THE
MONASTERY OF ST. PETER AND ST. PAUL,
USUALLY CALLED
ST. AUGUSTINE'S ABBEY.
IN THE EASTERN SUBURB of the city, is the precinct of the once magnificent ABBEY OF ST. AUGUSTINE, much of the ruins of which is still remaining;
the abbey stood mostly in the western part of it, the
whole being inclosed with a strong wall, containing
within it about sixteen acres of ground.
This precinct is exempt from the liberties of the
city and county of the city of Canterbury, being
esteemed to be within the jurisdiction of the justices
of the county of Kent at large; a small part of it on
the south side, next the wall of this precinct, adjoining to the public high-road of Longport, is
within that borough. (fn. 1) The whole of it is extraparochial.
Between this monastery and that of Christ church,
there was ever an apparent jealousy and emulation;
though no epicopal chair had been placed in it, yet
the abbot had the privilege of the mitre and of other
ensigns of episcopacy, and that the abbey might not
seem second to any, or inferior to Christ-church itself,
they put themselves under immediate subjection to
the pope, and procured to themselves an exemption
from professional obedience to the metropolitical
church, and the jurisdiction of the metropolitan; and
if the profound veneration, which all men bore to St.
Thomas the martyr, had not surmounted all opposition, they would at least have maintained their pretences to an equality, if not to a superiority of glory
and dignity, against their rival monastery.
KING ETHELBERT having seated St. Augustine in
his royal palace at Canterbury, as has been fully related before, began by his persuasions in 598, on a
large spot of ground, situated without the city walls
eastward, the building of a monastery to the honour
of St. Peter and St. Paul; after which, in 605, the
king, with his queen Bertha and their son Edbald,
St. Augustine, and the nobles of the realm, celebrated
the solemnity of Christmas, at Canterbury; when,
with the general consent and approbation of all present, as well clergy as laity, the king, on the 5th id.
January, delivered up this monastery, with the endowment of it, at the instance of St. Augustine, to
God and the monks, who should serve perpetually in
it; and he enriched it with different possessions of
lands and other ample gifts, and placed Peter, the
first abbot, over the monastery and the congregation
of monks in it, (fn. 2)
In this monastery, St. Augustine placed Benedictine
monks, that is, followers of the order of black monks,
after the rule of St. Benet, of which order he himself
was, and they were of the same fort as those placed in
the neighbouring priory of Christ-church.
King Ethelbert's two printed charters of the donation and foundation of this monastery, are both dated
in the same year, anno 605; the variations of these
one from the other, may well cause a suspicion of their
not being genuine, and Sir Henry Spelman, though
for other reasons, is of that opinion, (fn. 3) although they
are printed from the manuscript registers of the mo
nastery and other antient documents of the like fort,
belonging to it, (fn. 4) and the former of them is recited in
the charter of inspeximus of king Edward III. in his
36th year, confirming the possessions of this monastery
to it. (fn. 5)
King Ethelbert, by another charter, granted that
same year, having constituted Peter, a monk, the first
abbot of this monastery, as before-mentioned, gave
to it for the increase of its revenues, the ville of Sturiag, other called Chistelet, with all its lands and appurtenances, together with his golden sceptre, and
other rich gifts. mentioning in it, that Augustine had
also enriched this monastery with relics of the apostles and martyrs, and with other ecclesiastical ornaments, sent him from Rome, and had directed (and
that with the pope's licence) that he and all his successors should be buried in it, for that the city was not
for the dead, but for the living, where he, the king,
likewise had ordered the sepulture both of himself and
his successors; (fn. 6) and that none of the bishops or kings,
his successors, should presume to hurt or disturb the
peace of it, or should dare in any shape to usurp any
subjection of it to them, but that the abbot himself,
who should be so constituted, should, with the advice
of his brethren, freely govern and order it both within
and without, &c. (fn. 7) Which charter was confirmed
and corroborated by one of Augustine, usually styled
the privilege of St. Augustine. (fn. 8)
After which, Mellitus, bishop of London, being
in 609 sent by king Ethelbert and archbishop Laurence to pope Boniface IV. on some business relating
to the English church, and likewise to obtain the confirmation of this monastery by the apostolic see, prevailed on the pope to convene a synod of the Italian
