The Genesis of Cistercian Chronicles in England: The Foundation History of Fountains Abbey [2]

Citation preview

OCT

-

The

B 342

4 1975

University Michigan Periodical Reading Room

of

ANALECTA CISTERCIENSIA PERIODICUM SEMESTRE

SUMMARIUM of Cistercian Chronicles in England . - The Foundation History of Fountains Abbey ( II )

D. BAKER , The Genesis

T.M. TOMASIC , William of Saint -Thierry on the Phenomenon of Christ Paradigm of Human Possibilities L.A. DESMOND , The Appropriation

to B.W.

:

179

The 213

of Churches by the Cistercians in England .

1400

O'DWYER , The Crisis in the Cistercian Monasteries in Ireland in the Early Thirteenth Century ( I ) .

Recensiones

ANNUS XXXI -

246

267 305

FASC .

1975 NOSTRA CISTERCIN MATER

EDITIONES CISTERCIENSES

(

I-00153 ) ROMA , PIAZZA DEL

TEMPIO DI DIANA ,

14

2

JUL .- DEC .

THE GENESIS OF CISTERCIAN CHRONICLES

IN ENGLAND

The Foundation History of Fountains Abbey

II

(* )

DEREK BAKER

The first part of this study dealt with the composition of the Foun dation History of Fountains Abbey — the Narratio . In it the sources for the work were considered ; the contributions of Serlo and Hugh of Kirstall assessed and the relationship of the Letter of Thurstan and the Narratio indicated . It was suggested that the process of composition occupied some twenty years , from c 1205/6 to c 1226 ( ¹ ) , and that while the Narratio is not all that it claims to be it is an important source for the history and spirituality of the first century of the Cistercians in England . In this second article the history and treatment of the Nar ratio during the Middle Ages will be examined , the appearance of a revis ed version of the Narratio in the late medieval period will be investi gated and the interrelationship of the manuscripts of that version will

-

be considered

1.

.

The history and treatment of

the

Narratio

-

T ( 2) . This in in The Narratio exists in only one medieval copy complete and must be dated to the later fifteenth century . Between the ( * ) For [ 'The Foundation History of ] Fountains [ Abbey ,' ] I , see Analecta Cisterciensia 25 ( 1969 ) 14-41 , where the standard abbreviations are indicated . ( ¹ ) Further evidence for the completion of the Narratio by 1226 may be found in the failure of the Narratio to make any reference to the transfer of certain Irish houses to the filiation of Fountains as a result of the conspiratio Mellifontis . These were Baltinglass ( 1227 ) , Jerpoint ( 1228 ) and Monasterevin ( 1228 ) . This was a connexion which was to endure until 1274 , though the abbots of Fountains do not seem to have fulfilled their duty of visitation very assiduo usly , and at the beginning of the connection malcontent Irish monks were sent to Fountains itself . For the disturbances amongst the Irish Cistercians see J.A. Watt , The Church and the Two Nations in Medieval Ireland , Cambridge 1970 , pp . 85-107 . ( 2) See Fountains I , pp . 1 , 35-36 .

Derek Baker

180

of its composition by Hugh of Kirkstall and Leland's description of it the Narratio , is explicitly referred to only twice . Both these refe rences occur in the Chronicle of the Abbots (3) in the President Book (4) of Fountains . This was almost certainly put together by abbot Green well ( 5) , who ruled Fountains from 1442 to 1471. As sources for his Chro nicle of the Abbots Greenwell used a psalter ( 6) , which appears to have served as an obituary , the so - called Chronicle of Robert Thornton () , now no longer extant , the Narratio , and certain other materials . Of these , the Narratio , though it is only directly mentioned twice (³ ) , is the major source for the first century of the abbey's existence . The two direct time

references occur under the years

1209

and

1252 .

In the first Greenwell remarks of abbot John of York In fundatione Fontium tamen habetur quod iste In

Iohannes obiit anno viii post creationem suam in abbatem ( 9) the second he says of Stephen of Easton sed in fundatione Fontium habetur quod vi annis ecclesiam Fontanensem gubernavit ( 1º) .

This is the last account of an abbot in Greenwell's Chronicle which is of any length . Apart from these explicit references , however , there are numerous indications in the wording of Greenwell's account that he was using the Narratio ( ¹ ) , and using the copy which Leland was later to see ( 12) . Without it he would have had little information about the first eleven abbots of Fountains . Leland , too , recognised the importance of the Narratio , making a special journey to Ripon to see it ( ¹³ ) . It is (3) Memorials I , pp . 130-153 . (4 ) Leeds Public Library, Archives

Dept. ,

MS VR

5383 .

( 5) See [ C.H. ] Talbot , Letters [from the English Abbots to the Chapter at Citeaux , 1442-1521 ] , Camden Society , 4th Series , IV , London 1967 , though Talbot's transcription is not , unfortunately , altogether accurate . (6) Memorials I , pp . 139 , 140 . (7) Ibid , p . 133 . (8) Ibid , pp . 133 , 137 .

(9) Ibid,

p . 133 .

( 10) Ibid , pp .

137-138 .

( 11) Compare , for example , Memorials I pp . 104-108 and p . 131 , pp . 125-128 and pp . 133-134 . Both the Narratio and Greenwell treat Maurice and Thorold as subordinate abbots of Fountains , and do not include them in the numbered series of abbots . pp . 136-137 and LN p . 168. The references to abbot ( 12) Compare Memorials Thorold show that Leland had access to the Narratio in its unrevised form , LN p . 167 , Memorials I p . 105 . ( 13) In spite of the fact that he had already visited Fountains ( LN p . 41 ) , Leland seems not to have seen the Narratio , nor any other surviving Fountains manuscript . In consequence he made a special journey during Henry VIII's pro gress to York in 1541 : « Mihi vero contigit , cum paucis abhinc annis illustrissi mus Henricus octavus rex Angliae , Eboracum ..... inviseret ; ut diverterem Ripo dunum, .... et casu reperirem Hugonis , monachi Kirchostallensis , librum de origine et rebus praeclare gestis Fontani monasterii celeberrimi ... »

I

The Genesis

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

181

curious , however , that he had not seen or heard of it during his pre Reformation visit to Fountains , nor come across it in either of its forms anywhere else , though he had already seen the Letter of Thurstan in the Parker manuscript (P) , and may have thought that this was the Founda

tion History of Fountains

( 14) . Leland's difficulty in finding the Narratio , intelligible however becomes when set beside the Narratio's history, history of rather , lack of between c 1252 and the middle of the fifteenth century , and in examining this a start must be made with that Chronicle of Robert Thornton to which Greenwell refers . ,

Thornton's career at Fountains is not at all clear . Under the year 1306 Greenwell records the death of Robert Thornton quondam abbas de Fontibus , prout patet in psalterio (15) , and further quotes an indenture as proof that he was abbot in 1289 ( 16) . However , Henry Otley precedes him in the list ( 17) , succeeding in 1284 and , apparently , ruling for over six and a half years ( 18) . Otley non habetur in Cathalogo Abbatum , and was buried in hostio Capituli as opposed to in Capitulo like Thornton and the rest the abbots ( 19) . That Fountains was in some sort of trouble at this period is clear from letters issued by archbishop Romanus of York and Edward I ( 20) , but it is not clear who the villains of the piece were . Neither Otley nor Thornton appear in the numbered series of abbots , the seventeenth abbot being Adam who ruled from 1280 to 1284 , and the eighteenth Robert Bishopton , who died in 1310 having , accor ding to Greenwell , ruled for over twenty years , that is for the whole of Thornton's alleged period of rule . Whatever the vicissitudes of his life , however , it would appear from Greenwell that Thornton did compose a Chronicle which is now no longer extant . Greenwell refers to this Chro nicle but seems to have made little use of it , probably because it had little to contribute : there is none of the detail for the abbots between Stephen of Easton and Thornton which there is for those before 1247 ( 14) His note on Hugh of Kirkstall in De Scriptoribus refers to Hugh's work and id quod et Thurstinus , archiepiscopus Eboracensis , antea , sed succicto libello de Origine Fontani Monasterii praestiterat , Bodleian MS Top . Gen. C.4 , p . 193 .

It has been suggested that Leland made no mention of the Narratio on his earlier visit to Fountains because it was not the kind of book he was interested in listing for the royal library , but this hypothesis is difficult to reconcile with the special journey that he made to see it in 1541 . (15)

Memorials

(16) Ibid. ( 17) Ibid . ( 18) In which (19) Ibid . (20) Memorials

I

p . 140 .

case he over -lapped Thornton's

abbacy .

.

,

,

,

,

,

...

I pp . 179-182 . The archbishop refers to quorumdam confede rationes et colligaciones illicitas and complains patrimonium Christi consu regula negligitur devocio mitur elemosina subtrahitur caritas contempnitur abiicitur

Derek Baker

182

whose careers are covered by the Narratio . Greenwell , in fact , refers to Thornton only once , but the reference is significant . In his account of John of York Greenwell contrasts the Narratio's statement that John of York ruled the abbey for eight years and nine days with the recorded dates of the deaths of Ralph Haget and John of York , which make the period six years and nine days . Greenwell continues .

In Chronica

It

tamen , Roberti Thornton habetur quod iste Iohannes obiit anno Domini 1211 et tunc verum est quod iste Iohannes prefuit a morte Radulphi 8 annis , diebus ix ( ²¹ ) . ,

is clear from this that Thornton's Chronicle , though probably no more than a limited chronology of the abbots , was a separate and independent work . What is significant , however , is that within half a century of the Narratio's final completion an ' abbot ' should have thought it worthwhile to go over again ground covered at some length by the Narratio . Why this was so it is impossible to say , but it might suggest that , whatever the reason , Thornton did not know of the Narratio .

This inaccessibility

of the Narratio can be confirmed again in the century , thirteenth and at the end of the fourteenth . Bodleian MS Rawlinson B 449 , like University College , Oxford , MS 170 , to which it is closely related , is a Fountains manuscript mainly of the thirteenth century , and containing amongst other things , part of a thirteenth century register of the house . On folio 10 of Rawl . B 449 is a brief note of the foundation of Meaux followed by a genealogy of the founder , William of Aumâle (2² ) . The little that it has to say of Meaux , and of its first abbot Adam , is sufficient to indicate that it is not drawing on the Narratio (23) . The same passage can be found , in association with other material , in the Chronica Monasterii de Melsa (24) . This was the work of the nineteenth abbot of Meaux , Thomas Burton ( 1396-1399 ) , in the period after his resignation as abbot . Thomas lived until 1437 , but from 1429 was

(21)

Memorials I p . 133 . It also appears in Bodleian MS Dodsworth 7 ( Vol . I of Dodsworth's Monasticon Boreale ) ff . 235r / v . ( 23) Rawl . B. 449 , f . 10 is in fact an odd leaf of later date amongst a variety of deeds in no particular order which occupy the first dozen leaves of the manuscript . It is possible that it may have been derived from a source which was available to Hugh of Kirkstall for his account , but in that case it is surprising that Hugh makes no use of it in his references to Adam , first abbot of Meaux , who is described in the Narratio as a former monk of St. Mary's , York and overseer of the first monastic buildings at Kirkstead , Woburn and Vaudey . It may , in fact , be more acceptable to associate the original of Rawl . B. 449 , f . 10 with that Chronicle of Robert Thornton to which Greenwell refers , though this ( 22)

can be no more than an unsubstantiated suggestion . ( 24) [ E.A. Bond , Chronica Monasterii de ] Melsa , 3 vols , Rolls Series 1866-8 ) .

