sign in sign up
<<
Home , Abbey, Biddlesden, Birchley Hall, Bishop of Sodor and Man, Bishop of the Isles, Braaid

Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU

Dissertations Graduate College

12-2015

Power Relations at the Cistercian Abbey of St. Mary at : With Special Interest in Connections at and Influence through the

Valerie Dawn Hampton Western Michigan University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

Part of the European History Commons, and the History of Religion Commons

Recommended Citation Hampton, Valerie Dawn, "Power Relations at the Cistercian Abbey of St. Mary at Rushen: With Special Interest in Connections at Furness and Influence through the Kingdom of the Isles" (2015). Dissertations. 1175. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1175

This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected].

POWER RELATIONS AT THE CISTERCIAN ABBEY OF ST. MARY AT RUSHEN: WITH SPECIAL INTEREST IN CONNECTIONS AT FURNESS AND INFLUENCE THROUGH THE KINGDOM OF THE ISLES

by

Valerie Dawn Hampton

A dissertation submitted to the Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy History Western Michigan University December 2015

Doctoral Committee:

E. Rozanne Elder, Ph.D., Chair Paul Maier, Ph.D. Rand Johnson, Ph.D. Francis Swietek, Ph.D.

POWER RELATIONS AT THE CISTERCIAN ABBEY OF ST. MARY AT RUSHEN: WITH SPECIAL INTEREST IN CONNECTIONS AT FURNESS AND INFLUENCE THROUGH THE KINGDOM OF THE ISLES

Valerie Dawn Hampton, Ph.D.

Western Michigan University, 2015

The is an island situated in the at the geographical center of the . During the Ages, the Isle of Man, which was only two hundred and twenty-two square miles, surprisingly was the seat of an important Viking kingdom that controlled and patrolled the Irish Sea and

Hebrides. Rushen Abbey, a Savigniac , was founded in 1134 near

Ballasalla, in the of , in the southeast of the Isle of Man.

This dissertation focuses on the influence that Rushen Abbey exerted on the ecclesiastical institutions and secular personas within the area of the Irish Sea and examines the external dignitaries which, in turn, influenced the abbey.

Ecclesiastical issues include the relationship between Rushen and its motherhouse, Furness in ; the associations among situated in the Irish Sea region (Furness, , , Holmcultram, Inch, and Gray); the consequences of Rushen and Furness’ Savigniac heritage after the

Congregation had been incorporated in 1147 into the Cistercian Order; and the

abbey’s influence on the bishopric of the Isles. Secular issues explored include the importance of Rushen Abbey to the magnates and nobles in the Irish Sea region in social, political, as well as economical relations, particularly the king of the Isles. Finally, the dissertation examines the ways in which both Rushen and its motherhouse, , both thrived in frontier regions and secured a place as the predominant religious influence on the Isle of Man.

© 2015 Valerie Dawn Hampton

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I have been blessed and would like to mention my first supervisor at

Western Michigan, Dr. Amos, who showed great support and gave me strength in spirit. I would also like to thank Dr. E. Rozanne Elder for taking on the mantle of my advisor and seeing me through this dissertation; it would not have been possible without her perseverance. I would like to express my gratitude to the rest of my committee—Drs. Francis Swietek, Paul Maier, and

Rand Johnson—for their insightful comments, encouragement, and hard questions. I am grateful to Dr. Florin Curta for always having his opinion, time, and reassurance. I am now a Ph.D. alumna of WMU because of these people being in my life: Thank you.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks for the guidance of Dr.

Marianne Di Pierro and the assistance of the Graduate College of Western

Michigan, for which I am eternally grateful. I would also like to thank Dr. Marion

Gray, Chair of the History Department, and Dr. Mitch Kachun, History Graduate

Studies Director, for encouraging me to apply and obtain research grants such as the Judith Stone Award from the history department and research funding from the Graduate College in 2010. This funding allowed me to study in the PIMS library in Toronto, which is the closest holding of many works on Furness

ii

Acknowledgments—Continued

without taking a trip across the pond, and the research grant also allowed me to digitize The Chronicle of Man.

I am also indebted to Dr. Peter Davey at the Centre of Manx Studies, who allowed me access to his chapter “Medieval and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-

1406 before it was released. Dr. Davey also let me peruse the books he had taken out of the Centre. This dissertation would not have been possible without the assistance of the Rare Books staff, holdings at the Manx National

Heritage Library Archives, and the Center of Manx Studies.

I owe my deepest gratitude to my parents, Jully and Leonard Hampton, who suffered through this dissertation with me; maybe Dad can retire now. I would also like to thank my grandparents. I want to mention the devotion of my service dog, Cinder, who was always my faithful companion, and Caligula,

Claudius, Gabriel, Sam, and Dean, who cheer me up every day while writing and editing this dissertation. I would like to thank my siblings, Lenny, Kris, and

Cheryl, for introducing me to reading and keeping me inspired. Lastly, I offer my regards and blessings to all those who supported me in any respect during the completion on this project.

Valerie Dawn Hampton

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... ii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Methodology and Statement of Sources ...... 2

Manx Sources ...... 4

Savigniac Studies ...... 14

Cistercian Sources ...... 21

Historical Significance and Thesis ...... 24

Historical Context ...... 24

Statement of Thesis ...... 26

Structure of Dissertation ...... 29

II. NEW MONASTIC ORDERS...... 31

Brief History of Cîteaux ...... 32

The Congregation of Savigny’s History ...... 37

Savigniac and Cistercian Growth ...... 40

Rapid Expansion ...... 40

First English Houses ...... 42

Cistercian and Savigniac Orders: Compared ...... 46

Similarities ...... 46

Purported Differences ...... 48

iv

Table of Contents—Continued

CHAPTER

The Merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Cistercian Order ...... 51

Controversy over Merger, Particularly with English Houses ...... 54

Savigny as the Cause of the Supposed “Corruption” of the ...... 59

Contentions in the Incorporation of Savigny ...... 62

Rushen Abbey ...... 65

III. BACKGROUND OF THE POLITICS AND EARLY HISTORY OF RUSHEN ON THE ISLE OF MAN FROM THE FIRST VIKING ARRIVAL TO THE END OF THE CROVAN DYNASTY (1079-1265)...... 67

Rapid Conversion of Viking Settlers to Christianity: First in the Isle of Man ...... 67

The Survival of Christianity in the First Viking Age ...... 68

Stone Crosses ...... 68

Viking Age Burials ...... 70

Second Viking Age: The Beginning of the Crovan Dynasty ...... 71

History of Rushen Abbey ...... 75

Foundation of Rushen Abbey (1134) ...... 75

Furness Abbey Donation ...... 77

Early Records of Rushen ...... 82

After the Merger with the Cistercians ...... 88

Rushen: Royal Mausoleum? ...... 90

Later Rushen ...... 92

v

Table of Contents—Continued

CHAPTER

IV. RUSHEN ABBEY AS A CISTERCIAN/SAVIGNIAC HOUSE ...... 96

The Impact of Twelfth-Century Reformed Monasticism in the Irish Sea Province ...... 96

Gregorian Reform ...... 96

Bernard and the Gregorian Reform ...... 99

Gregorian Reform Introduced to the Irish Region ...... 101

New Monasticism and Reform in the Isle of Man ...... 103

Isle of Man as an Ideal Region for New Monasticism ...... 103

Monks as Frontiersman in the Irish Sea Region ...... 106

Church Reforms on the Isle of Man...... 109

Savigniac Order ...... 112

Cistercian-Savigniac Affiliation in 1147 and its Effects ...... 112

Relationship between Rushen and Furness ...... 113

Characteristics of Rushen Not in Accord with Cistercian Ideals ...... 115

Cistercianizing Rushen Abbey ...... 118

Cistercian Statutes ...... 118

Abbey Industries ...... 120

Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct ...... 123

Conclusion: Adaptations and Effects of the Savigniac-Cistercian Affiliation on Man ...... 130

V. RUSHEN ABBEY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER MONASTIC HOUSES IN THE IRISH SEA REGION ...... 132

vi

Table of Contents—Continued

CHAPTER

Other Monasteries on the Isle of Man ...... 132

Religious Houses Other than Rushen Abbey Founded on Mann ...... 132

Cistercian Houses during the Manx “Second Viking Age” ...... 138

Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the Late Eleventh Century ...... 143

Monastic Houses Outside the Isle of Man ...... 147

Galloway ...... 147

England ...... 149

Argyll ...... 151

Ireland ...... 152

The Relationship amongst Reformed Monasteries in the Irish Sea Region ...... 155

Political Patronage ...... 155

Trade among Irish Sea Monasteries ...... 157

Rushen Abbey’s Relationship with Geographically Close Monastic Houses ...... 161

VI. RUSHEN ABBEY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH SECULAR POWERS ...... 164

Patrons of Rushen Abbey ...... 164

Royal Patronage and Land Grants ...... 164

The Bishopric and Its Connection with Rushen ...... 171

Elected during Crovan Dynasty ...... 173

Secular Disputes Concerning Rushen Abbey ...... 179

vii

Table of Contents—Continued

CHAPTER

Metropolitans...... 179

Electoral Right of Bishopric ...... 187

Cathedral Chapter ...... 204

The Secular Affairs of Rushen Abbey ...... 208

Trade ...... 208

Allocations and Tithes ...... 209

Abbots as Barons and Judges ...... 210

Monastic Tenants ...... 211

Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships ...... 213

VII. CONCLUSION ...... 216

Previous Knowledge of Rushen Abbey ...... 216

Older Research and Documentation on Rushen Abbey ...... 225

Primary Sources ...... 225

Secondary Sources ...... 227

The State of Modern Manx Research ...... 228

Recent Research ...... 228

Recently Addressed Issues Concerning Older Research ...... 230

Issues Addressed by This Dissertation ...... 232

How This Dissertation Increases Knowledge about Rushen Abbey .. 236

APPENDIX

Table and Figures ...... 244

viii Table of Contents—Continued

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 250

ix

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Situated in the Irish Sea at the geographical center of the British Isles, the

Isle of Man, only 221 square miles, surprisingly was the seat of an important

Viking kingdom that controlled and patrolled the Irish Sea and during the .1 In 1134, on the southeast corner of the island, Rushen Abbey, a

Savigniac monastery, was founded near , in the parish of Malew. 2

This dissertation focuses on the influence Rushen Abbey exerted on the ecclesiastical institutions and secular persons within the area of the Irish Sea and, conversely, examines how those institutions and persons influenced the abbey during the Manx Crovan dynasty (1079-1265).3 Ecclesiastical issues to be investigated include the relationship between Rushen and its motherhouse,

Furness in Cumbria, not least Furness’ unique electoral right over the See; the associations among monasteries situated in the Irish Sea region (Furness,

1. Caesar stated that the Isle of Man was situated in the middle between Britain and . (Gallic Wars, Lib. v. c. 13). Giraldus Cambrensis also places the island stretched in the middle between the north parts of Ireland and Britain (Topography of Ireland, c. 15). Mann was called by various names in classical sources: Mona or Menavia, by Caesar; Monabia by Pliny (Lib. ii. c. 9.); Monapia by Pliny the Younger (Natural History, iv. 103); Mevania by Paulus Orosius, Lib. i. c. 2:82); Menavia Secunda by Bede (Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum, Lib. ii. c. 5); Eubonia and Manaw by Nennius (Lib. iii. c. 8, 14). Secondary sources are William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 4 and George Broderick, “Pre-Scandinavian Place-Names in the Isle of Man,” accessed November, 01, 2008, http://www.george-broderick.de/iom_docs/pre-scandinavian-place-names.doc.

2. See Appendix Figure 1, p. 248.

3. See Appendix Figure 2, p. 249.

1

Iona, Whithorn, Holm Cultram, Inch, and Gray); the significance of Rushen and

Furness’ Savigniac heritage after the incorporation of the Congregation into the

Cistercian Order in 1147; and, finally, the abbey’s influence on the bishopric of the Isles. Secular issues to be explored include the importance of Rushen Abbey to the magnates and nobles in the area, particularly the king of the Isles. Finally, the dissertation will examine the ways in which Rushen Abbey influenced neighboring kingdoms.

Methodology and Statement of Sources

The methodological framework of this dissertation is constructed from material cultural, and literary and archival sources. Since the nineteenth century,

Manx researchers have provided abundant material cultural information through the publication of many archaeological reports about Rushen Abbey.4

Since most published theories concerning the abbey have largely been derivatively based on the concept of the conventional Cistercian house in architecture and daily life, material culture is of key importance to any study of

4. Joseph G. Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868): 36-55. Published archaeological research by William C. Cubbon: “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925): 509-518; Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1927); A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1938). Articles published by Lawrence Butler: “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen: Excavations 1978- 79,” Journal of British Archaeologists Association 141 (1988): 60-104; “Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: Interim Report on Excavations, March 26th-April 14th 1989,” Cîteaux 39 (1988): 350-51; “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen, Isle of Man: Excavations on the East Range 1988- 89,” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 155 (2002): 168-194. The most definitive archaeological report about Rushen is Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: , 1999).

2

the abbey and supplements the meager primary literature. Archival and primary literary sources will include the few documents relating to the Isle of Man which are scattered through various charters, papal bulls, monastic resources, and state archives.

Manx references can be found in the Patent Rolls, Close Rolls, Charts

Antiqua, charter compilations, monastic and papal records. The Patent Rolls are charters recorded on open parchment sheets; a few of the records relate to Manx royalty and include letters of protection and safe conduct. The Close Rolls are charters recorded on closed parchment, and range in subject matter from royal edicts and ecclesiastical and civil judicature, to military affairs. The Charts

Antiqua consist mainly of charters of religious houses and monastic transactions, such as releases, quitclaims, and manumissions. The witness lists, when they are included at the end of these charters, offer valuable information on genealogy and dates. Among compilations which have assisted researchers, that of

Augustinus Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum Historiam

Illustrantia, published in 1864 in , has been widely used as a resource by

Manx historians on the Middle age in the Isle of Man. This compilation contains records relating to the ecclesiastical history in the Irish Sea region.5 Thomas

Rymer’s Foedera, published between 1704 and 1713, contains many documents

5. Augustinus Theiner, Vetera monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum historiam illustrantia quae ex Vaticani, Neapolis ac Florentiae tabulariis deprompsit et ordine chronologico disposuit, 1216-1547 (Rome: n.p., 1864).

3

issued by the English king and other rulers.6 Monastic records, the most valuable sources for this dissertation, include chronicles, chartularies, mortuary books, registers, and calendars. Finally, papal bulls to be used in this dissertation encompass the works of Jaffé, Potthast, and Holtzmann.7

The key historical documentation needed to create this dissertation falls into three categories: Manx, Savigniac, and Cistercian. This dissertation will examine all the extant records of Rushen Abbey, Furness, and other Cistercian and Savigniac monasteries in the Irish Sea region and the ecclesiastical records that mention them for the purpose of analyzing the abbey’s monastic, ecclesiastical, and secular relationships. I have analyzed manuscripts, published primary sources, and secondary studies in the above categories and have provided a review of the primary sources and previous literature below.

Manx Sources

Primary Sources

The most important primary Manx source is Chronica Regum Manniae et

6. Thomas Rymer, Foedera, conventiones, literae et cujuscunque generis acta publica, inter regis Angliae et alios quosvis imperatore reges pontifices, principles, vel communitates, ab ineunte saeculo duodecimo, ab nostra usque tempora, habita aut tractata. 20 vols. (London: J. Tonson, 1704-35).

7. Phillip Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXCVIII. 2 vols. (Graz: Akademische Druck – U. Verlagsanstalt, 1956); August Potthast, Regesta pontificum romanorum inde ab a. post Christum natum MCXCVIII ad a. MCCCIV. 2 vols. (Berlin, 1874-75; rp. Graz, 1957); Walther Holtzmann, Papsturkunden in (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1930): Johannes Ramackers, Papsturkunden in Frankreich. Neue Folge 2. Band: Normandie. no. 21 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1937).

4

Insularum (Chronicle of Man), British Library, MS Cotton Julius A.VII.8 This unique manuscript, most likely composed by a of Rushen Abbey in the mid-thirteenth century,9 was perhaps made at the behest of a Manx king. The chronicle documents, year by year, historical events that concern the Isle of Man and the surrounding islands from 1016 to the fourteenth century. The Chronicle of

Man bears witness to the island’s role as the capital of the Norse Kingdom of

Mann and the Isles, as well as the influence of its kings and religious leaders. It also provides details of the role of the Rushen Abbey. Early entries are vague and concise, often dedicating only one or two lines to a year and recording nothing in some years; later events are narrated extensively, especially those referring to the royal family, miraculous events, and the bishopric. The chronicle concludes shortly after the death of the last Hiberno-Norse king of Man in 1316 with the plundering of Rushen Abbey by Scottish invaders. Like other monastic chronicles, the Chronicle of Man takes an interest in the family of the monastery’s patron.10 It is clear from his support of the Crovan dynasty against usurpers that the monk-chronicler regarded the Hiberno-Norse rulers as his rightful kings,

8. Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles, BL Cotton Julius A.vii: this is the only extant copy of the Chronicle of Man.

9. George Broderick, Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles (Douglas: , 1996), ix.

10. Susan Wood, English Monasteries and Their Patrons in the Thirteenth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955), 6, 123-5; John Taylor, The Use of Medieval Chronicles (London: Historical Association, 1965), 13-14; Chris Given-Wilson, Chronicles: the Writing of History in Medieval England (London: Hambledon Continuum, 2004), 81-86.

5

probably because the royal family founded and continued to patronize Rushen throughout the dynasty.11

The text of the Chronicle of Man is available in five forms: the manuscript at the British Library;12 a microfilm facsimile of the manuscript;13 digitalized images of certain pages of the manuscript published by the British Library;14 a facsimile published in a limited edition by the Manx Museum;15 and, finally, the printed editions.16

The 1860 edition by Peter Munch was published with the addition of notes from sources not previously associated with the Isle of Man.

Munch added explanations to the Hiberno-Latin text to explain terminology in

11. For example, the chronicler expresses his aversion to of , who seized control of Mann in 1158-1164, and whom the chronicler considered to be the downfall of the kingdom: Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v, 37 v, 39 r.

12. Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles, BL Cotton Julius A.vii.

13. ‘Part 1. Cotton’ in Medieval Literary and Historical Manuscripts in the Cotton Collection [microform] 123 microfilm reels 35 mm. (London: British Library. Dept. of Manuscripts).

14. ‘Online Images,’ at the British Library Online Gallery: see bibliography for more information on exact images taken from the Online Gallery. http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ index. html. I also ordered the folios of BL Cotton Julius A. vii missing from the Online Gallery through the British Library’s Imaging Services.

15. The Chronicle of Man and the Isles: a facsimile of the Manuscript Codex Julius A. VII in the British Museum, ed. (Douglas: Manx Museum, 1874).

16. William Camden, Britannia, sive florentissimorum regnorum Angliae, Scotiae, Hiberniae, et Insularum. adjacentium, ex intima antiquitate chorographica descriptio (Londini, 1586), 727 – 740; Rev James Johnstone, Chronicon Manniae, or a Chronicle of the King’s of Man (Copenhagen, 1786); J. R. Oliver, Chronicon Manniae et Insularum in Monumenta de Insulas Manniae, vol. I. Manx Society 4 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860); Peter A. Munch, The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys: Edited from the Manuscript Codex in the British Museum, ed. Dr. Goss, Manx Society 22 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860); George Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum (Douglas: The Manx Museum and National Trust, 1979).

6

the manuscript.17 He also supplied translations of those parts of the work that had been previously given in Latin alone. Munch’s work is dated by today’s standards; however, it remains the most scholarly edition to date. In 1979,

Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum was edited by George Boderick.18 Boderick’s introduction provides a paleographic analysis of the manuscript,19 describes the state of the manuscript, the various hands, changes in scribes, and the history of the manuscript.20 These editions are all unreliable and none of the published translations of the Chronicle of Man are reliable for modern academic research. In the near future I plan to publish a new critical edition.

Beyond the Chronicle of Man, primary sources about the Isle of Man in the

Middle Ages were compiled in 1860 as Monumenta de Insula Manniae by John

Robert Oliver at the request of the Manx Society.21 These volumes contain editions of all the charters relating to the Isle of Man that Oliver could discover in numerous archives and public records offices in the . The charters contain bilingual, Latin and English, texts, mainly from English sources and papal letters. No subsequent comparable collection has been attempted. The

17. Munch, The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys.

18. Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum.

19. Boderick, “Preface,” in Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum, i-xii.

20. Munch, The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys; Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum.

21. John Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, 3 vols. Manx Society 4, 7, 9 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860-2).

7

first volume of Oliver’s work contains selected excerpts from chronicles that pertain to the Isle of Man.22 Included in Monumenta Volume One are selected passages from the chronicles of Jocelin of Furness,23 Florence of Worcester,24

William of Malmesbury,25 Orderic Vitalis,26 Henry of Huntingdon,27 Matthew of

Paris,28 Roger of ,29 William of Newburgh,30 the Annales Cambriae,31 and the Account of Haco’s Expedition.32 Volume Two and Volume Three contain a

22. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 1, Manx Society 4 (1860), 1-244.

23. Jocelin of Furness, ‘Chapter XCII,’ in The Life and Acts of : the , and apostle of Ireland, trans. David Rothe (Dublin: Hibernia Press Co, 1809), 108 – 9.

24. Florence of Worcester, The Chronicle of Florence of Worcester, trans. Thomas Forester. (London: Henry G Bohn, 1854), AD 827, p. 50-1; AD 1094, p. 198; AD 1098, p. 204.

25. William of Malmesbury, The Chronicle of the Kings of England, trans. John A. Giles (New : AMS, 1968), 3, 292 and 4.1, p. 343.

26. Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3.

27. Henry of Huntingdon, Henrici Archidiaconi Huntendunensis Historia Anglorum, ed. Thomas Arnold (London: Longman, 1879), Lib. 1.2, p. 6-7; Lib. 2.23, p. 52; Lib. 2.24, p. 83.

28. Matthew Paris, English History, vol. 1. trans. J. A. Giles (London: George Bell and Sons, 1889), AD 1236, p. 30-2 and Matthew Paris, English History, vol. 3. trans. J. A. Giles (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1854), AD 1256, p. 166.

29. Roger of Wendover, Flower’s of History: The History of England. vol. 1. Trans. J. A. Giles (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1862), AD 974, p. 263-4; AD 1151, p. 506.

30. ‘A Continuation of William of Newburgh’s History to A.D. 1298’ in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II., and Richard I. Vol 2. ed. Richard Howlett. Chronicles and Memorials of and Ireland during the Middle Ages vol. 82 (London: Longman & Co. and Trübner, (1885), AD 1265, p. 549; AD 1275, 569 – 71.

31. Annales Cambriae, ed. John Williams (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and , 1860), AD 584, p. 5; AD 684, p. 8; AD 987, p. 21.

32. Norwegian Account of King Haco’s Expedition against , trans. James Johnstone (Edinburgh: 1883), AD 1248, p. 13-4; AD 1249, 14-7; AD 1261, 17-8; AD 1262, 18-9; AD 1263, 20-4.

8

series of muniments that illustrate the state of the island in late antiquity and the

Middle Ages and includes Manx and English state papers and letters, as well as papal bulls and all patent and close rolls, antique charts, and grants pertaining to the monastery. Volume Two features charters dated from 1134 AD to 1408 AD,33 while Volume Three contains those from 1414 AD to 1770 AD.34

In 1871, the Manx Society published in one volume, compiled by William

Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, a selection of mostly secondary early historical sources not included in Oliver’s Monumenta, detailing the secular and ecclesiastical life of ancient and medieval society on the Isle of Man.35 The author decided against including the Manx Chronicle, because it had already been published and was widely available at the time.36 Harrison’s work also includes translations of the synodal statutes of the Manx and passages from various post-medieval histories: Camden’s Britannia,37 Speed’s History,38

33. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (1861), 1-250.

34. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 3, Manx Society 9 (1862), 1-269.

35. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871).

36. Munch, The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys, see note 16; Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum: see note 16.

37. William Camden, from the section ‘Insulae Britannicae’ in Britannia, sive florentissimorum regnorum Angliae, Scotiae, Hiberniae, et Insularum. adjacentium, ex intima antiquitate chorographica descriptio (Londini, 1586), 724 – 762.

38. John Speed, ‘History of the Isle of Man,’ in The Theatre of the Empire of Great-Britain, Book I. Chap. 46 (London: George Humble, 1627), 91-92.

9

Dugdale’s Monasticon Angelicanum,39 Cox’s Magna Britannia,40 Wilson’s

History,41 Willis’ Survey of the of Mann,42 and Grose’s Antiquities.43

Secondary Sources

Among the published secondary sources on Manx ecclesiastical history, the most useful monograph is ’s Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.44 Moore traced the history of the Manx Church from its early Celtic foundation to the nineteenth century. The Celtic and medieval history of the church and monastic houses on the island, from early Christian influences through the changes incorporated by the Norse Crovan dynasty to the end of

Viking rule, is covered in three chapters: the “Celtic Period,”45 the “Scandinavian

Period (?850-1275),”46 and “The Rule of the .”47

39. William Dugdale, ‘Rushen Abbey’ in Monasticon Angelicanum, vol 5. ed. Caley, Ellis, and Bandinel (London: 1825), 252-256.

40. Thomas Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, 6 vols. (London, 1720-31).

41. Bishop Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Works of the Right Reverend Father in God, , vol. VII (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1847) 247-270.

42. Browne Willis, ‘Survey of the Cathedral of Man,’ in A Survey of the of York, Durham, Carlisle, Chester, Man, Litchfield, Hereford, Worcester, Gloucester, , Lincoln, Ely, Oxford, and , vol. I (London: H. Gosling, 1742), 369-380.

43. Francis Grose, ‘Antiquities of the Isle of Man,’ in Antiquities of England and , 8 vols. (London: 1773-87), vol. 6, 197-214 and vol. 8, 161-162.

44. Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893).

45. Moore, “Celtic Period” in Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 9-31.

46. Moore, “Scandinavian Period (?850-1275)” in Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 32-62.

10

In his history of the Church on the Isle of Man, William Dempsey developed a trustworthy account of the “great recovery” of Catholic Christianity in the island brought about under the leadership of Olaf I (1102-1153).48 In 1958,

Anne Ashley, in a short pamphlet, wrote about the Church in Mann from its

Celtic Christian background through the Viking Age and the Crovan dynasty

(1079-1266).49 It was during the Crovan dynasty that the Manx Church rapidly converted from the tribal Irish tradition of Christianity to that of the Roman

Church.

Recent publications include “Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” a detailed list of the bishops of the See of Sodor and Man in 1994.50 Its compiler, Watt, provides brief biographies for all Manx bishops, rumored and documented, in chronological order.

A 1996 master’s thesis by Mary Buck at the University of Guelph investigated the introduction of the twelfth-century reformed monastic Orders to northern England and the Isle of Man and the establishment in England of the

Cistercian Order and the Congregation of Savigny, paying special attention to

47. Moore, “The Rule of the Monks (1275-1406)” in Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 63- 80.

48. William S. Dempsey, ”The Great Recovery” in The Story of the in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958). The Manx Church was most prestigious during the Viking Crovan dynasty.

49. Anne Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man (London: St. Anthony’s Press, 1958).

50. Donald Elmslie Robertson Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review 45 (1994): 99-119.

11

Furness Abbey in Cumbria and its daughter house Rushen on the Isle of Man.51

Buck examined the ways in which Furness Abbey came to exercise authority in

Mann during the late-thirteenth century. She relied heavily on secondary sources for her conclusions, often failing to substantiate her theories with primary sources.52

In 1998, Donald Dugdale, describing the early in the British Isles, concentrated on the Isle of Man from the third century to the sixteenth century.53 Unlike many other modern scholars54 who assert that Celtic traditions were assimilated and incorporated by the Viking settlers after the

Norse invasion of Mann, Dugdale theorizes that the Celtic heritage of the island was too heavily overwritten to have survived in any aspect of Manx culture.55

51. Mary E. Buck, “Twelfth-century Cistercian and Savigniac foundations in England and the Isle of Man a comparative study,” (M.A. thesis, University of Guelph, 1996).

52. Buck’s sources are mostly secondary works; papal bulls and charters are pulled from these records even when they can be found in extant copies or more accurate editions: Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; David Knowles, The Religious Orders in England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959); R. H. Kniving, Isle of Man: A Social, Cultural, and Political History, 3rd ed. (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1975). Buck has also mistaken an editor’s comment for an actual transliteration of a charter, on page 116.

53. Donald S. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins (Felinfach: Llanerch Publishers, 1998).

54. Ronald Williams, The Lords of the Isles: The Clan Donald and the early Kingdom of the Scots (London: Chatto and Windus, 1984), 82; R. Andrew McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles: Scotland’s Western Seaboard c. 1100-1336 (East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 1997), 29-30; Benjamin Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes: Dynasty, Religion, and Empire in the North Atlantic (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 3-5, 9, 206; David M. Wilson, The in the Isle of Man (Aarhus : Aarhus University Press, 2008), 13, 15, 87, 96, 100-103, 136.

55. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 5; though Dugdale seems to contradict himself on pages 188-190.

12

The Centre for Manx Studies recently published A New History of the Isle of

Man, a five volume history of the Isle of Man, each volume containing articles on recent research by Manx scholars from prehistory to the present day.56 In fall

2015, A New History of the Isle of Man: Volume Three: The Medieval Period 1000-1405 highlighted the island’s influence in the Irish Sea region and explores the multi- cultural traditions of Man.57 The book is separated into two parts, focusing on politics and society.