bishops next year, for this purpose, at which Mellitus
was present, in which the same was confirmed, and
the privilege of the confirmation was recited in the
bull for that purpose. (fn. 9)
By the above charters it appears, that the chief intent of setting apart this space of ground in the
suburbs of the city, and the founding of a monastery
on it, was, that it should be a place of sepulture for
them and their successors, as well in the kingdom, as
in the archbishopric, for ever afterwards; (fn. 10) for it was
not then, nor long afterwards, the custom to bury
within cities; (fn. 11) in compliance with this injunction,
many kings and archbishops were buried within it afterwards. Of these, Thorn and others have recorded
the following: king Ethelbert, with Bertha his queen,
and Letard, bishop of Soissons, her chaplain and conconfessor, in the portico of St. Martin; (fn. 12) Eadbald,
with Emma his queen, in the portico of St. Cathe
rine; (fn. 13) the kings Ercombert (fn. 14) and Lothaire, with his
daughter Mildreda; Mulus, a staranger king, brother
of king Cedwalla, and Withred, who was the last king
interred in this church; the archbishops Augustine,
Laurence, Mellitus, Justus, Honorius and Deodatus,
were all interred in the porch of this church. The
archbishops Theodore, Brithwald, Tatwin and Nothelm, (fn. 15) were buried in the church itself; but archbishop Cuthbert procured a licence from the pope, and
a grant from the king likewise, wherein a right of sepulture, within his own cathedral of Christ-church,
was given and confirmed to it; by which this monastery was, in great measure deprived of a fundamental
privilege, if it may be so styled, as having been appropriated solely to it from its first foundation; but although the cathedral of Christ-church was allowed a
right of burial, equally with this monastery, by which
it was deprived of the sepulture of most of the archbishops, and several other persons of nobility, yet there
were many prelates and nobles of high title and distinction afterwards, from time to time, buried within
this church and monastery, besides a multitude of
others, whose memories have been for ages lost, and
few of whom have at this time one bone lying near
another.
Among others whose sepulture is known to have
been here, arcbbishop Janibert or Lambert, as he was
variously called, the next but one in succession to arch
bishop Cuthbert, was buried in the chapter-house,
by his own particular directions, being the last archbishop buried here; (fn. 16) S. Brinstan, archdeacon to St.
Alphage, was buried in the north portico of the
church. (fn. 17) Emer, bishop of Shirburne, and many of
the abbots were buried in the church, and other parts
of the monastery, several of whom are mentioned in
their lives. Here was also buried in St. Ann's, commonly called the Countes's chapel, Juliana, countess
of Huntingdon, the rich Infanta of Kent, as she was
called, who died in 1350, and endowed a chantry here
for the repose of her soul, with many charities to be
distributed to the poor, on the day of her anniversary
for ever.
Besides these burials in the church, there were others
within the precincts of this monastery, for they had
within it an antient cemetery for burial, (fn. 18) not private
and proper only to this abbey and the several members of it, or for such as made choice of it for that
purpose; but still further until the dissolution, the
proper and only cemetery belonging to some of the
parish churches of the city in the patronage of the
abbey, which had not church-yards of their own;
these were, those of St. Mary Magdalen, St. Andrew,
and St. Paul; but on the suppression of this monastery, this cemetery being disused and converted to
other purposes, those parishes buried their dead in the
church-yards of other churches, to their great inconvenience, till they found opportunity to purchase
others for this purpose, to themselves elsewhere.
The foundation of this abbey being thus laid, it
soon advanced to stateliness in the enlargements of its
buildings, and the augmentation of its endowments;
among those who added to the former, was king Eadbald, the son of king Ethelbert, who, at the instance
of archbishop Laurence, built a fair church in this monastery, which he called St. Marie's. After Eadbald,
king Canute, the great monarch of this realm; Egelfine, the abbot of it, who fled through fear of the
Conqueror; abbot Hugh Florio, who was of kindred
to king William Rufus, and by him made abbot;
these, with others, several of whom will be noticed
hereafter in the list of the abbots, were the persons
who chiefly increased the buildings, some adding
churches and chapels, some dorters and resectories, or
some other kinds of edifices.