43 ( London

The Genesis

in

England

183

24ª ),

of Cistercian Chronicles

in

in

,

in

,

,

to

a

a

living comforblind . A great administrator , literate , possibly learned ( tably on pension of forty shillings year his own room the monastery Burton devoted his remaining years the history and records of the house and he took great care both in the composition searching out the sources for the history of of his chronicle and

,

a

:

it

to

of

,

to is

,

as

.

(

it

28 ,

,

) a

,

(

27 ).

in

,

)

(

26 .

,

is

.

B

.

,

it

,

,

to ,

(

25 ),

de

.

,

a

These sources he enumerated and included amongst them parvus tractatus but this was not the fundatione for Meaux quotes Narratio which he neither refers nor from The early part of his chronicle does however make use of the extract in Rawl 449 supplementing with other material amongst which the Letter of Thurstan The use he makes of this shows that the copy he had access to was one possessing the elaborate dating clause and the footnote summarising the careers of those who left St. Mary's York separate copy of the Letter of Thurstan fact and not one embodied in the Narratio As late therefore the time Burton the Narratio was virtually unknown even to man as methodical and industrious as Burton showed likely that himself to be and owed its reappearance began Greenwell when he do for Fountains what Burton had done for Meaux not long before Meaux

,

(

30 ).

at

in

at

.

a

,

(

)29 ,

The later abbots of Fountains from Greenwell on were almost period of without exception men of ability and enterprise This was great activity Fountains and the work on all departments of life the records of the house this time matched that on the buildings

'

'.

-

.

-

.

I,

,

in

in

a

is

in

'

is

.

.

-

I

,

74

.

Ibid

.p

.

,

See below pp 184 205-6 As we have seen he did know .

( ( ( ( 28 27 ) ) 26 ) ) 25

.

,

at

,

it

',

et

to

.

in

,

,

.

,

,

-

,

,

is

-

as

)

(

pp LVIII LXX In 1393/4 given 24a An outline of Burton's career Melsa twenty second seniority he appears list of the twenty eight monks of the house and described as bursarius et servitor abbatis In 1396 he is twenty first in seniority but seems to hold no office In that year he was elected abbot but the three years of his abbacy until his resignation in 1399 were marked by almost continual controversy and opposition within his community and he resigned his office order to spare his house further judicial expense At the time of his election the abbacy he was described as virum utique religiosum bene literatum but nowhere there any clear evidence that he attended the schools at Oxford and in this context should be remembered that in Burton's time the earlier organisation of cistercian studies Oxford had broken down and was not to be reestablished without the protracted labours of men like Marmaduke Huby in the fifteenth century pp LXXII LXXIV See the survey in ibid

,

in

it

10 ,

)

,

)

.

,

( 30 )

.

( 2.

,

(

,

(

,

III

.

).

(

),

.

,

)

(

( 29 )

.

I

.

,

f.

of the extract now included in the Fountains Register Rawl B. 449 and used the early part of his history pp 74 76 Melsa John Greenwell 1442-1471 Thomas Swinton 1471-1478 John Darnton 1478-1494 Marmaduke Huby 1494-1526 See Talbot Letters and for Huby Dom David Knowles The Religious Orders in England ed Cambridge 1961 pp 28-38 For example the great fifteenth century cartulary For surviving Fount-

Derek Baker

184

Of this literary activity Greenwell ( 3 ) seems to have been the originator, and without his Chronicle of the Abbots , it would be difficult , if not impossible , to produce a complete series of the abbots of Fountains . If, likely ,

-

Narratio he must have been struck repetition , incoherence , poor organisation . Hugh of Kirkstall himself had protested his insufficiency ― he was merely writing donec veniat qui dignitatem materie cultiori stilo adequet (32) . Greenwell was just such a man , and quite capable of carrying out the revision which the Narratio underwent at about this time . This revision was in the interests of greater cohesion and clarity , and to suit the literary and stylistic taste of the reviser . Again and again one finds relatively minor changes of words and word order , transposition of clauses and sentences , retitling of chapters and subdivision of some of the longer sections . But there were larger changes too . The first letter of St Bernard to abbot Geoffrey was omitted from the revision . It added little to St Bernard's second letter to Geoffrey , and even the biblical quotations were the same . In like manner there was a drastic revision of the Letter of Thurstan . Its bias , anachronisms and repetitions are so obvious to the careful reader that it could not be expected to survive a thorough as seems

he rediscovered the

by its shortcomings

revision of that History of Fountains , the Narratio , in which it was set . It was not simply a question of omitting the more contentious passages : in at least three places whole sentences have been transposed , and two out of three sentences so moved occur in the middle of longer sections which are omitted altogether . All this will be discussed more fully in a subsequent article (33) , but in view of the considerable recent discussion about the relative authenticity of the two versions of the Letter of Thurstan (34) it should be said here that neither version is authentic . The longer text is certainly the earlier , while the shorter version is the product of that fifteenth - century revision of the whole Narratio which should in

all probability be ascribed to the scholar abbot Greenwell (35) . It is to this revision that the Narratio owes its survival in a finished form . The full copy of Hugh of Kirkstall's work was still accessible at Ripon when Leland saw it in 1541 (36) , with additional notes (37) added

ains cartularies and registers see [ G.R.C. ] Davis , Medieval Cartularies [ of Great Britain ] (London 1958 ) pp . 47-48 . ( 31) For Greenwell see Memorials I pp . 148-153 ; Talbot , Letters . p. 3. (32) Memorials (33) [ The Foundation History of ] Fountains [ Abbey ] , . p . 17 . ( 34) See Fountains ( 35) Marmaduke Huby might be regarded as another strong candidate , but the revised Narratio itself is to be found in several differing forms ( see below ) and there would probably have been insufficient time for these variations to have become established and disseminated had Huby and not Greenwell been the author of the revision of the Narratio . (36) LN pp . 163-168 . marginalia and additions or alterations ( 37) The additions are of two kinds

I

I

III

The Genesis

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

185

since Greenwell's time , but it has since vanished . Apart from this there is only the incomplete , late - medieval copy of the unrevised Narratio preserved at Trinity College , Cambridge ( “ ) . The Narratio , in fact , survi ved , and circulated , in its revised form . One can point to two , and pro bably three , pre - Reformation copies , and six seventeenth-century trans

cripts or references ( 9) , and it is clear from this that the Narratio in its revised form achieved a limited pre - Reformation circulation , and that these were the copies which were transcribed by the sixteenth and se venteenth -century antiquaries . In its original thirteenth -century form , however , Hugh of Kirkstall's text seems to have gone out of circulation soon after

it was completed , to have spawned no copies , and not

to have been known time of Greenwell .

,

even

even

in the circle of Fountains itself , before the

Such a situation calls for some explanation : Why should a history of Fountains , commissioned by the abbot of Fountains , be so quickly for gotten — even at Fountains itself ? The answer would seem to lie in the existence of a rival , well -established text the Letter of Thurstan (* ) . Leland referred to this as a libellus , and it is clear that it was intended as an apologia , a justification of events at St Mary's , York in 1132 written

-

at

-

of Fountains was assured , and modelled on the Exordium , to which it refers . The Letter of Thurstan soon seems to have become widely known , and not merely in cistercian circles . Both a time when the success

P

and O are cistercian copies ; C was possibly cistercian , and at Meaux Burton had access to the Letter of Thurstan ( ª¹ ) — possibly through Foun

to the text of the Narratio . The marginal additions generally explain or comment on places or sites mentioned in the text as , for example , the identification of the vanished vill of Herleshow . The textual additions all focus on the problem of the family of Fountains in Norway , and the number of the daughter houses of Fountains ( see Fountains I pp . 36-38 ) . LN p . 165 comments : « De domo , quae

vocatur Kirkstede , missus est conventus monachorum in Norwegiam , et construxe runt abbatiam , quae Hovetheia [ Hovedo ] nominatur . Sed et illa concepit et peperit aliam in eisdem partibus » . This last being presumably a mistaken refer ence to Tutterö , the daughter -house of Lysa . On the same page the bishop of Bergen who visited Fountains is identified as Sigwardus , while on p . 166 Lelend has , correctly , « Haec soboles matris nostrae octo genuit filias : sex neptes susce pit ex iis . » ( sic ) In the absence of the manuscript which Leland saw it is impossi ble to say exactly how these alterations had been made to the text of the Narratio , but it may be noted that the first , the only one of any length , occurs at the end of the section describing the foundation of Louth Park , and could , presumably , be simply an addition to the text at this point . ( 38) Cambridge , Trinity College , Gale MS 0.1.70 ( James 1104 ) . For discussion of this manuscript see Fountains I pp . 1, 35-36 and below pp . 188-206 . (39) See below pp . 125-31 . (40) For a list of the manuscripts of the Letter of Thurstan see Fountains p . 17. They will be discussed in Fountains . See also Derek Baker ' Scissors and paste : MS 139 again ', Studies in Church History 11 ( Oxford 1975 ) pp . 83-123 . (41) See Melsa I p . 74 .

I

III

Derek Baker

186

tains , but more likely at Meaux itself . M , however , certainly belonged to

St Mary's , York , and it is interesting to note not merely that the abbey was interested in possessing the Letter of Thurstan , but also in repairing and completing its copy as late as the end of the fourteenth century . This is the sole surviving non -cistercian copy of the Letter of Thurstan , but there is evidence that St Mary's , York was not unique in its interest in it , or access to it .. In the early anonymous life of Thurstan , which pro bably derived from Pontefract , the cluniac house where Thurstan ended his days , reference is made to his foundation of Fountains in a way which shows that the Letter of Thurstan was consulted (42) . At a much later date , in 1420 , Robert Burton , the town -clerk of York ( 1415-1433 ) added a note (43) about Fountains to his copy of the Chronicle of the Archbishops of York which goes under the name of Thomas Stubbs , and this , too , derived from the Letter of Thurstan . Such surviving evidence may fairly be taken as an indication of a much wider circulation than now appears , and of an interest which continued right through the medieval period . O was being copied at Fountains at about the time that the Narratio was being finished ; C was a thirteenth -century manuscript ; M one of the fourteenth century , and both Thomas Burton of Meaux and Robert Bur

Raine , Historians of the ] C [ hurch of ] Y [ ork ] , 3 vols , Rolls Series 71 (London 1879-94 ) II pp . 259-69 . This anonymous 'Life ' is printed from the sole surviving manuscript British Museum Cotton Titus A. XIX , a fifteenth -century quarto manuscript on paper . The ' Life ' is in fact an incoherent , composite work compiled , probably , on behalf of the cluniac house of Pontefract where Thurstan died in 1140 , and in the expectation of his canonisation . It consists of a brief prose preface ( pp . 259-60 ) , sketching Thurstan's career from his election as arch bishop of York to his reconciliation with the king , and leading into verses by Hugh of Pontefract ( pp . 261-5 ) which describe Thurstan's life up to his consecra tion by Calixtus II in 1119. These end abruptly with the lines « Postea bis denis et sexannis Eboracae Presul praclarus praefuit ecclesiae . » There then occurs another , disjointed prose interlude ( pp . 266-7 ) consisting of notices of two bene factions , the battle of the Standard , Thurstan's death , the foundation of Fount ains , and a second notice of Thurstan's death . This leads into the verses by Geoffrey Turcople ( pp . 267-9 ) , archdeacon of Nottingham c 1137 - c 1153 , which describe Thurstan's post mortem appearance to him in a dream , and then extol his virtues . John of Hexham , in his History of the Church of Hexham ( s.a. 1141 ) , refers to the archdeacon's dream , and quotes from his verses . Though all the elements combined here have to do with Thurstan there is little connection between them , and nothing to show when they were put together in their present form . There has been little or no attempt to relate them to each other , and no real sense in which these disparate elements can be termed a 'Life .' ( 42)

J.

