dated. There are also one or two instances found amongst the institu- tions of vicars appointed for a short time by the rectors of churches under secular patronage[1] ; but only Hanslope seems to have had a per- manent vicarage ordained under the rector. [2]
The numerous suits in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries between the monastic impropriators and the children or successors of their bene- factors are dry enough reading, but they should be of some interest not only to the historian but to the student of human nature. The county of Buckingham has its full share of these records. It would be rash and partial to suppose that in all these cases the laymen were the aggressors and the monks in the right ; but when it became necessary to bring out charters and show the original claim, the monks had generally the advantage. The advowsons of Wendover,[3] Chesham Leicester, [4] Ment- more,[5] Illmer, [6]Filgrave,[7] Mursley, [8] Wyrardisbury, [9] Great Woolstone, [10] were certainly claimed during the thirteenth century by laymen who could not prove their rights ; on the other hand, the abbots of Wooburn and Tewkesbury had to renounce their claims to the churches of Bow Brickhill [11] and Great Marlow.[12]
The abbots of St. Alban's also had a good deal of trouble in con- nexion with their churches in Buckinghamshire, especially Turville. First of all they had a suit with the Morteyns about the advowson of this church ; but it ended happily in 1 276 by a full recognition of the abbot's right.[13] In 1277, however, Archbishop Kilwardby held a special inquiry in the church of High Wycombe as to the title by which so many churches were held ' in proprios usus ' by the monks of St. Alban's, and again Turville was called in question as well as Wingrave. The abbot answered by sending his proctors to appear before the archbishop at Whitchurch ; but they could not get a satisfactory hearing from him, and were even excommunicated. The matter was settled finally at a friendly meeting between the archbishop and the abbot.[14] There were
- ↑ E.g. Pitstone, Drayton and Beaconsfield.
- ↑ Ibid. Rolls of Grossetete, A° 17 (dorse).
- ↑ Cur. Regis R. 55 (13 John), n. 5.
- ↑ Ibid. R. 59 (15 John), n. I5d. The same abbot had also to vindicate his claim to the chapel of St. Leonard dependent on the parish church. Feet of F. (Rec. Com.), p. 253.
- ↑ Ibid. 201, 236.
- ↑ Ibid. 14 Henry III. No. 2.
- ↑ Ibid. 14 Henry III. no. 6
- ↑ Ibid. 22 Henry III. no. 6.
- ↑ This case is one of greater interest. The church had been originally given to Gloucester Abbey by Robert Gernun ; the Munfitchets who succeeded him laid claim to the advowson, and intruded a clerk into the church. David, archdeacon of Buckingham (1145-1171), at a public synod at Aylesbury restored the churches to Gloucester Abbey ; but an appeal to Pope Alexander III. was necessary before the matter was finally settled. See Hist. Mon. S. Petri Glouc. (Rolls Series), 164-74.
- ↑ Round, Calendar of Documents relating to France, p. 366, No. 1041.
- ↑ Feet of F. 19 Henry III. No. 4. Ibid.
- ↑ 32 Henry III. No. 20.
- ↑ Gesta Abbatum (Rolls Series), i. 430-1. The marginal identification of ' Tyrefeud ' with Ther- field, Herts, is obviously a mistake. Turville appears as Tyrefeud in the Taxatio and elsewhere, and the scene of all the disputes related above is plainly Bucks.
- ↑ There was a protest first against the excommunication of the proctors on the ground of the 'privilegia ' of Popes Celestine II., Clement III., and Lucius III., which provided that no archbishop, bishop or other prelate should excommunicate any monk of St. Alban's, and if they did it should be void. But the matter was really settled when the archbishop visited St. Alban's, and was received by the abbot with a mingled courtesy and firmness which appears to have disarmed him completely. Ibid. i. 432-4.
285