In relation to its possessions and endowment, it
would be too tedious a matter to particularize them
here, and there is the less occasion for it, as they are all
taken notice of in the course of the history of the
county of Kent; but certainly the multitude of benefactors of all sorts, who made their donations and
grants of lands to it, out of the warmth of their devotion to the place, for the double founder's sake,
strove through a pious zeal to outstrip one another,
in an open handed liberality to this abbey; among
these were most of the Saxon kings, and besides them,
king Canute, the Danish monarch, must not be forgotten, down to king Edward the Confessor. The
succeeding kings, for the most part were rather confirmers or restorers of the old, than contributors of
the new possessions of the abbey, their charters, as
well as the former ones, are recorded in the registers
of it, and are printed in Reyner, Thorn, and other
books.
The revenues of this monastery are exactly recorded by Thorn, in his Chronicle of this abbey, by
which it appears, that they were possessed in their
several manors, of 11,862 acres of land, (fn. 19) and that
in king Richard II.'s time, their spiritualities were
taxed at 424l. 13s. 4½d. and their temporalities
at 808l. 0s. 12½d. the whole of both were taxed at
1232l. 14s. 4½d. (fn. 20)
Whenever the kings of this realm were under any
necessity for money, for the carrying on their wars, or
on any other pressing occasions, they in general directed their writs to the several bishops, abbots,
priors, &c. to supply them with specific sums therein
set down to each, promising to repay them at a particular time. Thus king Edward III. in his 12th year,
borrowed of this abbot and convent fifty marcs; in
his 16th year, 100l. in his 20th year 200 marcs, (fn. 21) and
king Richard II. in his 10th year, borrowed of them
100l. and again in his 20th year, 100 marcs more.
It has been said that the art of printing in England
was used in this monastery, under the care and patronage of the abbots of it, before it was exercised elsewhere, not long after the middle of the fifteenth century. (fn. 22) But Stow contends for its having been first
used in 1471, by a press set up by archbishop islip,
in St. Peter's church, in Westminster. (fn. 23)
This monastery had many great and extraordinary
privileges conserred upon it, both by royal charters,
and by papal bulls; the royal charters seem to have
been free acts of grace, purchased either through benevolence and favour, or at no greater expence than
that of entertaining the several kings in it, who are
said by the reports of our English Chronicles, to have
been more frequently received and lodged here, than
in the neighbouring monaltery of Christ-church; but
the papal bulls were purchased at the dearest rate,
with great sums of money, as if the seal affixed to
every bull of privilege had been, not of lead, but of
pure gold. These privileges are recorded at large in
Thorn's Chronicle, to which the reader is referred.—King Ethelbert's grant of freedoms and privileges to
this abbey, has already been mentioned, as has the
charter of St. Augustine to it, confirming and corroborating them, as it was esteemed in those times, being usually called the privilege of St. Augustine to this
monastery, other succeeding kings (fn. 24) and some of a
much later date granted others and confirmed the
former ones, and there were some on writs of quo warranto brought against the abbot, confirmed and recorded in the several itineraries of the justices itinerant for the county of Kent, all which are given at
large by Thorn. These privileges were exemptions
from toll, sheriff's tourn, and such like, now entirely
obsolete and useless; and the liberties were such as
were claimed in their several manors; all which are
particularly mentioned in the description of them,
under their respective parishes, in the several parts of
the history of the county of Kent.
The abbots of St. Augustine's had by the grant of
king Athelstan, the privilege of mintage and coinage
of money, which continued until the time of king
Stephen, and then was utterly lost; Silvester, the 45th
abbot, who died in the year 1161, being the last who
enjoyed it. (fn. 25)
The abbot of this monastery was possessed of the
aldermanry of Westgate, in this city, in see, by grant
from the crown, and it was afterwards held of the abbot at a certain rent, in lieu of all service to him. (fn. 26)
In the year 1103, the king granted a fair to this
monastery for five days, that is, from two days before
the day of, and the two days after the translation of
St. Augustine; (fn. 27) which fair was continued to be kept
till the time of king Edward I. at which time it was
disused, on account of the many quarrels and disturbances, which continually happened from it in their
church yard; and on account of the heavy exactions
on bread and ale, which the bailiffs of the city claimed
during the time of it; afterwards, king Stephen
granted to this monastery, a fair on the feast of St.