-

/

The reference to the foundation of Fountains precedes the second notice of Thurstan's death ( p . 267 ) . It is repeated almost verbatim as part of the more extensive accounts of William of Newburgh ( History , Bk I , CXIV ) , and , following him , 'John of Brompton ', ed . R. Twysden , Historiae Anglicanae Scriptores X ( London 1652 ) cols 1028-9 . (43) HCY II p . 386 , n . 7 .

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Genesis

ton of

187

York referred to the Letter of Thurstan in the fifteenth century .

The Narratio , of course , spanned a much wider period in the life of Fountains than the Letter of Thurstan , but that seems to have been regarded almost as an English Exordium . It was already in circulation , and it took precedence over the Narratio , and Hugh of Kirkstall recognised this by the use that he himself made of the Letter of Thurstan , and by including it in his work . It was probably for this reason , more than any other , that the Narratio lay neglected and forgotten until the time of abbot Greenwell , and then achieved a limited circulation only in a revised form .

2. The Manuscripts

(a ) Oxford

of

the unrevised

Bodleian

:

III

,

Top .

Gen.

Narratio C. 3 ( SC 3119 )

[ LN ]

of Leland's Collectanea contains , on ff . 163-168 , extracts from the Narratio . Folios 153-176 of the manuscript are shorter than those on either side of them , and constitute a separate section in the volume . Volume

They contain

ff. ff . f. f.

153

159

159-160 161 162

ff . 163-168 ff . 169-171

f.

171

f.

172

ff . 173-175

f.

176

The Life of St John of York

Ex libello adiuncto de Preposito Beverlac . (half of folio 160 is left blank ) Notes from the Itinerary The Life of St John of York by Folchard The Narratio (three - quarters of folio 168 is left blank ) Ex libro de vita S. Wilfridi Ex vita Wilfridi , Peter of Blois (one- third of this leaf is left blank)

Blank Ex revelatione Elizabethae virginis (three -quarters of folio 175 is left blank) Blank

Leland made a special journey from York to Ripon in 1541 to see Hugh of Kirkstall's History (44) , and it was probably on this occasion that he made his notes on the contents of the Narratio . Leland's Itinerary (45) shows him moving from Beverley to Ripon , and this is in agreement with the order of the extracts in this part of the Collectanea . In 1541 Marmaduke Bradley , the last abbot of Fountains , was a canon of Ripon , and it is possible that the copy of the Narratio which

(44)

See n .

(45) IV , pp .

13 above . 23-29 .

Derek Baker

188

Leland consulted was then in his possession . Though there are clear differences between the manuscript which Leland saw and the only surviving medieval copy of the Narratio , T (4 ) , there can be no doubt that Leland copied from an unrevised text of the Narratio , and most probably from the same manuscript which was available to abbot Greenwell that is , from the Fountains copy of the Narratio (47) .

(b )

Cambridge

Trinity College , Gale MS

.

0.1.79 (James 1104 )

[ T]

Gale 0.1.79 is a parchment roll of four membranes . The membranes measure 2 ' 44 , 2 ' 734 ", 2 ' 24 " and 1 ' 1014 ". The total length of the Roll is 9 ' 1 " and its width 10½ ". It is badly written , and has been corrected . The text occupies the whole of one side of the roll and continues on the back of the second , third and fourth membranes ending some sixteen inches from the bottom . The membranes are sewn together , and were obviously put together after they had been written , which probably explains why the back of the first membrane was not used . It has a slight tear at the top , and rather more considerable damage to the right- hand edge of the first membrane towards the top . Tissue paper repairs partially obscure both the title and the press - mark .

"

The text of the Narratio in this manuscript ends before Ralph Haget became abbot of Fountains in 1190 ( 48) . The continuation to the time of abbot John of Kent ( 1220-1247 ) , which appears in the other three manuscripts of the whole Narratio ( 49) , is mainly concerned with abbot John of York ( 1203-1211 ) and has virtually nothing to say of abbots John of Ely ( 1211-1220 ) or John of Kent . Walbran used T for the greater part of his edition of the Narratio and supplemented it by the text in A to the time of John of Kent .

It

is possible that there is a change of hand in the last eight lines

-

of the Roll , and there is every indication that it was intended to continue the text beyond the point at which it now ends there is plenty of room to continue , there is no explicit , and it looks as though the scribe may actually just have begun the next sentence . The internal evidence of the Narratio reinforces this conclusion (50) , and when it is borne in mind that Leland saw a manuscript which had been continued to the time of John of Kent , quite apart from its other continuations and marginalia , it is likely that it was intended to continue T to the same point . The text of the Narratio in T , in fact , should be seen as an incomplete fifteenth - century copy of the original Fountains text .

I

(46) See Fountains ( 47) The agreement

pp . 35-38 .

of the references to the Narratio in Greenwell's Chronicle of the Abbots and Leland's extracts from the Narratio included in LN make this most probable . (48) Memorials I p . (49) A , D , and L.

(50)

See Fountains

I

122 ,

pp .

line

23 .

38-40 .

The Genesis

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Gale manuscripts were accumulated by Dr Thomas Gale

189

( 1635

/6

and his eldest son , Roger Gale ( 1672-1744 ) . Thomas Gale became Regius Professor of Greek at Cambridge , and High Master of St Paul's , in 1672 , and Dean of York in 1697. Roger Gale became a scholar of Trinity College , Cambridge in 1693 , and a fellow in 1697 ( B.A. 1694 , M.A. 1698 ) (50 ) . 1702 )

The Gale manuscripts were catalogued in Bernard's Catalogue of 1697 , but somewhat obscurely . Bernard recorded at that date the year of Thomas Gale's appointment at York — only some two hundred manuscripts , compared with the four hundred and fifty presented to Trinity in 1738. Manuscript 0.1.79 does not appear in Bernard's Cata logue and could have been obtained by Thomas Gale while he was at

York

( 1697-1702 ) .

There is no explicit indication of the manuscript's date or prove nance . James ascribes it in his catalogue ( 51) to Fountains , but gives no reason . Ker , apparently on internal evidence , lists it as a Fountains ' manuscript (52) . The manuscript has , however , no ex libris , as most sur viving Fountains manuscripts have , no Fountains press - mark , nor any definite inscription linking the manuscript with Fountains (53) . There is , in fact , nothing in T to link it specifically to Fountains , and its contents would have been of as much interest to the daughter houses of Foun tains as to the mother house itself. There are , however , some indications on the manuscript which may make it possible to fill in part of its history . Walbran , in his edition. of the manuscript , dates the hand to the early fifteenth century ; James and Ker , however , more correctly , place it in the later fifteenth century . This could make it contemporaneous with the literary activity at Foun tains stimulated by abbot Greenwell ( 1442-1471 ) and continued under abbot Huby ( 1494-1526 ) . This was a period of great activity in every sphere at Fountains , under a quartet of able abbots . Apart from the great building projects under abbots Darnton ( 1478-1494) and Huby , and the latter's scheme for a new cistercian cell at Ripon barely a decade before the Reformation , this was the period which produced the great fifteenth century cartulary , in five volumes , the cartulary of royal and papal privileges , and the finely produced Antiquum registrum terrarum feodo rum ac possessionum (54) made , as it records , in 1509 by Stephen Green for abbot Huby . The hand of this last is similar , though not identical , to

(508) For the careers of Thomas and Roger Gale see D.C. Douglas , English Scholars 1660-1730 ( 2 ed . London 1951 ) . , p . XXXII . (51) ( 52) N. Ker , Medieval Libraries of Great Britain ( 2 ed . London 1964 ) p . 88 . ( 53) British Museum MS , Cotton Faustina B I , for example , also ascribed to Fountains by Ker on evidence from the contents , records the death of a monk of Fountains on folio 205 , and there are other partially erased comments about Fountains on the same leaf. (54) Now British Museum Additional MS 18276 .

III

Derek Baker

190

T, and without being able definitely to ascribe T to Fountains itself it would not be surprising if such a copy of the Narratio had been that of

produced during such a period of active copying and reorganisation at Fountains . This supposition may be strengthened by the presence in two Fountains registers of manuscripts very similar to T. In Rawlinson B 449 , folio 124 is one of a number of additional leaves bound into the register .

It is in

a similar hand and form to T, has been rolled and is an indenture , in English , dated the 31st . of May in the 14th . year of Edward IV ( 1474 ) . In University College , Oxford , 170 , folio 157 is a rolled leaf of almost exactly the same dimensions as the membranes of T. The recto and part of the verso , are taken up with charters relating to Sawley ' differing , in detail , from other copies of the same charters . There is a title- ' Copie cart . of mon de Sallay in Ayncliffe ' ― very similar to the title of T , and the hand , and method of paragraphing , are also very closely related to those in T. This cannot , of course , prove conclusively a Fountains origin for T, but it may at least be taken as strong support for what has , hitherto , been merely conjecture .

On the back of the first membrane of T there is a slightly - damaged title Narratio de Fundatione monasterii de Fontibus in com Ebor * pressmark largely illegible endorsement De hac There and qui hanc Narrationem narratione ...... hugo de Kirkstal Serlone Grafigures correspond pages matico 198 268. These last the the 1559 edition of Bales Scriptores which refer Serlo and Hugh of Kirkstall place the press mark its type does not have been unable far appear anywhere Ker but there another Gale manuscript 0.1.78 press mark which has the same type Both these manuscripts only amongst manuscripts are rolls the ones the Gale and they are the only Gale manuscripts which James records that they were left blank the manuscript list of book numbers which accompanied the Trinity presumably because they were rolls Gale 0.1.78 James bequest 1103 vellum roll 3/8 by almost neat hand of the fifteenth centpry genealogy England and has no contains the kings indication of provenance The hand not the same as that Gale 0.1.79

.

to

in

...

...

,

a

KI ;

.

,

KI .

,

,

is

-

to

,

,

of

(

,

of

a

in

.

in

.

is

a

of

8 '

"

10

.

,

It

a

is

.

)

to

in

( 55 )

of

,

,

-

a

in

,

so

I

'

to

...

...

[

]

,

is a

...

,

it

to

is

(

55a ).

.