In 2006, Francis Coakley established an electronic database containing a compilation articles, books, and journals concerning the Isle of Man.58 The website includes fully printed texts of various monographs and documents concerning the history of Mann. A number of articles from the Journal of the Manx

Museum and some unpublished documents are included, as are many of the

Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society.

Archaeological Reports

Archaeological research on the Isle of Man began with mid-nineteenth- century reports of Joseph G. Cumming.59 During the early twentieth century,

56. New History of the Isle of Man, 5 vol. (Liverpool University Press, 2000-2010).

57. Duffy, ed., New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406 (Liverpool University Press, 2015).

58. Frances Coakley, “The Manx Notebook,” Douglas: The Manx Society. http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/ (2006, updated 2010).

59. Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 36-55: see note 4.

13

William C. Cubbon reported the findings of the initial excavations at Rushen

Abbey (1924-1935) and discussed what might be extrapolated from them.60 More recently, Lawrence Butler has reported on new archaeological discoveries and reinterpreted previous finds.61 Butler points to inaccuracies in Cubbon’s work and reinterprets his evidence in light of 1988-89 excavations. In 1999, Peter Davey edited Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report following the

1998 excavations at Rushen.62 This work identifies potential future archaeological and historical work on the political and social significance of the abbey and raises questions, which this dissertation shall address.

Savigniac Studies

Scholars have not explored the relationship among Savigniac houses in the British Isles. What work has been done has concentrated on the foundation of the Norman Savigny63 and its relationship with daughter houses in England,64 or

60. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 509-518; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch; Cubbon, A Guide to Rushen Abbey: see note 4.

61. Butler, “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen: Excavations 1978-79,”: 60-104; Butler, “Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: Interim Report on Excavations, March 26th-April 14th 1989,” 350-51; Butler, “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen, Isle of Man: Excavations on the East Range 1988-89,” 168-194: see note 4.

62. Davey, Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report: see note 4.

63. The foundation of the Congregation of Savigny is treated in Auguste Laveille, ed., Histoire de la Congregation de Savigny par Dom Claude Auvry, vol. 1, Société de l’histoire de Normandie, 30 (Rouen: A. Lestringant; Paris: A. Picard et Fils, 1896); Léon Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” Revue Mabillon 5 (1909): 290-335; Jacqueline Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny, chef d’Ordre et fille de Cîteaux,” Le Moyen Age 45-46 (1936): 1-19, 104-114, 178-190, 249-272; Mary Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order: Savigny’s Role within Twelfth-Century Monastic Reform,” Revue Bénédictine 86 (1976): 94-108; Michel Pigeon, “Sur la contemplation à Savigny,” COCR 54 (1992): 234-49. There is also a biography of

14

debated aspects of the merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Order of

Cîteaux.65 There is, however, no modern monograph of the Congregation of

Savigny and no current study of Savigniac English houses.66 The only study of relationships among the English Savigniac houses focuses on a debate between

Savigny and Furness over filiation rights to .67

Main Savigniac Sources

The Histoire de la congrégation de Savigny68 was published in three volumes between 1896 and 1898, but written by Claude Auvry, of Savigny from 1698

Vital, which concerns the early history of the congregation: Jaap van Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, prédicateur itinerant, fondateur de l’abbaye normande de Savigny (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1990).

64. In particular, the connections Savigny held with Byland, Jervaulx, and Furness, shown in articles like Janet Burton, “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx,” in Monastic Studies II, ed. Judith Loades (Bangor: Headstart History Publishing, 1991), 119-131 and also seen in Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “ Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 3-25.

65. Treatments on Savigny’s incorporation into the Cistercian Order includes: M. Lambert, “La date de l’affiliation de Savigny et de la Trappe à l’Ordre de Cîteaux,” Collectanea OCR (1936): 231-233; Marie-Anselme Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation à l’ordre de Cîteaux,” Collectanea OCR 9 (1947): 351-358; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” Church History 52 (1983): 285-298; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 3-25; Michel Pigeon, “Présence de saint Bernard à Savigny,” COCR 52 (1990): 204-12; Francis R. Swietek, “The Role of in the Union of Savigny with Cîteaux: A Reconsideration,” in Bernardus Magister: Papers Presented at the Nonacentenary Celebration of the Birth of Bernard of Clairvaux, ed. John R. Sommerfeldt (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1992); Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “‘Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit’: Alexander III on the Reception of Savigny into the Cistercian Order,” Revue d’histoire ecclesiastique 89 (1994): 5-28; Michel Pigeon, “Savigny, Cîteaux…et Clairvaux,” COCR 60.4 (1998) 355-361.

66. Laveille’s Histoire de la Congregation de Savigny is antiquated. Articles include Dimier’s “Savigny et son affiliation à l’ordre de Cîteaux,” (1947): 351-358 Suydam’s “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” (1976): 94-108; Pigeon, “Sur la contemplation à Savigny,” (1992): 234-49.

67. For example, Burton, “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx,” see note 64.

68. Laveille, Histoire de la Congregation de Savigny, see note 66.

15

to 1712. It is not surprising, considering Auvry’s position, that he presented the early history of the Congregation of Savigny favorably and highlighted the life and deeds of Serlo, who was of Savigny during the merger of the

Savigniacs and the Cistercians. Auvry’s history remains the only comprehensive history of Savigny (to c. 1244) and a unique source on the state of Savigny before and after the merger. In the twentieth century, Jacqueline Buhot published a few chapters on the Savigniac Order in Le Moyen Age, giving a general history of the congregation and its merger with the Cistercians.69 Buhot’s research covers the

Abbey of Savigny itself and the Congregation of Savigny, as well as detailing the leadership of the who succeeded Vital (?-1122), the founder of the

Savigniac Order: Geoffrey (1122-1139), who created the Congregation of Savigny;

Ewan the Englishman (1139), who went to Savigny from Furness and held office only for one year, 1139; and Serlo (1140-1153), who brought the congregation into the Order of Cîteaux.

In 1909, Léon Guilloreau, in Revue Mabillon,”70 also described the origins of Savigny and provided a short biography of Vital and Geoffrey chronicling early Savigniac history. After describing the Savigniac administration, governance, and spirituality, Guilloreau gave a brief account of the English

69. Jacqueline Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny, chef d’Ordre et fille de Cîteaux,” Le Moyen Age 45-46 (1936): 1-19, 104-114, 178-190, 249-272;

70. Léon Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” Revue Mabillon 5 (1909): 290-335.

16

houses.71 In 1980, Bennett Hill, in his study of the origins of Savigny and its first six daughter houses in ,72 demonstrated that these seven Savigniac monasteries were among the principal reasons behind colonization in forest and frontier territories.73

In Church History, 1983, Terrence Deneen and Francis Swietek examined the alleged episcopal exemption of Savigny before and after the merger with the

Cistercian Order. Their research indicates that episcopal exemption of Savigniac houses in the early twelfth century was unlikely on the grounds that evidence of exemption is unreliable and ambiguous in wording.74 The same year, they published an examination of two bulls long believed to have been issued by Pope

71. Tulket (1124, which trans-located and became Furness in 1127), Neath (1130), Quarr (1132), Basingwerk (1133), Combemere (1133), Rushen (1134), Calder (1134), and Swineshead (1135), Stratford Langthorne (1135), Buildwas (1135), Buckfast (1136), Devon (1136), Hood ((1140), which was settled by dislocated monks from Calder and trans-located twice more: Old Byland (1143) and Byland (1177)), Coggeshall (1140), Jervaulx (1145).

72. Bennett Hill, “The Beginnings of the First French Foundations of the Norman Abbey of Savigny,” The American Benedictine Review 31 (1980): 130-152.

73. Beaubec, Pays de Bray, Normandy (1127/28); Vaux-de-Cernay, Yvelines (1128); Chaloché, Angers (1129); Saint-André-en-Goffern, Falaise (1130); Foucarmont, Seine-Maritime (1130); La Boissiere, Denézé-sous-le-Lude (1131). In 2002, Karen Billings applied a ‘frontier paradigm’ to research on Furness Abbey in her thesis. [Karen Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” (M.Phil. thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002).]

74. Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” Church History 52 (1983): 285-298. It was not until 1184 that Savigniac houses had true episcopal exemption resulting from their Cistercian status as Lucius III granted salva sedis apostolice autoritate et Cisterciensis ordinis debita reverentia. [Johannes Ramackers, ed., Papsturkunden in Frankreich, New Folge, vol. 2, Normandie, Abhandlungen der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaten zu Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, Dritte Folge, 2:341 (no. 242)]

17

Lucius II on December 5, 1144 on behalf of Savigny.75 The first bull, Desiderium quod, was a privilegium confirming Savigny’s possessions;76 the second, Quia igitur, placed Savigny under papal protection and again confirmed its possessions.77 They concluded that Quia igitur was a forgery.78 In 1993, Swietek and Deneen analyzed Quia igitur using a recovered copy of the complete text.79

They again concluded that the bull was a forgery fabricated between 1148 and

1153,80 and that the forgery was modeled on the bull Habitantes in domo, issued by

Pope Innocent II to Cîteaux in 1132, and on Desiderium quod, to which it was later found attached.81

75. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” see note 65: bulls printed in Laveille, Histoire de la Congregation de Savigny, 2:340-3 and Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, 8673 (6104).

76. Desiderium quod: original is in Paris, Archives nationales L 966, no. 5; copies can be found in Paris, Bibliothéque nationale MS nouv. acq. Lat. 1022, 737-6 and Deneen and Swietek, ‘Appendix I’ in “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 20-3.

77. Quia Igitur: copies can be found in Peregrinus of Vendôme, Historia praelatorum et possessionum ecclesiae B. Mariae de Fontanis, ed. L. D’Achery, Spicilegium sive collectio veterum alquot scriptorum 2 (Paris,1723), 578; André Salmon, Recueil de chroniques de Touraine (Tours, 1854), 277- 78; and Deneen and Swietek, ‘Appendix II’ in “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 23-24.

78. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 11-2, 19-20.

79. Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered: Lucius II’s Bull Habitantes in domo of December 5, 1144,” in Studiosorum speculum: Studies in Honor of Louis J. Lekai, ed. Francis R. Swietek and John R. Sommerfeldt, Cistercian Studies Series 121, (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1993), 363-387.

80. Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,” 366-9, from the Paris, Bibliothéque nationale MS nouv. acq. Lat. 1652, fol. 61 r-v.

81. Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,” 365, 378-9.

18

Sources on Furness Abbey

On Furness, there are several studies. In 1412, the abbot of Furness,

William Dalton, requested that John Stell, a monk of the abbey, record its charters and deeds.82 In 1774, in The Antiquities of Furness, Thomas West presented ancient customs, rights, privileges, and bylaws of Furness Abbey and included a detailed description of the abbey’s buildings.83 In his account, West reproduced many of the charters from the Furness cartulary. In 1880, Joseph

Richardson published a second version of The Antiquities of Furness,84 chronologically listing the abbots and their deeds and discussing the extant letters and documents, especially those involving secular persons. His history of

Furness, its foundation, patrons, and benefactors, extends until just after the abbey’s dissolution in 1537.

In 1870, a guide to the abbey ruins and its history by James Morris included a list of abbots, discussed the public and private transactions of the abbey, and provided a translation of the Furness Abbey foundation charter.85 In

82. Walford D. Selby, ed., and records preserved in the Public Record Office, vol. 7 (London: Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1882), Part 1, xxxi: Hunc John Stell digitis monachus scripsit sine penna.

83. Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 1774).

84. Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880).

85. James P. Morris, Handy guide to the ruins of Furness Abbey (Ulverston: n.p., 1870).

19

1884, Thomas A. Beck published many of the charters from the cartulary in his extensive history of Furness Abbey, Annales Furnesienses.86

A printed edition of the Coucher Book of Furness Abbey published in 1886 by

John C. Atkinson consisted of three parts:87 the foundation charter of the abbey and charters regarding the abbey’s right to certain surrounding lands;88 the exemption of the abbey from numerous secular taxes;89 and an annotated list of abbots, as well as bulls granted to the abbey by the (Alexander III to Urban

VI).90

In 1915, John Brownbill produced Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Volume

Two to supplement Atkinson’s Furness Coucher Book by including charters involving land owned by Furness but located at a distance from the abbey.91

Brownbill’s Coucher Book is also divided into three parts: (1) the original charter of foundation, land donations involving Furness’ surrounding towns, and

86. Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness. London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844.

87. John Christopher Atkinson, ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, Chetham Society vol. 1, pts. 9, 11, 14 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886-8). In his introduction, Atkinson described the original manuscript structure of the coucher book.

88. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, Chetham Society 9 (1886), 1-260.

89. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, Chetham Society 11 (1887), 260-536.

90. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, Chetham Society 14 (1888), 536-728.

91. John Brownbill, ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London. Chetham Society vol. 2, pts. 74, 76, 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1915-9).

20

records of property sales;92 (2) similar charters from , , and

Cumberland;93 and (3) lists of abbey rentals and accounts, Manx and Irish charters, and notes and additions made to Atkinson’s Furness Coucher Book.94

Cistercian Sources

Building on the early modern Monasticon Anglicanum volumes by William

Dugdale,95 Thomas Tanner’s Notitia monastica,96 and Francis Gasquet’s The

Greater Abbeys of England,97 David Knowles,98 in the mid-twentieth century,

92. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, Chetham Society 74 (1915), 1-288.

93. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, Chetham Society 76 (1916), 289-583.

94. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, Chetham Society 78 (1919), 585-880.

95. William Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum. 3 vols. (London: Turks Head, 1693). Dugdale includes an account of each religious house in England, with its respective Latin Charters. In this edition, Wright adds descriptions of monastic seals, notices of records, more religious houses including those of orders, and accounts for many destroyed monasteries.

96. Thomas Tanner, Notitia monastica, ed. James Nasmith (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1787). Tanner lists monastic houses by alphabetical order and includes a short history of each and the valuation of its properties.

97. Francis Aidan Gasquet, The Greater Abbeys of England (New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1908). Among the abbeys, Gasquet included Furness, Fountains, Jervaulx, Rievaulx, and Rushen.

98. The Monastic Order in England by David Knowles, originally published in 1940, covers the period from the Revival of in 943 to the Fourth Lateran Council of 1216. [David Knowles, The Monastic Order in England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963).] Knowles continued his account of English monastic history in The Religious Orders in England, which cover all Orders from 1216 to the sixteenth-century Dissolution. [David Knowles, The Religious Orders in England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959).] In 1953, David Knowles and Neville Hadcock published Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, a comprehensive survey of pre- religious houses of England and Wales listed by Order, and providing dates of foundation and dissolution as well as brief historical notes. [David Knowles and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales (London: Longman Group Limited, 1953).] Volumes concerning religious houses of Scotland and Ireland were subsequently published. [David E. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, Ed. Ian B.

21

launched modern scholarship on British monasticism.99 Monographs on religious

Orders in England have increasingly proliferated.100 Susan Wood’s English

Monasteries and Their Patrons in the Thirteenth Century101 appeared in 1955, the

Cowan. 2nd ed. (London: Longman Group Limited, 1976); Gwynn, Aubrey and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses Ireland (London: Longman Group Limited, 1970).]

99. In 1979, Roy Midmer published a listing of medieval monasteries in England, containing brief details on the history of each houses. [Roy Midmer, English Medieval Monasteries, 1066-1540: A Summary (London: Heinemann, 1979).] The series The Heads of Religious Houses England and Wales provides references for establishing the dates and outline of the careers of each abbot or prior and or prioress (when known). [C.N.L. Brooke and David Knowles, The Heads of Religious Houses England and Wales, 940-1216 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972); Vera C.M. London and David M. Smith, eds., The Heads of Religious Houses England and Wales II 1216-1377 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); David M. Smith, ed., The Heads of Religious Houses England and Wales III 1377-1540 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.)] These volumes can be used to date undated documents and give practical evidence to the number and provenance of religious house superiors. Researchers can use the lists to know what abbot was ruling a house during an event and see one ’s relationship to his or another community.

100. In 1961, G. H. Cook published a general account of the monastic establishments of England from the seventh to the sixteenth century, emphasizing the planning of monastic churches and attached cloistral buildings. [G. H. Cook, English Monasteries in the Middle Ages, (London, Phoenix House, 1961).] In 1967, E. K. Milliken published an account, focusing on monastic buildings, monastic life, and monastic vocation. [E. K. Milliken, English Monasticism Yesterday and Today (London: George G. Harrap and Company, Limited, 1967).] By 1994, Janet Burton, in Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300, explored the interdependence of religious houses of England, Wales, and Scotland and the secular world and examined the conflict between the monastic ideal and the secular demands made on the monks. Burton investigates the effects on monastic orders of the Norman settlement, the outcome of new European monastic interpretations, and the consequences of each on religious women. [Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).] In 1999, Burton examined monastic recruitment, patronage, economy, cultural life, social interactions, and the role of women in monasticism from 1069-1215 in Yorkshire. [Janet Burton, The Monastic Order in Yorkshire, 1069-1215 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).]

101. Wood, English Monasteries and Their Patrons, see note 9. Wood investigates of the relationships between religious houses and their patrons, and the interactions between the Church and the Crown.

22

works of Bennett Hill102 and those of Emma Cownie in 1968 and 1998, respectively.103 An extensive bibliography on the Cistercian Order in Britain was published by Robin Donkin104 and Cistercian library holdings were identified by

David Bell.105 Studies on Cistercian material culture106 and monographs about

102. Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968). Hill provided a history of the Congregation of Savigny and its English houses.

103. Emma Cownie, Religious Patronage in Anglo-Norman England, 1066-1135 (London: Royal Historical Society, 1998). Cownie also examined religious patronage in Anglo-Norman England, from the Norman Conquest in 1066 to 1135. She analyzed gift-giving between laymen and monks, particularly gifts of land, and the motives for such pious generosity.

104. Robin Donkin, Cistercian Bibliography. A Check List of Printed Works Relating to the Cistercian Order as a Whole and to the Houses of the British Isles in Particular, La Documentation Cistercienne 2 (1969): 1-104. This is a helpful but now outdated bibliography of printed works on the Cistercian Order, particularly their houses in the British Isles.

105. David N. Bell, The Libraries of the Cistercians, Gilbertines, and (London: The British Library, 1992). This book is one of the volumes of The Corpus of British Medieval Library Catalogues, whose goal was to publish the extant catalogs of British medieval libraries. David N. Bell, An index of Cistercian authors and works in medieval library catalogues in Great Britain (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1994). This work includes indexes of British Cistercian library holdings and works in existing library catalogs of monastic houses and other institutions in Great Britain.

106. Lawrence Butler has examined specific themes of archaeological work in England and Wales. [Lawrence Butler, “The Cistercians in England and Wales: A Survey of Recent Archaeological Work 1960-1980,” in Studies in Cistercian art and architecture, ed. Meredith P Lillich, Cistercian Studies 66 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982): 88-101.] In 1984, Collin Platt analyzed the architecture of English monastic buildings to explain the daily lives of monks. [Colin Platt, Abbeys and of Medieval England (London: Secker & Warburg, 1984).] Two years later, Christopher Norton and David Park surveyed surviving ruins and decorations of Cistercian houses. [Christopher Norton and David Park, eds., Cistercian art and architecture in the British Isles (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986).] In 1993, G. K. Beaulah asserted that certain thirteenth-century square-tile mosaic tiles may be unique to England. [G. K. Beaulah, “Thirteenth century square-tile Mosaic Pavements at Cistercian houses in Britain” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, vol. 4, ed. Meredith P. Lillich. Cistercian Studies 134 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publishing, 1993), 1-14.] Recently, Glyn Coppack published an architectural history of British Cistercian houses. Coppack examined archaeological remains of Cistercian buildings to explain their economic innovations, their skill in industry, and their impact on the surrounding countryside. [Glyn Coppack, White monks: the Cistercians in Britain, 1128-1540 (Stroud: Tempus Publishing Limited, 1998).]

23

particular Cistercian houses have expanded our knowledge of the Cistercians in

England.107

A few recent publications relate, in particular, to Cistercian monasteries around the Irish Sea. In 1981, Geraldine Carville looked at monastic economic activities of Cistercian houses close to the Irish Sea, focusing on monastic trade imports and exports between religious houses.108 Keith Stringer, in 2003, examined the reformed Church in twelfth- and thirteenth-century and

Cumbria,109 and connected religious houses in Galloway and Cumbria with the

Isle of Man by tracing trade and possession of Manx property.110

Historical Significance and Thesis

Historical Context

Despite the published research cited above, research on the Congregation

107. Those pertinent to this dissertation include: Joan Wardrop, and its Benefactors, 1132-1300, Cistercian Studies 91 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1987). Stuart Harrison, Byland Abbey (London: English Heritage, 1999). This history of Byland Abbey includes a room-by-room tour of the abbey ground and three segments on the abbey’s architectural importance, monastic life, and monastic economy. Glyn Coppack, Fountains Abbey. The Cistercians in Northern Ireland (Stroud: Tempus Publishing Limited, 2004). Coppack examined archaeological finds to explain the context and development of monastic buildings at Fountains. Glyn Coppack, Peter Fergusson, and Stuart Harrison, (London: English Heritage, 2006).

108. Geraldine Carville, “The Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” Cîteaux 32 (1981): 37-73. Furness Abbey, Holm Cultram, and Rushen Abbey can be documented to have imported and exported materials to and from Ireland.

109. Keith J. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria: Contrasts, Connections and Continuities (Whithorn: Friends of the Whithorn Trust, 2003).

110. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 23-8, 38-40. He also includes charters of property rights and church allocations in the appendix, 41-54.

24

of Savigny in general has been significantly neglected by the academic community. This dissertation hopes to help remedy this absence in the literature by expanding our knowledge of these Orders. Specifically, this dissertation focuses on Savigniac monasteries in the British Isles under the imposing influence of its first English foundation, Furness, and so develops new perspectives on the relationship of Savigniac and Cistercian monasteries in the

Irish Sea region.

The ecclesiastical history of the Isle of Man has also been neglected by modern scholars by comparison with research and publications available on that of other early kingdoms in the British Isles. Prior research has addressed particular abbeys,111 but not adverted to the network of relationships among them. Research on Rushen Abbey has until now been confined to archaeological reports, guidebooks, and a few books and articles about the general history of the abbey.112 Documentary resources on Rushen are sparse, while archaeological

111. Samuel James Garton, Furness Abbey, Lancashire (London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1943); John Compton Dickinson, Furness Abbey (London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1965); Maureen Donnelly, Inch Abbey and Parish (Downpatrick, n.p.: 1979); Ann Elizabeth Hamlin, Grey Abbey, County Down (Belfast: Historic Monuments and Buildings Branch, Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland, 1979); Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997); Stuart Harrison, Jason Wood, and Rachel Newman, Furness Abbey (English Heritage, 1988).

112. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871): from which is taken Dugdale’s Monasticon Angelicanum, p. 46 and Grose’s Antiquities, p. 162 (These can also be found in William Dugdale, ‘Rushen Abbey’ in Monasticon Angelicanum, vol. 5. ed. Caley, Ellis, and Bandinel (London: 1825), 252-256 and Francis Grose, ‘Antiquities of the Isle of Man,’ in Antiquities of England and Wales, 8 vols. (London: 1773-87), vol. 6, 197-214 and vol. 8, 161-162.) Joseph G. Cumming, The Story of Rushen and Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), 50; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man” in Archaeologia Cambrensis vol. XII, 3rd Series, no. XLVIII (1866): 432-3; Cumming,

25

data are abundant. However, archaeological reports do not further our knowledge of Manx or Savigniac inter-relationships. While the influence of this abbey’s powerful motherhouse, Furness, has been noted by previous historians,

Rushen Abbey has not been analyzed to ascertain its role in Savigniac history.

Statement of Thesis

This dissertation builds on previous scholarship by drawing on primary sources, published scholarship, and archaeological reports to address previously unstudied questions. One of the major goals of this research has been to reveal the diplomatic and social relationships that existed between Rushen Abbey and its motherhouse, Furness. Some previous works have claimed that Rushen was merely a satellite community of Furness, housing three monks instead of the thirteen needed to found a monastery.113 I shall argue that Rushen did not begin

“Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 36-55; Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880), 59; Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893), 34; William C. Cubbon: “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 509-18; Cubbon, “History of Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla. Isle of Man. -1134 A.D.,” in Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 4, no. 1 (1935): 98; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 3-4; Leopold Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium Liber Primus (Vienna, 1877; rpt. Ridgewood, N.J.: Gregg Press, 1964), CCLIII, 101; Gordon Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: Manx Experience, 1988), 7; David E. Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” in Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, Ed. Ian B. Cowan. 2nd ed. (London: Longman Group Limited, 1976), 196; Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015).

113. William of Worcester, Itinerarium, ed. James Nasmith (Cambridge: James Nasmith, 1778), 312: Castrum monasterii de Russyn cum iii monachis. A fifteen-century source does not confirm the number of monks at the time of Rushen’s foundation. Reformed houses usually started out with twelve monks plus an abbot, and even at the dissolution of Rushen, the abbey still had six monks.

26

as a satellite plantation of Furness and, as a Cistercian house, the abbey was definitely autonomous. Even so, Rushen always maintained close connections with Furness and would have held the same ideas and traditions as its motherhouse.

Another area of research will be Rushen’s ties to other monasteries in the

Irish Sea region for the purpose of discovering the kinds of connections that may have existed between Rushen, Cistercian monasteries in the Savigniac tradition, and other religious Orders with land on the Isle of Man. The research undertaken in this dissertation should substantiate that connections were developed between these monasteries by means of political relationships among monastic patrons; economic, trade, and ecclesiastical ties; and the filial connections within the religious Order. 114

Finally, this dissertation will discuss the relationships between Rushen

Abbey and the King of the Isles, giving special attention to the influence on

Rushen of social and political matters within the kingdom. I shall examine the circumstances surrounding the foundation of Rushen and the extraordinary gift to Furness of jurisdictional powers over the Bishopric of Sodor in order to discern the early motives of the Manx kings in their patronage to Rushen and

114. There is documentation of these connections in archaeological remains and primary literature such as monastic charters. Secondary sources include a few sources but I will make the Manx and Cistercian connection: Carville, “The Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” see note 108; Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, see note 109; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, see note 54; Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, see note 54.

27

Furness and both abbeys’ continued influence on the Isle during the Crovan dynasty. Although the King of Man had been ordered by the Pope Gregory IX115 and also by Henry III, king of England,116 not to interference in monastic affairs, the monastery was nevertheless drawn into secular life as its abbots were barons in the island and held a number of secular responsibilities, especially over their tenants.

The overall goal of this dissertation then is to reveal the influence of

Rushen on monastic and secular society in the Irish Sea, not least the monks’ ties to the magnates of the neighboring realms of Ireland, Scotland, and England. The island may have been overlooked by modern scholars, but as Mann, inclusive of the Hebrides in the Irish Sea, was a significant kingdom from 1095-1265, I shall argue that Rushen Abbey was a significant monastery in the Irish Sea region and definitely the most powerful religious institution on Mann. The Church of the

Isle of Man held great significance in the Isles, and so I propose that Rushen

Abbey and its motherhouse profoundly influenced the medieval culture of the

Isles.

115. Moore, Diocesan Histories, 60. This bull, of which the original is not known to exist, is preserved in a modern transcript (c.1600) which was discovered by Bishop Bardsley at Bishop’s Court in 1888. Moore, “Bull of Pope Gregory IX to the Bishop of Sodor, 30 July 1231,” The English Historical Review, vol. 5, no. 17 (Jan., 1890): 101-107: 101-105, text is given on 105-7.

116. Oliver, “Henry the III to Olave, 1218,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, 42.

28

Structure of Dissertation

This dissertation is organized into analytical categories that provide its primary structure, while individual chapters are written according to historical chronology. Chapter II provides a brief background on the Cistercian and

Savigniac Orders and examines the history of Savigniac monasteries in England and their unification with the Cistercian Order as a way of discerning any features unique to this subgroup or to Rushen Abbey. Chapter III investigates the rapid conversion of Viking settlers to Christianity, connections between the and Furness Abbey anterior to Rushen Abbey’s foundation, the circumstances behind the grant of Manx land to Furness Abbey and possible reasons for the Rushen foundation, and provides a clear history of Rushen Abbey and the political landscape on the Isle of Man. Chapter IV evaluates the impact of twelfth-century reformed monasticism on the region, the familial connections of

Rushen Abbey with its motherhouse, Furness, and its ongoing influence in Manx affairs, and investigates Rushen’s position as a Savigniac-become-Cistercian monastery. Chapter V examines early religious traditions in the Isle of Man and the Hebrides, the filiation connections of other Savigniac and Cistercian houses, as well as their relationship with other religious Orders and the secular church.

Chapter VI addresses the secular associations of Rushen Abbey within the

Kingdom of Man and the Isles and the neighboring lordships of Galloway,

Ulster, Argyll, Scotland, Ireland, and England, as well as the bishopric of the

29

Isles. Monastic patronage and disputes between the crown and monastery are discussed in this chapter, as is the abbey’s secular involvement with magnates and monastic tenants. The last chapter, Chapter VII, presents the conclusion at which I have arrived from a careful analysis of these sources. The research examined and theories formed by this study will, I hope, contribute to a broader understanding of circumstances surrounding Savigniac and Cistercian monasticism in this unique area of the British Isles.

