A HISTORY OF LONDON country clergy must also have had an evil effect in London, where, according to Courtenay, they shamefully spent their time, neglecting their cures.** From 1386 to 1395 may be described as the second period of Lollard activity in London. In August 1386 power was granted to the bishop to arrest and imprison all maintainers or preachers of unsound doctrine within the City or diocese,*' and in November Braybrook forbade rectors, &c., to allow any one to preach (except Franciscan friars) without a licence from him, specially mentioning Nicholas Hereford and John Aston ; '° this prohi- bition was repeated in 1393.'^ In 1387, when many Londoners were said to be polluted with Lollard doctrine, a riotous attack on the house of the Austin Friars was caused by a sermon denouncing them as guilty of murder and other horrible crimes, the charges being repeated in a paper fixed upon the door of St. Paul's.'" Some craftsmen and others held secret conventicles where they discussed Holy Scripture in an heretical way ; these were for- bidden by the king in 1392." An heretical citizen named Claydon was sent to Conway Castle about 1394.'* Early in 1395 the Lollards ' set up publicly on the doors of St. Paul's, and at Westminster, abominable accusations of the clergy, and hitherto unheard-of conclusions, by which they endeavoured to destroy ecclesiastical persons and the sacraments of the Church ' ; it was re- ported that they were encouraged by 'certain noblemen and knights.' On his return from Ireland, whither Braybrook and the Archbishop of York had gone to ask him to return to the succour of the Church, the king ' snybbed ' these men and forbade them with threats to ' maintain such matters ' any more. It is said that after this they no longer ventured to act openly. '^ Braybrook must then have been in high favour with Richard, for in July he obtained for himself and his successors a grant of all the fines and forfeitures exacted from tenants on the episcopal estates. '° In the autumn a papal letter exhorting the king to suppress the Lollards was followed by one exhorting the mayor and sheriffs to urge him to act according to the pope's wishes." The St. Albans chronicler, using exaggerated language in his hatred, describes the citizens at this period as ' extremely proud and avaricious, unbelievers in God and the ancient traditions, maintainers of the Lollards, slanderers of religious persons, detainers of tithes, and impoverishers of the common people.' '* The last but one of these charges refers to a dispute about offer- ings which was going on at this time. This seems to have been independent of the Lollard movement, and was settled by Archbishop Arundel at a metro- politan visitation in 1397." It is noteworthy that bequests to the high ^ Wilkins, Con<r. iii, 215.
- Ca/. Pat. 1385—9, p. 200. This permission was renewed in 1394 ; ibid. 1391-6, p. 414.
^ Lond. Epis. Reg. Braybrook, fol. 330 ; cf. fol. 237. " Ibid. 342. " Chron. Angl. 376 ; Walsingham, Hist. Angl. ii, 157-9. F° details see ' Religious Houses.' " Powell and Trevelyan, The Peasants^ Rising, 44. " Wilkins, Cone, iii, 372. " Ca/. Pat. 1391-6, p. 555 ; Walsingham, op. cit. ii, 215-17; Capgrave, C/i;c«. c/^ £»f/. (Rolls Sen), 259-60. For the twelve 'Conclusions' see Engl. Hist. Rev. Apr. 1907, and references there given. One of the images specially mentioned by Lollard preachers was the rood of the north door at St. Paul's ; Walsing- ham, op. cit. ii, 188. ^ Chart. R. 18 & 19 Ric. II, m. 15, no. 11. For other notices of Braybrook in connexion with the king see Issues of the Exch. (Rec. Com.), 242 (cf Cal. Pal. 1388-92, p. 158), 244, 247, 253 ; Chron. Angl. 382-3 ; Walsingham, op. cit. ii, 162-3, 233 ; Capgrave, op. cit. 247, 271. '" Sharpe, Cal. Letter Bk. H, 428 ; cf Walsingham, op. cit. ii, 219 ; Cal. of Papal Letters, iv, 515. " Walsingham, op. cit. ii, 208. " See infra. The visitation led to a dispute about the jurisdiction of the archbishop in the diocese of London ; Epis. Reg. Braybrook, fol. 444 et seq. 218