Peter and St. Paul, which, through neglect, was
used but for a short time; and there was another fair
for the sale of husbandry and cattle only, yearly on a
Friday, viz. after the seast of the exaltation of the
Holy Cross, in recompence of the former fairs abovementioned. (fn. 28)
The privileges granted to this abbey by the papal
bulls were numerous and extensive; in the first of
them it is called, the first born, the first or chief mother of monasteries in England, and the Roman chapel in England, adding, that the archbishop was not
to visit it as their prelate, but as their brother, not
out of a pretence of prelacy, but out of the duty
of love, and that he was to repute the abbot as a
legate from Rome, as a fellow minister of the gospel
of peace.
The monastery had likewise by these bulls large
immunities, in respect both of secular and ecclesiastical
matters. In 611, the pope granted a bull, that no
bishop should intrude upon this monastery, on pretence of exercising any episcopal function within it,
but only such as should be freely invited and admitted
to it by the convent, to perform the divine offices
within their church. In 955, pope John XIII. commanded the monks of Christ-church, who are said to
have envied those of St. Augustine, not to molest this
convent upon any pretence whatever. Afterwards the
pope by his bull, took this monastery entirely under
his own protection, which meant the exemption of it
from every intermediate power of the archbishop, or
any ordinary whatever, and subjecting it only and
wholly to the pope himself; and pope Alexander II.
in the year 1063 conferred on Egelsine, abbot of this
monastery, who was sent to Rome on an embassage
to him, such honours and powers, as belonged to the
episcopal dignity only, so that he in some respects appeared and acted as one, for he permitted and granted
licence to him and his successors, to wear the mitre,
sandals and gloves, after the manner of those who exercised that sunction. Notwithstanding this, these
ornaments were soon laid aside by the abbot, for archbishop Lanfrance would not suffer any such innovation, nor were they resumed till the year 1179, when
the pope made a new grant of them, from which time
they were constantly made use of, and the abbot was
accounted a mitred abbot; which, as Cowel interprets it, was an abbot sovereign, exempt from the
jurisdiction of the diocesan, having episcopal jurisdiction within himself, and he had place and voice not
only in parliament as a spiritual baron, being con
stantly summoned there by writ, (fn. 29) but also in the general councils, where by the gift of pope Leo IX. his
place was next to the abbot Montis Caffini. (fn. 30) .
The abbot of this monastery was empowered to pronounce the solemn benediction, when mass was ended,
and at some times the sentence of excommunication
against such as should with-hold or privately withdraw
tithes, or other ecclesiastical dues to the convent and
the churches of it; and he had authority to celebrate
the offices of religion in those churches and chapels,
which were appropriated to their own convent; he
had power likewise to reconcile and consecrate anew
any of their own churches or church-yards, which
happened to be desecrated by the shedding of blood,
or by any other pollutions. These are mentioned,
among many other privileges, which were granted
from time to time by the several popes to this monastery.
Their exemption from archiepiscopal jurisdiction
claims however some further particular notice, for as
it infringed on the rights and dignity of the metropolitan, so it caused continued disputes and animosities
between them.
This monastery, from the first foundation of it to
the time of the Norman conquest, was subject to the
mother church, and the archbishop was accustomed
at all times, whenever he pleased to come and have
access to it, to celebrate publicly in it the offices of
religion, and to pay his devotions privately at the
shrine of St. Augustine. He frequently endowed it
with rich ornaments, delighting to confer honours
on it, and to desend it from every injury it was
subject to.
The abbots at the times of their benediction, prosessed obedience to the archbishops, as is computed
by Ralph de Diceto, for 500 years, (fn. 31) or rather according to the account of Gervas, for the space of 575
years. Some of these original professions are still remaining among the archives of Christ-church, one of
them was made in the presence of seven bishops, who
certified it under their seals; this was the prosession
of abbot Sylvester; (fn. 32) however, after a long contest
between the archbishops and the successive abbots,
concerning this privilege, it was decreed, in order to
compromise the matter, that the archbishops should
in future give the benediction to the abbot of St. Augustine's, within the abbey church, without exacting
the prosession of obedience to the archibishop, or his
metropolitical church; (fn. 33) but to gain and keep this
privilege was attended with a vast expence, and great
sums were paid at the election and benediction of an
abbot; Thorn mentions one instance of its amounting
altogether to no less a sum than 1008l. 13s. 8d. (fn. 34)
Notwithstanding these many instances of royal munisicence, aided by the fostering hand of papal favour
and indulgence, this abbey met with detriments and
misfortunes, which at times obscured the sunshine of
its prosperity, till it at last was overtaken by that impetuous storm, which wholly extinguished the glory
and majesty of this once famous and opulent abbey.
