants; also 'the number of ladies' was to be augmented and they were
to use veils which came down to the eyelids. (fn. 19)
In 1526 the net income was about £74; in
1535 it was £82.
There is a conflict of evidence about the date
of the suppression of the house. As early as June,
1536, the king made a grant of the manor of
Corsley in Wilts, 'parcel of the late priory of Studley, Oxon, dissolved by Parliament' (fn. 20) ; but as the
deed of surrender by the prioress, Joan Williams,
is dated 19 November, 1539, (fn. 21) and all the possessions of the house, with the exception of
Corsley, were sold in February, 1540, (fn. 22) we are
driven to the conclusion that Studley was refounded after its first dissolution. To add to
the difficulty, there is mention in 1536 of 'Mary
Baynbrig, late prioress of Studley,' (fn. 23) whereas there
is no room for her in the list of prioresses, nor
was there any sister of that name at the visitation of 1530.
Prioresses of Studley
Petronilla, occurs 1200 and 1227 (fn. 24)
Juliana, c. 1230 (fn. 25) and c. 1241 (fn. 26)
Alice de Craucumbe, elected 1251 (fn. 27)
Elizabeth, occurs 1258, (fn. 28) died 1276
Margery Clement, elected 1276 (fn. 29)
Mabel, elected 1288, (fn. 30) died 1292
Clementia Oweyn, appointed 1292, (fn. 31) resigned
1322
Agnes Husee, (fn. 32) elected 1322
Margery de Berchesdone, occurs 1342 (fn. 33) and
1351 (fn. 34)
Margaret, died 1378 (fn. 34)
Elizabeth Freemantle, elected 1378, (fn. 35) died
1388
Agnes Attehalle, elected 1388 (fn. 36)
Agnes, occurs 1424 and 1436 (fn. 37)
Eleanor Cobcot, occurs 1445 (fn. 38)
Eleanor, occurs 1472 and 1487 (fn. 39)
Elizabeth Samwell, died 1515 (fn. 40)
Catherine Cobcot, elected 1515, (fn. 40) died 1529
Joan Williams, appointed 1529, (fn. 41) surrendered
1539
The twelfth-century seal is a pointed oval,
representing the Annunciation; two figures
standing on each side of a tree or pillar; the
Virgin on the right with a book in her left hand
and the right resting on her bosom; the angel
Gabriel with nimbus is on the left, with the
word AVE issuing from his mouth. Legend:—
SIGILL' . VENTVS . ECCL'IE . S[CE MA]RIE . DE .
STODELEIE.
This seal was in use in 1370, (fn. 42) but if we may
credit Dunkin, (fn. 43) there was another seal in the
sixteenth century. The subject is the same,
but the central object is definitely a tree, not a
pillar, and the angel is represented as saying
AVE MARIA. Legend:—
SIGILLE · COE · CONVENTV[S ·] MARIE ·
D'· STODLEY·