30

CHAPTER II

NEW MONASTIC ORDERS

During the eleventh century, a “new monasticism” developed in Western

Europe, deriving its ideals from accounts of early desert .1 These reformed Orders considered the Cluniacs’ (traditional monks) landed wealth and feudal power contradictory to the Rule of St. Benedict and desired a return to a life of “apostolic poverty” and strict adherence to the Rule.2 Among them were the Cistercians and Savigniacs, who emerged in 1098 and 1105, respectively, and merged in 1147. What follows is a brief historical survey of the two Orders, which will highlight the differences between the two, the merger of

1147, and its meaning for the English Savigniac houses, particularly Rushen

Abbey.

1. Treatments of the history of and ideals behind the new monasticism are provided by Henrietta Leyser, Hermits and the New Monasticism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984); C. Hugh Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism. 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 1989), 1-17, 146-66; Janet Burton, “The New Monastic Orders of the Twelfth Century,” in Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 63-84; Dom M. David Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963), 191-207.

2. Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 4-5. The Cistercian fathers viewed the wealth of the monasteries as one source of corruption in the Cistercian ideals, so they laid emphasis on ideals of poverty in the Rule of St. Benedict which would bring about a disagreement between Bernard of Clairvaux and Peter, Abbot of . [Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 199-203; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 224-5; Adrian H. Bredero, “The controversy between Peter the Venerable and Saint Bernard of Clairvaux,” in Petrus Venerabilis (1156-1956). Studies and Tests commemorating the eighth centenary of his death, ed. Giles Constable and James Kritzeck. Studia Anselmiana 40 (Rome: n.p., 1956), 53-71.]

31

Brief History of Cîteaux3

Robert of Molesme, the house he founded in 1075, became disillusioned by the abbey’s increasing involvement with society at Molesme, in the hope of reforming the customs derived from Carolingian monasticism by way of early

Cluny.4 Robert, along with several other monks of Molesme, believed that customs had begun to supersede observance of the Rule of St. Benedict and they desired strict adherence to the Rule.5 These monks petitioned and received authorization from the in Lyon to establish a new monastery.6 In

1098, a small group of monks left Molesme together with Robert.7 They

3. Primary sources featuring treatments on the foundation and early history of Cîteaux are provided in the Exordium Parvum, which is printed in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux: An Edition, Translation, and commentary, Studia et Documenta IX (Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999), ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, I, 197-259 and A, 416-440. Other sources include: William of Malmesbury, The Chronicle of the Kings of England, trans. John A. Giles (New York: AMS, 1968), 4.1, 347-351; Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3. The view taken in this dissertation will be those of the primary sources, unless contradicted with convincing arguments. Secondary sources include: Usmer Berlière, “Les Origines de Cîteaux et l’order benedictin du XLL siècle,” Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique, I (1900), 253-90; Archdale King, Cîteaux and Her Elder Daughters (London: Burns & Oates, 1954); Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 172-80; Hill, “The Foundation of Cîteaux,” in English Cistercian Monasteries, 1-14; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 146-206; Jean Leclercq, “The intentions of the founders of the Cistercian Order,” in The Cistercian Spirit: A symposium in memory of Thomas Merton, ed. M. Basil Pennington. Cistercian Studies Series, 3 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1970), 88-133.

4. Waddell, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, 6.

5. Ibid., 6, 419, 430-34.

6. “Exordium Parvum” Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 418-421.

7. Ibid., 421.

32

established a “New Monastery” in the forest of Cîteaux.8 A year later, Robert returned to Molesme.9 Alberic became abbot of Cîteaux (1099-1109) and Stephen

Harding prior.10

Following the principles of simplicity, seclusion,11 and a literal observance of the Benedictine Rule,12 Cistercian monks rejected anything not mentioned in the Rule: “namely, coats, fur garments, linen shirts, hoods, too, and drawers, combs and coverlets, mattresses, and a variety of dishes in the , as well as lard and all else that was contrary to the Rule in all its purity.”13 They rejected all sources of income that required involvement with secular society and they built “far from human habitation.”14

8. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 420-421: the archaic name of the monastery was Novum Monasterium, and was later changed to Cîteaux, the name of the forest.

9. “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 422-27.

10. “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 427-28 and William of Malmesbury, The Chronicle of the Kings of England, 4.1, ed. Giles, 347- 351.

11. “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 430, 435.

12. Ibid., A, 419-421, 430-34.

13. Ibid., A, 434: froccos videlicet et pellicias ac staminia, caputia quoque et femoralia, pectina et coopertoria, stramina lectorum ac diversa ciborum in refectorio fercula, sagimen etiam et caetera omnia quae puritati Regulae adversabantur.

14. “Instituta Generalis Capituli,” Rule I in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, C, 458; “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 434-35.

33

The Cistercians returned manual labor to the horarium, or daily schedule, and they insisted that communities be self-sufficient as described in the

Benedictine Rule.15 This led to the introduction of conversi, lay brothers, to manage and supervise granges, and allowed the choir monks time for liturgical prayer and private meditation, from which the aliterate conversi weren’t allowed to participate.16

Life at Cîteaux was harsh,17 as , third abbot of Cîteaux

(1109-34), in his first years as abbot faced bad harvests, disease, and, according to the Exordium Parvum, the monks’ own account, lack of vocations.18 This may have been an exaggeration, as by 1113, Cîteaux had enough monks (twelve monks and an abbot) to found a new monastery at La Ferté.19 In that same year,20 the young Bernard of Fontaine and thirty of his companions entered the

15. “Instituta Generalis Capituli,” Rule V and VIII in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, C, 459-460. Conversi exempt from horarium.

16. James S. Donnelly, The Decline of the Medieval Cistercian Laybrotherhood, (New York: Fordham University Press, 1949), 1-15; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 176-9; Chrysogonus Waddell, ed. Cistercian Lay Brothers: Twelfth-Century Usages with Related Texts, Studia et Documenta, X (Cîteaux: Commentarii cistercienses, 2000.)

17. “Exordium Cistercii” and “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, A, 401-2, A, 438. See also Hill, “The Foundation of Cîteaux,” in English Cistercian Monasteries, 5-6; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 200; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 173.

18. Ibid.

19. May 1113. Leopold Janauschek, Originum cisterciensium Liber Primus (Vienna, 1877; rpt. Ridgewood, N.J.: Gregg Press, 1964), 4; Waddell, Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, 207; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 173.

20. There is indication of thirty novices, who simultaneously entered the monastery in the Exordium Parvum (“Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux,

34

“new monastery” at Cîteaux. Over the next three years, the four “elder daughters” of Cîteaux were quickly established:21 La Ferté in 1113,22 Pontigny in

1114,23 and Clairvaux and Morimond in 1115.24

Uniquely among the reformed Orders, Cîteaux legislated for observances to be followed in all Cistercian houses and instituted a system of mutual dependences.25 They instituted an innovative administration consisting of the

General Chapter of Cîteaux, the constitutional body supervising the Order, and

ed. Waddell, A, 438): this occurs right before the founding of new monasteries. Many early scholars have taken the Exordium Parvum to mean that Bernard entered in 1112, including Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 6; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 173; and Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 200 has Bernard entering Cîteaux in 1111. Louis Lekai, The Cistercians: Ideals and Reality (: Kent State University Press, 1977). Finding the Exordium Parvum faulty and basing his research on the Vita prima, Lekai asserts that Bernard was admitted to Cîteaux in 1113, not 1112 (which had been the previously believed myth).

21. King, Cîteaux and Her Elder Daughters: see note 3.

22. La Ferté was founded May 1113. Waddell, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, 207; P. Leopoldus Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 4.

23. Pontigny was founded on June 30, 1114. P. Leopoldus Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 4.

24. Clairvaux and Morimond were simultaneously founded on July 26, 1115. Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 4-5; Waddell, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, 265.

25. Waddell, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, 1-397. The earliest legislative documents are the Exordium Parvum (EP) and the Instituta Generalis Capituli Apud Cistercium: EP is a hybrid work, probably written by Stephen Harding c. 1112/3, yet before 1147 additions (an index, chapter titles, and chapters iii, xv-xviii) were made to the EP purportedly by Raynard de Bar, abbot of Cîteaux (1133/4-1150). For more information on early Cistercian organization see: Michael Casey, “Bernard and the Crisis at Morimond: Did the Order Exist in 1124?” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 38, no. 2 (2003): 119-75; Elizabeth Freeman, Narratives of a New Order: Cistercian Historical Writing in England, 1150-1220 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2002), 1-26, 215-20; Patrick McGuire, “Taking Responsibly: Medieval Cistercian Abbots and Monks as their ’s Keepers,” in Friendship and Faith: Cistercian Men, Women, and Their Stories, 1100-1200 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002), 248-268; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 183-189.

35

a system of visitation.26 These relationships are enshrined in their early documents, the Carta Caritatis and the Instituta Generalis Capituli apud Cistercium, so that all houses would follow uniform rules and visitation.27 As the Carta

Caritatis indicates, the Cistercian fathers were inspired by the ideal of mutual charity.28

The rapid growth and expansion of the Cistercian Order is believed to have been due to the eloquent expression of spirituality of their monks and to the shared written ideals mentioned above.29 Some scholars attribute this to

26. The origins, development, and function of the General Chapter are provided in Chrysogonus Waddell, Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 2003), 37-9; see also Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 187-90. Primary sources on the General Chapter include the “Summa Cartae Caritatis (SCC)” and the “Carta Caritatis Prior (CC1)” in Waddell, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, B, SCC Ch. III-IV, 404-7, B, CC1 Ch. VII-VIII, 446-7. Primary sources on visitation include B, CC1, Ch. IV-VI, 445-6 and the Instituta Generalis, C, Ch. XXXIII-XXXIV, 470-1 [Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed., Waddell.].

27. The latest source on the origin dates of early Cistercian legislation and documents and their evolution into later documents with similar content can be found in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, 1-397. The earliest documents concerning this are the Carta Caritatis Prior (CC1) and the Instituta Generalis Capituli Apud Cistercium. CC1 is the 1119 confirmed edition of the Carta Caritatis, written by Stephen Harding (there is likely an older version undiscovered). The Instituta Generalis is a codification of General Chapter statutes starting with statutes from the time of Stephen Harding to those enacted under Guy (1133/4?) and Raynard.

28. See also “The Carta Caritatis Posterior,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, D, 500-505. The EP and CC were created so that Cistercian monks, especially the new foundations, may mutually love and maintain the founders’ ideals of monastic life. [Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, I, 205, A, 402.] The ideals of Cistercian charity can be found in Martha Newman, The Boundaries of Charity (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996); Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 183-6; McGuire, “Taking Responsibility,” 248-268; Brian Patrick McGuire, “The Age of Friendship: Networks of Friends 1120-1180,” in Friendship and Community: The Monastic Experience 350-1250, Cistercian Studies Series 95 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1988), 231-295.

29. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 5-9 and Knowles, Monastic Orders, 191-227.

36

Bernard’s leadership, spirituality, and activity on the political scene.30 Whatever the case, the number of houses climbed quickly from five houses in 1115 to thirty-eight in 1129.31 By 1151, there were three-hundred thirty-three houses in

Europe, fifty-four of them in England.32 See below for the expansion of

Cistercian houses in England.33

The Congregation of Savigny’s History

Rushen Abbey, the focus of this study, was not originally a Cistercian house. At the time of Rushen’s foundation (1134) it belonged to the

Congregation of Savigny, which had developed from a small hermitage Vitalis of Mortain established around 1093 in the forest of Mortain, which connects

Normandy, Maine, and Brittany.34 In 1112, Vitalis’ hermitage at Savigny came

30. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 6; Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994), 73; C. H. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism: Forms of Religious Life in Western Europe in the Middle Ages. 3rd ed. (Longman: London and New York, 2001), 180.

31. Logan, F. Donald, A History of the Church in the Middle Ages (New York: Routledge, 2002), 139.

32. Louis J. Lekai, The Cistercians: Ideals and Reality (Kent: Kent State University Press, 1977), 44; Logan, F. Donald, A History of the Church in the Middle Ages (New York: Routledge, 2002), 139.

33. See Chapter II, Section “First English Houses,” 42-46.

34. Primary source documentation on the foundation and early history of Savigny is provided by Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History, ed, Marjorie Chibnall B. VIII, Ch. XXVII, 3: 51-53; Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis; Eugene P. Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufrid primi et secundi abbatum Saviniacensium,” Analecta Bollandiana (1882): 355-410; “Chronicon Savigniacense” in Miscellanea novo ordine digesta, ed. Stephen Baluze, corr. J. D. Mansi vol. 1 (: 1761), 326-29. Treatments on the issue are provided by Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 80-115; Léon Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” Revue Mabillon 5 (1909): 290-335; Auguste Laveille, ed., Histoire de la Congrégation de Savigny par Dom Claude Auvry, 3 vols., Société de l’histoire de Normandie, 30 (Rouen: A.

37

under the auspices of Raoul, Lord of Fougères.35 That same year Savigny received the confirmation of Turgis, Bishop of Avranches,36 and Henry I, King of

England,37 but the abbey had not yet been founded (although the Manx Chronicle dates the founding of Savigny to 1112).38 The abbey had certainly been founded by 1115, when Guillaume, Count of Mortain, in giving land for a nunnery to

Vital, identified him as the Abbot of Savigny.39 Thus, the foundation for the monastery lies within the years 1112-1115. A bull granting episcopal exemption by Pascal II (1099-1118) may narrow that date to 1113-1115.40 Most scholars

Lestringant; Paris: A. Picard et Fils, 1896); Mary Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order: Savigny’s Role within Twelfth-Century Monastic Reform,” Revue Bénédictine 86 (1976): 94-108; Jacqueline Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny, chef d’Ordre et fille de Cîteaux,” Le Moyen Age 45-46 (1936): 1-19, 104-14, 178-90, 249-72; Jaap van Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, prédicateur itinérant, fondateur de l’abbaye normande de Savigny (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1990).

35. Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis,” 355; printed in Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 258-60, 272-4. See also Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 84-5; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 4-8.

36. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1, 152-5; Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis,” 355; Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 274-6.

37. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1, 118; Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana 11, Instrumenta, 110-1; Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 257-8. Vitalis was still called heremitae, not abbot.

38. Chronicle of Man, f. 35v. See also the primary sources Etienne de Fougères, Vita Vitalis, ed. Eugene P. Suavage, “Vitae BB. Vitalis et Gaufridi, primi et secundi abbatum Saviniacensium,” Analecta Bollandiana 1 (1882), 355-410 and Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3 and the secondary sources Laville, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 139-63; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 5; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 82-85.

39. Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, II, Abrincensis, 168-110; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 306-07; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 6: ... adjuvante fratre Vitali, tunc tempore abbate Savigniaci existente.

40. Laville, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 164; Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 264; Phillip Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXCVIII, corrected by W. Wattenbach, S. Loewenfeld, et al., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1885-1888), n. 6501 (4802) and Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 5, whose source is the destroyed Cartulaire de Savigny,

38

assume a date close to 1112/3.41

Like the Cistercians, Vitalis desired that his monastery strictly observe the Rule of St. Benedict,42 in a return to manual labor, poverty, and simplicity.43

No early legislative documents survive from the Congregation of Savigny, so their original traditions are known only from secondary sources.44 At Savigny,

Vitalis coupled the austere spirit of the hermitage with apostolic preaching.45

Preaching in neighboring regions, caring for the sick, and performing pastoral work were distinctive to Savigny among the reform Orders.46 Having been a

XIII, f. 149, n. 603, then housed in the Archives de la Manche. There is no date in the bull, which is why scholars cannot pinpoint a precise date.

41. Swietek and Deneen as well as Hill, Buhot, Guilloreau, Moolenbroek take this opinion. [Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” Church History 52 (1983): 285; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 5-6; Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 295; Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 92-98. Hill stated that Vital was first referred to as abbot in 1112 but he did not identify the source in Bennett D. Hill, “The Beginnings of the First French Foundations of the Norman Abbey of Savigny,” The American Benedictine Review 31 (1980): 132; however, Hill identified a date between 1112-5 in English Cistercian Monasteries, 84-5.]

42. Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis, 541; Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufrid,” 350 and the secondary sources Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1. 54; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 8; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 86-87.

43. Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny:” 8; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 86- 87; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1. 54-57.

44. Sources that refer to Savigniac customs include Laveille, Histoire de Savigny; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 80-115; Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 1-19, 104-114 and the primary sources Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufridi,” and Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis.

45. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 93-94; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1.208; and the primary source, Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, 330-3.

46. Ibid.

39

for years, Vitalis had little experience in structuring cenobitic monastic life and, until his death in 1122, advocated preaching away from the monastery.47

Vitalis was succeeded by Geoffrey of Bayeux (1122-39), who tightened monastic discipline and is credited with the development of the Savigniac

Congregation.48 As a former monk of Cerisy-la-Forêt in Normandy, Geoffrey’s experience as a cenobite enabled him to plan monastic buildings and to formulate regulations.49 In the manner of the Cistercians, Geoffrey established a

Chapter General and system of regular visitations within the Congregation.50

Savigniac and Cistercian Growth

Rapid Expansion

The Congregation of Savigny spread rapidly,51 not unlike its Cistercian

47. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 86-9, 93-4.

48. For Geoffrey’s role in establishing the Congregation, see Guilloreau, “Les Foundations Anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 299-300, 320-323; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 12-17; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-92.

49. Guilloreau, “Les Foundations Anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 299-300, 320-323; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 12-17; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-92.

50. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 96-97; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 13, 17; Francis R. Swietek, “The Role of Bernard of Clairvaux in the Union of Savigny with Cîteaux: A Reconsideration,” in Bernardus Magister: Papers Presented at the Nonacentenary Celebration of the Birth of Bernard of Clairvaux, ed. John R. Sommerfeldt (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 291; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2, 198-208; and the primary sources “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufridi,” 403-05 and Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis, 544: vistitationes et capitulum generale totius generationis apud Savigneium per tridium quotannis in fest sanctissimae Trinitatis instruit an 1132...( Sunday).

51. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 97-98 and Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335. See Chapter II, Section “First English Houses,” 42-46.

40

counterpart.52 Some scholars claim that it was less expensive to found a

Savigniac or Cistercian monastery than an abbey of black monks.53 Cistercians and Savigniacs required only an area of wasteland and forested lands.54 Patrons often viewed their role as that of investors and expected both spiritual and material returns.55 A baron or knight would undoubtedly have had spiritual motives, whether penance or piety, in founding a monastery, and gained the prayers of monks in return, yet many also expected to acquire visible status and financial gains.56 Considering the reciprocal nature of the relationship between patron(s) and monastery, expenditure by and losses to him/them were outweighed by perceived benefits.57

52. Waddell, Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter, 37-9 and Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 187-90. See Chapter II, Section “Brief History of Cîteaux,” 32-37.

53. Louis J. Lekai, White Monks (Okauchee: Cistercian Fathers, Our Lady of Spring Bank, 1953), 278; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 246-247; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 46-66.

54. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 44-53, on where Savigny was situated; the movement of Furness and Byland to hospitable lands the founding lords could not use is mentioned in Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 85, 97-98.

55. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 38-53: Hill cites mainly of Cistercian patrons in Louis Lekai, White Monks (Okauchee: Cistercian Fathers, 1953), 278 and William Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, (new ed, London: Bohn, 1846): with many various feudal law texts, and a few primary sources when dealing with specific events throughout the book to make her case.

56. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 54-77; Susan Wood, English Monasteries and their Patrons in the Thirteenth Century (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), 1-6. Emma Cownie, Religious Patronage in Anglo-Norman England 1066-1135 (Rochester: Boydell and Brewer, 1998), 185-206.

57. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 77; Wood, English Monasteries and their Patrons, 122-135.

41

First English Houses

Within thirty years, Savigny possessed thirty-three houses in all,58 fourteen of them in England.59 The first Savigniac house in England was founded in 1124 at Tulketh near Preston, Lancashire, on land belonging to

Stephen of Blois, Count of Mortain.60 Stephen may have supported the foundation because he possessed land both in Mortain, France and Lancashire,

England.61 Three years after arriving at Tulketh, the Savigniacs transferred to

Furness in Cumbria.62

By the time of King Stephen’s ascent to the throne of England in 1135, there were ten Savigniac houses in the British Isles:63 seven founded directly

58. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 97-98. According to Hill, Beaubec in 1127 or 1128, Vaux-de-Cernay in 1128, and Chaloché in 1129 were the first Savigniac monasteries founded in France. (Hill, “The Beginnings of the First French Foundations of the Norman Abbey of Savigny,” 130-152.)

59. Tulket (1124, which trans-located and became Furness in 1127), Neath (1130), Quarr (1132), Basingwerk (1133), Combemere (1133), Calder (1134, trans-located multiple times), Swineshead (1135), Stratford Langthorne (1135), Buildwas (1135), Buckfast (1136), Devon (1136), Calder II (1140), Coggeshall (1140), Jervaulx (1145). [Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; David Knowles and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales (London: Longman Group Limited, 1953), 110-128; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxix.]

60. Frederick M. Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” in The Victoria History of the County of Lancashire (VCH), vol. 2, ed. John Brownbill and William Farrer (Kent: Dawson, 1991), 114.

61. John H. Round, Studies in Peerage and Family History (London: J. Nisbet & Co., 1910), 168 n. 2.

62. Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 2: 114.

63. Of these ten, Stephen personally founded Furness (1124), Neath (1130), Basingwerk (1131), Quarr (1132), Combermere (1133), Stratford Langthorne (1135), and Buildwas (1135). (With Matilda of Boulogne, Stephen later founded Buckfast, Devon (1136), Coggeshall, and (1140). [Dates provided by Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 98; Guilloreau, “Les

42

from Savigny,64 three from Furness.65 The rapid growth of the Order before the

Savigniac General Chapter and regulations had begun to be established in 1132 led to Furness wielding enormous authority amongst the English Savigniac houses and directly controlling one-third the English houses by filiation and by geographical proximity.

Four years after the first Savigniacs arrived in 1128, Cistercians from

L’Aumone in Normandy crossed the English Channel to found Waverley in

Surrey.66 Three years later, in 1131, the Cistercians founded Tintern in

Monmouthshire.67 Even though the Cistercians arrived later to England than the

Savigniacs, they rapidly spread throughout the island, especially in the south and northeast. Within twenty years of their arrival, thirty-one Cistercian

Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxix.

64. Furness 1124 (Tulket until 1127), Neath (1130), Basingwerk, (1131), Quarr (1132), Combermere (1133), Buildwas (1135), Stratford Langhorn (1135). [Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 98; Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; David Knowles and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales (London: Longman Group Limited, 1953), 110-128; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxix.]

65. Rushen (1134), Calder (1134), and Swineshead (1135). In 1140, Furness also founded Coggeshall. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 98; Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxix.

66. Waverley was founded on Nov. 24, 1128 from, L’Aumone. [Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 114, 127-128.]

67. Tintern was founded on May 9, 1131 from L’Aumone [Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 114, 127-128.]

43

monasteries had been founded in England.68 Eleven of the monastic houses were in the L’Aumone filiation, but only Waverley and Tintern were direct daughters; Forde, Thame, Garendon, Biddlesden, and Bruern were founded from Waverley.69 By 1148, L’Aumone had a great-great-granddaughter house when Stoneleigh, the daughter house of Bordesley, a daughter of Garendon, founded Marevale.70 In 1147, Morimond founded one of the early English houses, Dore.71 Bernard of Clairvaux was the driving force behind the Cistercian colonization of Yorkshire, and this led to most early English Cistercian houses being affiliated with the Clairvaux family.72 Nineteen of the thirty-five early foundations were Claravallian ties; five were founded directly from Clairvaux:

68. Waverley (1128), Tintern (1131), Rievaulx (1132), Fountains (1132), Garendon (1133), Wardon (1135), Forde (1136), Thame (1137), Bordesley (1138), Kingswood (1139), Kirkstead (1139), Louth Park (1139), Newminster (1139), Whitland (1140), Stoneleigh (1141), Revesby (1142), Cwmhir (1143), Boxley (1143), Pipewell (1143), Woburn (1145), Rufford (1146), Kirkstall (1147), Vaudey (1147), Roche (1147), Bruern (1147), Biddlesden (1147), Margam (1147), Sawtry (1147), Dore (1147), Merevale (1148), Sawley (1148). [Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxv-cxxviii; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.]

69. Waverley (1128), Tintern (1131), Forde (1136), Thame (1137), Garendon (1133), Biddlesden (1147), Bruern (1147). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

70. Waverley (1128), Garendon (1133), Bordesley (1138), Stoneleigh (1141), Merevale (1148). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

71. Dore (1147). Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxv-cxxviii; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

72. Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994), 73.

44

Rievaulx, Fountains, Whitland, Boxley, and Margam.73 Both Fountains and

Rievaulx expanded quickly in England: Fountains had six daughter houses by

114774 and three granddaughter houses by 1148,75 while Rievaulx had three daughter houses by 114676 and one granddaughter house by 1147.77 Another six houses, nearly all from the Clairvaux filiation, were founded in England by

1153.78

David Knowles suggested that the rapid development of reformed monasteries in twelfth-century England was caused by the renaissance of monastic life spurred by the Gregorian reform movement.79 The twelfth-century historian William of Newburgh noted that this great monastic expansion in

73. Rievaulx (1132), Fountains (1132), Whitland (1140), Boxley (1143), Margam (1147). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

74. Fountains (1132): Kirkstead (1139), Louth Park (1139), Newminster (1139), Woburn (1145), Kirkstall (1147), Vaudey (1147). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

75. Newminster (1139): Pipewell (1143), Roche (1147), Sawley (1148). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

76. Rievaulx (1132): Wardon (1135), Revesby (1142), Rufford (1146). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

77. Wardon (1135): Sawtry (1147). Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

78. Combe (1150), Holm Cultrum (1150), Sibton (1150), Flaxley (1151), Meaux (1151), and Tiltey (1153). Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” cxxv-cxxviii; Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 110-128.

79. Knowles, Monastic Orders, 191-247: specifically 197.

45

England occurred during King Stephen’s reign.80 Bennett Hill proposed a more political solution. The years 1135-1155, when thirty-one Cistercian monasteries were founded, he observed, corresponded to a period in England when baronial power was strong.81

Cistercian and Savigniac Orders: Compared

Similarities

Cistercians and Savigniacs were founded on similar principles: strict observance of the Rule of St. Benedict, manual labor, and simplicity.82 As a twelfth-century Benedictine observer, Orderic Vitalis, wrote, the Savigniac monks observed “the modern institutions of the new [Orders],” rather than the older Carolingian traditions.83 Since Savigny was founded by at least 1115, one

80. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, Lib. I, Cap. XV, Rolls Series. Denique multo plura sub brevitate temporis, quo Stephanus regnavit, vel potius nomen Regis obtinuit, quam centum retro annis servorum et ancillarum Dei monasteria initium in Anglia sumpsisse noscuntur.

81. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 22-30.

82. Some scholars think that the customs of Savigny were very close to those of the Cistercians: Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2: 168-78, 200; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 104-121; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 202; Swietek, “The Role of Bernard,” 296-97; Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 298 and the primary sources Ex Chronico Savigniacensi, in Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France XII, ed. M. Bouquet (Paris, 1840-1904): 781; Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3; Chronicon Savigniacense, ed. Baluze, 1: 326; and Robert of Torigny, Chronicque de Robert de Torigni, ed. Léopold Delisle, Sociéte de l’histoire de Normandie 2 vols. (Rouen, 1872- 73), 2: 184: Hic beatus vir modernas institutiones in aliquibus cisterciensibus smiles monachis suis imposuit. Others assert that the Savigniacs were more like the Cluniacs than the Cistercians: Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104 and Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 94-108.

83. Ordericus Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History, ed, Marjorie Chibnall B. VIII, Ch. XXVII, 3: 52. Sed modernas institutiones neophitorum prout sibi placuit amplexatus est.

46

year after the first draft of the Carta Caritatis,84 the Cistercian regulations and customary, it is plausible that its regulations were similar to those of the

Cistercians, especially in view of the “stricter rules” introduced by Geoffrey, the second abbot of Savigny, when he became abbot in 1122.85

Overall, there were several other similarities between the Savigniac and

Cistercian Orders. Both Savigniacs and Cistercians founded monasteries in secluded locations in order to live a contemplative life.86 Both Orders professed a strict adherence to the Rule of St. Benedict.87 Both Savigniac and Cistercian monks wore an undyed woolen habit.88 Moreover, in 1132, Geoffrey established a General Chapter and abbatial visitation imitating the organization of

Cîteaux.89

84. The first draft of the Carta Caritatis, was probably written around 1114 and was confirmed in 1119 by Pope Callistus II (CC1). Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed Waddell, 22-24, II, 261-281.

85. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 384-391.

86. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 92; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1.208; and the primary sources, Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History, ed, Marjorie Chibnall B. VIII, Ch. XXVII, vol. 3: 51-52; “Exordium Parvum” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed., Waddell, A, 430-435.

87. Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis, 541; Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufrid,” 350; Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, 6, 419, 430-34 and the secondary sources Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1.54; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 8; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 86-87.

88. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 173; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 8; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 88.

89. Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 299-300: see note 70 and Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 97: see note 72.