To pass by the loss of that long enjoyed right and
interest of the burials of kings and archbishops, which
has been already taken notice of, in order to mention
a much more dreadful calamity which besel this abbey; I mean the frequent and grievous infestation of
this place by the Danes; and however their chroniclers for their abbey's greater glory, sometimes ascribe
their safety and deliverance from those invaders, to
miraculous preservation; yet doubtless it either suffered from their violence, or at least purchased its
peace, and so prevented a much greater calamity at a
dear rate, and with costly redemptions, especially in
that lamentable spoil and devastation of the city, made
by those merciless tyrants in the reign of king Ethelred, in the year 1011, when Elmer, then abbot of
this monastery, was suffered, as it is said, to go away
unhurt; (fn. 35) because, as may reasonably be thought, he
had ransomed himself and his abbey, by composition
with the enemy. (fn. 36) Is it credible, says archbishop Parker, (fn. 37) that among so many storms and invasions of the
Danes, by which so many monasteries were overthrown, that this haughty abbey should remain safe
and secure from the Danish ravages, which so miserably destroyed this city?
In the year 1168, the dreadful calamity of fire,
nearly destroyed this monastery; it happened on August 29, when the greatest part of it was burnt; in
this fire many of their antient codicils and charters
perished, and the church itself being destroyed, the
shrines of St. Augustine and many other saints, were
miserably spoiled; upon which the pope, in order to
afford them some affistance towards the repair of their
monastery, granted to the abbot and convent, the
appropriation of their three church of Faversham,
Minister and Middleton. (fn. 38)
Another misfortune happened to this monastery,
though of quite a contrary nature to that last mentioned, for as that was by fire, so this happened by
water, though more than one hundred years between
the one and the other; for in the year 1271, on the
day of the translation of St. Augustine, there came on
a storm and flood, which proved a general calamity
to this city; it thundred and lightened that whole
day, and the night of it, in which time dark clouds
were continually gathered together, great torrents of
rain flowed down for many days, flocks and herds
were driven by it out of the fields, and trees were
overthrown and torn up by the roots; in this inundation of rain, the city of Canterbury was almost
drowned, and the flood occasioned by it was so high,
both in the court of the monastery and the church,
that they had been quite overwhelmed with the water, continues the chronicler, had not the virutue of
the faints, who rested there, withstood the waters. (fn. 39)
But the greatest obstacle this abbey met with, which
in a great measure put an end to the further aggrandizement of it, though it was felt in common by it
with others, was the restraint of the laity from any
longer extending their bounty in passing over their
see estates to the abbey, without the king's special licence, by the statute of mortmain, passed anno 7
Edward I. without which prudent measure the over
active charity of this kind of operative devotion, would
in time have put the abbeys and monasteries in possession of the greatest part of this kingdom, leaving so
small a share to others, as to endanger the safety of
both prince and people.
To supply this loss however, as far as possible, and
make it selt less sensibly by the religious, they brought
forward a piece of policy, which they quickly put in
use; which was, the procuring not only priviliges and
immunities from payment of tithes, but also appropriations, or the annexing of churches to their houses;
I mean the parsonages of them, leaving the church a
bare vicarage or curacy, which though invented and
set on foot long before, yet now, the other current
of their gain being stopped, became more abundant
than ever. (fn. 40) But it ought to be remembered, that
though these were improperly enough in the hands of
these religious, yet they became much more so afterwards, as many of them continue at present in the
possession of laymen; an evil, says Mr. Lambarde,
suffered to exist in this day-light of the gospel, to
the great hindrance of learning, the impoverishment
of the ministry, the decay of hospitality, and the infamy of our profession.
Whatever else occurs worthy of notice concerning
this abbey, to the time of its dissolution, will be mentioned hereafter, under the respective abbot, in whose
time it happened.