In reality there is hardly any good and useful purpose which can be imagined, religious or social, to which some mediæval guild or other was not devoted. Mr. Toulmin Smith, after examination of the documents relating to these fraternities, has enumerated the following as objects for which they were founded, or at any rate worked: (1) relief in poverty--a very general object; (2) sickness; (3) old age; (4) loss of sight; (5) loss of limb; (6) loss of cattle; (7) on fall of house; (8) in making pilgrimages; (9) loss by fire; (10) loss by flood; (11) loss by robbery; (12) shipwreck; (13) imprisonment; (14) aid in pecuniary difficulties; (15) aid to obtain work; (16) defending in law; (17) relief to deaf and dumb; (18) relief for leprosy; (19) dowry on marriage or on entry into religious house; (20) repairs of roads and bridges; (21) repairs of churches; (22) burial of the dead. Mr. Thorold Rogers, in his _Economic Interpretation of History_, says of the Guilds that-- “they were well-nigh universal, though they were unchartered and informal. Their prosperity was derived from grants or charges on land or houses made for the purpose of securing the continuance of a religious office, much appreciated and exceeding common in the period of English social history which precedes the Reformation, prayers or Masses for the dead. “The ancient tenements, which are still the property of the London companies, were originally burdened with Masses for donors. In the country the parochial clergy undertook the services of these chantries.... The establishment of a Mass or chantry priest at a fixed stipend, in a church with which he had no other relation, was a common form of endowment. The residue, if any, of the revenue derivable from these tenements was made the common property of the Guild, and as the continuity of the service was the great object of its establishment, the donor, like the modern trustee of a life income, took care that there should be a surplus from the foundation. The land or house was let, and the Guild consented to find the ministration which formed the motive of the grant.” This is very true, but it may be questioned whether Mr. Thorold Rogers appreciated the extent to which these chantry funds were intended to be devoted to purposes other than the performance of the specified religious services. Certainly writers generally have treated the question of the chantries as if they had no object but the keeping of obits or anniversary services for the original founder and his kin. To show what really was the case, it may be well to take a couple of instances in Hampshire. In connection with the parish church of Alton in the sixteenth century there were six obits or chantries. The following is the account of these which I take from the Chantry Certificates made by the King’s Commissioners in the first year of the reign of Edward VI.:--