.p

,

xxv Attention should be drawn here

to

III

55 ) )

(

55a

(

St

T

.

-

,

it

a

.

.

to

,

,

Burton in the introduction to his Monasticon Eboracense lists the manuscripts of the York chapter library together with their pressmarks These seem be of the same type as those of the two Gale manuscripts Ia combination of letters and asterisks No definite associathorough comparison with the tion of this sort can be made without press possible York marks but that both rolls were brought from by possible York Thomas Gale Such an examination may also make discover whether was brought into the Chapter library by Thomas Mary's Tower was destroyed on the 16th April 1644 Thomson when the recent appearance

of an

im-

The Genesis 3.

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle (a ) London : British Museum , Arundel 51 Oxford

:

Bodleian

,

1.

ff.

2.

f.

3.

ff.

1-14

A

Dodsworth Dodsworth Add . 123 ( SC 30168 ) Dodsworth 140 (SC 4282 )

British Museum , Arundel A folio volume 834 " x 13 " of

The Catalogue dates it as ' c .

(56).

Lansdowne 404 26 ( SC 4168 ) 9 ( SC 4151 )

(b) London,

L d

RG

Y

[A ]

51 21

191

folios .

of the Arundel Manuscripts ( 57) 1600 ' . The volume contains three items : .

Hugonis monachi de Kirkestal opusculum de origine monasterii de Fontibus .

The pedigree of Mandevill the first founder of the abbey of Walden to Henrie the fourth , as appeireth by a leger of the Abbey thear . 16-18 . Notices of the founders and benefactors of Walden Abbey in Essex copied out of an ould parchment roule in the hands of Mr. Christo pher Bird of Walden 1600 . ' finis huius rotulae '

15 .

Folios 20 and 21 are blank ; there is no folio 19. The gatherings divide between folios 9 and 10 and folios 15 and 16. The volume is in a modern binding , and has had the bottom

edges trimmed

.

Inside the cover

it has

a stamp : Soc Reg Lond dono HENR HOWARD Norfolciensis The Arundel manuscripts , assembled by Thomas , Earl of Arundel - 4/10/1646 ) were shared by Henry Howard between the Royal

(7/8/1592

portant study of the records kept in St Mary's Tower at York · B.A. English and C.B.L. Barr , 'The Records formerly in St Mary's Tower , York ' I , Y [ orkshire ] , A[ rcheological ] [ ournal ] , part 166 , vol XLII , 2 ( Wakefield 1968 ) pp . 198-235 ; YAJ , part 167 , vol XLII , 3 ( 1969 ) pp . 359-386 ; III , YAJ , vol XLII , 4 , part 168 ( 1970 ) pp . 465-518 . The authors stressed the importance of the largely unused collections of the Yorkshire antiquary John Burton , now in the Bodleian Library as MS Top Yorks a 1 , b 3-17 , d 4-7 , e 7-29 . An examination of these manuscripts disclosed that material relating to Fountains was to be found in MSS Top Yorks e 7-12 and e 18. This , however , was limited to copies of charters from St Mary's Tower , extracts from the Monasticon Anglicanum and occasional information about the pedigrees of later lay owners of Fountains and its estates . There was nothing relating to the Narratio or to the history of the abbey . ( 56) The title given to the revised version of the Narratio by Walbran , Memo , p . XVII . rials (57) London , 1840 .

J

I

II

Derek Baker

192

Society and the College of Arms in 1681 , the Royal Society manuscripts being deposited at the British Museum in 1831. Dugdale records A in his 1665 list ( 58) of the Arundel manuscripts that passed to Gresham College , and it appears in Bernard's Catalogue of 1697 ( 59) .

The manuscript is written in what appears to be , both in titles and variety of styles . It is difficult to argue , however , that this indi cates a number of copyists , for the same hand is clearly apparent in all three sections of the manuscript . There are two notes in the text of the Narratio which show the copyist checking parts of his text against other examples . Of the first letter of St Bernard to abbot Geoffrey ( 60) he comments text , a

Hanc epistolam inter epistolas S. Bernardi non invenio , sed teram , videlicet 94 , incipientem ' consilium expetitis a me ' . Of St Bernard's letter to Henry Murdac (61) he says Hanc epistolam in operibus Beati Bernardi

At the head of the text of the Narratio in the Anglicanum

is the note

-

Ex ms de orig monasterii de Fontibus

1654

-

al

non reperio ( 62) . edition of Monasticon

in bibl Arundeliana

.

The declared relationship between the printed text and the Arundel ma nuscript cannot , however , be accepted . The Catalogue ( 63) of the Arundel manuscripts notes that items 2 and 3 are printed in the Monasticon : it makes no such claim for the first item , the Narratio ( 64) . Nor does the text of the Narratio in Dodsworth's Collections ( 65) have any title relating it to the Arundel manuscript . Walbran , in his edition of the Narratio , rejected the Arundel manuscript as the original of the version in the Mo nasticon on textual grounds ( 6 ) , and though his proof turns out on close examination to be less convincing than he assumed his conclusion , no netheless , was correct (67) . ( 58) Oxford , Bodleian , Dugdale Collections XLVIII , f . 75ª . ( 59) Vol II , p . 74 , no . 51 . (60) A. f. 6v . (61) Ibid f . 10r . ( 62) British Museum , Royal MS 8. F. XV , a Byland manuscript of the twelfth century , has four of the letters , amongst them both letters to abbot Geoffrey . Mabillon's 1690 edition of St Bernard's works has all six letters . The 1513 Paris edition of St Bernard's works contains neither the first letter to abbot Geoffrey nor that to Henry Murdac , and it is possible that the copyist consulted this , but if so it is odd that he did not note that it also lacked St Bernard's letter to the community at Fountains , A. f . 10 . (63) London , 1840 . ( 64) In Dodsworth's Collections the Narratio items in vol 51 .

appears

in vol

26 ,

the other two

(65) D. (66) Memorials I p . xvII . (67) The relation of the Arundel text to the Dodsworth manuscripts will be more fully dealt with below .

The Genesis

It is

of Cistercian

Chronicles in England

193

too , to indicate any precise derivation for the Arun del text of the Narratio ( 68) . Its history before it came into the possession of the Earl of Arundel is unknown , and though in general it belongs to the same family as the other manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle there are sufficient differences to distinguish ist manuscript tradition from that of all the others . These relationships and differences will be dealt with at a later point in this article , but it may be said here that the Arundel text of the Narratio probably represents the original version of the Curtailed Chronicle , and may have derived from a lost Fountains ma nuscript . If this is the case then it must be regarded as the most autho ritative of the surviving manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle . impossible

,

(c) London.

British Museum , Lansdowne 404 A folio volume 814 " x 1214 " of 48 folios . 1.

2.

ff . 1-35

ff.

36-45

Liber

ff. 46-48

contains three items :

de origine monasterii

Fontanensis Valores temporalium Episcopatus Eliensis

no 3.

[L]

It

,

An

1608

Extenta Manerii de Caldecote facta die Lune proxima ante festum beati Petri in Cathedra anno R R. Edwardi filii R Edwardi xiiii tempo re Domini Hugonis Abbatis de Sancto Albano

Items 1 and 2 are on paper and in different seventeenth -century hands . However , on folio 1r besides the note liber de origine there is a small label containing the words Episcopatus Eliensis ; these are in the same hand as item 2. Item 3 is an entirely separate and different section . It is on vellum and in a fifteenth -century hand . The binding of the manuscript is modern . Item 1 is a nicely written copy of the Narratio with a fairly elaborate title ( 69) — Liber de origine monasterii Fontanensis — in the same hand as the text . There is slight damage to the right -hand edge of 4 which involves the loss of the ends of some lines . These lacunae can , however , be supplied from the other manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle . There is no clear indication of the manuscript's provenance , though its close association with a document from Ely should perhaps be borne in mind (70) .

f

(d) Oxford,

[D ] Bodleian , Dodworth 26 (SC 4168 ) This volume of Dodsworth's collections is now bound together with volumes 24 and 25. The notebooks , however , originally arrived at the Bodleian in an unbound state , and their present organisation bears little a (68) Both of the other items in the manuscript have their origins stated ledger and a roll respectively . There is none for the Narratio . ( 69) f. 1v . (70) John , abbot of Fountains from 1211 to 1220 , was bishop of Ely from 1220 to 1226 .

Derek Baker

194

or no relation to Dodsworth's own arrangement , the order of which was

-

indicated by a series of letter codes , five in number . foliations , the The present volume 26 has two — in part three principal ones being Dodsworth's and the Bodleian's . Neither is wholly satisfactory , but since Dodsworth indexes the volume according to his own foliation it would have been better to have left that undisturbed , and to have noted where folios were missing and , in one case , duplicated . In the list of contents below the Dodsworth foliation is used with the Bodleian foliation given in brackets .

f. i ff. ii- vi f . vii f . vii

flyleaf index

blank AAA

ff. 1-4 missing ff. 5-23 ( 119 )

ff. 24-95 ff . ff.

ff. ff.

f.

ff. ff.

(20-92

)

148

Library in

1618 .

Ex libro de Drax ( Dodsworth duplicated the numbering of f. 43 ) Beverley rentals

(This section has yet another foliation (2-84 ) which numbers each side ) Blank (no Bodleian numbers )

149-155 ( 136-142 )

Charters relating and Chester

to

Revesby

Blank number ) The Narratio 157-191 ( 143-177 ) Blank 192 196 ( 178-182 )

156 (no Bodleian

· 195 ( 136-181 ) are made up of two These quires contain the Revesby and Chester charters and the

Within this volume quires .

Letters from the parliamentary commissioners to Thomas Cromwell , copied by Dodsworth from the Cottonian

96-102 missing 103-145 ( 93 - 135 )

146

( thus the first volume in Dodsworth's folio series )

ff.

149

Narratio .

The Narratio is in a different hand to the charters which precede it . It is not in Dodsworth's hand ( as a comparison with Dodsworth 9 shows ) , but may , possibly , have been corrected and annotated by him . The text of the Narratio printed in the Monasticon Anglicanum in was taken from this manuscript , but not entirely accurately , and the printed text has one or two serious errors . As has already been 1655

The Genesis of Cistercian Chronicles in England

195

pointed out (* ) Dodsworth 26 , in spite of the explicit statement in the Monasticon , cannot have been derived from Arundel 51. It has , in fact , strong similarities , both in text and in hand , to Lansdowne 404 .

(e )

Oxford , Bodleian

.

[d]

Dodsworth 9 ( SC 4151 )

This volume in Dodsworth's collections is the third and last volume of his Monasticon Boreale , compiled , as he tells us in c 1627 , largely from materials preserved in St Mary's Tower , York , and in his own hand , It has not , I think , been previously noted that ff . 190 to 192 contain extracts from the Narratio which precede a series of charters ( ” ) copied from the volume of the Fountains cartulary in the Cottonian library ( " ) . There is no indication given of the source of these extracts from the Narratio- they do not occur in the volume of the cartulary which supplies the charters — they are preceded by three blank folios , and a similar number separate them from the charters . The extracts begin with the section describing the foundation of Fountains itself (74) , and break off in the middle of the chapter on the monk Geoffrey (7 ) , omitting the intervening letters of St Bernard (7 ) . There is no heading to the initial section of the Narratio , which starts some three inches down f . 190. At the top of this folio is written In historia de Fontibus . It may be noted that A , L and D all have chapter headings at this point : only T

-

does not , but the considerable differences between that manuscript and the text in Dodsworth 9 make it impossible to suggest that Dodsworth

derived his text directly from T. It is probably best to assume that space was left for a title which was not supplied , and that the extracts were intended as an historical introduction to the charters .