47

Purported Differences

There were also undeniable dissimilarities between the two Orders. The most important difference was that the Congregation of Savigny accepted the patronage of churches and tithes and managed mortgages and rentals.90 There is reason to believe, however, that many early Cistercian houses also accepted some resources forbidden by their own regulations.91 Tradition has it that

Savigny was exempt from diocesan jurisdiction and subject only to the papal see, though this has been disputed.92 The first Cistercians were not exempt.93 It has been argued that the abbot of Savigny presided unrestrictedly over all

Savigniac houses much as did the abbot of Cluny,94 although Savigniac houses were permitted to found daughter houses without the consent of Savigny and

90. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1, 207; Marie-Anselme Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation à l’ordre de Cîteaux,” Collectanea OCR 9 (1947): 351-358.

91. Constance Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered,” Cîteaux 39 (1988): 217-230; Jeffrey Michael Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176” (M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1993); Lawrence A. Desmond, “The Appropriation of Churches by the Cistercians in England to 1400,”Analecta Sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 31 (1975): 247. All three sources cite Cistercian possessions before the 1147 merger,

92. Francis R. Swietek and Terrence M. Deneen, “‘Ab antiquo alterius odinis fuerit’: Alexander III on the Reception of Savigny into the Cistercian Order,” Revue d’histoire ecclesiastique 89 (1994): 5-28. In Deneen and Swietek’s “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 297-8, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that Savigniac exemption was more myth than reality since their status was ambiguous from 1112-1184, when they gained exemption under their status as a Cistercian house.

93. Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 46-7; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny:” 112; Jean-Berthold Mahn, L’Order Cistercien et son gouvernement des origines au milieu du XIIIe siècle, 2nd ed, (Paris, 1951), 256.

94. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104 and Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 94-108.

48

most were considered abbeys, not priories.95 If Savigniac houses were all subject directly to Savigny, however, Furness would never have been able to claim

Byland as a daughter house.96 Furness, being geographically close and having founded one-third of the English houses, may have viewed itself as head of the

English nucleus of Savigniac houses. An 1144 Bull of Pope Lucius II, Quia

Igitur,97 identified various authorities and rules given to Savigny over her daughter houses; however, it has been proven by Swietek and Deneen to be a forgery. Thus, it is not likely that Lucius II gave Savigny authority over all

Savigniac houses in 1144. Furthermore, Quia Igitur would have given Serlo the authority to deal with recalcitrant Savigniac houses if the bull were not a forgery.98 Since Savigny did not have complete regional authority before 1147, it

95. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 91-97; Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 97, 100.

96. The controversial claim of Furness for Byland is described in detail in Janet Burton, “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx, and the Problems of the English Savigniacs, 1134-56,” in Monastic Studies II, ed. Judith Loades (Bangor: Headstart History Publishing, 1991), 123-125; William Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, vol. 5 (London: Turks Head, 1693), 5. 349-52; and the primary source History of Byland, located at the Bodleian Library MS Dodsworth 63, fol. 10v-14r.

97. Quia Igitur: copies can be found in Peregrinus of Vendôme, Historia praelatorum et possessionum ecclesiae B. Mariae de Fontanis, ed. L. D’Achery, Spicilegium sive collectio veterum alquot scriptorum 2 (Paris, 1723), 578; André Salmon, Recueil de chroniques de Touraine (Tours, 1854), 277-78; Deneen and Swietek, ‘Appendix II’ in “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 23-24 and a recovered copy [Paris, Bibliotheque nationale MS nouv. acq. Lat. 2652, fol. 61 r-v] is printed with textual criticism in Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,” 366-69. The controversial quote from Quia igitur: Si quis vero ex abbatibus, monachis quoque vel conversis vertre congregationis a proposito et ordine exorbitaverit, et secundo terciove commonitus incorrigibilis permanserit, abbate absque ulla contradictione retento iuxta providentiam Savigneiensis abbatis qui pro tempore fuerit, loco ipsius [alius] idoneus substituatur, monachus vero si contumax fuerit regulariter corrigatur.

98. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 17-18.

49

seems more logical that during Geoffrey’s abbacy, the Savigniacs were more filially inclined than had been believed by Hill and Suydam.99 This would weaken the hypothesis of a Cluniac model.100 While Savigniac English abbeys were not regulated by annual visitation until 1132, they, like Cistercian houses, were autonomous and, in the case of Furness, maybe slightly too autonomous.101 An examination of the major differences between the two

Orders makes it obvious that they were not as estranged as was once thought,102 especially given the new research on monetary gains, exemption status, and organization.103

99. Geoffrey established a Savigniac General Chapter and a system of visitation [see note 50], Furness tried to claim Byland as a daughter house and houses were autonomous as seen by Calder’s plight [see note 96], and it is clear that the Savigniacs thought of a daughter house as dependent upon its mother, not grandmother [Burton, “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx,” 129].

100. Hill and Suydam consider both considered Savigny to have similar traits to a Cluniac model. [Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104 and Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 94-108.] Buhot considered the Savigniac to be more Cistercian in Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 112.

101. Furness was very independent until the 1147 merger and fought vocally against it: Thomas Beck, Annales Furnesienses. History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness (London: Payne and Foss, 1795-1846), 140; Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 115, n. 14.

102. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104 and Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order,” 94-108.

103. 1. Monetary gains [Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered,” 217-230; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176”; Desmond, “The Appropriation of Churches by the Cistercians in England to 1400,” 247.]; 2. Exemption status [Swietek, “‘Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit,’“ 5-28; Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 285-298.]; 3. Organization basis [no published source has given an unchallengeable assertion for the Cluniac model hypothesis, yet there are many sources that indicate the Savigniacs were closer in development to Cîteaux than Cluny.]

50

The Savigniac monks differed from both Cluniacs and Cistercians in one major aspect. Savigniac monks often left their monasteries to preach and perform pastoral duties.104 This activity must have been regarded as distinctive, for Orderic Vitalis commented on it in his short account of the Congregation.105

This Savigniac peculiarity certainly contradicts Thomas Merton’s statement that a monk’s vocation is to find God, while other religious vocations are to bring souls to God.106 Until Innocent III’s authorization of the Franciscan Rule in 1209, no other monastic Order was distinguished by its preaching to secular society;107 even so, the did not have the cloistered contemplative spirit of the “New Monasticism.” Thus, the Congregation of Savigny was unique among the reformed Orders in mixing the contemplative life of the monks with their preaching vocation.

The Merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Cistercian Order

Despite any dissimilarity, in 1147, the Congregation of Savigny became part of the Cistercian Order. The main role in bringing the Congregation of

104. Moolenbroek, Vital l’ermite, 192; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 93-94; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1. 208; and the primary source, Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History, ed, Marjorie Chibnall B. VIII, Ch. XXVII, 3: 51-53.

105. Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, B. VIII, Ch. XXVII, 3: 51-53. Ritus Cluniacensium vel aliorum qui monachilibus observantiis iamdudum mancipati fuerant imitatus non est, sed modernas institutiones neophitorum prout sibi placuit amplexatus est. Hic eruditione litterarum erat apprime imbutus, fortitudine ac facundia preditus, ac ad proferendum quicquid volebat animosus, non parcens in populari sermone infirmi nec potentibus.

106. Thomas Merton, The Silent Life (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1957), viii.

107. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 238-260.

51

Savigny into the Cistercian Order was played by Serlo, the fourth abbot of

Savigny.108 The Cistercian Order may have been attractive to him on two counts.

First, Cistercians writers such as Bernard of Clairvaux and Ælred of Rievaulx articulated Cistercian spirituality, and Carta, which made Serlo desire to be a monk of Clairvaux.109 Secondly, and more likely, the most attractive quality of the Order of Cîteaux was its strong central administrative organization. Savigny lacked a strong central administration,110 which led to fractious independence in the Congregation, especially within the nucleus of the English daughter houses.111 By 1132, four English Savigniac houses had grown accustomed to autonomy;112 Furness for eight years had been left in a self-governing position in

England with little other Savigniac contact, which was enough time to give a sense of independence. English dissent may have prompted Savigny to forge the bull, Quia Igitur, granting it total control over all Savigniac houses.113 Deenan

108. Swietek, “The Role of Bernard,” 289-302; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 227 and 251. Serlo would have approached Pope Eugenius III concerning the merger.

109. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2: 368-69; Swietek, “The Role of Bernard,” 293; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 178-79.

110. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 101-2; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 69; Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 355-6.

111. Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-358; Swietek, “The Role of Bernard,” 295 and also in the primary sources, Robert of Torigny, “Tractatus de immutatione ordinis monachorum,” in Chronicque de Robert de Torigni, ed. DeLisle, 2: 189; Chronicon Savigniacense, ed. Stephan Baluze (Lucca, 1761): 1: 326-27.

112. Furness (1124), Neath (1130), Basingwerk (1131), Quarr (1132).

113. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2:340-43; Deenan and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered: Lucius II’s Bull Habitantes in Domo of December 5, 1144,” 366-9, 743-5. The following section of the bull refers to the controversy with the English monasteries following the merger:

52

and Swietek concluded that Quia Igitur is a forgery based on Innocent II’s bull

Habitantes in domo and Lucius II’s bull Desiderium Quod after discovering that nine of the thirteen sections were replicated from these two bulls.114 Serlo, unable to control his foreign houses, approached Pope Eugenius III at Reims, proposing a possible merger with the Cistercians, to which Eugenius assented.115

On Trinity Sunday 1147,116 the Savigniac General Chapter voted to petition to be incorporated into the Cistercian Order.117 Only fifteen abbots were present; among the three from England, Furness was notably absent.118 Three months later, in September, the unification was approved at the Cistercian

General Chapter at which the Cistercian Pope Eugenius III was present.119 On

September 19, 1147, Pope Eugenius confirmed the union of the Congregation of

Prohibemus etiam ut nullus abbatum in ordine vestro facere scisma presumat aut commissam sibi abbatiam vel quemlibet alium locum [absque assensu] communi alterius ditioni tradere.

114. Paris, Archives nationales L 966, no. 5. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2: 340-43; Deenan and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,” 378-9; Deenan and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 18-20.

115. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2: 371-2, 378; Swietek, “The Role of Bernard,” 299-300. Thus it was Serlo’s initiative and by papal agreement that Savigny was incorporated later that year into the Cistercian Order.

116. June 22, 1147.

117. Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2:370-71; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 104.

118. The abbots of Byland, Neath, and Quarr were present from the English Savigniac houses. [Burton, “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx,” 128.]

119. M. Lambert, “La date de l’affiliation de Savigny et de la Trappe à l’Ordre de Cîteaux,” Collectanea OCR (1936): 231-33; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 104.

53

Savigny and the Cistercian Order in Pax ecclesiae, issued at the abbey of Saint-

Seine.120

Gilbert of Sempringham was also present at the Cistercian General

Chapter of 1147, in the hope of merging his Order with Cîteaux as well, but his petition was denied,121 probably because the houses under his wardship consisted of many nunneries and the Cistercians did not want to be involved overtly with female Orders.122 Moreover, there was considerable disorganization in the Sempringham Order, following no common legislation and having no unified General Chapter.123 The Savigniac Congregation included some nunneries and was similarly disordered within the English nucleus, and, as such, may have been fortunate in a successful merger with the Cistercians when Sempringhams were denied.

Controversy over Merger, Particularly with English Houses

When the Congregation of Savigny merged with the Cistercians, Serlo received most of what he desired.124 Savigny was to hold direct authority over

120. Swietek, “The Role of Bernard”; Lambert, “La date de l’affiliation”; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 105. Pax ecclesiae can be located in Jacques P. Migne, , 221 vols. (Paris, 1844-55): vol 180: col. 1282.

121. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 225; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 206.

122. Ibid.

123. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 225.

124. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 101-2; Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 69.

54

all thirty-one Savigniac daughter houses and retain its own privileges.125

Savigny and its houses were accepted as daughter houses of Clairvaux.126 This action created problems: by ranking Savigny just after the four “elder daughters” of Cîteaux, Savigny supplanted Preuilly as the fifth daughter house of Cîteaux.127 Another confrontation over ranking arose between Furness and

Waverley and was not settled until 1232 when both houses assumed leadership as separate heads over their respective English foundations on the basis of pre-

Cistercian ranking:128 Furness over Savigniac and Waverley over Cistercian houses.

The unification of the two Orders was resisted and even disregarded by several English Savigniac houses,129 notably Furness.130 Consequently, the

125. It is unlikely that Savigny was head over all Savigniac houses before 1147, so this clause may have given them firmer control than they had held under Geoffrey’s administrative system. See note 50. For further discussion of Savigniac exemptions after and before the merger, see Chapter II, Section “Purported Differences,” 48- 51.

126. Information on the filiation of the congregation with the Order of Cîteaux is provided by Laveille, Histoire de Savigny; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 80-115; Guilloreau, “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny,” 290-335; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 178-90 and the primary sources Sauvage, “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufridi,” and Sammarthani, Gallia Christiana, XI, Abrincensis.

127. Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-58.

128. Thomas Beck, Annales Furnesienses. History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness (London: Payne and Foss, 1795-1846), 140; Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 115, n. 14; Annales Monastici, ed. Henry R. Luard, 5 vols., Rolls Series (London: 1864-9), 2: 31; Alice M. Cooke, “The Settlement of the Cistercians in England,” English Historical Review VIII (1893): 641- 2. Waverly maintained precedence at General Chapters and above other English Cistercian houses, while Furnessprioratum in tota generatione Elemosinae in Anglia tantum. [Maurique, Annales Cistercienses, 2 vols. (, 1739), 2: 104.]

129. Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “The and the Merger of Savigny with Cîteaux: The Import of the Papal Documents,” Revue Bénédictine 112 (2002): 335-

55

declaration of union was promulgated again at the Council of Rheims in 1148,131 and on April 10, 1148, Eugenius III issued the bull, Apostolicae sedis,132 in which he called upon all Savigniac houses to accept the union and placed all the

English Savigniac houses under the authority of Savigny.133

Furness Abbey opposed the transition to Cistercian customs because these customs would suppress the supremacy Furness held over other English

Savigniac houses.134 After the 1148 Council,135 Furness appealed to Rome

344; see also Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 100, 105, Walter Daniel, The Life of Ælred of Rievaulx, ed. Frederick M. Powicke (London: Nelsons, 1950) lxiii-lxiv; John H. Round, Calendar of Documents Preserved in France 918-1206, vol. 1, 819 (London: H. M. S. O., 1899) 297. The Papal acta following the union in 1147 are often associated with the Furness dispute, on the grounds that more English houses than Furness resisted on the assumption that all Savigniac houses were directly placed under Savigny. While there was tension in the Congregation, there was no confirmation that the union of the two Orders created a widespread rebellion. Furness, however, still disputed with other Savigniac monasteries. One such dispute was challenging its superior, Savigny, for jurisdiction over Byland in 1154. Ultimately, Furness submitted to the verdict of Cistercian judges from Garendon and Rievaulx on that case.

130. Léon Guilloreau, “Le démêlé entre Serlon, abbé de Savigny, et Pierre d’York, abbé de Furness, 1147-1150,”Revue catholique d’histoire, d’archéologie et de literature de Normandie 25 (1916), 127-141; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 100, 105; Walter Daniel, The Life of Ælred of Rievaulx, ed. Frederick M. Powicke (London: Nelsons, 1950) lxiii-lxiv.

131. Paris, Archives nationales L 966, no. 7. See also Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, 9235 (6418).

132. Apostolicae sedis can be located at Paris, Archives nationales L 966, no. 7 and in the sources Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, n. 9235 (6418); Edmund Martène and Ursin Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum 1 (Paris, 1717): 1.404-06 and Guilloreau, “Le démêlé entre Serlon,” 137-38.

133. Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, n. 9235 (6418). See also Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 106; Deneen and Swietek, “The Roman Curia and the Merger of Savigny with Cîteaux,” 335-344.

134. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 105-107.

135. The Furness rebellion against the merger is narrated in John C. Atkinson, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, vol. 1, pt. 1, Chetham Society 9 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886), 9; Dugdale, Monasticon

56

against the merger, but the pope was unrelenting.136 Abbot Peter of Furness was forced to submit.137 He relinquished his office, but the monks of Furness persisted in their claim.138 Hugh, Bishop of Rouen, sent a letter to Furness demanding that the monks submit to the merger or be excommunicated.139

Faced with this ultimatum, the Furness monks capitulated.140 Their former abbot Peter was replaced by Richard of Bayeux (?1148-1152/3), a monk of

Savigny.141 Richard’s abbacy was short, and his successor, John of Cauncefield

Anglicanum, 5: 246; Deneen and Swietek, “The Roman Curia,” 345-349; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 15-17; Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”372-4; Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 15; Léopold Delisle, “Documents Relative to the Abbey of Furness, Extracted from the Archives of the Abbey of Savigny,” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 6 (1851), 420-21; Guilloreau, “Le démêlé entre Serlon,” 138-39.

136. Eugenius III referred the matter over to a tribunal on Michaelmas (Sept. 29, 1148) presided over by Hugh, bishop of Rouen, and Arnaulf, bishop of Lisieux. Peter was able to defer the case until Martinmas (Nov. 11, 1148), but was not present at the proceedings. [Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 15; Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”372-4]

137. Peter delivered the letter of postponement to Savigny and, as the Furness Coucher Book states, may have been detained there and stripped of his abbacy. [Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”373-4; Furness Coucher Book, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:1: 8-9]. Peter may have submitted amicably as he was soon entrusted as the abbot of Quarr, another Savigniac- Cistercian house. [Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 15; Furness Coucher Book, ed. Atkinson, 1: 8-9; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 129.]

138. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 15-16; Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”374.

139. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 15-16; Delisle, “Documents Relative to the Abbey of Furness,” 421-22; Guilloreau, “Le démêlé entre Serlon,” 140. Date of letter not given.

140. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 16; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 3: 17.

141. Paul Hermann Müller, ed., Päpstliche Delegationsgerichtsbarkeit in der Normandie (12. und frühes 13. Jahrhundert) Studien end Dokumente zur Gallia Pontificia, 4 (Bonn, 1997): 93, no. 6; and mentioned in the secondary sources Deneen and Swietek, “The Roman Curia,” 345-46 and

57

(1153-70?), a monk of Furness, seems to have returned to independent behavior, which can be seen by his conflict with Savigny over filiation rights to Byland.142

The English Savigniac houses did not acquiesce quickly. Serlo first sent his prior, Guido, to visit all the English houses with the 1148 bull of Eugenius III in order to make them conform to the Cistercian rule,143 and then on October 21,

1149, Serlo received papal permission to excommunicate those who did not comply during his visitation of the congregation the following year.144

Emboldened by his new authority, Serlo took direct action toward securing the loyalty of the English houses and effectively ending Furness’ bid for independence.145 Nonetheless, the Cistercian abbots at the end of the century were still attempting at the General Chapter to make Savigniac monasteries conform to their customs.146 At the same time, however, some English Savigniac

Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 100-08.

142. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 17. Information on abbots provided in Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 128 and Atkinson, “Introductory Chapter,” in Furness Coucher Book, ed. Atkinson, 1:1: xxv, xxxiv-xxxvii. Citation on the controversy over Byland is located in note 93.

143. Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 15; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 76 and the bull is noted in note 129.

144. Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, n. 9351 (6495). Martène and Durand, Veterum scriptorum, 1: 813, Migne, Patrologia Latina, 180: n. 1398.

145. “Ad Serlo en Abbatem,” in Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum historicorum, dogmaticorum, moralium amplissima collecta 1, eds. Edmund Martene and Ursin Durand (Paris), 813. See also Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 18; Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”374.

146. Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-358; Waddell, ed. Twelfth-century Statutes: There are many instances in the statutes of the Cistercian General Chapter where Savigniac monasteries are cited for neglecting their duty of attendance (1195/11, 313-14; 1198/15, 407;

58

houses were being trusted by the General Chapter with the oversight of various tribunals.147 Furness eventually submitted to Cistercian customs and even restructured the architecture of their abbey to conform to Cistercian models.148

Savigny as the Cause of the Supposed “Corruption” of the Cistercians

Some scholars have considered the assimilation of Savigny into the

Cistercian Order a source of the future relaxation of Cistercian ideals.149

Jacqueline Buhot claimed that, although the Savigniac Order was easily assimilated because it, like Cîteaux, was modeled on reforms based on eastern eremitic ideals, the Savigniacs contaminated150 the Cistercian Order by continuing to practice Savigniac customs after the merger.151 Bennett Hill

1198/40, 416, etc.). Savigniac abbots had been admonished for misconducts as well (1194/51, 300-301 and 1200/19, 460-61).

147. Waddell, ed. Twelfth-century Statutes had these statutes Byland in Lil 1196/28, 361; Buildwas Lil 1195/70, 342-3 and Lil 1199/21, 429; Quarr Lil 1192/35, 249.

148. Furness altered the abbey church apse and transepts, the , the cloister and most notably the refectory, all according to Cistercian statutes. The abbey church had apsidal chapels before the merger (noted by John Hope); this was altered to square ends formed along the lines of the original apsidal forms. The refectory was first constructed along the east/west axis, and was changed to the Cistercian standard of north south, which also made room for a warming house and separated laybrothers from choir monks. [Harold Brakspear, “On the First Church at Furness,” Transactions of the Lancasshire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society, vol. XVII (Manchester: Richard Gill, 1901), 84-5; W. H. St. John Hope, “The Abbey of St. Mary in Furness, Lancashire,” in the Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, vol. 16 (Kendal: T. Wilson, 1900), 221-302; Stuart Harrison, “Tour of the Abbey,” in Furness Abbey (London: English Heritage, 1998), 3-21.]

149. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 109-111; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 188-9, 249-264; Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-358.

150. Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 189: Ceci explique la survivance à Savigny de coutumes particulières qui, comme nous le verrons plus loin, finirent par contaminer l’Ordre cistercien tout entier.

151. The letter of Alexander III (?1166-1179) indicates that at least Furness and her

59

viewed the union as a complete disaster. It brought corruption to the

Cistercians, he argued, because Savigny’s model had been based on the Cluniac system.152 Hill also insisted that reception of tithes and property disputes lay behind the Savigniac corruption.153

Others have argued that these issues were a problem for many Cistercian as well as Savigniac houses during the twelfth century.154 Alice Cooke reasoned that the relaxation of Cistercian ideals was due, not to the union, but to the rapid spread of Cistercian settlements in England.155 Cooke granted that the Cistercian

Order expanded with the absorption of the Congregation of Savigny,156 but conversely held that Cistercian growth itself was too rapid to allow the

daughter-house, Swineshead, still did not observe all Cistercian customs. Walter Holtzmann, ed., Papsturkunden in England, in Abhandllungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse (Berlin:1956-1952): 2.366, n. 174. See also Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 107-09; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 250.

152. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 109-111; there is no concrete evidence as of yet to Hill’s claims, see Chapter II, Section “Purported Differences,” 48-51.

153. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 109; however, Long and Bouchard prove that some Cistercian houses also have tithes and property disputes before the merger [see note 91].

154. Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered,” 217-230; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127- 1176,” see note 91.

155. Cooke, “The Settlement of the Cistercians in England,” 625-676.

156. Cooke, “The Settlement of the Cistercians in England,” 668-676: Cooke also shows proof that the English Savigniac houses were still seen as separate from the English Cistercians as late at 1205, maybe even 1264 [Charter of John in 1208 to the monks of Neath, calling them Savigniac (Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, 5: 259, Append. III and see also p. 226 for a letter of the abbot of Savigny (1264) to Furness and Byland: ac aniversis generationis Savigniacensis coabbatibus per Angliam et Walliam constitutis.

60

Cistercians to maintain their original ideals.157 Finally, Robin Donkin suggested that the merger did not impinge on Cistercian ideals but that a changing economy and rapid growth led the Cistercians to modify their original ideals as they were, however reluctantly, drawn into ecclesiastical and economic affairs.158

Recent research suggests that the early ideals of the Order of Cîteaux had declined before the merger occurred.159 Constance Bouchard argued that the

Cistercians had always been involved in such “activities” as gifts, rents, and mills,160 and considers these, not as a sign of “corruption,” but as evidence that the Cistercians were an important part of the twelfth-century economy.161

157. Cooke, “The Settlement of the Cistercians in England,” 676. Savigniac house spread just as rapidly a decade before the Cistercians in England; however, the Savigniacs did not have the benefit of a strong administration [see Chapter II, Sections “Savigniac and Cistercian Growth,“ 40-46 and “The Congregation of Savigny’s History,” 37-40].

158. Robin A. Donkin, “The Cistercian Order and the Settlement of Northern England,” The Geographical Review 59 (1969): 403-16. As Lawrence notices, the Cistercian vocation of poverty and manual labour actually led to an increase in wealth [Medieval Monasticism, 190-92; see also Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 352-56.

159. Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality,” 217-230; Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176,” see note 91.

160. Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality,” 217-230. Bouchard cites in evidence income from mills at La Ferté in 1133 and the reception of tithes and peasants in 1140 at Cîteaux. Bouchard’s sources on Cistercian economic discrepancies include: George Duby, ed., Recueil des pancartes de l’abbaye de La Ferté-sur-Grosne, 1113-1178 (Paris, 1953), 77-78, 171-2; Chaumont, Archives départementales de la Haute-Marne, in series 1H5, 2H2, 5H5, 5H7, 5H10, 6H2, 8H81; J. Marilier, ed., Chartes et documents concernant l’abbaye de Cîteaux, 1098-1182 (Rome, 1961), 49-51, 82-85, 92-3, 98, 101, 107-8, 140-1; Martine Garrigues, ed., Le premier cartulaire de l’abbaye cistercienne de Pontigny (XII-XIII siècles), Collection de documents inédits sur l’histoire de France 14 (Paris, 1981), 122-4; Jean-Baptiste Auberger, L’unanimité cistercienne primitive: Mythe ou realité? (Achel, 1986): 11, 19, 35-6, 61-2, 140-41, 151.

161. Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality,” 218.

61

Jeffrey Long has stated that the “corruption” was simply a reaction to the increasing cash economy and the monks’ rising popularity, which led to an overpopulation of conversi and rising fiscal accountability.162 As Cistercian granges prospered, monetary transactions led to commercial trade, which could not be avoided in the emerging European mercantile economy.163 These economic changes had begun long before the union with Savigny—starting in

1128, leveling off mid-twelfth century, then growing again into the thirteenth century.164 By comparing and calculating Cistercian and Savigniac abuses, both before and after the merger, Long concludes that neither Order had significantly more success than the other in being free from secular possessions.165

Contentions in the Incorporation of Savigny

Contention over the union of the two Orders was focused on Savigniac privileges.166 English Savigniac houses openly contrived to their

162. Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176.”

163. Ibid., 122.

164. Ibid., 121-124.

165. In “1147 Rejected,” Long concludes that, before 1147, the Cistercian abbeys in England and Wales were eight percent more likely to acquire gifts prohibited by the Cistercian Order in proven cases. If all non-proven cases were included, Savigniac abbeys were then fifteen percent more likely than Cistercian, but held to a standard for which they did not have statutes.

166. Savigny’s privileges had been granted in two bulls issued by Pope Lucius II on December 5, 1144: Desiderium quod and Quia igitur. Desiderium quod confirmed Savigny’s possessions; Quia igitur, emphasized Savigny’s direct papal protection and defined Savigny’s supremacy within the Congregation. Anomalies in the second bull, however, indicate that Savigny had, in fact, forged Quia igitur. [Deneen and Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” 3- 25 and Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,” 363-387.]

62

exemptions after their absorption into the Cistercian Order.167 Savigny is thought to have kept its privileges and claimed papal exemption as a condition of the union, thereby creating controversy after the merger.168

Bernard of Clairvaux’s position against diocesan exemption for the

Cistercian houses, including the Savigniacs, is widely known.169 Many scholars have indicated that the Savigniacs had full exemption before the merger and retained this status.170 These conclusions are based on the phrase in papal confirmations salva apostolicae sedis auctoritae,171 yet many bulls contained the phrase salva apostolicae sedis auctoritae et diocesanorum episcoporum canonica

167. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 107-15; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 250; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 3-25; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered: Lucius II’s Bull Habitantes in domo of December 5, 1144,” 363-387.

168. Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-358; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 188-9.

169. Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered,” 228; Desmond, “The Appropriation of Churches by the Cistercians in England to 1400,” 246; Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 292; Lekai, The Cistercians: Ideals and Reality, 68.

170. Auvry and Hill are both adamant that Savigniac exemption existed since its foundation [Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1: 204; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104]. Buhot and Suydam insist that exemption was not granted until the bull of Lucius II (Desiderium quod) on Dec. 9, 1144 [Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order:” 97-98. Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 107.]

171. Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 290-1. The first extant record of this phrase is in Desiderium Quod by Lucius II. Popes Athanasius IV and Adrian IV also issued bulls with this phrase.

63

iustitia.172 Savigniac houses’ actual exemption was indeterminate until 1184,173 when Savigny obtained exemption as a Cistercian house.174

Recent scholarship has indicated that Pope Eugenius III did not grant

Savigny exemption from Cistercian restrictions on spiritualia, revenues from parochial churches and lay tithes, as had previously been thought.175 If it had,

Savigny would not actively have sought protection from secular magnates and local bishops176 who continued to defend the monastery’s spiritualia in litigation before diocesan and secular courts. In fact, no pope before Alexander III (1159-

1181) had granted exemption for spiritualia to Savigny, and this he limited to those grants acquired before the merger.177 The privileges of Eugenius III,

Anastasius IV, and Hadrian IV on behalf of Savigny all omit mention of

172. Ibid., 290-298: bulls from Eugenius III and Alexander III included salva apostolicae sedis auctoritae et diocesanorum episcoporum canonica iustitia in their bulls. Athanasius IV, Adrian IV, and Lucius III all included this phrase in some of their bulls.

