The dissolution of the monasteries : $b As illustrated by the suppression of the religious houses of Staffordshire — John Shaqi
The dissolution of the monasteries : $b As illustrated by the suppression of the religious houses of StaffordshireHibbert, Francis Aidan
History
The dissolution of the monasteries : $b As illustrated by the suppression of the religious houses of Staffordshire
Hibbert, Francis Aidan
Great Britain -- History -- Henry VIII, 1509-1547; Monasteries -- England -- Staffordshire; Monasteries and state
The house gained nothing by its independence, but rather the reverse.
The Prior found his subjection to the lay-patron involved him in
litigation, without gaining him protection from the jealousy of
neighbours. The house shared in the general decline in wealth and
numbers after the Black Death. In 1384 Bishop Robert de Stretton
appointed the Prior and Canons of Calwich to be the collectors in the
Archdeaconry of Stafford of the Convocation grant, but they petitioned
to be excused on the plea of infirmity, poverty, and smallness of
numbers (there were only two Canons besides the Prior).
It sank lower and lower. In 1438 the Prior was charged with the
forcible detention of ten oxen and eight cows, for which damages to
the amount of £20 were claimed. Twenty years after he was troubled by
neighbours breaking into his close, cutting down his underwood and
letting loose their cattle to graze upon his pastures.
Accordingly, when the Prior died in 1530, the house was a poor place
with a bad record. In accordance with the usual practice, the Priory
was taken into the royal hands during the vacancy; and the subsequent
story affords an interesting illustration of the way in which the
attack on clerical privileges which was carried on in the early years
of the Reformation Parliament, was supported by irregular movements in
detail. It also helps us to see how the great work of the Suppression
of the Monasteries was the independent work of the Government. They
made use of Parliamentary support and sanction when it was convenient
or wise, but the work was in reality their own. The suppression of
Calwich was never referred to Parliament. It aroused no feeling and
evoked no protest from anyone. It was evidently looked upon as quite a
natural exercise of the royal power.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account