76ª .)

The extracts from the Narratio in Dodsworth 9 are in fact virtually identical to the equivalent passages in D , of whose original they may be regarded as a largely uncorrected copy . The similarity of the margi nalia in the two manuscripts , and the correspondence between the errors in both manuscripts , corrected in Dodsworth 26 , uncorrected in Dods worth 9 , suggest that both were derived from the same original (

a

.

]

[

)

(

.

,

(f )

RG Oxford Bodleian Additional MS 123 SC 30168 This is small notebook of some one hundred leaves entitled

pp

.

.p

I

47

.

36-45

.

.

I

,

313

See Appendix

A

,

96 95

94 ,

.

.p

.

Epp

,

Ibid

XII

.

C

Memorials below

,

,

British Museum Cotton Tiberius Memorials 31

)

?

a

is

It

,

197-201

.

below pp

.

,

192

196-208

.

ff

) )

( (

76a

.p

See above

) ) )

( ( ( ( (

76 75 ) ) 74 73 72 71

(

.

it

it

.

It

to

Extracts from charters and other documents relating Yorkshire fa came to the Bodleian from its former owner G. Sumner who notebook of in fact now bears the title seems to have given antiquary Gascoigne the Yorkshire Richard 1579-1661 and has been milies

Derek Baker

196

compiled from both ends . It has in consequence two separate lists of contents , one at each end of the book , relating to the contents of the different halves of the notebook ( 77) . In the notebook cross - references are made indiscriminately in finem in both halves of the book . In general , Gascoigne seems to have made his extracts in the period 1618-1620 , though some are as late as 1628 and 1630. The notebook quotes largely from Yorkshire documents , usually giving the name of the owner at the time , the number of folios in the work (though this may vary slightly

for the

same work ) , and folio references for the extracts themselves . Though the scale of his undertaking was vastly different , one could wish that Dodsworth had done the same . A number of Fountains manuscripts are amongst those from which Gascoigne quotes and to which he refers ( 78) , and on two occasions he

mentions an otherwise unknown History of Fountains of at least 15 folios , which was then in the possession of William Ingleby ( 79) . The folio references to this History given by Gascoigne indicate a volume of approximately 18 folios , and both its size , and the extracts given by Gascoigne , make it clear that it was a copy of the Curtailed Chronicle ( 80) . When Gascoigne's description of it ( 8¹ ) is taken in conjunction with his description of other manuscripts in his notebook , and with the Ingleby family's reputation as collectors of Fountains manuscripts , there must be at least a strong possibility that this copy of the Curtailed Chronicle had belonged to Fountains . It was , moreover , a copy known to Dodsworth , though apparently not used by him , for he used and annotated Gascoigne's notebook ( 8² ) . [ Y] Oxford, Bodleian . Dodsworth 140 Dodsworth 140 is a volume of miscellaneous materials , some of it relating to St Mary's , York , amongst which is a list of monastic founda-

(g)

( 77) In references to the contents of the notebook the front and back of the book will be distinguished by the addition of ' F ' or ' B ' to the folio references .

(78) Amongst the Fountains manuscripts mentioned which it is possible to identify are Oxford , Bodleian , Rawlinson B. 449 ; Oxford , University College 170 ; London , British Museum , Egerton 3053 ; London , British Museum , Additional 40009 . Perlegit Richardus GascoiThree of these have notes in Gascoigne's own hand gne , 16 Octob . 1619. Iterum perlegit 7 Septemb 1620 ( Rawl B 449 ) ; Perlegit Richardus Gascoigne , 26 Oct. 1629 ( Univ . Coll . 170 ) . 25 Decembr . 1619. Richarde Gascoi-

-

gne ( BM . Add . 40009 ) .

(79) Gascoigne refers in his index on f. B 44r /v to fo 32 : b . Ex historia de fountaynes W. Ing, and on f . B 32v the extracts from the Narratio are said to be Ex lib de Fontibus . (80) The account of the monks Gervase and Ralph , for example , is placed on f. 4v , leaving no room for the Letter of Thurstan in its extended form , while the succession of Ralph Haget to the abbacy of Fountains is placed on f. 15v . (81) n . 67 above. Rog : Do : leave it at Mr Masones to be sent (82) RG f . F 1v has a note to Mr. Lemmon in Preston in Andernesse to bee sent to Hutton Grange .

-

The Genesis

tions

in Yorkshire

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

( 83) . Three

197

of the monastic houses in this list are

referred to yet another unknown History of Fountains . The manuscript also includes a list ( 84) of the abbots of St Mary's , York , in which abbot Geoffrey is referred to as abbot at the time of the foundation of Fountains ( 85) .

Like the History of Fountains mentioned in RG this History , too , corresponds to none of the surviving texts in its foliation , but is clearly a copy of the Curtailed Chronicle . It is of the same general size as the other seventeenth century transcripts of the Narratio , and plainly could not have contained the Letter of Thurstan in its longer form . 4. The inter- relationship of the manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle

(a ) Arundel

51

[

A ] and Dodsworth

26

[

.

D].

In the first edition of the Monasticon Anglicanum ( 1655 ) an Arundel manuscript ( 86) is quoted as the source for various extracts relating to Fountains , its daughter -houses and Rievaulx , and these ascriptions are repeated unchanged in the 1825 edition of the Monasticon . These refe rences are given below : the pagination is that of the 1655 edition . Rievaulx (p . 727 ) : Fountains

( pp . 733-752 ) :

Newminster

(p .

Louth Park

(p.

Woburn (p .

829 ) :

Vaudey (p .

800 ) :

805 ) :

831 ) :

Kirkstall ( p .

854 ) :

'ms de origine monasterii de

bibl Arundeliana p l ' ' ex ms de orig monasterii in bibl Arundeliana ' ' ex

fontibus in

de Fontibus

ms de origine Fontanensis coenobii

in bibl Arundeliana fol

8b '

' ex codice ms de origine Fontanensis coenobii in biblioth Arundel fol 8b ' ' ex ms de orig Fontanensis coenobii in

bibl Arundeliana ' ' ex ms de orig Fontanen coenobii in bibl Arundel fol 11a' ' ex ms de orig Fontanensis coenobii in bibl Arundeliana fol 11b'

Rievaulx , and all the daughter - houses of Fountains except Kirkstead and Meaux , have references to Arundel 51 , and for these two houses better foundation accounts were available elsewhere . For Kirkstead , British Museum MS , Cotton , Tiberius C viii , a fifteenth - century ma nuscript , supplies a much fuller account than the brief entry in the (83) f. 1. (84) f. 28v . ( 85) These references will be considered further below , pp . ( 86) Arundel 51 in fact , though this is not stated .

203-205 .

Derek Baker

198

Narratio , which

does not even merit a separate chapter heading though it does give the name of the first abbot , which the Cottonian manuscript does not . For Meaux , the standard history was produced by abbot Thomas Burton at the end of the fourteenth century . This expands the extract in the thirteenth -century Register of Fountains ( 87) , which , in its turn , embodies the notice in the Narratio . Thus , in general , Dodsworth's sections on all these houses begin with references to the Narratio , and to the Narratio , apparently , as in Arundel 51 .

Of these seven accounts five give folio references for their extracts . Four of these tally exactly with the foliation in Arundel 51. One , that for Kirkstall , given as folio 11b , is wrong . It should be 11a , but this is clearly an error since in the Narratio the account of Kirkstall comes before that of Vaudey , which is referred to folio 11a in the Monasticon . as

This may be taken as strong confirmation that Arundel 51 was used the original of all the extracts from the Narratio printed in the Mo-

nasticon . Walbran , however , claimed that the differences between Arundel 51 and Dodsworth 26 , from which the text in the Monasticon was immediately derived ( 88) , made it impossible for the latter to be derived from the former . The differences he noted between the two transcripts are indeed decisive in denying an immediate relationship between them , even if one can discount the majority as trivial copyist errors . But it was not only the copysts who were at fault . Walbran notes that alone amongst the manuscripts of the Narratio D includes ' Jervasius ' amongst and that it alone omits William of Ste Barbe from those who accompanied Thurstan to St Mary's , York in 1132 (9 ) . In fact , however , both and A and L have the name 'Jervasius ' , and so does T as a faint , but clear , marginal addition in the same hand as the rest of the roll . As for William of Ste Barbe , it is true that his name does not appear in the text of the Narratio printed in the Monasticon , but does appear in all other manuscripts of the Narratio . The those who left Fountains

( 89) ,

omission , however , is not Dodsworth's . In Ste Barbe appear in the text , but there is as bishop of Durham .

D not only a

does

William of

marginal note about him

This is not the only mistake made in the printing of D , but apart from putting in question the accuracy of the text in the Monasticon , it also reflects on Walbran's collation of the text in D. To be fair , he does not claim to have carried out a complete collation

-

It

with the text of the Monasticon throughout the large portions which I have compared , and I may confirm the supposition , that the one was taken from the other , by the fact that , the blank agrees

(87) Rawlinson B

449 , fol . 10 . ( 88) See above pp . 193-5 . (89) Memorials I p . 9 , n . 15 . (90) Ibid , p . 25 ,n . 1.

The Genesis

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

199

738th page of the printed corresponding book [ the Monasticon ] has a hiatus in the manus cript ; furnishing also conclusive proof against the use of the Arundel MS . , which contains in a most intelligible form , the words requi space

which occurs in the 58th line of the

red ( 9¹ ).

Even here , however , Walbran is being less than accurate . 'The words required ' turn out on examination to be one word , teneritudinem , and in his edition he does not note fully the differences between the medieval text , in T, and that of the seventeenth - century transcripts at this point ( ” ) . These qualifications aside , however , it remains true that teneritu dinem is missing in D and not in A , and a detailed comparison and col lation of the seventeenth -century transcripts reveals sufficient differen ces ― though no major variations between the two texts to make it unlikely that one was derived from the other .

--

At this point , too , it should be noted that Dodsworth himself does not , either in D or d relate his transcripts from the Narratio to A : He gives , in fact , no indication of their derivation . Moreover , if the extracts apart from those in the from the Narratio printed in the Monasticon entry for Fountains itself — are considered , it will be found not merely that Dodsworth does not ascribe them to A, but that they do not appear in that form anywhere in Dodsworth's Collections . A fairly exhaustive survey of the Collections revealed that extracts from the Narratio are to be found only in Dodsworth 26 [ D ] where it is copied completely , and in Dodsworth 9 [ d ] : this latter is a brief extract probably intended to serve as an historical notice about the abbey prefatory to the charters

-

( 93) . It may be assumed , therefore , that appearing all extracts from the Narratio in the Monasticon under houses other than Fountains were added when the text was being prepared for printing . Further , a close examination of these extracts suggests that at this stage , as the headings in the Monasticon indicate , they were derived from A and not from D. The differences between the text of the Narratio printed in the section on Fountains and the extracts appearing under Newminster , Woburn and Vaudey are too slight to afford grounds for judgement . Those under Louth Park , Kirkstall and Rievaulx , however , differ sufficiently to be decisive ( 94) .

of Fountains there transcribed

Whether

it

was Dodsworth

or Dugdale who took the additional

( 91) Ibid , p . XVII . (92) Ibid , pp . 30-31 . ( 93) The references to the Narratio in Dodsworth 140 are not actual quota . tions from the text . ( 94) In the following pairs of passages from the Monasticon the first , given in full , is that which appears in the section devoted to the house to which it refers . The second , from which only variant readings are quoted , is taken from the full text of the Narratio printed in the section on Fountains .

