A HISTORY OF LONDON At a very early date Abbot Gilbert had made provision for the clothing of eighty monks, and Abbot William endowed the kitchen with a revenue of ;^I50 lis. gd., including the manors of Ashwell (Herts.), Longdon (Worcs.), and Morden (Surrey),"' but the turning-point in the constitutional history of Westminster was reached when Richard de Berking made his composition with the monastery in 1225.^" He assigned to the convent the manors of Peering, Stevenage, Wheathampstead, Aldenham, Battersea, Wands- worth, and Knightsbridge, with the farms of Deene and Sudborough, Shepperton and Halli- ford (Halgeford), Kelvedon and Hendon, with reliefs and escheats and the 10 marks a year which his predecessors had received for their clothing and _^8 from the tithes of Droitwich ; for fuel he assigned the farms of Denham (;^I5)> Holwell {£6), and Datchworth {60s.), and the brushwood from Pyrford ; for wages for the convent he assigned £6 from the church of Oakham ; and for repairs in the dormitory and elsewhere, lOOs. from the manor of Islhamp- stead and the revenues of the mills of Westmin- ster, saving to the abbot free multure. To the charges of hospitality he appropriated the church of Staines and half the church of Wheathampstead with a rent of j^io from ' Wokendune ' (Essex) and ^8 from Westminster, and half the herbage of Westminster. The composition goes on to say that the abbot in chapter deputed one or two brethren for the keeping of hospitality, while for keeping the manors assigned to the convent ' he made some of the brethren proctors and obedientiaries as many as the convent thought fit.' This is evidently not the first institution of obedientiaries at Westminster, but it may have been the occa- sion of an increase in their numbers^** and the definition of their status, for the document further states that the abbot must remove them readily on complaint of the convent, but that he could not do so at his own pleasure without assigning good cause. With regard to the maintenance of hospitality, the convent was to imdertake all entertainment except that of kings, legates, arch- '** Cott. MS. Faust. A. iii, fol. 237. It does not appear whether this was Postard or Humez. '" Ibid. fol. 225-30. '*' The following is a list of the Westminster obedi- entiaries compiled from various sources, between the reign of Edward I and the dissolution of the monas- tery : — Prior, sub-prior, chamberlain, two cellarers, almoner, sub-almoner, guest-master, third and fourth priors, m.ister of the novices, archdeacon, precentor, suc- centor, infirmarian, sacrist, refectorian, steward of the granary, treasurer, treasurer intrinsecus, keeper of St. Mary's Chapel, keeper of the shrine of St. Edward, war- den of the new work, wardens of the manors of Queen Eleanor, of Richard II, of Henry V, and of Henry VII, keeper of the churches, scrutator, bailiff of the liberty of Westminster and bailiff extrivsecus ; while the abbot had a treasurer, seneschal, and bailiff of his own. bishops, and nuncios with twelve or more horsemen ; for these the abbot was to provide, as also for all guests whom he had himself invited. The abbot retained the advowsons of all churches on the conventual manors, as well as the service and wardship of all who owed knight's service, and he received the homage of every free tenant of the abbey. In return he had to answer to the king for all scutages, and to defend the abbey and its property in all suits ecclesiastical and secular ; he was also bound to provide fuel and a dish of meat for the ' misericorde ' of the con- vent from the feast of the Epiphany to Septua- gesima, and gruel in Lent, as well as bread and beer on the occasion of the ceremonial feet- washing of the poor on Maundy Thursday and wine for the wassails of the convent on the same day. He had to secure the convent against inundations of the Thames, and to re- pair the walls of the monastery. The convent, on the other hand, undertook to pay any fines which might be exacted by the king's court from any of their minors, to answer for the hidage on their own lands, and not to waste or alienate their woods or emancipate their villeins without the consent of the abbot. No abbot or prior was to visit the conventual manors without the consent of the whole convent, lest by too frequent visits its share should be dimin- ished. With regard to the abbot's maintenance, he might eat in the refectory with the convent when he liked, and might at any time bring as many as four people with him ; and when resi- dent within the monastery or at Eye he was to receive six loaves daily from the cellarer, but when elsewhere he could not claim bread or any other food from the convent. He was responsible for certain anniversaries and the liveries [lihera- tiones) of the servants on the principal feasts. This arrangement, with certain modifications, remained in force throughout the Middle Ages, but it was not always acquiesced in without ques- tion. In 1227 the convent complained that their share was not sufficient, and the bishops of Bath, Salisbury, and Chichester were called upon to mediate ; the manors of Ashford (Midd.) and Greenford were added and dos. from the manor of ' Suberk,' on condition that nothing should be exacted from the abbot in the way of victuals, firewood, or contributions towards the debts of the prior and convent.^** After the great quarrel with Abbot Crokesle in 1252, the bishop of Bath and John Mansel, provost of Beverley, made certain provisions which seem to point to an attempt on the part of the convent to interpret the original composi- tion wholly in their own interests. The abbot was to be allowed to remove the obedientiaries according to the rule of St. Benedict, and for reasonable cause ; he was not to be bound to find flesh for the convent, and was to be admitted '" D. and C. Westm. Book No. 11, fol. 66z. 448