173. Ibid., 298. For a full account see Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 285-298. Until 1184, depending on the pope as indicated above, the wording could change, however Savigny gained undisputable exemption by 1184 as a Cistercian house.

174. Ramakers, Papsturkunden, 2:341. Lucius III granted all Cistercian houses exemption in 1184. For a full account see Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112- 1184,” 285-298. See also Lekai, The Cistercians: Ideals and Reality, 68 and Mahn, L’Order Cistercien et son gouvernement, 119-155.

175. Deneen and Swietek, “‘Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit,’“ 5-28.

176. Ibid., 15-16. Deneen and Swietek mention charters from Henry II to Savigny and charters from the Cartulary of Savigny by Bishop Herbert of Avranches, Henry of Fougères, and Ralph II of Fougères.

177. Ibid., 26.

64

spiritualia, while confirming all other income.178 It was not until 1188 that

Clement III, followed by Celestine III, actually permitted Savigniac monasteries to acquire spiritualia;179 however, this exemption did not apply to Cistercian houses.180

The Congregation of Savigny did not change its customs immediately after the General Chapter of 1147 or even after the decree of Pope Eugenius; the

Congregation assimilated steadily to the Order of Cîteaux.181 Yet, although incorporated into the Cistercian Order, the Congregation never fully assimilated; Savigniac houses became peculiarities within the Cistercian

Order.182

Rushen Abbey

Rushen Abbey was not widely thought to have been a Savigniac house until the publication “The Monastic Orders of Rushen Abbey (Savignian and

178. Ibid.

179. Deneen and Swietek, “‘Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit,’“ 25-26. Clement III and Celestine III confirmed unrestricted spiritualia. Clement III: Phillip Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXCVIII, corrected by W. Wattenbach, S. Loewenfeld, et al., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1885-1888), 16334; W. Holtzman, Papsturkunden in England, (Abhandlungen der Akadmie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, Neue Folge 25. Berlin: 1930), 554-8; Holtzman, Papsturkunden in England, 644-5.

180. Deneen and Swietek, “Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit,” 27.

181. Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,”188-9, 249-264; Michel Pigeon, “Savigny, Cîteaux…et Clairvaux,” Collectanea OCR 60.4 (1998): 355-361.

182. Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny,” 189, 249-264, see note 34; Dimier, “Savigny et son affiliation,” 351-358, see note 90.

65

Cistercian” by Glen Taylor in 1927,183 even though its filiation as Furness’ daughter house was known. Because Rushen had been thought of only as a

Cistercian abbey by scholars until the early twentieth century, most historical accounts generically compare the abbey only to Cistercian monasteries.184

Having been founded as a Savigniac monastery by Furness thirteen years prior to the merger, Rushen, however, should be analyzed as both Savigniac and

Cistercian.

Rushen Abbey will here be examined according to its customs, both before and after the merger, to determine its level of conformity to the Cistercian

Order. A better understanding of Rushen’s place as a Savigniac-Cistercian

Abbey will be gained by investigating the foundation of Rushen, allocations

(especially those considered illegal for Cistercians), its architectural layout, and the statutes of the Cistercian General Chapter after 1147, as well as synodal statutes of the Bishopric of Sodor.

183. A. Glen Taylor, “The Monastic Orders of Rushen Abbey (Savigniac and Cistercian),” in Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society vol. 3 (Douglas: 1927), 250-57.

184. William Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 516-18; Christian Cubbon, “A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited,” 2nd Edition. Douglas: Island Development Company Limited, (1938), 14-15; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 16; Gordon Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: Manx Experience, 1988), esp. 16-18; Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997), 4-17.

66

CHAPTER III

BACKGROUND OF THE POLITICS AND EARLY HISTORY OF RUSHEN ON THE ISLE OF MAN FROM THE FIRST VIKING ARRIVAL TO THE END OF THE CROVAN DYNASTY (1079-1265)

Rapid Conversion of Viking Settlers to Christianity: First Viking Age in the Isle of Man

This chapter will first explore the Viking history of the Isle of Man and

Christianity’s survival through the Viking Age, and then detail the history of

Rushen Abbey. Cognizant of the political history of the Isle of Man and

Rushen’s background, the reader will be able to put the remaining chapters of the dissertation into context.

The first Viking ruler of the Isle of Man is thought to have been Godred

MacFergus, who ruled Ireland around 850 AD.1 Thirty years later another

Viking ruler, Harald Finehair (880-940), ruled in Norway. At the beginning of his reign, Harald consolidated the warring clans in Norway, giving the Norse a strong government in the North and allowing them to reach further abroad than previous kings.2 There were two main Viking clans settling within the Irish Sea region, the Haraldsons and the Olafsons.3

1. Benjamin Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 11; David W. Moore, The Other British Isles (Jefferson: McFarland & Co., 2005), 69, 99; Ronald Williams, The Lords of the Isles: The Clan Donald and the early Kingdom of the Scots (London: Chatto and Windus, 1984), 63; R. Andrew McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles: Scotland’s Western Seaboard c. 1100-1336 (East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 1997), 30-1. Williams claims Godred MacFergus was an ancestor to Somerled, who later comes in conflict with the Crovan dynasty. Hudson dismisses the account of MacFergus as being mostly fictitious rather than historic.

2. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 58; Orkneyinga saga trans. Jón Andrésson Hjaltalín and Gilbert Goudie, ed. Joseph Anderson (Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1873),

67

During this early era, the two clans fought for portable loot and small farms for estates.4 The Haraldsons were more connected with the Isle of Man at this time.5 By the late eleventh century, the two clans were still fighting, but for control of trade routes and lordship of the Isles.6 The conflict eventually resulted in 1060 AD in the Isle of Man being under the rule of Dublin, with Godred

Sitricsson installed in Mann as a tributary king under Murchad mac Diarmait, ruler of Dublin (1052-1070).7

The Survival of Christianity in the First Viking Age

Stone Crosses

The most noticeable evidence of medieval religion on the Isle of Man is the remains of stone cross slabs that are found throughout the entire island.8

Depicted on them are scenes from both Norse mythology and symbols of

Christianity. The Manxmen were already constructing Christian stone crosses

1; Arthur W. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, vol. 1 (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1900), 86.

3. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 18. Godred Crovan was of the Olafson clan.

4. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 205.

5. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 171, 205-6. The Haraldsons tried to take back control of the Isle until 1115 A.D.

6. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 205-6.

7. Chronicle of Man, f. 32 v. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 96; Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 171-2. The Olafsons benefited when Diarmait mac Máel no mbó defeated Donnchad MacBrian, son of Brian Boru; he became .

8. David M. Wilson, The Vikings in the Isle of Man (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 2008), 57; Kermode, Manx Crosses, 1; Cubbon, The Art of the Manx Crosses, 3-4.

68

before the Vikings arrived on Mann.9 The Viking settlers incorporated features similar to those of the Manxmen into their own memorial stones and began to chisel memorial stones with patterns unique to the Scandinavians, though some continued to show Irish influence, resulting in a ringchain motif unique to the

Isles.10

Some cross slabs have an inscription that includes the name of the remembered dead, and often of the surviving relatives. Norse names appear frequently on the stones, but many Celtic names are also found.11 This implies that the natives and the settlers lived alongside each other peacefully, intermarried, and assimilated.

Many of the stone crosses of the Viking Age in Mann display scenes from the Norse sagas.12 Of these scenes, most depict events told about Ragnarök, a saga foretelling the apocalypse of their pagan gods. The very conspicuous apocalyptic imagery may well be a visual representation of the rapid Viking conversion to Christianity, the end of their old beliefs, and their acceptance of a

9. Phillip M. C. Kermode, Manx Crosses (1907; repr. Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press, 1994), 15-38.

10. Kermode, Manx Crosses, 38, 59-60; Cubbon, The Art of the Manx Crosses, 4, 18.

11. There are twenty-three Norse names and seventeen Gaelic and non-Norse names found on the stones. Gaelic male names appear 50 percent less often than Norse male names in runic inscriptions; the ratio of Gaelic to Norse female names is the same. [Heather Rose Jones, “Early Medieval Manx Names,” 2006. http://heatherrosejones.com/names/manx/earlymanx.html.

12. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 61-2.

69

new religion.13

Viking Age Burials

The continuity of Christian faith within the early Viking settlements has been shown by the examination of these stone monuments. Small churches

(keeills) were built, and by around 1000 AD pagan symbols had disappeared. As the stone crosses indicated, the early Viking settlers became Christian sometime in the early tenth century and initiated burial changes.14 Like Christian burials, these burials were lintel and faced east, and almost all later burials were within parish churchyards.15

Grave goods became extremely rare as conversion took hold, for in the

Christian faith, the dead are buried close to the Church (i.e., to God), and there is no need to take earthly goods into the afterlife.16 This is different than the pagan burial practice of placing goods in the grave to be taken with the dead to the afterlife, or the isolated burial on a personal estate.17

13. This could possibly be how the Viking settlers considered the conversion that death had come to the old gods and beliefs, and now a new greater god was to be worshipped.

14. Wilson, The Viking Age in the Isle of Man: The Archaeological Evidence, 30; Wilson, The Viking Age in the Isle of Man, 56-7.

15. Gerhard Bersu and David M. Wilson, Three Viking Graves in the Isle of Man, The Society for Medieval Archaeology (London: Society for Medieval Archaeology, 1966), xiii-xiv.

16. The closer the person was buried to the church, the more pure of spirit; i.e., medieval archaeology showed babies were found really close to church walls.

17. Wilson, The Viking Age in the Isle of Man, 27.

70

Second Viking Age: The Beginning of the Crovan Dynasty

Godred Crovan, the son of Ivar Haraldson,18 fought with the Norwegian invader Harald Hardrada against the English king, Harold Godwinson (Jan. 6,

1066–Oct. 14, 1066), at Stamford Bridge in 1066.19 He escaped and sought refuge under Godfrey Sytricson, the King of Man (>1066-1070), who “received him with great honor.”20 In 1070, Godfrey Sytricson’s son Fingal (1070-1079?) succeeded him and fended off many raids on the island from Ireland.21 Probably after Fingal’s death, Godred Crovan made three attempts to conquer Mann, succeeding in his third in 1079 and remaining in power there until 1095.22 From

18. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 53-4, 83, 170-1. Ivar Haraldson (King of Dublin, 1038-46) was the grandson of Olaf Cuaran (King of 941-943/944; King of Dublin 952–980); following the lineage of the Olafsons.

19. Chronicle of Man, f. 32 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 154, 171; Moore, The Other British Isles, 100; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 104; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 33.

20. Chronicle of Man, f. 32 v. et honorificae susceptus est ab eo. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 171; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 104; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 96. Hudson states that Godred Sytricson was probably a distant cousin of Godred Crovan, another great grandson of Olaf Cuaran.

21. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 172. The raids were from the Haraldson clan attempting to regain Mann, though the identities of the leaders were not named as they were unsuccessful.

22. Chronicle of Man, f. 32 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 171-2; Moore, The Other British Isles, 100-1; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 97-8; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 32-4; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105. Godred gave his Viking followers a choice of taking plunder or settling the island: he then granted the southern half of the island to his fellow Vikings and the northern part to the natives. [Chronicle of Man, f. 33 r. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 172; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 96: McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 34.] After Godred’s triumph in Mann, he “subdued Dublin, and a great part of Leinster, and held the Scots in such subjection that no one who built a vessel dared to insert more than three bolts” [Chronicle of Man, f. 33 r and v. Igitur godredud subiugavit sibi dubliniam et magnam partem laynestir. Scotos vero ita perdomuit ut nullus qui fabricaret navem vel scapham ausus esset plusquam tres clavos ferreos inserere. See also Moore, A History

71

1091-1094, Godred Crovan also ruled Dublin until he was driven out by an Irish coalition under and Diarmait.23 Ruling Dublin and Mann, Godred mainly resided in Dublin, and his eldest son Lagman probably ruled the Isles in his name.24 In 1095, Godred died of the plague on , and Lagman (1095-1098) became the next King of Man.25

In 1098, Magnus Barelegs led a large fleet to the Sudreys to claim the Isles for Norse suzerainty.26 After his short reign, Lagman reclaimed the throne but faced opposition from his brother Harald, whom Lagman eventually blinded and mutilated.27 Lagman repented in grief and voluntarily resigned his

of the Isle of Man, 103; Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 177-80; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105; Moore, The Other British Isles, 101.] This limitation was decreed so that Dubliners could not build bigger ships that could compete with Manx fleet.

23. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 104; Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 183. The battle took nearly a year.

24. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 189. Godred Crovan was the only Crovan king to rule Dublin and Mann, as hold on Dublin was tenuous during his lifetime.

25. Chronicle of Man, f. 33 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 183-4; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 104; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105-6. Hudson states that the plague originated in Bavaria in 1094 and spread to the Irish Sea region by August 1095 until 1096. It is mentioned in the “Annals of Ulster,” U1095.8, accessed December 5, 2014, http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T100001A/index.html.

26. Chronicle of Man, f. 34 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 189-194; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 104; Moore, The Other British Isles, 102; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 35-6; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 106-7. Magnus died near Downpatrick in 1103, which allowed Lagman (1103-1111) to be reinstated as King of Man. [Chronicle of Man, f. 35 r. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 197-8; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 107; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 37.]

27. Chronicle of Man, f. 33 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 189; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 104; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105.

72

kingdom, leaving his youngest brother Olaf as his heir.28 In 1112/3, the

Manxmen sent for Godred Crovan’s son, Olaf I (1112/3 -1153), who had been raised in the English court.29 For forty years, Olaf’s rule was “peaceful.”30

In 1153, Olaf was betrayed and killed by his nephews, sons of Harald

Godredson.31 However, Olaf’s son, Godred II (1154-1158 and 1164->1188), hearing of the betrayal while in Norway, came back to Mann to punish his cousins and took his place as King of Man.32 Somerled of Argyll (1158-1164) took the island from him by force,33 but Reginald Olafson (1164), brother of

28. Ibid. The Manx Chronicle states that Lagman “took the cross, and went to Jerusalem, where he died.” Chronicle of Man, f. 33 v. et signo crucis dominicae insignitus iter ierosolimitatum arripuit quo et mortuus est. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 198-99. Hudson believes that Lagman ruled after Magnus from 1102-1108, then joined King Sigurd on his pilgrimage. Since Olaf was too young, he was fostered at the English court, in 1111/2. The chiefs (þangs) of the Mann sent word to Muirchertach, entreating him to appoint a ruler of royal race as regent in Mann until Olaf was old enough to take his inheritance. Muirchertach agreed and sent Domnall mac Tadc, who did not listen to the High King’s orders and abused his power in Mann. After two years, the Manx þangs drove him from the island. [Chronicle of Man, f. 33 v. - f. 34 r. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 199-200; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 104-5; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105.]

29. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v. See also Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 202; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 107-8; Williams, The Lords of the Isles, 105, 7.

30. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v. Olavus filius Godredi Crovan cepit regnarae super omnes insulas, regnavit que xl annis, erat autem vir pacificus...

31. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. and f. 36 v. No source gives information on them other than they resided in Dublin, were the sons of the blinded and mutilated Harald, and the one who wielded the weapon to kill Olaf I was the middle son, Reginald Haraldson. No other brothers were named.

32. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 v.

33. Chronicle of Man, f. 37 v. and f. 39 r. While Godred II was King of Man, he battled Somerled of Argyll from 1156-1158, for control of Mann. Somerled forced Godred II to leave the island, and ruled from 1158-64.

73

Godred II, regained the Olafson kingdom in 1164.34 Four days later, Godred II landed with support from Norway and seized his birthright.35

Godred’s heir was his second son Olaf II, who was born in wedlock, unlike his other children, yet his first son, Reginald (1188-1226) ruled over

Mann, but only with the support of the Manxmen, because Olaf II was too young.36 Reginald eventually fell out of favor with the Manxmen, and Olaf II

(1226-1237) recovered his inheritance through civil war.37 Harald (1237-1249),

Olaf II’s son, was officially made king of Mann in Norway in 1242.38 He drowned in 1249, coming back from Norway, and his brother Reginald II became king for a month (May 1249) before being murdered by a Manx knight named Ívarr and his accomplices.39 Seizing the opportunity, Harald II (1249-

1250) took over rule of Mann.40 In 1250, Magnus (1252-1265), son of Olaf II, attempted to claim his inheritance, but was thwarted by another kinsman’s

34. Chronicle of Man, f. 39 r. and f. 39 v.

35. Chronicle of Man, f. 39 v. Reginald Olafson probably was not labeled the first because he was considered a usurper, like Somerled, and also ruled only four days. Godred II castrated and blinded him.

36. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 v. When Olaf II came of age, he requested land from his brother in lieu of his birthright. [Chronicle of Man, f. 41 v. and Chronicle of Man, f. 43 r.]

37. Chronicle of Man, f. 43 v.

38. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 r.

39. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 r.

40. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 v. and f. 48 r. Harald II was the son of Godred Don and grandson of Reginald Olafson. He was summoned by the King of Norway and deposed as a usurper.

74

attempt to usurp the island;41 he finally gained kingship in 1252, the last acknowledged Viking ruler of Mann.42

History of Rushen Abbey

Foundation of Rushen Abbey (1134)

Godred Crovan’s son, Olaf I, founded Rushen Abbey in 1134,43 twenty- one years after becoming King, and all records identify Furness as its

41. Harald and Ívarr allied themselves against Magnus; Magnus was ultimately successful with the backing of Norway.

42. Chronicle of Man, f. 48 r. - f. 49 v.

43. Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles, BL Cotton Julius A.VII: fol. 35 v.; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. Brownbill, vol. 2, pt. 3, Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), xxx-xxxxii, 11- 12, 708-9; Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 1774), 112, 125-6; Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness (London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844), 122-3; William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871): from which is taken Dugdale’s Monasticon Angelicanum, p. 46 and Grose's Antiquities, p. 162 (These can also be found in William Dugdale, ‘Rushen Abbey’ in Monasticon Angelicanum, vol 5. ed. Caley, Ellis, and Bandinel (London: 1825), 252-256 and Francis Grose, ‘Antiquities of the Isle of Man,’ in Antiquities of England and Wales, 8 vols. (London: 1773-87), vol. 6, 197-214 and vol. 8, 161-162.) Joseph G. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), 50; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man” in Archaeologia Cambrensis vol. XII, 3rd Series, no. XLVIII (1866): 432-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 36; Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880), 59; Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893), 34; William C. Cubbon: “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 509; Cubbon, “History of Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla. Isle of Man. -1134 A.D.,” in Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 4, no. 1 (1935): 98; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 3-4; Leopold Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, vol. 1, CCLIII (Ridgewood, N.J.: Gregg Press, 1964), 101; Gordon Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: Manx Experience, 1988), 7; David E. Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” in Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, Ed. Ian B. Cowan. 2nd ed. (London: Longman Group Limited, 1976), 196; Donald Elmslie Robertson Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review 45 (1994): 111; Karen Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” (M.A. thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002), 37; Benjamin Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes

75

motherhouse.44 According to the Manx Chronicle, however, the land for the new monastery had first been given in 1134 by Stephen of Blois to the Abbey of

Rievaulx.45 The Chartulary of Furness states:

Certain land in Mann was given to the Abbey of Rievaulx for the foundation of Rushen Abbey, but afterwards it was given to Furness Abbey to found one of the Cistercian Order there where it is now situated, and so it issued not from Rievaulx but from Furness.46

Rievaulx had been founded only in 1131, and building there began in 1132.47 It seems unlikely that the Cistercian Yorkshire abbey would have been capable of undertaking a new foundation so far away, only three years after its own foundation. Rievaulx’s first daughter house was founded only in 1135.48

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 9, 202; Moore, The Other British Isles, 105; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 217; Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. By Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015), 352.

44. Ibid.

45. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 122; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill 2:3, xxx, 11; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 352.

46. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 122; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, 11; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433. Certa terra in Mannia data fuit Abbatie de Rievalle ad construendam Abbatiam de Russin, postea tamen data fuit Abbatie Furnesie ad construendam eam de ordine Cisterciensi ubi modo scituata est et sic non de Rievalle sed de Furnesio exivit.

47. Glen Coppack, The White Monks: the Cistercians in Britain 1128-1540 (Stroud, 1998), 20- 21.

48. Colin Platt, The Abbeys and Priories of Medieval England, 2nd ed (London, 1995), 40-42. The first daughter house of Rievaulx was Warden Abbey, Bedfordshire, founded 1135. Other early foundations were , Scotland, 1136; , Scotland, 1142; Revesby Abbey, Lincolnshire, 1143.

76

Furness Abbey Donation

Since Rievaulx could not make use of the land, Olaf invited Eudo, the

Abbot of Furness, to the Isle of Man in 1134.49

however Olaf Godredson, the King of Man, according to Furness it was granted to the abbot of Rievaulx first, then at his suggestion it to Furness, so that he might build a monastery of the Savigniac Order there.50

The King of Man desired a more stable religious organization for his realm, and discussed with Abbot Eudo the means by which he might establish a bishopric on the Isle of Man for the propagation of the in a Roman context.51 Conferences between the Manx king and the abbot of Furness on aligning the church on Mann with the greater European church brought monastic life and episcopal oversight to the Isle of Man.52 Simultaneously, a new bishopric was established, seated on St. Patrick’s Isle within the archdiocese of

49. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lancashire, vol. I., fol. 30; Oliver, “Charter of Olave, King of the Islands, A.D. 1134,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 1-3; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), 708-9; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 7.

50. Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101. “...cuius tamen bona Olavus Godredson, Mannissi rex, ex Furnesii primo abbati Rievallensi, tum Furnesiensi eo consilio concessit, ut sui ordinis Saviniacensis coenobium ibidem erigeret. Qui regis voto satisfaciens monachos IV Id. Jan. 1134.

51. Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, 694, 708-9; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Moore, Diocesan Histories, 33-34; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 7; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 28.

52. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 7; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 28-9. See Appendix Table 3 for list of Abbots of Furness, p. 247.

77

York.53 The abbot and prior of Furness were the first to sign the charter as witnesses, along with some prominent Manx chieftains (called þangs).54 This likely indicates that both the abbot and the prior were on the Isle of Man when the charter was issued by King Olaf.

O[laf] king of the Isles, to all the sons and faithful of the Holy Church of God, both future and to come, greetings. Since an earthly kingdom is never managed well unless Catholic way of the king of heaven be observed there. Therefore, I, Olaf with the assent of good and wise men in counsel, have decreed and decided so that the Christian religion in my kingdom shall be preserved only under its own bishop rather than rendered desolated under foreigners and mercenaries so to speak, naturally for their own complaints and not his lords. Know, therefore and give testimony to the truth, that in regard of this discretion, I have committed in admiration and granted forever the holy church of St. Mary of Furness, because of the proximity of the place, nay more on behalf of the good life of their inhabitants, but also on the authority of the episcopal election and observe my whole law of Christianity, saving always the reverence for the apostolic see. And in order that the same may be more perfect and more strongly represented, I donated in free and perpetual alms a certain part of my land for the construction of an abbey by the aforementioned church, just as another charter witnesses. These witnesses: Eudo, the abbot; Gill, the prior; W., monk; William and Hugo, priests; Turkill, son of Fohgel; Jol, son of Macmars; Gill; Fin; Snetol, son of Cutell, and many others without whom the matter may be conducted. At How Ingren.55

53. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, 694, 708-9; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man”; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126.

54. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 1-3; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, 708-9.

55. Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lancashire, vol. I., fol. 30. Oliver, “Charter of Olave, King of the Islands, A.D. 1134,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 1-3; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no 1, 708-9; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. O[laph] rex Insularum universis sancte Dei Ecclesie filiis et fidelibus tam futuris quam presentibus salutem. Quum regnum terrenum nequaquam bene disponitur nisi in ibi celorum Regi

78

The original charter for the land donated to Rushen Abbey by Olaf to

Furness Abbey disappeared over the years, if indeed there ever was one earlier than the 1134 charter. Foundation rights were clearly given to Furness in the

1134 charter, however, and they are referred to in another charter issued by Olaf to , , in 1134.56 It granted the right of election of the

Bishop of Sodor and Man to the Abbey of St. Mary of Furness. The lands for the abbey were not the only grants Olaf made to the Abbey of Furness; he also gave additional lands in Mann, privileges and immunities.57 Beyond this, not much is known of the original donation. The date at which settlement actually began at

Rushen is also difficult to determine. Peter Davey agrees with the Furness

catholice serviatur, iccirco ego Olaph, sapientium consilio et bonorum assensu decrevi et statui ut iu regno meo christiana religio a suo potius Episeopo in unum conservetur quam sub advenis et tanquam mercenariis sua quippe et non Domini querentibus, divisa desoletur. Scitote itaque et testimonium veritati perhibete quod hoc discretionis intuitu commisi et in perpetuum concessi ecclesie Sancte Marie de Furnesio, propter loci confinium immo pro bona vita inhabitantium ipsius, episcopalis electionis dignitatem set et totius juris mei Christianitatis observantiam, salva semper sedis apostolice reverentia. Quod etiam ut melius fieret et firmius teneretur quandam partem terre mee ad abbatiam construendam, predicte ecclesie, sicut alia testatur cartula, in perpetuam elemosinam erogavi liberrimam. Testibus hiis: Eudone, abbate; Gill., priore; W., monacho; Willelmo et Hugone, presbiteris; Turkillo, filio Fohgel; Joh., filio Macmars; Gill.; Fin; Snetol, filio Cutelli, et multis aliis sine quibus res agi potest. Apud How Ingren. [How Ingren is the site of Lorne House, Castletown.]

56. Ibid; and Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, 708-9, no 1, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123.

57. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Dugdales, “Monasticon Angelicanum,” 46 and “Grose's Antiquities,” 162; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Moore, Diocesan Histories, 34-5; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 36; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 512-18; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

79

Coucher Book and Glyn Coppack that building and settlement may have begun close to 1138.58

The reputation of your sanctity spread throughout the whole world, which both the illustrious renown of your predecessors and your own virtue in private as well as public acts do not allow to remain hidden, has in no small degree rejoiced us. We praise therefore the wonderful works of the almighty king, giving him thanks, and we glorify the Lord for what he has done for you, who has exalted you in dignity and sanctity above all our neighbors. For the rest, we signify to you, that the lord Eudo, abbot of the monastery of Furness, from whose boundaries we are not far distant by sea, at our tripartite petition and persuasion, the fame of the religion of the said place having been reported to us, entered with confidence upon the arduous undertaking, and has come to us at great labor for the fruitful occupation of extending the church, under the inspiration of the almighty. Finally, it has been determined among us, both by our decree, and the solemn advice of the people, that a chief bishop should be chosen from among his people, who may direct the spread of Christianity through the Isles. Therefore we call upon you, and humbly implore the grace of your benevolence to ratify by the imposition of your hands, that which by common diligence has been so providentially procured to be done, to the honor of God and the of our souls, namely, that our bishop may be promoted under the authority of your seal, as soon as possible, to the rank of bishop, for the love of God and of us. The lord Abbot therefore relating to us such wonderful and holy things of you, and saying that he was unwilling and unable to go to any other pious [archbishop], but to you, his father, filled with great joy for all things, we have rendered thanks to God as far as we are able.59

58. Coppack, The White Monks: The Cistercians in Britain 1128-1540, 48; Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. By Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, forthcoming), 352.

59. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no. 1, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. Olavus, Dei gratia rex Insularum T[urstino] eadem gratia Eboracensi archiepiscopo salutem et orationes in Christo. Fama sanctitatis vestre orbem terrarum circumquaque pertingens qua et majorum vestrorum insigne preconium et virtus vestra tum privatis tum publicis actibus illustris in abscondito latere non sinit, nos quoque non parum laetificavit. Collaudamus igitur regis omnipotentis

80

This grant, directed to T--- (probably Thurston, archbishop of York [1114-

1140]),60 states that Olaf, king of Man, gave to Eudo, abbot of Furness, land on which to build a monastery in a place called Rushen; this agrees with the

Chronicle of Man.61 The connection of the Isle of Man with England is not altogether surprising as Olaf I’s father, Godred Crovan, as King of Dublin and

Man, had given canonical obedience to Canterbury and Olaf, himself, was raised at the English court.62 Olaf seems, on the advice of Eudo, to have established his bishopric under the metropolitan of York, in whose province

magnalia, gratias agentes ei, quia magnificavit Dominus facere nobiscum, qui vos super omnes vicinos nostros dignitate atque sanctitate exaltavit. De cetero significamus vobis, quod dominus abbas E[udo] Furnesiensis cenobii, a cujus finibus non longe per mare distamus, audientibus nobis famam religionis ejusdem loci, tripartita petitione persuasioneque nostra iter quamuis arduum tamen confidenter ingressus, compensato itaque et itinerandi onere laborioso et labore super ecclesia dilatanda fructuoso, Domino aspirante, ad nos usque pervenit. Denique et nostro decreto et plebis consultu sancitum est inter nos, ut ex suis pontifex eligeretur, qui Christianitati per Insulas gentium propagande preficeretur. Qua propter ad vos conclamamus vestreque benignitatis gratiam humiliter implorarnus, quatinus impositione manuum vestrarum ratum fiat quod communi diligentia tam provide procuratum est fieri, ad honorem Dei, et salutem animarum nostrarum, scilicet, ut episcopus noster ad episcopi gradum sub auctoritatis vestre signaculo pro Dei amore et nostri, quam citius fieri potest promoveatur. Narrante nobis igitur domino abbate tam mira tamque sancta de vobis, dicenteque se nolle nec posse ad alium quempiam ire nisi ad vos patrem suum, gaudio magno replet pro universis, gratias Deo nostro prout potuimus, persolvimus. Valeat sanctitas vestra in Domino.

60. Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no. 2, 709; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 125. Moore, Diosesan Histories, 59. Thomas II died as Archbishop of York in 1114 and Thurstan was consecrated in 1119, staying archbishop till 1140. Thus it stands that the “T” in the charter of Olaf I refers to Thurstan since Olaf I was only King of the Isles during Thurstan’s reign as archbishop.

61. Chronicle of Man, fol. 35 v. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no. 2, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. See also Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 125.

62. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 125-6; Arthur W. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, vol. 1 (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1900), 164; Moore, Diocesan Histories, 33-4.

81

Furness was located.63 The ramifications of this switch in archiepiscopal obedience will be further explored in Chapter VI, which will examine the secular relations of Rushen Abbey.

Early Records of Rushen

Earliest Site

Rushen is a name derived from the Norse “rhos” meaning headland or woodland.64 Basil Megaw has suggested that Rushen was initially located near

Scarlett,65 yet newer research by Davey and Roscow on the 1540 Computus revealed that the abbey farms were grouped in treens and that the block of land between Castletown and Ballasalla constituted the Treen of Rushen.66

Rushen Abbey was built on the western bank of the Silverburn river, in the parish of Malew, the Sheading of Rushen, about two miles north of

Castletown and close to the village of Ballasalla.67 The land had previously been

63. Chronicle of Man, fol. 35 v. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no. 2, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. This will be fully examined in Chapter VI.

64. Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 7.

65. Basil R. S. Megaw, “The original site of Rushen Abbey and its significance,” Recent Archaeological Research on the Isle of Man, P.J. Davey ed., BAR, British Series 278 (Oxford: Archaeopress, 1999): 361-6.

66. Peter Davey and Jim Roscow, The Dissolution of Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society Monograph, 2010), 1-200; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 352-3.

67. William of Worcester, Itinerarium, ed. James Nasmith (Cambridge: James Nasmith, 1778), 312: Castrum monasterii de Russyn cum iii monachis. Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101; Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Cox's Magna Britannia,” p. 87 (From

82

unplowed meadowland.68 The river provided a water supply for mill-power and a drainage system. To the north and south, rising ground gave shelter from the winds and included a good quarry for limestone building material.69 It was an ideal secluded rural place for a monastery.

The site of Rushen Abbey was long believed to have previously been the site of a Celtic monastery or keeill.70 Recent archaeological digs exposed a large number of Christian lintel graves dating from pre-Norman times.71 This discovery confirms that a monastery or keeill had pre-dated the building of

Rushen Abbey.72

Janauschek wrote that in 1098 MacMarus had built a monastery in that same place.73 This seems to reflect a later tradition and it is doubtful that

Thomas Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, 6 vols. (London, 1720-31); West, The Antiquities of Furness, 125; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 48; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 432; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958), 68; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 352-3.

68. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 509-510.

69. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8. Excavations show that the pre- monastic Rushen site was a wetland beside the Silverburn river. Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999), 36.

70. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8; Moore, Other British Isles, 105; Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report, 34-5, 40-3, 64-5, 98.

71. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8; Moore, Other British Isles, 105; Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report, 34-5, 40-3, 64-5, 98.

72. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3, 8; Davey, Rushen Abbey: First Archaeological Report, 34-5, 40-3, 64-5, 98.

73. Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8.

83

MacMarus had in fact founded a monastery there, although his son may have donated to Rushen later or given Rushen a small keeill that was on his father’s lands.74 Documents from Furness mention a monastery of St. Leoc,75 an early

Celtic local saint, and indicate when the parish of Malew received its name after the ninth century.76

Foundation from Furness

The status Rushen Abbey had in relation to its motherhouse Furness remains one of the vaguest matters in ancient and modern sources.77 William of

Worchester mentions Rushen Abbey in his fifteen-century Itinerary as “the monastery of Rushen with three monks.”78 Grose (1772-1776), in his Antiquities, made it clear that he believed that Furness had held full power over all lands

74. This is my theory as MacMarus’s son, Jol, is a witness of the Rushen foundation charter name. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lancashire, vol. I., fol. 30. John Robert Oliver, “Charter of Olave, King of the Islands, A.D. 1134,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, 1-3; Brownbill, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, 2:3, no. 1, 70

75. Donald S. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins (Felinfach: Llanerch Publishers, 1998), 134- 36; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1927), 4-7; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8. Leoc probably stems from the Celtic Saint Lua, who was an abbot and a of St. Comgall. Sometimes called, Lugud or Molua. “St. Lua,” Catholic Online, accessed Feb. 19, 2012, http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id= 4321.

76. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8.

77. William of Worchester, Itinerarium, 312; Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Dugdales' “Monasticon Angelicanum,” 46 and “Cox's Magna Britannia,” 87 and “Grose,” 162; Moore, Diocesan Histories, 34; James Gell, Introduction to Parr’s Abstract, Manx Society, vol. xii (Douglas: Manx Society, 1866), 3.

78. William of Worchester, Itinerarium, 312. Castrum monasterii de Russyn cum iii monachis.

84

and rights given by the Kings of Man.79 He specifically labeled Rushen “a cell dependent on the abbey of Furness.”80 In 1893, Moore stated that the entire

Manx church had been subjugated to Furness.81 While these authors viewed

Rushen as a mere cell of its motherhouse, James Gell could find no evidence that

Furness held anything except patronage and filiation as the motherhouse over

Rushen, not total authority over the abbey or any of its temporalities other than that given by the Carta Caritatis.82

In the Isle of Man section of the eighteenth-century Magna Britannia,

Thomas Cox insists that Rushen was the chief monastic presence on Mann, and from the first consisted of the regular abbot and twelve monks.83 The Annales

Furnessienses mentioned that one of the first monks, Wimund, and other brethren moved into the new foundation in 1134 and that shortly afterward

(sometime between the foundation 1134 and 1140) Wimund became the first at Olaf’s new See.84 This certainly implies that there were

79. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Grose's Antiquities,” 162.

80. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Grose's Antiquities,” 162.

81. Moore, Diocesan Histories, 34.

82. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed Waddell, II, 261-81 and B, 422-52. See also Gell, Introduction to Parr’s Abstract, 3.

83. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Cox's Magna Britannia,” 87 (from Thomas Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, 6 vols. (London, 1720-31).

84. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 140, see also William of Newburgh, Historia rerum anglicarum, lib. i. cap. xxiv. ed. Hans Claude Hamilton (London: Sumptibus Societatis, 1856), 64- 7; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 62; Alan O. Anderson, “Wimund, Bishop and Pretender,” Scottish Historical Review 7. 25 (1909): 29-36; Donald Elmslie Robertson Watt,

85

more than three monks at Rushen at its foundation, making it unlikely that it had been a mere cell. In addition, Furness founded another daughter house in the same year as Rushen, 1134, at Calder in Cumbria.85 The monks sent out to

Calder were the normal abbot and twelve brethren.86 If this was Benedictine common practice87 in the Savigniac tradition, then it is only logical that Rushen would have had the same regular number of founding monks according to the

Rule. Rushen must have been a full monastic house with an abbot and twelve monks, as there were definitely enough monks to send out to preach at parishes and to go out to Mirescoge, a northern large satellite. The archaeology shows large enough to house a complete small monastery with laybrothers. More than three monks of Rushen were witnesses in one document in the Furness Coucher Book in 1217. This indicates that more monks were present, as all monks would normally not have signed. There were six monks at

“Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review 45. 2 (1994): 115-6.

85. David Knowles and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales (London: Longman Group Limited, 1953), 112, 117. See also Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59 and West, The Antiquities of Furness, 112.

86. Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59 and West, The Antiquities of Furness, 112.

87. Lawrence “Medieval Monasticism,” 20 and Hugh E. Ford, “St ,” The New Advent , accessed October 22, 2015 http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02467b.htm state that Benedict founded twelve monasteries each with twelve monks and abbot in the late sixth century. The Cistercian Rule follows this practice, as do probably most reformed Orders: Instituta Generalis Capituli XII, “How a newly founded church is appointed with abbot and monks and other necessities” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux ed. Chrysogonus Waddell. Studia et Documenta 9 (Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999), C, 461. Duodecim monachi cum abbate tertiodecimo ad coenobia nova transmittantur.

86

Rushen’s dissolution in 1540, and because it was the last Cistercian monastery in the English realm to be dissolved, no new monks would have been taken in during these last years (after Furness was dissolved in 1537 and fate loomed) to replace any who died or left of their own accord.

Privileges Enjoyed by Rushen

In 1153, the generosity of Olaf I to the abbey was recognized by Pope

Eugenius III, who confirmed all the gifts placed in the hands of Furness

Abbey.88 These included vast lands and even , which were not allowed by the Cistercians, but were by the Savigniacs.89 These grants were confirmed by a bull issued by Urban III in 118690 and another by Celestine III in 1194.91 The

Kings of Man, descendants of Olaf I, over the years renewed and added to the previous royal grants. Often one of the first acts of the new king would be to confirm his predecessors’ grant to Furness and Rushen. Godred II, Reginald II,

88. “Special Bull by Pope Eugenius III,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1, pt. 3, Chetham Society 14 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886-8), 591-5. See also Oliver, “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1153,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 8-12.

89. See Chapter II, “The Merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Cistercian Order,” 51-65.

90. “Bull of Pope Urban III,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3, 617-618. See also Oliver, “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1186,”in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 15-6.

91. “Confirmation by Pope Celestine III,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3, 642-3. See also Oliver, “Bull of Pope Celestine III to Furness Abbey, A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 21-5.

87

and Harald all expanded the lands of Rushen Abbey.92 Rushen quickly became the most powerful landowner in Mann besides the king himself.

The abbey of Rushen, like that of Furness, held great secular power in

Mann; the Bishop of Sodor was chosen usually from one of the abbey’s number.93 The abbots of both were frequently upper class citizens before they entered monastic life, coming from families of wealth and power.94 Even though every monk had a voice in the chapter on the election of a new abbot, the election was often influenced by familial patronage interests.95

After the Merger with the Cistercians

When, in 1147, the Savigniac abbeys were absorbed into the Cistercian

Order in the filiation of Clairvaux, the monks of Furness vocally protested the merger but submitted in 1148.96 Rushen may have sympathized with Furness in

92. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2: “Charter of Godred. A.D. 1154,” 13-15; “Charter of Reginald, A.D. 1188,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3, 17- 8; “Letters to our Lord the Pope, A.D. 1219,” 53-7 in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” 77-8 in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3, 79-81.

93. Chronicle of Man, fol. 35 v. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. This will be examined in Chapter VI, “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 167-169.

94. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 120.

95. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 120. See also Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994), 219-22.

96. See Chapter II, section “The Merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Cistercian Order,” 51-65.

88

this debate; nevertheless, Rushen would also have accepted the practices of the

Cistercian Order by or before 1148.

The lands Rushen owned in Mann were vast: there were numerous large farms or granges, which were probably managed by lay brothers.97 There were also smaller granges that were visited by monks of Rushen.98 The name grange can still be seen in modern place names, such as the Ballagranges.99

All sources agree that the entire community of Rushen Abbey transferred to Douglas in 1192 and remained there for four years before returning to

Rushen.100 The purpose will be discerned below in Chapter IV.101 Cubbon,

Cumming, and A. W. Moore suggest that the buildings at Rushen were being enlarged during these years.102 Some buildings had to have been at Rushen at their arrival at the site, so whether this relocation was to enlarge those

97. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man”; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 358. The main labor on granges was provided by laybrothers.

98. Ibid.

99. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 516-18; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 358.

100. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 217; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362.

101. See Chapter IV, Section “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-30.

102. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

89

accommodations or to make them conform to Cistercian guidelines is not clear.103 There is no reason given in any extant document for the short-term move and no indication that the Rushen site had suffered from a natural disaster or raid.

Rushen: Royal Mausoleum?

Rushen Abbey, specifically the north transept of the abbey church, became the burial site of the Manx royal family.104 Skeletal remains of persons of all ages and both genders were discovered in the north transept, buried in a common grave.105 Carbon-dating and stratigraphy indicate a grave of noble family members at Rushen Abbey in the twelfth century.106 This grave is currently thought to belong to Olaf I, the founder of Rushen, and his close family.107

103. Calder had enough construction completed within four years of its foundation, that the monastery was said to be devastated by Scottish raiders in 1138. If Calder, another daughter house of Furness had such buildings in so short a time, it only seems logical that Rushen would have some permanent buildings within fifty-four years since its inhabitance. Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 112, 117; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 112, 129-30.

104. Coppack, “The Planning of Cistercian Monasteries in the Later Middle Ages,” 197- 209.

105. Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9, 14.

106. Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 8-14; Davey, Rushen Abbey: First Archaeological Report, 64-5.

107. Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 8-14; Davey, Rushen Abbey: First Archaeological Report, 64-5: the remains were carbon dated to approximately 1160; King Olaf died just before in 1153. He was assassinated by his nephews, and to secure the throne the usurpers would have tried to dispatch the entire family. The coup did not prevail as Godred II, Olaf’s son, was in Norway at the time. [Chronicle of Man, fol. 36 r.-v.] The monks probably collected the bodies of the slain from the site and interred them within the north transept of the abbey

90

Females and children were buried within the Cistercian church, although the Cistercians did not ordinarily allow women, alive or dead, within their churches.108 These women must have been the family of a significant patron to have been interred there. The children were laid out tenderly on stone pillows with purple quartz placed over their tiny bodies.

The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys mentions that royal and noble figures were interred within the abbey, which acted as “the Abbey of the

Irish Sea,”109 a royal mausoleum. Reginald, , nephew of Olaf I (1225); Olaf II (1237) and his son, Reginald (1249); the Norwegian Jarl

Gospatrick (1240); and the last Norse King of Man, Magnus (1265) were all buried within Rushen Abbey according to the Manx Chronicle.110 This tradition indicates that the kings were respected by the monks and recognized as the abbey’s patrons and benefactors.

church. However, it is not known whether the grave site was part of the abbey church at that time, as the abbey was enlarged in 1192. [Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 434.]

108. “That women may not even come inside the monastery gate,” in Capitula XVII in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, C, 411, Quod nec ingrediuntur portam monasterii and Capitula XVIV, C, 412, Those whom we receive for confession, for Communion, for burial," in, ad sepulturam, neminem extraneum praeter hospites et mercenaries nostros intra monasterium videlicet morientes recipimus, sed nec oblationem ad missam in conventu.

109. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 354. See Coppack, “The Planning of Cistercian Monasteries,” 197-209, where he concluded that Rushen Abbey was basically a royal mausoleum.

110. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r.; f. 44 v.; f. 47 r.; f. 48 v.; f. 49 v. Mentioned in Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

91

Later Rushen

The Growing Power of Rushen

Rushen Abbey, like its motherhouse, became well accustomed to the various industries and trade of the Cistercian Order. There were many small roads connecting abbey lands with major ports at , Douglas, and

Castletown, as well as two longer roads, one leading through St. Johns (Tynwall

Hill) to Peel and the other through St. Mark’s, the , and , to the port of Ramsey (near monastery).111

Furness and Rushen were well respected in Mann and given landed baronies.112 The only people allowed to allocate holdings of lands were the

Bishop of Sodor and the Isles and the abbots of the various monasteries which had been granted land on Mann.113 The Abbot of Bangor and Saball in Ireland, the Prior of Whithorn, and the Prior of St. Bee’s in Cumberland held baronies in

Mann as well, as will be described in Chapter V.114

111. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 78.

112. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 45; Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 87; Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 107.

113. Philip W. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” in the Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol. V, no. 1 (1942): 49; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 350, 365-7. Keith J. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria: Contrasts, Connections, and Continuities (Whithorn: Friends of the Whithorn Trust, 2003), 23-8: the appendix includes royal, episcopal, and papal transcripts of documents giving land in Mann to Whithorn. The monasteries included Rushen, Furness, Whitern in Galloway, St. Bede's, and Bangor and Saball.

114. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90. See Chapter V,

92

According to the Chronicle of Man, the abbey church of St. Mary of

Rushen Abbey was not consecrated until 1257 by Richard, Bishop of Sodor and

Man, with King Magnus in attendance.115 The abbey church had been started at least 130 years earlier with its first stone structure in 1192; building continued throughout the thirteenth century and the final dedication was not celebrated by the bishop until the final expansion was finished. The Furness Coucher Book corroborates this by stating that the abbey was founded by 1138,116 the same date as Calder,117 and the church was dedicated to the Blessed in 1257.118

In 1266, the gave the King of Scotland jurisdiction over

Mann and the Isles, ending Norse rule.119 Politics were then uncertain in Mann for over a century, with Scottish and English powers vying for control of the island. It is clear that the preferred their previous connections with

England, which had started with Olaf I, because in 1290 in a letter composed at

Sections “Galloway,” and “England,” 147-150.

115. Chronicle of Man, f. 49 v.; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196.

116. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 11.

117. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 49. Calder within four years had enough building complete, so that building and supplies had been “devastated” by Scottish raiders. With this in mind, Rushen would probably have had as much growth within its founding years, especially with royal patronage. Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 112, 117; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 129-30.

118. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Grose's Antiquities,” p. 162; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 165; Chronicle of Man, f. 49 v.; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90. The usual dedication of all Cistercian houses was to St. Mary.

119. Chronicle of Man, f. 49 v; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 358-9.

93

Rushen Abbey, the people of Man declared themselves subjects of Edward I,

King of England.120 Eventually, politics also favored England and the Isle of

Man came under the control of the Stanleys, Lancastrian governors of Mann installed by Henry VI in 1406.121

Dissolution

On April 9, 1537, Abbot Robert of Furness surrendered the monastery of

Furness to Henry VIII during the dissolution of the monasteries throughout the realm.122 The Isle of Man was unaffected while there were still monastic houses being disbanded in England during the next three years, until June 24, 1540, when the abbot and six remaining monks were expelled from Rushen Abbey.123

Rushen had therefore had to fend for itself for three years, without help from its motherhouse, and with the knowledge of impending doom. Rushen Abbey was the last Cistercian house in the English realm to be dissolved; its revenues were disbursed by the Court of Augmentations in London.124 The Earl of Derby,

120. Oliver, “A letter from the inhabitants of the Isle of Man to Edward I. A.D. 1290,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 110-1; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man.”

121. Oliver, “Charter of Henry IV to Sir John Stanley. A.D, 1406,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 235-246; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 359. The Stanleys were a great family name in England, whose houses were in Knowsley and Lathom, southwest Lancashire. Sir John Stanley and his heirs were given lordship of Man by Henry VI for two falcons a year.

122. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 163-73; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369-70.

123. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 351-2; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369-70.

124. Various primary sources exist in the Augmentation Office Documents, Carlton Ride, London and a transcript at the Clerk of the Rolls, Isle of Man. PRO Roll of Accounts (Isle of

94

chosen to oversee the dissolution of both Furness and Rushen, acquired from

Rushen land valued at £122 16 11, worth six pence an acre with over 4,900 acres, and £37 8 8 in silver.125 Rushen Abbey was definitely not an impoverished

Cistercian house before the dissolution.

With this background on the political and religious situation in the Isle of

Man and its connection to the wider medieval world, the following chapters seek to pose fact-based theories concerning Rushen Abbey’s religious and secular relationships. The next chapter examines the extent to which Rushen can be classified as Cistercian, Savigniac, or both.

Man – Dissolution), ed. Theophilus Talbot (Douglas, Manx Sun Office, 1894), 8. See also A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1938), 19; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369-70.

125. Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 438; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37 and “Appendix B,”; Cubbon, “History of Rushen Abbey,” 108; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369. Cumming noted that the following items were taken from Rushen Abbey at its dissolution: “four chalices, one cronche (abbot's pastoral staff), one censer, one cross, two little headless crosses, one navicula (ship), one hand and one byshope’s head (reliquaries), four cruets, eleven spoons, two standing cups, two pocula (ale-pots) with covers, one fiat pece, one salt, two masers (silver mounted wooden drinking cups), and one pix of silver.” Cumming cites no document details other than that the document was from the Record Office Rolls of Henry VII.

95

CHAPTER IV

RUSHEN ABBEY AS A CISTERCIAN/SAVIGNIAC HOUSE

The Impact of Twelfth-Century Reformed Monasticism in the Irish Sea Province

Gregorian Reform

In the eleventh century, a thorough reform of the Roman Church was instituted by Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073-1085) as a program of action to bring papal sovereignty over the affairs of the entire Latin Christian community1 and the reforms specifically addressed simony, clerical marriage, and lay investiture.2

Hayden White states that the Gregorian Reformation reorganized the Church, giving it an ordered, disciplined administration rather than the patrimonial arrangement of the Church before the Reformation.3 The pope was declared the supreme leader of the Church4 and considered the juridical and governmental

1. C. Colt Anderson, The Great Catholic Reformers (Mahwah: Paulist Press, 2007), 33, 37. Richard W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages (1970. Reprint, London: Penguin Books, 1990), 102. This was a collaborative effort by laity, monks, and clergy to reform the church. The cardinals, Perter Damian, Humbert, and Hildebrand were a sort of triumvirate behind to movement on reforming the papacy.

2. H.E.J. Cowdrey, The Register of Pope Gregory VII 1073-1085: An English Translation (Oxford University Press, 2002), 600. See also Colm Morris, The Papal Monarchy (Oxford University Press, 1989), 109-121; Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 102- 106; Hill 116-119. The register entry for the Roman council of Nov. 1078 extensively records Gregory’s legislation.

3. Hayden V. White, “The Gregorian Ideal and Saint Bernard of Clairvaux,” in Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 21, no. 3 (Jul.-Sep. 1960), 324-5. See also Anderson, The Great Catholic Reformers, 33, 45; J. W. Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power in the Ecclesiology of St Bernard,” in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Series, vol. 24 (1974), 1; Southern, “The Papacy: II. The Age of Growth, c. 1050-1300,” in Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 100-133.

4. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 326.

96

head of the Christian community.5 The pope’s claims to be the head of the

Church and the vicar of Christ on earth led the papacy to see itself as the supreme temporal and spiritual state.6 The Church was seen by Rome not only as the body of Christ and the Roman See as descendant of St. Peter, but as an institution more authoritative than any secular state, for the Roman Church comprised all Christian society as the papacy represented divine will.7

The , who after 1059 selected, advised, and aided the pope, and lawyers instituted the reforms (1075-1076).8 These reforms were enumerated in the Dictatus Papae of 10759 and inscribed in the papal registers.10

The document placed the bishops under the authority and scrutiny of papal legates and also allowed ecclesiastical courts to be bypassed in cases of direct appeals to Rome.11 Gregory VII introduced canon laws to solidify papal

5. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 326; Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power,” 2.

6. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 325; Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 104-5. See also M. Maccarrone, Vicarius Christi: storia del titolo papale (Lateranum, nova series, xviii, 1952).

7. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 324-5.

8. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 324, 326.

9. Gregorii VII Registrum, M.G.H., Epistula Selectae, ii, ed. E. Caspar (Berlin 1920-1923), 202- 8; “Dictatus Papae” in Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, trans. Ernest F. Henderson (London: George Bell and Sons, 1910), 366-367; B. Pullan, Sources for the History of Medieval Europe from the Mid-Eighth to the Mid-Thirteenth Century (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1971), document no. III 9, translated from Gregory VII's Register, no. II 55a.

10. Gregorii VII Registrum, M.G.H., Epistula Selectae, ii, 202-8; “Dictatus Papae” in Select Historical Documents, 366-367; B. Pullan, Sources for the History of Medieval, document no. III 9.

11. Gregorii VII Registrum, M.G.H., Epistula Selectae, ii, 202-8; “Dictatus Papae” in Select Historical Documents, 366-367; B. Pullan, Sources for the History of Medieval, document no. III 9.

97

sovereignty: the pope alone “could make new laws, ... set up bishops”; “the pope can be judged by no one”; “he alone can translate bishops”; “he can absolve subjects from their allegiance”; and “his legates, even though inferior in Orders, have precedence over all other bishops.”12 Gregory and his supporters claimed to be restoring perfection in the apostolic church, giving himself papal authority and liberating bishops from lay rulers.13

The Gregorian reforms succeeded in placing the papacy in the supreme position of leadership in Latin . This brought even more litigation and bureaucracy to Rome as the pope claimed the right to dispense justice and benefits in all areas of Christian and clerical life.14 The papal bureaucracy increased throughout the next two centuries, as measured by the number of general councils, (papal) legatine councils, and papal letters.15 By 1140-1150, the

12. Gregorii VII Registrum, M.G.H., Epistula Selectae, ii, ed. E. Caspar, 201-08. See also Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 101-3 and Uta-Renate Blumenthal, The : Church and Monarchy from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988). Naturally, those in power, such as the , Henry IV, opposed these laws openly and in 1176 was excommunicated. Henry IV was so overwhelmed by scheming barons and opposition that he begged for forgiveness the next year. Even though restored in faith, the revolt against him continued so he renewed his feud against the church instituting the line of anti-popes through his divine right as emperor. The “Investiture Controversy” died out with his son, Henry V, returning his support to the Roman papacy (though he installed one anti-pope, Gregory VIII, Henry V abandoned his father’s ways at the Concordant of Worms). 7. Quod illi soli licet pro temporis necessitate novas leges condere; 3. Quod ille solus possit deponere episcopos vel reconciliare; 19. Quod a nemine ipse iudicari debeat; 13. Quod illi liceat de sede ad sedem necessitate cogente episcopos transmutare; 27. Quod catholicus non habeatur, qui non concordat Romane ecclesie; 4. Quod legatus eius omnibus episcopis presit in concilio etiam inferioris gradus et adversus eos sententiam depositionis possit dare.

13. Morris, The Papal Monarchy, 110-13.

14. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 109-111, 117.

15. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 108-109. General councils called for and presided for by the pope increased (esp. from 1123-1312). In looking at England,

98

reforms created a comprehensive system of canon and “papal justice emerged in everyday European life.”16

Bernard and the Gregorian Reform

The Gregorian reforms were still being contested long after Pope

Gregory’s death in 1085 and the “Investiture Controversy” ostensibly ended in

1122.17 Reforming Orders of the New Monasticism, such as the Cistercians (1098) and Savigniacs (1112/1115), (1184), and Premonstratensians (1135), arose in the wake of Gregorian reforms.18 During the lifetime of St. Bernard

(abbot of Clairvaux, 1115-1153), Gregorian reforms resulted in the expansion of papal curialism, legalism, and bureaucratic administration, which were all scrutinized under the disapproving eye of Bernard’s personality.19 The abbot of

Clairvaux argued that Christian charity should be the ultimate source of order and unity within the Church.20

councils initialed by papal legates were most active between 1070-1312 and papal letters rose under Leo IX then increased significantly from 1130 (Innocent II)–1324 (John XXI).

16. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 115-117; Catherine E. Boyd, “The Gregorian Reform,” 86.

17. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 101-3 and Uta-Renate Blumenthal, The Investiture Controversy: Church and Monarchy from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988).

18. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 326.

19. Morris, The Papal Monarchy, 187 and White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 321, 348.

20. Bernard of Clairvaux, De consideratione, I, ii, Patrologia Latina., n. 182, specifically, 727- 31, 35-6, 749-50, 761, 764-66, 776. See also Martha Newman, The Boundaries of Charity: Cistercian Culture and Ecclesiastical Reform, 1098-1180 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996). In De Consideratione, St. Bernard wrote to Eugenius III, a Cistercian pope, about his concerns that litigation and secular involvement would affect the spiritual welfare of the Church. Bernard

99

Bernard, however, recognized aspects of the Gregorian Reformation as useful and practical: canonical jurisdiction and continuity in administration with regular leadership.21 “St. Bernard intervened in English ecclesiastical difficulties at least twenty-five times between 1120 and 1150, concerning himself with matters directly related to the issue of the program of reform.”22 Bernard objected to the College of Cardinals23 and the universal immediate jurisdiction of the pope,24 yet most resistance to the reforms departed with Bernard’s death in

1153.25 As Southern astutely observed, Rome was owed an undefined obligation because, before the Gregorian Reformation, it was recognized as the Church’s center of “spiritual power,” but afterwards as the “center of ecclesiastical government.”26

attacked curialism, legalism, and secular bureaucracy.

21. Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power,” 15; White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 325.

22. Knowles, M.O. Appendix ix, 705-6; Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 118-119. Hill makes a case that the Cistercians spread Gregorian Reform in England through the influence of St. Bernard.

23. White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 346.

24. Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power,” 8, 16.

25. Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power,” 16; White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 339, 346.

26. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages, 136; Gray, “The Problem of Papal Power,” 14; White, “The Gregorian Ideal,” 348. The authority of the Gregorian system was furthered after the papacy’s disputes with Barbarossa (Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I), which required him to defend the papacy of Pope Eugenius III in exchange for his coronation in 1153 during the Treaty of Constance. His reign was troubling through the tenure of a few popes, and he died on amiable terms under the tenure of Gregory VIII.