Derek Baker

200

extracts from A it is difficult to say - the Arundel manuscript was conveniently close at hand during the preparation of the Monasticon for

printing , and both men knew of it : Dodsworth had taken the Walden Rievaulx

( a ) Regnante in Anglia illustri rege Henrico filio Willielmi cognomento Ba stard , etc. , monasteria construuntur , et sopitis praeliis , sancta ubique religio dila tatur . Floruit per idem tempus foelicis recordationis beatus Bernardus , abbas Clarevallensis , vir magnificus , et in Dei rebus strenue agens , etc. Multorum siqui dem monachorum pater , monasteria non pauca construxerat , et missis expeditio nis suae militibus iam finitimas occupaverat regiones , etc. Hic instinctu divino de nobili sua Clarevallensi vinea quandam bonae spei plantationem ad Anglicanas partes direxerat , quaerens fructum in gente illa , sicut ubique terrarum , etc. Sus cepti cum honore a rege et regno , in provincia Eboracensi nova iaciunt funda menta , constituentes abbatiam quae Rievallis nominatur , et haec prima plantatio ordinis Cisterciensis in territorio Eboracensi , etc. ....

Floruit eodem tempore monasteria ..... fructum in

.

,

....

(b) Regnante Gulielmi cognomento Bastard foelicis memoriae ..... strenue se habens ..... non pauca gente illa quaerens ..... iaciunt nova fundamenta Louth Park

,

,

,

,

.

,

hi

.

,

,

;

et

.

,

.....

munera

,

( b )

Eodem tempore Alexander ..... nostri ordinis Kirkesteade ..... de sede .....

et

.

et

in

-

,

,

et

et ,

.

in

,

.

4.

,

.

,

,

et

.

,

)

(

(

a )

Eodem tempore scilicet anno quinto fundationis monasterii de Fonti bus Alexander bonae memoriae Lincolniensis episcopus locum quendam Haver holme nomine ad abbatiam ordinis nostri construendam in manus eiusdem abba tis de Fontibus consignavit Suscepit abbas offerentium munus de Dei praesumens adiutorio missis fratribus ad utrumque locum aedificia construxit erigit officinas Anno septimo fundationis domus de Fontibus rebus pro tempore convenienter dispositis una die scil Non Febr emissi sunt duo monachorum conventus alter sub abbate Roberto de Snella ad monasterium de Kirkested alter apud Haverholme sub abbate Gervasio ambo de primis patribus erant qui de coenobio Ebora censi egressi sudore vultus sui hanc vineam plantaverunt Displicuit fratribus qui apud Haverholme missi fuerant sedes habitationis suae commutatione facta locum alterum quem Parcum Lude nominant de manu episc receperunt cecidit semen in terram bonam surrexit messem copiosam facti sunt in gentem magnam de divino .....

Kirkstall ,

et

,

,

,

.

,

(

a )

Anno MCXVLII incarnationis Dominicae homo quidam nobilis Henricus de Laceio nomine in territorio Eborac monasterium ordinis nostri suscepit cons truendum assignat locum erigit officinas mittitur ad eum monachorum con

et ,

in

,

et

,

in

et

.

et ,

et

et

,

.

,

,

(

,

-

,

S.

.

et

,

.

,

,

)

in

,

.

,

ventus sub abbate Alexandro Iste Alexander unus erat ex primis patribus nostris frater uterinus domini Ricardi abbatis de Fontibus qui apud Claram Vallem ut pace Inter hos monachos ego Serlo emissus sum homo dictum est quievit iam decrepitus ut ipse vides aetate confectus Locus habitationis nostrae primo Bernolfwic dicebatur quem nos mutato nomine montem Mariae fecimus appellari Mansimus ibi per aliquot annos multa perpessi incommoda famis frigoris tum quia turbato regno bona nostra multoties diriperent grassatores tum propter aeris inclementiam imbrium importunitatem qui finibus illis fruges destruunt ut nosti habitatores reddunt egenos Displicuit proinde grangiam redacta nobis locus habitationis nostrae abbatia de assensu

The Genesis

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

201

materials from it , and Dugdale had catalogued it ( " ) . The probability is , however , that it was Dugdale . He complained of the amount of work involved in preparing the Monasticon for the press , and , having used A for the other cistercian houses , he could easily have assumed that D was also derived from it : a mistake Dodsworth

(b )

Dodsworth

9 [d ]

and Dodsworth 26

is unlikely to have made . [D].

The extracts from the Narratio in volume III of Dodsworth's Mo nasticon Boreale , occupy folios 190 to 192 " , and consist of those chapters dealing with the establishment of the community in Skeldale , the election of the first abbot , the appeal to St Bernard , and the sending of the monk Geoffrey to Fountains . No indication of the derivation of this extract d,

is given , except for a heading In historia de fontibus . The extract is in Dodsworth's hand , and can be viewed as an introduction to the charters of Fountains which it precedes . It ends abruptly , however , in the middle of the account of the monk Geoffrey , and a number of blank folios both precede it and separate it from the charters . A comparison of these two Dodsworth manuscripts reveals a num ber of differences between them , but in general they are very similar . Even the differences — apart from one or two omitted words — can be used to confirm rather than to deny the relationship between them , and there is every indication that both manuscripts were derived from a common source . In a number of cases , for example , corrections have been made in one manuscript and not in the other (96) , but the original of the correction is usually still sufficiently visible to show that both had originally the same reading . It is difficult to argue that one is a better text than the other since each makes some mistakes where the other does not , but on balance the text in Dodsworth 9 sets , perhaps , a slightly better standard . It should be emphasised that this is not a com parison and evaluation that can be safely made from the printed text in the Monasticon . It may also be noted that the difficulties encountered by the copyists of both manuscripts were generally the same , and this , taken with the other evidence , suggests that Dodsworth 26 , but both from a common original .

(c) Dodsworth 26

9

is not derived from Dodsworth

[ D ] and Lansdowne 404 [ L]

Walbran mentions the Lansdowne text of the Narratio twice in the consilio Henrici fundatoris nostri , ad locum alterum migravimus , qui nunc Kirk stall nominatur . Anno xv . fundationis monasterii de Fontibus , xiiii . kal . Junii emissi sumus sub Alexandro XII . monachi et x . conversi . (b ) ..... Barnolfwet ...... fecimus nominari ..... quae in finibus ..... in grangia redacta ex assensu ..... ad alterum locum ..... Kirkstall ..... sub abbate Alexandro .... (95) Oxford , Bodleian MS , Dugdale Collections XLVIII , f 75ª . ( 96) It is probable that Dodsworth 26 , though not in Dodsworth's hand , was corrected by him .

(97)

Memorials

I,

p . xvI .

Derek Baker

202

introduction to his edition of the Narratio . It was , he says , ' very cor rectly written , and , I have no doubt , a faithful transcript of its origi nal ' ( 97) , and he later adds

After a perusal of the Lansdowne copy , I did not find variations of such importance as to induce me to encumber the notes by their repetition , but I had it before me during the process of collating the Gale [ T ] with the Arundel [ A ] text , and have occasionally noti ced its readings ( 98) . The Narratio is associated in Lansdowne 404 with an Ely survey , trans 1608 , so it may be slightly later in date than the Arundel text .

cribed in

Walbran's failure to collate L thoroughly with A and D has obscu red the close relationship of the Lansdowne and Dodsworth texts . For example , at the beginning of the Letter of Thurstan the greeting ends , in D , with the words numquam deficere exoptat . In L the word exoptat is added to the text , almost as an afterthought , at a point where it is unnecessary , where it upsets the balance of the sentence , and where it is recorded by no other manuscript apart from D. An even more striking example , particularly since Walbran made such an issue of it , occurs during Thurstan's account of his visitation of St Mary's , York . In reply to abbot Geoffrey's objection to the entry of Thurstan's retinue into the abbey the archbishop remarked that he ought not to visit the abbey without his clerks . D, as Walbran showed ( 99) , makes Thurstan's remark absurd by putting cum for sine . This error is not copied by A , but it is in L.

a

in

.

,

L

D ,

100 ).

Where the Lansdowne manuscript disagrees with the Arundel so does the Dodsworth . Where the Lansdowne manuscript differs from the Dodsworth so does the Arundel : there is virtually no occasion when all three manuscripts differ from each other . There are certain differen ces between A and L which cannot be explained as copyist errors , but must indicate two slightly different originals ( The disagreements between and however are not of this type They seem to be the product of hasty or inaccurate copying the dissemination of com .

mon original

-

99 98 101100 ) ) )

Ibid Ibid

—

as

E

as

,

101 ).

(

in

,

in

early The Lansdowne text was probably existence 1608 Ely survey part the date of the and of the contents of Dodsworth 26— the extracts from British Museum MS Cotton Cleopatra IV was compiled 1618 Whether or not the Narratio was copied for Dod

.

',

.

.

(

)

, '

.

.

, ,

.p .p

.

-

)

(

(

( (

XXI xx See below pp 206-8 N. Denholm Young and H.E. Craster Roger Dodsworth and his Circle Yorkshire Archaeological Journal XXXII Wakefield 1936 pp 5-32

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Genesis

203

sworth at that time it is impossible to say with certainty , but it is likely . At all events D, d and L all spring from the same basic stock , and as copies the Dodsworth texts are inferior to the Lansdowne . Neither the two Dodsworth transcripts , nor the Lansdowne , give any indication of their derivation .

(d ) Dodsworth

140

[Y]

Dodsworth 140 is a volume of miscellaneous materials , much of it relating to St Mary's , York , which includes amongst its contents a list of monastic foundations in Yorkshire ( 102) . In it the foundations of Fountains 34

,

Kirkstall and Meaux are noted in the following form

HI

Mo de Fontanensis

Historia

f

Fontanensis 2

( sic ) Steph Mo de Kirkestalle

1147

Mo

de Melsa

1150

7b

Historia

Fontan 16 Steph

:

fol

15b

Historia

fol

Fontanensis

16

Y , on folio 28v , is a list of the abbots of St Mary's , York . abbot Geoffrey is said to have been abbot at the time of the foundation of Fountains , which is referred to in the following way : Later in

.

MS

MS

121

a )

,

34.H.I. facta est Abbatsia de Fontibus

In

:

.

A °

,

.

to

of

cataloguing his notebooks Dodworth's original system volume of Chancery records for York On folio 104b amongst number of references to monastic foundations that of Fountains occurs

a D

according

of Dodsworth

104b

-

)

D

34 HI ( Kal Jan. 104b This last notice cross refers to folio

(

103

In it

Y is ,

.

-

in I

.

is

.' .

Y

in

in

Y

,

il

Y

to

,

at a

is

is

:

is

it

-

.

,

-

of

[

Y ]

both Dodsworth 140 and Dodsworth 121 the ascription of the Henry foundation of Fountains to the thirty fourth year of 34 there any loophole the fuller reference course wrong Nor plain that what H.I. Kal Jan makes meant the actual foundareception tion of the house and not its into the Cistercian Order slightly later date and the date has been corrected '33 .H.I 121 appearance Dodsworth and both in error of this The significant In the list of monastic foundations given the foundais

' ,

to

-

it

in

December

the English throne on

1132

5

succeeded

.

27

to

I

Corrected 33. Henry Fountains was founded on to

( 1100.

folio

1 .

,

) )

(

102

103

is

is

it

as

Y

in

.

.

is

tion of Fountains also dated '34 H.I. and this date said to be taken from folio 7b of an otherwise unknown Historia Fontanensis From the folio references given clear that this History of general the same size the seventeenth century transcripts of the corresponds precisely Narratio though its foliation none of

August

Derek Baker

204

103

them . It is , in fact , another copy of the Curtailed Chronicle , and is no longer extant . The appearance of the date of the foundation of Fountains on folio 7b of this History would place it after the text of the Letter of Thurstan in its shorter form : that is , at the point in the story where the community is established at Fountains by archbishop Thurstan .

,

not identical

to that referred to

,

a in in

if

It is

,

'

',

a

.

,

it

,

to

,

a

is

)

The first chronicle referred to by Dodsworth in Dodsworth 121 ( history of Fountains nor of the cistercians England neither particular but its numerous references cistercian foundation and to the family of Fountains make more than likely that lost cisterpossible cian history should be included among its sources closely that this too was historia Fontanensis and one related

in Y.

in

,

,

is

'

-

a

is

D .

.

is

'

'

:

.

is

.

,

'

'

is

.

-

Y

One further inter connection should be mentioned not the only manuscript Dodsworth to refer to the Cronica de Kirkstall this way and on this point On folio 167r of marginal comment there to the section of the Narratio which describes the foundation of Foungiven as '34 H.I. and the cross reference tains Once again the date pa explicit and unique but to D. 104.b. made This reference

);

Y ;

D

D

(

of

,

121

of

D

D ,

is

Y

other evidence for the connection between and Dodsworth and more particularly between and the Historia Fontanensis mentioned in Y. Nome of the other manuscripts of the whole Narratio have notes or marginale references this sort 103b the physical spacing corresponds the text in with the folio references to the unidentified Historia Fontanensis mentioned in and in the foundation accounts there

is

,

)

]

]

it

a

is

a

at

,

V ,

.

.

)

-

II

.

(

',

.

)

(

'

,

.

-

.

.

,

,

a

it

it

,

is

-

.

.

it

to

,

,

a

is

. [

[

in

,

a

:

A

(

(

103a) In MSS Dodsworth 121/2 SC 5062-3 reference made to two chronicles in British Museum MS Cotton Domitian XII which bearstet the misleading title Cronica de Kirkstall In quodam cronica Bruto usque ad Edwardum Tertium bound upp with the Cronicle of Kirkstall Bibliotheca Cottoniana numero 32. fols 1-54 and In Cronica de Kirkstall bound together with the former fols 55-138 may have belonged to the The latter not Kirkstall chronicle though house but an abridgement of Higden's Polychronicon and of its continuation from 1346 to 1430. At least for the years 1346 1430 direct copy of the Polychronicon owned by the cistercian house of Whalley Dodsworth's extracts occupy folios 104B 166A of his notebook The former short chronicle to the year 1334. From its interest in events at Woburn and the particular attention paid to the foundation of Fountains and its first four daughter houses seems likely that was first compiled the cistercian house of Woburn and may be an abridgment of more extensive northern cistercian chronicle now lost which also seems to have been used by Thomas Burton for the Historia Melsa The Domitian A XII text has been ascribed by Bond to the later fourteenth century The few extracts made by Dodsworth occupy fols 102A 104A of his notebook See Melsa pp XXXII and John Taylor The Kirkstall Abbey Chronicles Thoresby Society 42 Leeds 1952 pp 35-6 103b Though see note 107 below

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Genesis

205

of Fountains , Kirkstall and Meaux have the marginal comments '34 . H.I.' , '12 Steph ' , and '16 Steph ' . There is , of course , no decisive proof

MS

123

RG

.

]

Bodleian Additional

[

)

(e

it

if

at

,

c

)

104

here , but it is at least reasonable supposition that the Historia Fontanensis referred to in Y was the original of the transcripts of the Narratio in D and d , and that it was sufficiently accessible to Dodsworth , possibly in St Mary's Tower at York , for him to have had recourse to it more than once . The implication is , too , that he knew of it , and made use of it , before Gascoigne's notebook ( came into his hands in 1630 and therefore would have had no need of the Ingleby manuscript even that time was still accessible

,

to

)

106

is

of

,

'

.p

below pp

.

.

,

195-6

at

107 ),

206-208

.

pp

See above

Above

105

195

.

( ( 104 ) ) )

(

.

,

a

'

'

in

(

)

105

(

.

,

,

in

Richard Gascoigne compiled this notebook the main between 1618 and 1620 though some entries were made as late as 1628 and 1630 As has already been mentioned he refers another copy of possession the Curtailed Chronicle which was then the the Ingleby family and hence possibly Fountains copy and which now no longer extant The extracts Gascoigne made furnish no additional readings or versions of the curtailed text of the Narratio but

(

in

it

,

in

,

a

is

.

in

,

/v

B

is

: b .

B

.

B )

.

,

,

,

,

(

compiled and indexed 106 Gascoigne his notebook from both ends The references to and extracts from the Narratio are in the back of the notebook The index for this section of the notebook on folios 44r and reference is made to fo 32 Ex historia de fountaynes W. Ing Elsewhere the notebook on marginal reference by Gascoigne folio 24r there connection with the foundation of Meaux

,

,

]

[

.

]

-

.

.

,

'

.

it

',

'

,

'.

'

in

,

,

at

'

,

'

'

in

.

,

[

,

a

.

-

,

in

,

-

.

in

,

)

,

(

.

B

f

vide 12 de foundacione de fount While on folio 32v the extracts from the Narratio are said to be Ex lib de Fontibus 107 See below Appendix B. Gascoigne's extracts from the Narratio are largely factual consisting of names and dates though he ends by quoting the final lines of the Narratio their entirety There are three surprising and perhaps significant exceptions all quotations Gascoigne begins his extracts Job fortior in sterquilinio quam Adam Paradiso and continues with second and incorrect quotation clearly separated from the first Si dici fas sit est utilius est quam evangelium multos militari sit eos imitari recitare His third quotation quisquis maius bonum occurs after his references to the Letter of Thurstan subire proposuit minus bonum quod licitum fuit sibi illicitum fecit All three quotations can be related to changes made in the text of the Narratio producing the curtailed version The first two quotations occur in the Letter of Thurstan the first immediately preceding the substantial excision and abridgement of the first part of the Letter made in the curtailed version the second coming towards its end The third quotation comes the end of the letter of St Bernard to abbot Geoffrey of St Mary's York included the Curtailed Chronicle The same quotation can be found in the other letter of St Bernard to abbot Geoffrey omitted in the Curtailed Chronicle but there occurs in the body of the letter

Derek Baker

206

In

108 ).

two points they show an affinity to D and L rather than to A. In referr ing to the appointment of the second abbot Richard RG describes him is

T

L

A ,

in

L

,

,

e

in

.

e

D

A.

in

the different lines

development within this group

)

(f

.

,

,

and on the other of texts

of

'

',

,

,

as

,

,

.

.

,

D.

in

as sacrificus ( This reading occurs only and he called sacrista Again the note on the election of abbot John of York starts Sublato Abbate Radulphus has sublato medio has the margin as an emendation alias sublato medio and the text Facto de medio the same wording These indications are slight but taken with the other evidence they demonstrate on the one hand the close interrelationship of all manuscripts of the curtailed chronicle

General relationships

109 ).

(

to

.

,

:

,

A ,

is

it

,

,

,

it to

a

of ,

is

as

of

The agreement between all surviving manuscripts the Curtailed Chronicle so close indicate that they all ultimately derive single original may be argued late mediaeval date from general agreement possible Within this however make one principal distinction that between the Arundel text and the other transcripts extracts or references

which Dodsworth

,

as

it

is

,

at

,

,

It

and used more than once

.

,

knew

.

,

it

.

Y

,

at

,

it

,

of

,

Y ,

It

.

D a , d

and all Dodsworth manuscripts derive has been shown single copy from the Narratio probably kept York but now possible that this lost can be no more than supposition but text was in St Mary's Tower York and perished when was blown up in the Civil War Its association in with records of St Mary's might abbey's copy suggest York that was that was this text

,

to

to

to

it

to

a

If

,

because

in

fact

,

,

in

Gascoigne may have included these quotations

,

is

c

,

it is

it

,

as

,

'

.

,

it

.

it

,

in

of

,

as a

,

Gascoigne's notebook RG shows that another copy of the Narratio described by him Fountains book was the possession William Ingleby The foliation of the Ingleby text makes impossible iden tify original belong with Dodsworth's but does seem the same manuscript tradition the Ingleby text was actually Foun explain the diffe tains book seems likely becomes difficult part and the Arundel text rences between the family of which which dated 1600 the earliest of the surviving copies of the Cur

the text

is

,

,

is

It

.

,

of the History to which he had recourse they had been visually emphasised as part of the process of revision which the Narratio ad undergone possible too that the same Ingleby manuscript the original of the erro neous dating of the foundation of Fountains to '34

,

:

I. '

X :

:

179-187

.

pp

.

)

(

109 See above

H :

,

34 :

'

,

)

9 : .b

F :

(

13 ,

in

,

a

I'

Y

D ,

H

found in and Dodsworth Gascoigne's note of the foundation of Woburn the first house given precise Steph date the Narratio reads anno incarnationis 1145 fundationis monas ergo Fountaines construct terii fontanensis 108 Richardus eboracum monasterii quondam sacrificus Ab secundus 121.

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Genesis

207

tailed Chronicle . It might be possible to argue that the Arundel text is the product of an inferior manuscript tradition if it were not for the closer agreement of A with the mediaeval text of the Narratio than of any of the other transcripts . Thus , in spite of its uncertain ancestry and early history , A is to be preferred to manuscripts which are closely connected to St Mary's , York , and to Fountains itself.

A

.

,

—

A ,

D.

,

110 ).

If the Lansdowne manuscript is considered , however , it may be possible to resolve this difficulty . L is closely related to D , but at a number of points it notes alternative readings ( Where this occurs the first reading generally accords with the alternative with records no such alternatives through there are many corrected and uncorrected copying mistakes

),

.

,

,

at

it

at

-

a

,

a

(

,

in

In

at

.

A

of X ',

is

it

.