100

Gregorian Reform Introduced to the Irish Region

A look at Irish Cistercian reforms can give insight into how Olaf I reformed the church on the Isle of Man. Reform was brought to Ireland by

Malachy (Mael Maedoc), ,27 who returned the rites of penance and confirmation to Irish practice.28 These were important reforms needed according to St. Bernard in the Life of Malachy:

[Malachy] had been sent not to men but to beasts. Never before had he known the like, in whatever depth of barbarism; never had he found men so shameless in regards of morals, so dead in regards of rights, so impious in regards of faith; so barbarous in regards of laws; so stubborn in regard of discipline, and so unclean in regard of life. They were Christian in name, pagan in fact,29... throughout the whole of Ireland, all that subversion of ecclesiastical discipline, that weakening of censure, that abandonment of religion of which I have spoken already; hence everywhere that raging barbarian replaced Christian kindness, nay a sort of paganism brought in under the name of Christ.30

In 1139, Malachy went to Rome to receive the , the symbol of an archbishopric, as the archbishop of and Cashel in Ireland.31 On his

27. Daphne D. C. Pochin Mould, The Irish (Dublin: Clonmore and Reynolds, 1964), 224. See also Robert T. Meyer, “Introduction,” in The Life and Death of the Irishman (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1978), 4; Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. X.19-XIV.31, p. 37-47; Malachy had been given and assumed the title of , but abdicated and left to be bishop of the small diocese of Down to have a monastic life.

28. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. VII, ed. Hugh J. Lawlor (London: 1920), p. 18; 161-163; Meyer, “Introduction,” 4.

29. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XIX, p. 45-46.

30. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XVI, p. 37.

31. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XV. 33-4, p. 49-50. See also the secondary sources: Meyer, “Introduction,” 4 and Mould, The Irish Saints, 225.

101

journey to Rome, he stayed at Clairvaux and met St. Bernard.32 In Rome, Pope

Innocent II approved Malachy’s intended reforms in Ireland and appointed him papal legate to Ireland, but stated that the request for the pallium must come from a general synod of the Irish clergy.33 On his trip home, Malachy again stopped at Clairvaux and left four of his brethren behind; in 1142, they returned to Ireland with other monks of Clairvaux to found , northwest of

Drogheda.34

An Irish foundation of the Savigniac Order may have predated Mellifont.

Erenagh Abbey, called “Carrig,” was founded in 1127.35 Erenagh is thought to have been founded by , King of Ulster, at Malachy’s instigation, and by the

Savigniac monks of Furness who were then at Tulketh, near Preston,

Lancashire.36 Malachy formally requested the pallium again in 1148, with the

32. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XVI. 37, p. 51-2. See also Meyer, “Introduction,” 4; Mould, The Irish Saints, 225.

33. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XVI. 38, p. 52-3. See also Meyer, “Introduction,” 4-5; Mould, The Irish Saints, 225.

34. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XVI. 39, p. 53. See also Meyer, “Introduction,” 5; Mould, The Irish Saints, 225. Janauschek states there had been claims that Mellifont was founded in 1140, 1142, and 1146. Cottineau lists 1142 as the foundation date. However, Bernard is a primary source and as Malachy is called “venerated founder” in Janauschek, Malachy probably founded the abbey having been influenced by Bernard. [Leopold Janauschek, Originum cisterciensium Liber Primus (Vienna, 1877; rpt. Ridgewood: Gregg Press, 1964), 70; Laurent Cottineau, Repertoiré topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieureś (Macon:̂ Protat freres,̀ 1939), 1813.]

35. Karen Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” (M. Phil. Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002), 30; Aubrey Gwynn and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland (London: Longman Group Limited, 1970),132.

36. Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 30, 33; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 132. Erenagh was destroyed by John de Courcey and refounded as Inch Abbey in 1180.

102

support of a general synod of bishops held at Inispatrick, to bring Ireland under

Roman canon law.37 Although Malachy died at Clairvaux on his second journey to receive the pallium from Pope Eugenius III, the request was granted, but the pallium was not conferred on Malachy’s successor until the 1152 , when the papal legate, Cardinal Papano, granted four pallia to the Irish

Church.38 The pallium was conferred upon the of Armagh, Cashel,

Dublin, and Turam.39 Malachy must have been known to the monks at Rushen

Abbey, for they recorded his death in the Chronicle of Man.40 In Mann, however, it was not a bishop but a king, Olaf I, who saw benefit in placing his realm under

Roman ecclesiastical law.

New Monasticism and Reform in the Isle of Man

Isle of Man as an Ideal Region for New Monasticism

The twelfth-century introduction of reformed monasticism to the “Irish

Sea Region”41 coincided with the reemergence of Viking control of the Isles in a

37. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. XXXIII, p. 84- 86. See also Meyer, “Introduction,” 4-5; Mould, The Irish Saints, 227.

38. Bernard of Clairvaux, The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, ch. LXVII- LXXV., p. 117-130. See also Meyer, “Introduction,” 4-5; Mould, The Irish Saints, 227.

39. Meyer, “Introduction,” 4-5; Mould, The Irish Saints, 227; Henry A. Jefferyies, “Ireland: Religion and Piety,” in A Companion to Britain in the Later Middle Ages ed. S. H. Rigby (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing), 433.

40. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. obitt sanctus Malachias episcopus et legatus yberniae apud claram vallem sepultusque est in oratorio beatae virginis mariae in quo sibi bene complacuit.

41. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 4.

103

“Second Viking Age”42 (952-1265). During this period, the unstable position of territories in the Irish Sea region caused both new and continuing lords and kings to found monasteries of the reformed Orders to enhance their status amongst their peers and in the sight of God, and founding a religious house was seen as a stabilizing force.43 This temporary security in a frontier region created fertile ground for the establishment of the reformed Orders.44 In creating influence for their kingdoms and taking charge of lordships, many rulers in the

Irish Sea region actively founded monasteries, especially those of the reformed

Orders, which formed an organized religious power that could assist the lords in maintaining order in the secular realm.45 Monasteries were built not only as status symbols to show the lords’ power and position amongst their peers,46 but also because it was socially and politically advantageous to be associated with the reformed Orders.47 A reformed house was seen as a force that could stabilize

42. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes, 4.

43. This is further discussed throughout this section. Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (1994; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 210-228; Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 54-5; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 27, 31-2.

44. Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (1994; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 210-228; Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 54-5; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 27, 31-2.

45. Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 27, 31-2.

46. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century, 54-55.

47. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century, 148.

104

the lords’ realm by monastic discipline.48

Rulers of the geographical areas surrounding the Irish Sea had many reasons for establishing and endowing monasteries in their region, other than a desire for purely spiritual benefits. Royal patronage brought wealth, influence, and power to endowed monasteries, while patrons received both spiritual benefits of prayers and recognition as a Christian ruler.49 A patron might be compensating for a transgression,50 and/or guaranteeing a place in the prayers of the monks,51 and safeguarding his land by giving it to the church, or he might simply be promoting his status and enhancing relations with neighboring nobles.52 There was a realistic “functional reciprocity” in the founding of a monastery.53 The patron had rights of (which has various definitions, but conveys the notion that the patron in some way could join the monastery before death).54 The patron might be allowed to take the habit in the future if he should desire to become a monk or to be buried in the monastic

48. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300, 210.

49. Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (1994; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 210-228.

50. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 217-8 and Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century, 54.

51. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 216-7.

52. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 215-219; Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 54-5.

53. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 211.

54. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 216-7, 221.

105

grounds.55 He also had the right to enjoy the hospitality of the monastery as a guest or to have a family member granted entry into the community.56 There were also material gains for the patron: for example, better livestock by interbreeding with the monks’ herd and using dung left by the monks’ sheep on their land for fertilizer.57 For all this, it was the duty of the patron to provide lands for the monastic house and to provide protection against physical assault.58

In Chapter VI, the prominent patrons of Rushen and Furness will be identified and discussed.59 Here we point out that the mutual benefits to patron and monastery promoted the spread of the reformed Orders as the lords around the

Irish Sea region continued to found monasteries, increasing their status in the eyes of other nobility and further bringing stability to their lands.

Monks as Frontiersman in the Irish Sea Region

Richard E. Sullivan applied to the medieval monk60 the frontier paradigm used by Frederick Jackson Turner of the American West.61 As a frontiersman, the

55. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 217-9.

56. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 220-21.

57. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century, 38, 75-77; Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 219.

58. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 223-4.

59. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen Abbey,” 164-171.

60. Richard E. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” The Frontier: Comparative Studies, vol. 2, ed. William W. Savage, Jr. and Stephen I. Thompson (Norman: U of Oklahoma Press, 1979), 25-26.

61. Frederick Jackson Turner, The Significance of the Frontier in American History, ed. Harold P. Simonson (New York: Frederick Ungar, 1963).

106

monk was separated from the mainstream of life, living in a unique environment

“different from which migration occurs chiefly by virtue of the fact that a place is empty of most of what had existed in the setting left behind.”62 Sullivan identified four principal frontiers for the medieval monk: (1) a distant uninhabited environment, (2) a close uninhabited environment, (3) a frontier region, and (4) The cloister.63 The reformed monasteries of the twelfth century were usually of the second category. The monks settled in uninhabited areas, isolated from proximity to the world: monasteries on islands like Iona, on mountains like , in barren spots like Cîteaux, and in caves like

Marmoutier.64 The environment could be dramatically different from more densely inhabited areas, even if travel to such places was short in distance.65 The

Irish Sea region, as well as forests of Yorkshire and isolated areas in Cumbria, were frontier areas of the third category: monks moved to a borderland or a region where they came into contact with people of a culture or sometimes with ethnic customs different from their own, and then often experienced raids, which

62. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” 27.

63. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” 29. (1) the uninhabited/barely habited environment, considerably distant from normal inhabited areas such as thick forests, deserts, and barren plains; (2) the uninhabited locales in proximity to the habited worlds but still isolated such as islands, barren areas, and caves; (3) the frontier region was inhabited with a different local culture and ethnic religious traditions; (4) the frontier created by the cloister as it is defined as a place physically apart from the world.

64. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” 29.

65. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” 29.

107

fits into the category most similar to the conventional idea of a frontier setting.

Karen Billings stated that the frontier paradigm could also be applied to

Furness, which was located on a very isolated peninsula in Cumbria.66 Rushen, also located in an isolated area but on a large island in the Irish Sea, and Furness both met Sullivan’s category two.67 The two monastic houses also fit category three: both were founded in borderland territory, and Rushen was extremely isolated in an environment of an unfamiliar culture, the Manx and Viking. The unstable situation of the Irish Sea region, often raided by neighboring kingdoms and “pirates,”68 led to its being considered an uncivilized place, apart from

Roman Christendom. As rulers of a frontier region, kings and lords looked to secure their lands quickly and to provide stability for their kingdoms. This often meant forming political alliances with the surrounding lords through marriage and trade, and in this situation the religious patronage of renown Orders was

66. Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 24-32, 48. For Furness see “Account of the Foundation of Furness Abbey,” in III, VIII, and X, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, vol. 1, pt. 1, ed. John C. Adkinson Chetham Society 9 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886), 21. See also Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness. London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844, 110-113 and Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (Furness: 1890), 47-48. For Rushen see: “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lancashire, vol. I., fol. 30. See also: “Charter of Olave,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae , ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, directs that the bishops of the Isles shall be chosen by the church of St. Mary of Furness,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. Brownbill, vol. 2, pt. 3, Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), no. 1, 708-9.

67. See note 63.

68. Hudson, Viking Pirates and Christian Princes. The title of Hudson's book refers to Viking raiders as ‘pirates.’

108

seen as a civilizing force.69 The frontier setting allowed the monks to be viewed as leaders who provided security to the realm.70

Church Reforms on the Isle of Man

Although Godred introduced Gregorian religious authority to the Isle of

Man in the late eleventh century, it was his son, Olaf I of the Crovan dynasty,

King of Man (1111-1154), who developed the Manx ecclesiastical system on the model he had seen at the court of England in 1134 and conveyed it back home.71

Rushen Abbey was also founded by Olaf I at this time.72 This new Viking dynasty on the Isle of Man considered the benefits of monastic patronage advantageous to themselves,73 and monastic foundations consequently held great prominence as the center of the new ecclesiastical system within the

Kingdom of Man and the Isles.

Olaf I had friendly relations with the abbot of Furness. He had heard of the goodness of the new monastic Orders, and specifically of Furness’ reputation for sanctity.74 In 1134, after consulting with Yvon, the abbot of Furness, Olaf I

69. Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 27, 31-2.

70. Sullivan, “The Medieval Monk as Frontiersman,” 37.

71. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6.

72. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9.

73. As mentioned above, the patrons would benefit spiritually and materially as well as provide a symbol of stability to the realm.

74. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed.

109

requested a new bishop of Sodor and Man to be elected from the Furness community.75 Sometime between 1134 and 1140, he sent a letter to Thurstan, archbishop of York, requesting approval of these measures.76 Until 1247, Furness had the unusual prerogative of nominating the Bishop of Sodor and Man.77 In its own right as well as motherhouse of Rushen Abbey, Furness in this way could directly influence religion on the Isle of Man.

In the charter Olaf I issued to Thurstan, his main goal was to reform and unite Christianity on Mann in accord with the organization of the Roman

Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. De cetero significamus vobis, quod dominus abbas E[udo] Furnesiensis cenobii a cujus finibus non longe per mare distamus, audientibus nobis famam religionis ejusdem loci, tripartita petitione, persuasioneque nostra iter quamuis arduum tamen confidenter aggressus, compensato itaque et itinerandi onere laborioso, et labore super ecclesia dilatanda fructuoso, Domino aspirante, ad nos usque pervenit.

75. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See also: Church in the Isle of Man, 12; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 46; Grose, Grose's Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 34-5; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,”; Donald E. R. Watt, "Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review, 45 (1994): 111. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v.

76. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York). This letter was written in the first year of the abbacy of Eudo de Sourdeval, 1134. Watt, "Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

77. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. See also: “Charter of Olave,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae , ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, directs that the bishops of the Isles shall be chosen by the church of St. Mary of Furness,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), 708-9. Quod etiam ut melius fieret et firmius teneretur quandam partem terre mee ad Abbatiam construendam, predicte ecclesie sicut alia testatur Cartula in perpetuam elemosinam erogavi liberrimam.

110

Church.78 Olaf I recognized the Savigniac abbey as a renowned religious house of the new monasticism.79 Furness had an independent nature, probably from being in a secluded frontier region with very few other monastic houses nearby, and it garnered a powerful position for itself to survive in the frontier. Furness, along with Rushen’s sister house, Calder, lay in close proximity, being separated from

Rushen by only a short sea voyage on the Irish Sea. Communication between the abbeys for the most part would have been quick and easy.

Olaf’s charter and letter were confirmed by a bull of Celestine III issued to

Furness on July 10, 1194:

In choosing a Bishop of the Isles we do, by our apostolical authority, confirm the liberty, which the Kings of the Isles, Olaf and Godred his son, vested in your monastery, as it is expressed in their original grants Dated at Rome, the 10th of the Calends of July, and the fourth year of our pontificate. 80

78. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. Quum Regnum terrenum nequaquam bene disponitur nisi in ibi celorum Regi catholice serviatur. Iccirco ego Olaph sapientium consilio et bonorum assensu decrevi et statui ut in regno meo Christiana religio a suo potius Episcopo in unum conservetur quam sub advenis et tanquam mercenariis sua quippe et non Domini querentibus divisa desoletur ... Quod etiam ut melius fieret et firmius teneretur quandam partem terre mee ad Abbatiam construendam.

79. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lancashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. Scitote itaque et testimonium venitati perhibete quod hoc discretionis intuitu commisi et imperpetuum concessi ecclesie Sancte Marie de Furnesio propter loci confinium immo pro bona vita inhabitantium ipsius Episcopalis electionis dignitatem, set et totius juris mei Christianitatis observantiam, salva semper sedis apostolice reverentia.

80. “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24. Original: BM Carta Antiqua 83. A 22. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, vol. 2:117. In choosing a Bishop of the Isles we do, by our apostolical authority, confirm the liberty, which the kings of the Isles, Olaf and Godred his son, vested in your monastery, as it is expressed in their original grants. In eligendo episcopum insularum, libertatem quam regis earum bonae memoriae Olavus et Godredus, filius eius, monasterio vestro contulerunt, sicut in authenticis eorum continetur, autoritate vobis apostolica confirmamus. Dat. Komse, 10 Cal. Julii, Pontificatus Nostri.

111

Savigniac Order

Cistercian-Savigniac Affiliation in 1147 and its Effects

When, in 1147, Savigniac abbeys were absorbed into the Cistercian Order in the filiation of Clairvaux, the monks of Furness vocally fought against the merger, but submitted in 1148.81 On the relationship between Furness and

Rushen, Peter Davey has stated that there is “evidence for a close collaboration and co-operation over many issues.”82 Davey stated that Rushen would have sided with Furness in this protest, for Rushen would have allied with Furness in any case of outside dispute, taking its cue from its motherhouse because of its close filial relationship. Rushen would have adopted the constitution of the

Cistercian Order by 1148.

By the late twelfth century, English formerly Savigniac houses were entrusted by the General Chapter with the oversight of jurisidictional Cistercian disciplinary cases,83 and Furness’ submission to Cistercian customs led eventually to its restructuring of the architecture of its abbey to conform to

81. See Chapter II, Section “Controversy over Merger, particularly with English Houses,” 54-59.

82. Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. By Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 368.

83. Waddell, ed., Twelfth-century Statutes: Byland (1196/28); Buildwas (1195/70, 1199/21); Quarr (1192/35).

112

Cistercian regulations.84 Furness became well known within the Cistercian Order, and during “the Mellifont Conspiracy” of 1228 was entrusted as one of the houses to which the Mellifont filiation’s member houses were reassigned.85 In the same interval (1147-1228), Rushen would also have become “cistercianized,” and it would probably have been easier for Rushen’s monks than for Furness’ since the abbey had been settled just over ten years before the merger.86

Relationship between Rushen and Furness

The exact relationship between Rushen Abbey and its motherhouse,

Furness, cannot be conclusively determined, yet their association must have been close. Rushen Abbey was recognized by Furness Abbey in its Coucher Book as an autonomous daughter house and Cistercian monastic house many times

84. Furness altered the abbey church apse and transepts, the chapter house, the cloister and most notably the refectory, all according to Cistercian statutes. The abbey church had apsidal chapels before the merger (noted by John Hope); this was altered to square ends formed along the lines of the original apsidal forms. The refectory was first constructed along the east/west axis, and was changed to the Cistercian standard of north south, which also made room for a warming house and separated laybrothers from choir monks. [Harold Brakspear, “On the First Church at Furness,” Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society, vol. XVII (Manchester: Richard Gill, 1901), 84-5; W. H. St. John Hope, “The Abbey of St. Mary in Furness, Lancashire,” in the Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, vol. XVI (Kendal: T. Wilson, 1900), 221-302; Stuart Harrison, “Tour of the Abbey,” in Furness Abbey (London: English Heritage, 1998), 3-21.]

85. Stephen of Lexington, abbot of Stanley, visited Mellifont to set affairs straight in Ireland in 1228 after Mellifont and the abbey’s daughter houses were reported to have been lax in Cistercian custom. Stephen was not an admirer of the Irish houses, and the Gaelic monks resented him: he replaced their abbots with English and continental monks. This was called the “Mellifont Conspiracy.” Stephen disassembled the Mellifont affiliation under Furness, Margam, Buildwas, Fountains, Clairvaux, and Lexington.

86. It seems that Rushen should have had some sort of (probably wooden) first buildings at the site that the monks moved between 1134-1140, just as the first community of Calder had buildings when their monastery was burnt by Scottish raiders in 1148. Also in the early years of their foundation, one of their founding members, Wimund, was named the first Bishop of Man, which leads us to suspect that Rushen was a small well-formed house from its foundation.

113

throughout the years.87 The Cistercian abbot of Furness, as Rushen’s father immediate, would have been obliged to visit Rushen once a year, either personally or by sending a delegated fellow-abbot (visitator), as stipulated in

Carta caritatis prior Cap. V,88 Instituta c. 1180/84,89 and Carta caritatis posterior 16.90

Since Furness was never admonished at the General Charter for not visiting

Rushen Abbey,91 the abbots can be assumed to have maintained a strong connection and fulfilled their duty every year.92 The reverse was also true: the abbot of the daughter was to visit the motherhouse once a year.93

87. Rushen Abbey was also included with the Savigniac houses confirmed to Savigny by Pope Anastasius IV, on April 20, 1154 in Patrilogia Latina 188, col. 1054. See also the The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Atkinson, vol. 1:3, n. 5, 711, n. 7, 712; David E. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, Ed. Ian B. Cowan. 2nd ed. (London: Longman Group Limited, 1976), 195.

88. Carta caritatis prior Cap. V, in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux. ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, Studia et Documenta 9 (Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999), II, 277 and B, 445. Semel per annum visitet abbas maioris ecclesiae omnia coenobia quae ipse fundaverit; et si amplius visitaverit, inde magis gaudeant.

89. Instituta Generalis Capituli XXXIII, “Of the Form of Vistitations,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, IV, 339-400 and C, 470-471. In faciendia visitatione cautelam maximam et diligentiam visitator adhibeat, ut fideliter et prudenter ad corrigendos excessus et conservationem pacis intendat, et quandam poterit, salva Ordinis disciplina, animos fratrum ad ampliorem reverentiam proprii abbatis et gratiam mutuae in Christo dilectionis inducat.

90. Carta caritatis posterior 16; in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, V, 382 and D, 501. Semel per annum visitet abbas maioris ecclesiae, vel per se vel per aliquem de coabbatibus suis, omnia coenobia quae ipse fundaverit; et si fratres amplius visitaverit, inde magis gaudeant.

91. No citations were found for Rushen in either Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter, ed. Chrysogonus Waddell (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 2003) or Statua Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis ad annum 1786, 8 vols. ed. Joseph Canivez (Louvain: 1933).

92. Ibid.

93. Instituta Generalis Capituli XXXIV, “That a daughter visits the mother church once a year,” ed. Waddell in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, IV, 340 and C, 471. Statuit causa humilitatis Cisterciensis conventus sollerti providentia, quatenus semel in anno saltem matrem

114

Moreover, as Furness nominated the bishops of Sodor and Man, a number of these bishops came from the ranks of the abbots of either Furness or Rushen.

Rushen was also involved in the elections of bishops by confirming or disapproving Furness’ choice, almost as an extension of Furness itself.94

Characteristics of Rushen Not in Accord with Cistercian Ideals

Privileges

Like many Savigniac houses, both Rushen and Furness enjoyed immunities granted to them before the 1147 merger.95 The abbey lands included not only territory Olaf I had given to the abbey of Furness in Malew, but also lands in other parishes on Mann96 that included vast lands and villas.97 After the

ecclesiam per abbatem suum, si sanus fuerit, visitet, filia.

94. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York); Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v and 51 v. See also Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 37; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 353. It seems at times Furness needed to ask Rushen’s approval after nominating a bishop as during Nicholas of Meaux, otherwise a representative of Rushen may have been needed at elections. “Testimony of Russin for Nicholas as elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 7, 722.

95. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York); “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio. See also: “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 8-12; Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v. The Furness Coucher Book has many pre-1147 charters including the foundation charter and Rushen was given many privileges and lands by Olaf I, which were confirmed by Pope Eugenius III as being those given by Olaf I.

96. Ibid. See also Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Dugdales' “Monasticon Angelicanum,” p. 46 and “Grose's Antiquities,” 162; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Moore, Diocesan Histories, 34-5; Cumming, The

115

merger, successive popes confirmed these immense lands and privileges to

Furness: Eugenius III in 1153;98 Urban III in 1186;99 and Celestine III in 1194.100

Olaf I’s descendants, as kings of Man, renewed and added to their predecessor’s royal grants. One of the first acts of a new king was often the confirmation of all the previous grants to Furness and Rushen. Godred II in 1154,

Reginald II in 1188, and Harald in 1205 all did so and also added to the lands of

Rushen Abbey.101 In this manner, Rushen quickly became the most important landowner in Mann after the king himself. By Cistercian rules, the grants made after the merger were not supposed to be accepted;102 however, not only Rushen but many former Savigniac and other Cistercian houses without Savigniac roots

Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,”; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man”; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

97. The lands are listed in full that Olaf I granted in the confirmation of Pope Eugenius III: “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio. See also: “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 8-12.

98. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1153,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 8-12.

99. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1186,”in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 15-6.

100. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Celestine III to Furness Abbey, A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 21-5.

101. Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2: “Charter of Godred. A.D. 1154,” 13-15; “Charter of Reginald, A.D. 1188,” 17-8; “Letters to our Lord the Pope, A.D. 1219,” 53-7; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” 77-8; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” 79-81.

102. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 107-15; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny:” 250; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 3-25; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered: Lucius II’s Bull Habitantes in domo of December 5, 1144,” 363-387.

116

accepted forbidden gifts, such as mills, churches, tithes, peasants, lordships, and payments, before and after the merger, as Jeffrey Michael Long has shown.103

Bishopric of Sodor

The abbot of Rushen, like the abbot of Furness, wielded great secular power in Mann, another thing that was contrary to both Orders’ ideals. The one obligation that set Furness and Rushen apart from other Savigniac and Cistercian abbeys in Britain was Furness’ unique right to nominate the bishops of Sodor and Man. According to the original grant by Olaf I and by its confirmation by his successors, Furness and Rushen had the sole advowson or right to nominate, and the King and the people of Mann had the right to accept or reject their nominee.104 The bishop of Sodor was usually chosen from either Furness’ or

Rushen’s community, which Olaf I also requested from the first grant.105 Every professed monk had a vote in electing a new abbot;106 the episcopal election

103. Jeffrey Michael Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176” (M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1993).

104. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York) and “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. See also: “Charter of Olave,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae , ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, directs that the bishops of the Isles shall be chosen by the church of St. Mary of Furness,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9.

105. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York).

106. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 120. See also Janet Burton, Monastic and Religious

117

required approval first by the archbishop of York,107 and then by the pope.108 The reformed papacy took a keen interest in seeing that the episcopal nomination remained in Furness’ and Rushen’s control, and they admonished kings of Mann who interfered in the election.109 In 1253, the pope took over the right of election himself to avoid conflict with the lords and royalty over the election. This will be thoroughly explored in Chapter VI.110

Cistercianizing Rushen Abbey

Cistercian Statutes

Cistercian and papal sources have to be carefully sifted for any mention of

Rushen Abbey after the merger of 1147. For example, Originum Cisterciensium of

Orders in Britain, 1000-1300 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994), 219-22.

107. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Thurstan, Archbishop of York, to consecrate the newly-elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709. Ex registro de ecclesia Ebor (from the Register of York).

108. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15-16; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24.

109. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24; 109. “Honorius III. to the Bishops of Carlisle and of Norwich,” in no. 11, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 196-98; “The Bull of Pope Gregory IX, 1231,” in Appendix, Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol. 5, no. 1 (1948): 14.

110. “Innocent IV. to the ; granting the use of and ring to him and his successors,” in no. 21, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 312- 12; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, 309-10. See also: Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. In 1253, the Archbishop of Nidaros was in Rome to receive the pallium, and the pope seized the occasion to name Richard, an Englishman, the next Bishop of the Isles. See Chapter IV, Section “The Effects of the Civil War on Election Rights,” 199-204.

118

Leopold Janauschek considered Rushen simply as a Cistercian house without reference to its Savigniac past and made only three references to the abbey. The first mention was “Sept. XVII: Russinium, Rushen Abbey, in Mannia insula

Angliae et dioec. Sodorensi ... filia Furnesii lineae Claravall.”111 The second mention occurs under “Furnesii filia”: “2. Russinhim, Rushen Abbey, in Mannia ins. Angl. et d. Sodor., XVII Sept. 1147.”112 Here, Janauschek carefully laid out the filial lineage of Rushen, its sister houses, and its motherhouse Furness, and placed them with other Savigniac houses within the filiation of Clairvaux.113

Janauschek’s third mention of Rushen identifies the abbey as the motherhouse of

Saddell Abbey in Scotland: “Russinii filia: Sandallum, Saund/e, in Scotia ed d.

Dunkeld, 1220.”114 However, there is no corroborating record of Saddell Abbey having been founded by monks of Rushen.115 The likelihood is that Saddell

Abbey was founded from Mellifont, in Ireland.116

The Cistercian Carta caritatis posterior required that “all the abbots of our

Order, having set aside every excuse, assemble yearly for the Cistercian General

111. Leopold Janauschek, Originum cisterciensium, CCLIII, 292.

112. Ibid, 313.

113. Ibid.

114. Ibid. This seemed to Janauschek to be a daughter house of Rushen Abbey,

115. No scholarly source other than Janauschek, especially primary sources indicate any filiation between Rushen and Saddell Abbey.

116. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196. See also McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 221 and Abbe L. Brown, “Cistercian Abbey of Saddell,” Innes Review 20. 2 (1969), 130-1.

119

Chapter; those only are excepted who are restrained by bodily infirmity”117 and

“those dwelling in remote regions; they should come within the timeframe established for them in Chapter.”118 The penance assigned for an absence was ordinarily noted in the minutes of the General Chapter of any year in which the abbot failed to attend. In 1190, for instance, the penance assigned to the English abbots of Quarr, Stanley, and Forde for absenteeism was a diet of bread and water.119 While Rushen had to attend the General Chapter only once every four years because of distance, the abbot would still have been mentioned in the records from any year he missed and no extant record of disciplinary action exists for Rushen.