,

to

possible suggest hypothetical but For these variations simple explanation The original versions of the Curtailed Chronicle was produced Fountains the time abbot Greenwell 1442-71 and probably bore indications of the process by which its revision had spawned been accomplished this form least one fair copy X¹ª copy of which was itself whatever remove

.

,

,

,

L,

,

.

follows

:

may be given

as

The whole scheme

,

it

of

,

,

it

,

While still at Fountains however X¹ underwent further minor revision and was from this revised manuscript X2 that RG and the original of the Dodsworth transcripts X2a derived When Gascoigne saw X² was in the possession the Ingleby family but has since vanished

c

1226

)

1205

/6

Narratio

( c

The Manuscript Tradition of the Narratio

later 15th century

)

(

(c

X¹

1442-1471

)

T

X¹ = Curtailed Chronicle X² = revised Curtailed Chronicle

Xia

St Mary's

(

X2a

)

(

X² Ingleby

)

1600

(

)

Monasticon Anglicanum 1655 Rievaulx Louth Park Kirkstall Newminster Woburn Vaudey

.

)

,

,

,

,

)

1655

(

(

Fountains

)

Anglicanum

Monasticon

(

1

(c

A

1608

)

)

(c

1618-20

(c

L

RG

Y

1618

)

c

(

D

1627

)

c

(

d

)

York

Derek Baker

208

Such a scheme can only be supposition , but it does allow the greater authority of the Arundel text without denying the claims of the Ingleby manuscript , and does suggest an explanation for the existence of two manuscript traditions which can be clearly differentiated , but which offer no such important historical or interpretive differences as mark off the mediaeval from the ' curtailed ' versions of the Narratio .

Of the manuscripts of the Curtailed Chronicle , then , A is probably a good copy , at one remove at least , of the original , L is a good copy of the revised original . D is a poor copy , at either one or two removes , of the revised original . It is the least reliable of these manuscripts , and shows many signs of careless copying , but the difficulty Dodsworth himself had in making , in d , a copy of part of the Narratio indicates that he , and the copyist of D , were , at the least , working from a very badly -written text .

in

,

is

a

,

.

-

XIV XVI

in ,

.

206

.

Medieval

Cartularies

pp

.

the comments in Davis

,

.p

above

for example

,

,

example

,

For

111 See

,

( ( 110 ) )

at

,

,

at

,

.

'

'

,

at

,

to

of

-

,

to

-

.

at

.

,

,

in

;

it

.

it

to

in

111 ).

The history of the Narratio from its composition by Hugh of Kirkstall in the early thirteenth century to its appearance in print in the Monasticon Anglicanum in the mid - seventeenth century is a curious one . To the modern historian , for all its limitations , the Narratio affords a fascinating , and very human , introduction to the endeavours and struggles , to the spiritual aspirations and material success of twelfthcentury English Cistercians . To sixteenth and seventeenth - century antiquarians the Narratio was of interest in a more narrowly historical and genealogical context , like so much else in their collections . To postReformation landowners it had its place in the body of documents which could be used to establish claims and cement ownership ( sharp contrast All this stands the neglect of the Narratio the Ages Middle Almost from the moment of its composition seems to slip from view preceded and eclipsed by the Letter of Thurstan unknown and apparently inaccessible even cistercian circles closely part associated with Fountains In no doubt this neglect reflects the decline of standards Fountains itself That there were lapses falling away from earlier practices can be seen from the failure of the abbots of Fountains visit their Irish daughters newly acquired century the thirteenth or maintain adequate supervision their Norwegian clergy and from the comments of archbishop Romanus the time of abbot Robert Thornton These difficulties were aggravated by the more material problems of debt and dilapidation of buildings lands and rents which afflicted so many houses this time Not until the later fifteenth century did things improve and with the general revival and reorganisation of the life Fountains which began with abbot Greenwell

The Genesis of Cistercian Chronicles in England

209

of the Narratio . Under men like Huby it was no embarrassment to be reminded of the achievements of that first cistercian century , and in the light of the vigorous activity of that far from twilight age it was not inappropriate to be brought back to the wonder and enthusiasm of Serlo at the very beginning of the history came the rediscovery and revision

:

Deus bone , quanta tunc apud Fontes vitae perfectio ! Quanta virtutis emulatio ! Quis fervor ordinis ! Quae forma disciplinae

57-58

.

pp

.

Memorials

I

)

(

112

(

112 )!

of Fountains

Derek Baker

210

APPENDIX A Bodleian MSS Dodsworth

26

[

D ] and Dodsworth

9

[

d]

A close comparison of these two manuscripts reveals certain minor differences between them . D is well - punctuated ; employs the normal abbreviations ; has been extensively corrected and has other corrections indicated in the margin , and employs the forms ' solempniter ' and ' hyems ' . d has little punctuation ; is not abbreviated , except where the terminal ' m ' of a word occurs at the end of a line ; seems to have been corrected only in the course of transcription , and not undergone any subsequent revision , and employs the forms ' solemniter ' and ' hiems ' . Apart from these general differences there are other differences of detail between the texts of the two manuscripts . These , however , are entirely the result of carelessness and incompetence on the part of the copyists ) . In D , for example , on folio 167r , the omission of videbatur (1. 17 ) ; ut instead of et ( 1. 18 ) ; rivulis for rivuli ( 1. 19 ) ; episcopulis (folio 167v l . 11 ) ; nulla for nullum ( 1. 14 ) ; sola tantum for solatium ( l . 14 ) . In d , on folio 190r , et for ut ( 1. 11 ) ; corrections in lines 14 and 16 ; tranctant for tractant ( 1. 17 ) ; abbati for abbate ( 1. 18 ) ; the omission of animarum ( 1.19 ) ; secidit for secedit ( folio 190v , 1.5 ) . What is significant about these manuscripts , however , is not their dissimilarity , which is slight and superficial , but their essential simila rity , and , frequently , their agreement in error which is matched by none of the other texts . The examples that follow are taken entirely from the section of the Narratio entitled De monasterii assignatione et abbatis electione , but they could be paralleled from each of the other three sections of the Narratio copied in d . In D this section occurs on

/ in d on folios 190r /v . It should be stressed that none of the forms noted here occur in A or L. Where a correction has been folios

167r v ,

made in D or d this is indicated

.

D folio

167r

d folio

190r

1. 10

tanta [ corrected ] tante

1.2

tanta

1. 11

Ripponam

1.4

Ripponam

1. 17

accomodatum

1. 11

accommodatum accommodum

elegendo

1. 18

elegendo

1. 18

possit

1. 12

[ corrected ] eligendo 1.25 possit

[ corrected

]

of Cistercian Chronicles in England

The Genesis 1.27 presedenti

211

1.21 presidenti

[ corrected ] presidens 1.29 elegunt [ corrected

]

1.23 ellegunt

eligunt 1.35 declinat

[ corrected ]

1.30 declinat

declinet

folio

folio

167v

1.2

arguit [ corrected armat

1.2

ut [ corrected ] et sollicitudinis

1.4

[ corrected

]

190v

1.2

arguit

1.3

ut

1.5

solicitudinis

]

sollitudinis 1.6

tantumque

1.7

tantumque [ corrected ] tantique

1.7

sollicitudinis [ corrected ] sollitudinis

1.8

solicitudinis

1.9

tarderet [ corrected ] tardaret

1. 11

tarderet

1. 12

procurabit

[ corrected

1.15

procurabit

]

procurabat

APPENDIX

B

References to the Narratio in the notebook of Richard Gascoigne

[

RG ]

This notebook , now Bodleian Additional MS 123 , was compiled in the period 1618-30 by the Yorkshire antiquary Richard Gascoigne . It contains references to a number of Fountains books , amongst them the Narratio . It is indexed and compiled from both ends , the Narratio extracts being indexed at the back of the notebook in the list of con tents on folios 44r v :

/

fo

32 : b .

-

Ex historia de fountaynes W. Ing .

-

No indication of the number of folios is given unlike many of the titles recorded but an earlier marginal note , in the same index , by Gascoigne , which refers to the foundation of Meaux remarks ' vide the copyists . In D, for example , on folio 167r , the omission of videbatur 12 de foundacione de fount ' , and other indications appear below .

f

Derek Baker

212

Extracts :

Job fortior in sterquilinio

quam Adam in Paradiso

.

Si dici fas sit utilius est multos militari quam evangelium recitare . Dominus prior Richardus , Dominus Galfridus abbas , et Hugo Deca nus Willielmus prior clericorum regularium de Gisburne , Willielmus Thesaurarius , Hugo archidiaconus , Serlo canonicus , Willielmus de Sancta Barbara , canonicus , capellanus meus et canonicus , Robertus sacerdos de Hospitali vixere 1 : Steph : vide Will Corbell Archi Cant . Simeon . Ur banus secundus Papa . Gervasius Radulphus . f : 4 : b et f : 5 : b 2 Richardus primus abbas de font . Sanctus Bernadus Ab Clarevallis vix tempore Thur stino Archiepiscopo f: 6 : b , G : Ab : Ecclesie Sancta Marie Ebor f : 6 : b . quisquis maius bonum proposuit illicitum fecit Gregorius . f : 7 : b Richardus dus : F : 9 : b Henricus

eboracum de Valleclara

,

minus bonum quod licitum fuit sibi

monasterii

quondam

tercius Ab : fount

.

sacrificus

Ab :

secun

f : 11

monasterium Kirkestede in territorio Lincolniensi fundat per nobilem Hen : fil : Eudonis . f : 9 . Wobourne in territorio praedicto fundat per Hugonem de Bolebece anno incarnationis 1145 , x : Steph , fundationis f: xi : b . monasterii fontanensis 13 , ergo Fountaines construct 34. H : 1 . Alanus primus abbas de Woburne Abbas de Lisa eodem Kirkstall 12 Steph fundata eadem lege Bitham 12 Steph : alias Vallis dei , Melsa 15 Steph cenob in territorio Lincolniensi .

Mauricius Abbas de Font f : 12 : b vide Thoraldus f : 13 . Richardus Ab : font f : 13 . Robertus Ab : de Pipiwella translatus ad Ab de font . f : 13 : b . Willielmus Novi Monasterii Ab : translatus ad Ab : fountaines : f: 14. Radulphus . Ab fountaines f : eodem : Novem annus apud Kirkstall

peractis , fontanensis ecclesie curam suscepit f : 15 : b . Sublato abbate Ra dulphus cognomento Hageth , successit Johannis abbas de Parco Lude vide fol : 9 . Et factum inusitatum quoddam quod tres sibi Johannes suc cessive fountanensi ecclesie praefuerunt . Quorum unus fabricam inco havit , secundus incohatam viriliter provexit , tertius provectam gloriose consummavit . Primus erat Johannes natione Eboracensis : secundus Johannes episcopus Eliensis : tertius qui adhuc superest et praeest Johannis de Cantia oriundus . **

consecratus 8 Marcii 1219 3.H.3 . Thesaurarius Anglie 5 anno ob 6 Maii 1225 : 9 : H : 3 vide Episcoporum vite in Ely fol 261 et 262 .

These extracts are discussed above pp . 205-6 . No attempt has been made here to alter or correct Gascoigne's wording .