Abbey Industries

Like its motherhouse, Rushen quickly amassed wealth through the monks’ industry in nearly every Cistercian industry while continuing the modes of economic support they had previously employed as Savigniac houses. The abbey drew income from herding, farming, and mining.120 Rushen also had

117. Carta caritatis posterior, in Narrative and Legislative Texts, ed. Waddell, D, lines 73-75, 501 (English, lines 84-87, 501-2). Sed omnes abbates de Ordine nostro singulis annis ad Generale Capitulum Cisterciense, omni postposita occasionem convenient, illis solic exceptis quos corporis infirmitas retinuerit.

118. Carta caritatis posterior, in Narrative and Legislative Texts ed. Waddell, D, lines 77-79, 501 (English, lines 89-91, 502). Et illis item exceptis qui in remotioribus partibus habitantes eo termino venerrint, qui eis fuerit in Capitulo constitutus.

119. Statute Lil 1190/25 in Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 2003), 200-1.

120. Gordon N. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: The Manx Experience, 1986), 20; Manx National Heritage, Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 2000), 89; Peter Davey, “Eleven Years of Archaeological Research at Rushen Abbey, 1998 to 2008,”

120

ownership of fisheries, and grain, dairy, and wool production.121 At the ford of the Silverburn River at Rushen Abbey, they even had a Vitruvian mill.122

Cistercians frowned upon holding fairs and markets and had strict rules against attending them,123 yet Furness and undoubtedly Rushen violated them.124 There is, as we have seen, reason to believe that some Cistercian houses also accepted resources forbidden by their own regulations.125

Rushen owned land in every parish on the island, and established granges in many of them.126 The labor on these farms was provided by laybrothers, conversi:

in Monastic Research Bulletin vol. 14 (2008), 19, also found at (accessed December 9, 2015), http:// www.york.ac.uk/ media/library/documents/borthwick/MRB14.pdf.

121. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 5; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 19, 23; Manx National Heritage, Rushen Abbey, 89; Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 19.

122. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 13; Cistercian law forbade revenues to come from mills which Savigniacs had not (Twelfth-century Statutes, Waddell, ed., Dij 2, Lao 129, Lis 110-111 in C Statuta to Series 1159 – 1179, 603-604; as well as in Narrative and Legislative Texts, ed. Waddell, C, Cap. XXIII, 412 and A, EP XV. 14, 324.) A vitruvian mill is purely mechanical with water as a power source. The wheel is placed vertically in the stream (at Rushen, the Silverburn River) with the introduction of gears between the wheel and millstones.

123. On the strict Cistercian regulations on going to fairs: Instituta General Capituli, “De nundinis. LIII.” and “De nundinis. LI.,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts, ed. Waddell, C, 478-9.

124. F. M. Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” in The Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, vol. 2, ed. M. A. Brownbill and William Farrer (Kent: Dawson, 1991).

125. Constance Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered.” Cîteaux 39 (1988): 217-230 and Jeffrey Michael Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176.” (M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1993), 121- 4. Long supports his claims with the surviving documentary evidence of mills, altars, tithes, vills, peasants, payments, lordships, markets, etc., having belonged to both Cistercian and Savigniac monasteries before 1147 (even before 1134) from surviving twelfth-century documents, mainly cartularies of the particular monastic houses. Bouchard claims that the fact that the only Burgundian house for which these types of gifts were not represented in this early time was Clairvaux signifying that Bernard was probably the leading influence behind the legislation of 1134 and strict observances proceeding from it.

126. Limites terratum monachorum, f. 54 r. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery

121

Rushen and Furness both had laybrothers before the 1147 merger, just like the

Cistercians.127 The west range of their abbeys served two functions: it provided living space for laybrothers and storage as a cellarium.128 Among the earliest

Savigniacs, the need for laybrothers is doubted, as St. Vital’s Savigny started as a hermitage. It was not until the tenure of the second abbot of Savigny, Geoffrey

(1122-39), that Savigny in 1222 expanded into a cenobitic community.129 This may have been the time when Savigny began accepting laybrothers in newly founded houses. Archaeological evidence makes clear that from its foundation Rushen housed laybrothers, just as Rushen’s motherhouse, Furness, had housed laybrethren even before the merger with the Cistercians.130 Archaeological remains show that the west range had a few ground floor rooms, probably a day room and refectory for the conversi, as well as the abbey cellar with their above it.131

of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot (London: Oxford University Press, 1924), 87-91; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man.”

127.. “Capitula,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux: An Edition, Translation, and commentary, Studia et Documenta IX (Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999), ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, C, XX-XXII, 411-412. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man.” The name grange can still be seen in modern place names, such as the Ballagranges. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 358.

128. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 17; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 11; Manx National Heritage, Rushen Abbey, 16; Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 9-11.

129. Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 89-97.

130. “Plan of Furness Abbey,” by William Henry St. Hope and Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999).

131. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 17; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 11; Manx National Heritage, Rushen Abbey, 16; Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 9-11.

122

Rushen also owned churches, appointed vicars, and provided chaplains to parishes on the Isle of Man.132 All this was contrary to Cistercian practice and its ideal of disentangling themselves from worldly affairs.133 Yet preaching had been a key obligation in the foundation of the Savigniac Order.134

Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct

To ascertain the layout of Rushen Abbey, the Centre for Manx Studies excavated the abbey ruins in 1998 and 1999.135 Their findings showed that the abbey had been very small: the smallest Cistercian abbey in the British Isles and perhaps even in Europe.136 Rushen Abbey, therefore, was a very modest edifice when compared to its motherhouse, Furness. In fact, Manx churches were all very small and simple in style: only some sixty to seventy feet long and sixteen to twenty feet wide.137 The cloister was only some ten meters square;138 normally

132. Rushen Abbey held the advowson of the vicarages of , , , Rushen and Malew; with Rushen, the parish church, vicarage and glebe were all within the abbey’s demense. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 353.

133. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 65.

134. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 93-94; Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 1.208; and the primary source, Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3.

135. Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 4.

136. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 353-54.

137. Lawrence Butler, “The Early Church on the Isle of Man, 500-1200,” in Church archaeology: research directions for the future, ed. J. Blair and C. Pyrah, CBA Research Report 104 (York: Council for British Archaeology, 1996), 46-47.

138. Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 7; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 354.

123

Cistercian were three times as large.139 Yet, St. Mary’s church at Rushen

Abbey was the largest medieval house of worship on the Isle of Man except for

St. ’s Cathedral in St. Patrick’s Island near Peel.

Like most Cistercian abbey churches, the abbey church at Rushen was constructed on a cruciform plan and local limestone was utilized for most of its structure.140 The had no aisles, which is unusual for a Cistercian church but commonplace in medieval Manx churches. No churches on Mann, not even the cathedral, had aisles.141 The choir was paved with a pattern of yellow and dark green tiles.142

The monastery ruins provide evidence of construction in the late twelfth century, which coincides with the time the monks transferred to Douglas (1192 to

1196).143 As pointed out in Chapter III, there are two points of view on why the monks relocated to Douglas for four years.144 Basil Megaw has put forth an

139. Ibid.

140. Joseph G. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), 53; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 37.

141. Butler, “The Early Church on the Isle of Man, 500-1200,” 46-47; Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 4; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 354.

142. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 17.

143. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,”513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 217; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362.

144. See Chapter III, Section “After the Merger with the Cistercians,” 88-90.

124

argument, based on place name evidence, that Rushen’s original site was in

Scarlett, near Castletown, and that the monks were forced to move temporarily in 1192 because the King required the land in Castletown for the construction of

Castle Rushen, and that only four years later the community resumed habitation in the south, but at a new location at Rushen.145 The Chronicle does not suggest this and only states, “In the same year (1192), the abbey of St. Mary of Rushen was removed to Douglas. After remaining there four years the monks returned to Rushen.”146 Scholars have suggested that the accommodations the Rushen monks used in Douglas later became the Douglas nunnery associated with the

Cistercians.147 Archaeological evidence suggests that the abbey buildings at

Rushen were enlarged during these same years, which would imply that the monks had indeed lived in the location before.148 The monks may have taken this opportunity to alter the abbey buildings to conform to Cistercian guidelines, yet it seems Rushen had already been in line with Cistercian practice as there had been no significant change in the abbey buildings after the merger.149 However,

145. Basil Megaw, “The original site of Rushen Abbey and its significance,” in ed. Peter Davey Recent archaeological research on the Isle of Man, BAR British Series 278, Oxford (1999): 261- 266. No archaeological evidence to prove this at the time.

146. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. Eodem anno Abbatia Sanctae Maniae de Russin translata est ad Dufglas, ibique per quatuor annos habitantes iterum ad Russin reversi sunt.

147. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362.

148. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

149. Calder had enough construction completed within four years of its foundation, that

125

Furness changed its original rounded apse to the normal Cistercian square apse just after the merger.150

In the British Isles, most Cistercian churches built or rebuilt after 1200 AD had an inlaid floor of glazed tiles.151 They were usually three inches square and laid in patterns of only two colors, a yellow and a tint that varies between black, brown, and green.152 Evidence of a local kiln on the island is indicated by two unique tiles at Rushen that were similar to others at but unknown elsewhere.153 The majority of the tiles found at Rushen have similarities to marigold tiles found beyond Mann in in Ireland, and to various tiles in

Chester, although the fabric and two designs are definitely Welsh.154

the monastery was said to be devastated by Scottish raiders in 1138. If Calder, another daughter house of Furness, had such buildings in so short a time, it only seems logical that Rushen would have some permanent buildings within fifty-four years since its foundation. Knowles and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales, 112,

150. Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 112, 129-30.

151. G. K. Beaulah, “Thirteenth Century Square-Tile Mosaic Pavements at Cistercian Houses in Britain,” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, vol. 4 ., ed. Meredith Parsons Lillich, CSS 134 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1993), 1.

152. Beaulah, “Thirteenth Century Square-Tile Mosaic Pavements at Cistercian Houses in Britain,” 1.

153. Helen Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey compare with those from other Religious Houses in the Irish Sea Area?” (M.A. in Manx Studies, University of Liverpool, 2005), 6, 59. There are at least two floor tile ruins unique to the Isle of Man and maybe as many as five others. They are like tiles at Rushen Castle. MC 13 and MC 24 are both line impression two-colored tiles, which are not found anywhere other than the Isle of Man.

154. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 59-61. MC 9 design is known from Bangor Cathedral, MC 14 design is identical to Montgomery Castle, Wales; MC4 and MC 9 both have the unusual red tile body fabric from Basignwerk Abbey. This could, as Skillan says, indicate that Wales may have been the source of manufacture for the Manx collection of tiles, or, as I think, these tiles particularly indicate that trade of tiles was influenced

126

In a recent excavation, tiles were found throughout the abbey, though mainly in the church, as they likely covered the entire church floor.155 Five different types of tiles were found in situ in the church area.156 Tiles with quatrefoil designs paved the church choir and the north transept, while large plain tiles were found in the nave and choir area; others with marigold designs or with fleur-de-lis in relief were found in the south transept.157 There were eighty tiles unearthed with a local oak-leaf and acorn pattern that paved the northwest quadrant of the north chapel in the south transept in situ, and patched parts of the choir and the nave, while a few were discovered in various places all over the abbey.158

Similar tiled floors were first used mainly in the Cistercian abbeys of

Northern Britain.159 Some abbeys used decorative tile designs, which conflicted with the simple Cistercian ideal to the point that the Cistercian General Chapter had to legislate against the inappropriateness of some tiled floors. In 1205, for instance, the Chapter disapproved of the variegated floor tiles of Pontigny, on the building material. I noticed that as far away as Byland Abbey there is a tile parallel with Rushen, MC 19 and that there are at least twenty other monastic sites with similar tiles.

155. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 6-9

156. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 6-9.

157. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 6-9, 34-36. 1. MC 1 and MC 2 (quatrefoil designs); 2. MC 12 (plain tiles) 4; MC 3 (marigold designs); MC 9 (fleur-de- lis in relief) 5; MC 10 (oak design – see note 158).

158. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 6-9, 34. MC 10 (oak design).

159. Beaulah, “Thirteenth Century Square-Tile,” 3-4.

127

which used four colors in a single pattern, something seen as superfluous.160

Plain square, single colored tiles usually placed in a mosaic were the most numerous kind found at Rushen Abbey; these were early styles from the early thirteenth century.161 Detailed tile floors came in the fifteenth century at Rushen, when they appeared after those in English houses.162

Although most of Rushen Abbey is now in ruins, excavations have revealed that the buildings were sound structures built from local limestone using simple construction methods. A finer detail in arches, doorways, and window heads, all carved from imported red sandstone, was found only in the décor of the buildings themselves.163 The church was very simple, plain, and probably more in conformity to the Cistercian ideal than many continental and

British Cistercian houses.164

Meredith Lillich states that the identification of a Cistercian building rests on three elements:

160. Statua Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis, vol. 1. 1205.10, ed. Joseph Canivez (Louvain: 1933). See also Terry N. Kinder, “Clay and What They Did with It: Medieval Tiles and Bricks at Pontigny,” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, vol. 4., ed. Meredith Parsons Lillich, CSS 134 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1993), 16, 20, 35.

161. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 17-18.

162. Skillan, “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey,” 17-19. The highly decorative designs started to appear at Rushen in the fifteenth century: two-design, counter-relief tiles in the fifteen or sixteenth century; a fleur-de-lis pattern relief tile appeared in the fifteenth century; a blue-white tin-glaze Spanish cuencatile in the sixteenth century.

163. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 10.

164. Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 16-17.

128

(1) the aesthetic of Cistercian Puritanism or, functionalism; (2) the reminiscence of Burgundian early-gothic structure (the pointed arch, the articulation of structural joints, meaningful proportion) as well as any symbolism; (3) the local, regional forms and preferences.165

Rib vaults and pointed arches allowed “heavenly” light to come into the church.

Cistercian churches usually had aisle-less , short towers, square-ended chapels and presbyteries, short transepts, and small cloisters.166 There was a simple 1:2 ratio reaching up to the heavens with a functional purpose and no superfluous ornamentation; it was a style universal for all houses of the

Cistercian Order.167 Combination of quality and workmanship with unpretentious materials mark these works as “Cistercian.”168

Rushen Abbey was nothing if not simple and functional in design. The abbey’s proportions fit each of Lillich’s indicators of a Cistercian monastery. It had pointed arches, meaningful proportions, and the typical variety of bi-colored tile patterns. Local preferences are certainly seen in the aisle-less nave of St.

Mary’s Church, the simplicity of overall design, and the use of local materials,

165. Meredith P. Lillich, ed., Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, vol. 1. Cistercian Studies Series, 66 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982), xiv-v.

166. Burton, Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300, 138.

167. Rolf Toman, The Art of Gothic: Architecture, Sculpture, Painting (Königswinter: Tandem Verlag, 2007), 8-9.

168. Meredith Parsons Lillich, “The Common Thread,” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, vol. 1, ed. Meredith P. Lillich, CSS 66 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982), xiii- xiv.

129

which characterized all Manx churches.169 On all counts, according to Lillich’s characteristics, Rushen Abbey exhibits the three elements that categorize it as

“Cistercian” building.

Conclusion: Adaptations and Effects of the Savigniac-Cistercian Affiliation on Man

As a new foundation in a remote area, Rushen Abbey, founded in 1134, just fifteen years before its motherhouse submitted to the Cistercian merger, did not have to do much, if anything, to alter its buildings to the Cistercian standard.

In that time, the community of monks at Rushen had amassed many privileges, lands, and a role in the election of the Bishopric of Sodor. Although privileges, rights, and more land were given by Olaf I and his descendants, these original privileges were confirmed by papal bulls.170 Contemporary Cistercian monasteries had used most of these means to wealth and land as well, despite their being theoretically un-Cistercian.171 No record of censure against Rushen by the General Chapter has survived and the regulations of duty as a motherhouse and daughter house according to the Carta caritatis were not neglected, showing

169. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 9; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 16; Butler, “The Early Church on the Isle of Man, 500-1200,” 46-47; Davey, “Research at Rushen Abbey,” 4.

170. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15-16; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24.

171. Constance Bouchard, “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered,” Cîteaux 39 (1988): 217-230; Jeffrey Michael Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176” (M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1993). See Chapter II, Section “Savigny as the cause of the Supposed ‘Corruption’ of the Cistercians, 59-62.

130

Rushen and Furness maintained close relations.172 Architecturally plain, Rushen

Abbey was recognized throughout the Furness Coucher Book as a daughter house of Savigniac foundation173 and was clearly made into a Cistercian monastic house by 1148 when its motherhouse submitted to the merger.174

172. Carta caritatis posterior 16, ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, D, 501 and V, 382.

173. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9.

174. Rushen is recognized as under Furness, which submits in 1148, after which they would have been placed in the Clairvaux family under the auspices of Savigny.

131

CHAPTER V

RUSHEN ABBEY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER MONASTIC HOUSES IN THE IRISH SEA REGION

Other Monasteries on the Isle of Man

Religious Houses Other than Rushen Abbey Founded on Mann

Five monasteries existed on the Isle of Man during the medieval period, c. 600-1540. Three of these were Celtic monasteries already in existence before c. 600: St. Leoc’s at Malew,1 St. Maughold’s at Ramsey,2 and St. Patrick’s on Peel

Island.3 Two other religious houses were founded after Rushen’s foundation: the

Priory of Douglas, Cistercian ;4 and the Minor at Brinnaken.5

1. Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1927), 4-7; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8.

2. Basil R. S. Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold.” Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society vol. 5 N. 2 (1950), 167-180; H. Cameron McNeil, Saints and Sites in Mann (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1928), 19; Gordon N. Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: The Manx Experience, 1986), 20; Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997), 3; Salter, and Old Churches of the Isle of Man (Malvern: Folly Publications, 1997), 39, 113-122; Anne Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, (York: St Anthony's Publications, 1958), 4-11.

3. McNeil, Saints and Sites, 19; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 3; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 5; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16-17, 102-111.

4. Philip W. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” in the Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol V. no. 1 (1942): 54-55; William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 30, 87; McNeil, Saints and Sites, 19; David E. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, Ed. Ian B. Cowan. 2nd ed. (London: Longman Group Limited, 1976), 197; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 5; The Church in the Isle of Man, 13; William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958), 69-70; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 31; Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893), accessed July 15, 2015, http://www.gumbley.net/mooreframe.htm.

5. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 30; McNeil, Saints and Sites, 19; Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 55; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 30.

132

St. Leoc

Rushen itself was founded near the site of St. Leoc.6 The first Celtic abbot of the monastery of St. Leoc has been identified as Conanus, who lived sometime in the ninth century, though it is possible Conanus may have been confused with the Abbot Conanus of Maughold Monastery.7 If accurate, this would date the monastery at least two centuries before Rushen.8 Various scholars have claimed9 that there had formerly been a monastic site at Rushen, founded in 1098 by

MacMarus, a chieftain (þang) of southern Mann after the death of Godred

Crovan.10 Archaeological work has uncovered a large number of Christian lintel graves and buildings one hundred and ten yards south of Rushen’s church

6. Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1927), 4-7; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8.

7. “FERQUHARD,” in the Hollinshed Chronicle at The History of Scotland, An Electronic Edition. Accessed July 30, 2015. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3 Atext%3A1999.03.0087%3Asection%3DFerquhard.

8. William Perceval Ward, The Isle of Man and the Dioceses of Sodor and Man (London: Rivingtons Notes, 1837), 2; William Sacheverell, An Account of the Isle of Man, ed. Joseph G. Cumming (Douglas: Manx Society, 1859), 8; Francis Grose, Grose's Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, ed. William Harrison, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 161.

9. Leopold Janauschek, Originum cisterciensium Liber Primus (Vienna, 1877; rpt. Ridgewood: Gregg Press, 1964), CCLIII, 101; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide, 8.

10. Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man, 4-3; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 8; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 3; Joseph G. Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1868), 37; Joseph G. Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man” in Archaeologia Cambrensis vol. XII, 3rd Series, no. XLVIII (1866): 453; Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101.

133

tower, suggesting the existence of an early monastic site there.11 Three layers of burials have been discovered superimposed over one another; in each case the graves were oriented to the east as is customary among ,12 and so indicating that this was indeed a Christian site.

The 1153 Bull of Eugenius III mentions a monastery of St. Leoc near

Rushen: “In Mann, by gift of the noble man, Olaf, King of the Isles, the lands of

Carneclet as far as the monastery of St. Leoc with all its appendices.”13 This gives the impression that the land Rushen was built on was known by the previous monastic name, the Celtic foundation of St. Leoc. The reference in the Bull of

Eugenius III was probably to the site and not to the monastery itself, which may already have died out.14 Secondary sources refer to the monastery dedicated to an early Celtic missionary, St. Leoc, mentioned in Eugenius III’s bull, and from

11. Christian Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man (Douglas: Brown & Sons 1927), 7; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 8; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3.

12. Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man, 7; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; C. Cubbon, 1958, 5.

13. “Special Bull by Pope Eugenius III,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. John C. Adkinson, vol. 1, pt. 3, Chetham Society 14 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1888), 591-5; “Bull of Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A. D. 1153,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 8-12. In Mannia ex donc nobilis viri Olavi, Regis Insularum, terras de Carneclet usque as Monasteriam Sancti Leoc cum appendiciis suis.

14. “Bull of Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A. D. 1153,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 8-12. There is no reference anywhere else to a St. Leoc monastery. If the site was still functioning, it would have been mentioned in the charters by Olaf given to Furness. The logical reasoning is that this reference is to the place as there had been a monastic presence there at one point.

134

which the parish Malew took its name.15

St. Maughold’s Monastery

The earliest monastery on Mann, dedicated to St. Maughold, was still in existence when Rushen Abbey was founded in 1138. Two primary sources detailed on cross slabs near Maughold16 provide irrefutable evidence that St.

Maughold’s still existed around 1200.17 Both stones were carved by Juan, a priest in Maughold parish.18 One states simply that Juan cut these runes;19 the other, found near Keeill Woirrey (also called Corna Keeill) in a remote part of the parish, identifies Juan,20 the parish priest, as being from the monastery of St.

Maughold.21

15. McNeil, Saints and Sites, 12; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 8; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man, 4, 7; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 433; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 9; William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958), 68; Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 1774), 112.

16. Manx Museum Classification no. 144 and no. 145. Phillip M. C. Kermode, Manx Crosses (1907; repr. Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press, 1994), 212-214.

17. Manx Museum Classification no. 144 and no. 145. Kermode, Manx Crosses, 212-214, and Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 173.

18. Ibid.

19. Manx Museum Classification no. 145: “Juan Priest cut these runes.” Phillip M. C. Kermode, Manx Crosses (1907; repr. Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press, 1994), 213-214, no. 115 and Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 173.

20. Manx Museum Classification no. 144: “Christ, Malachi, and Patrick, and Adaman! But of all the sheep is Juan the priest of Cornadale.” Kermode, Manx Crosses, 212-213, Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 173, Donald S. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins (Felinfach: Llanerch Publishers, 1998), 120.

21. Kermode, Manx Crosses, 213; Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 170, 173;

135

By the thirteenth century, a church of St. Michael was erected next to St.

Maughold’s Romanesque abbey church, built around the eleventh century.22 The eleventh-century abbey church was not the first on the site, but indicated a thriving community whose members improved their abbey church.23 Maughold was gradually drawn more and more into Roman customs and farther from its

Celtic traditions. Neighboring peoples, however, continued to follow the old ways by using old Corna keeill and its graveyard.24

Two primary sources mention Maughold monastery during the twelfth century: Jocelin of Furness’ Life of St. Patrick and the Chronicle of Man. The

Chronicle of Man reported the abbey was still flourishing in 1158.25 Jocelin of

Furness, writing circa 1185, stated that the early ruins of the great monastic city

Maughold could still be seen.26 The Celtic monastic city may have been viewed as obsolete, since Maughold lacked the discipline of the new reformed Orders, yet the monastic city survived for some time after Rushen’s arrival on the Isle of

Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 119-121.

22. Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 171-2; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 120.

23. Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 172-3; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 59- 63.

24. Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,”173; Kermode, Manx Crosses, 212-13

25. Chronicle of Man, f. 37 v. - f. 39 r. Mentioned below in miracles section for full synopsis as it takes many folios. Eo tempore cum adhuc sumerledus esset in mannia in portu que (sic) vocatur ramso, nuntiatum est exercitui eius ecclesiam sancti machuti pecuniis esse refertam.

26. Jocelin of Furness, Life of St. Patrick, ed. Edmund L. Swift (1185. Dublin: Hibernia Press Co., 1809), 169-70; Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 173, 175. “And in that island [Mannia] a city of no small extent was named after him [Machaldus]; the remains of whose walls may yet be seen.”

136

Man, as will be shown below.27

St. Patrick’s Island, Peel

St. Patrick’s Island, off the coast of Peel in west Mann, developed into a religious center during the years of the Viking settlements.28 With a rich religious background, the grounds had been used in the seventh and eighth centuries for

Christian burials.29 Excavations have shown a few tenth-century pagan burials overlaying the earlier Christian graves, indicating that the Vikings used the early

Christian graveyard for their burials.30 Around c. 1000, a church dedicated to St.

Patrick was built on the western part of the small island and a keeill was erected to the north of the burial grounds.31 A round tower showing Irish influence was constructed forty feet west of St. Patrick’s church, which indicates fear of foreign pillaging; the Celtic monks at St. Patrick’s Island, having quickly converted the

Viking settlers, did not, however, need to defend their possessions from local

27. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the late Eleventh Century,” 143-147.

28. Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16; James A. Graham-Campbell, “Tenth Century Graves: The Viking-Age Artefacts and their Significance,” in David Freke, et al, Excavations on St. Patrick's Isle, Peel, Isle of Man, 1982-1989 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press 2002) 83-98.

29. Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16; Stanly Rubin “Skeletal Material,” in Freke, et al, Excavations on St. Patrick's Isle, 99-120 and David Freke, “Grave Data,” Freke, et al, Excavations on St. Patrick's Isle, 120-154.

30. David M. Wilson, The Viking Age in the Isle of Man: The Archaeological Evidence (Odense: Odense University Press, 1974), 47-50; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16.

31. David W. Moore, The Other British Isles (Jefferson: McFarland & Co., 2005), 104; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16.

137

marauders.32

The large church, the tower, and the keeill on St. Patrick’s Isle, all built between 950 and 1050, was the last large Celtic monastic city founded on the Isle of Man. Dugdale suggested that the Céli Dé established this monastery under the patronage of the newly converted Viking rulers who had had contact with

Christian Norway, Dublin, and York, and that the Céli Dé were instrumental in providing the priests, who maintained the keeills around the island.33

Cistercian Houses during the Manx “Second Viking Age”

Mirescoge

After the establishment of Rushen Abbey, other monastic sites were founded on the island. In 1176, the first grant of land for a religious house was given to Sylvanus, Abbot of Rievaulx.34 The land was given by Godred II, King of

Man, after Godred II and his wife, Fingulas, granddaughter of the Irish high king

Muircheartach MacLochlainn, were married by Sylvanus according to the

32. Moore, The Other British Isles, 104; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 16; Wilson, The Viking Age in the Isle of Man, 128; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 104-5, 109-10. Round towers were popular in Irish monasteries between 900-1200. They were usually 100 ft high, tapering at the top, and around 40-60 ft in circumference. The round tower at Peel is cylindrical not tapered and measures about 45 ft on the outside with a diameter of 6 ft inside. There are four windows 35 ft up which indicate the original top story. Peel tower does not have much in common with Irish towers except that its door faces the west gable of St. Patrick’s Church and is 7 ft above ground.

33. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 109-10.

34. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Grose, Grose's Antiquities in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 163; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. by Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 351.

138

Roman rite.35 This wedding occurred because the Apostolic Legate to Pope

Alexander III, Viranus, had paid a visit to the Isle of Man in 1171 and noticed that the king was not canonically married to his own wife and was thus, in

Roman eyes, living in sin.36

Little is known of the location of the first gift to Sylvanus except that it lay on lands near Mirescoge. When released by Rievaulx, the land and its estates were transferred to Rushen Abbey, although the date of this occurrence remains unknown.37 By 1280, the land holdings of Mirescoge, mentioned in the Limites terrarum monachorum,38 had already been given over to Rushen and included nine quarterland farms referred to as abbeylands.39 Rushen may have used these farms as granges, and early building remains indicate that they may have used the monastic site itself as a large grange, now called Grange Farm.40 As

Cistercian regulations in 1151 stated that granges had to be at least two leagues away from each other and abbeys ten, it seems more likely that Mirescoge was a

35. Muircheartach Mac Lochlainn was king of Ireland from around 1156, following Toirdhealbhach Ua Conchobhair whom he opposed until his death in 1166. He was succeeded by his opponent Ruidri Ua Conchobair. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 351.

36. Chronicle of Man, f. 39 v. - f. 40 r.

37. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 351.

38. Limites terratum monachorum, in Chronicle of Man, f. 53 r. - 54 v.

39. Limites terratum monachorum, f. 54 r. Written around 1280. Et terram monachorum de Myrosco lacu qu dicitur Hesca na appayse et ascendit per sic scetum directe a loco qu dicitur munernyrzana per Boscum qui dicitur Kor.

40. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 351.

139

satellite of Rushen than used as a “large grange.”41 Cistercian regulations on distance notwithstanding,42 Mirescoge may be seen as simply a very large grange at a good distance from the monastery, yet even Easson records it as a monastic house transferred to Rushen.43

Cistercian Nunnery at Douglas (Douglas )

Although its exact foundation date is unknown, a Cistercian nunnery

(often incorrectly identified as Brigittine)44 was founded sometime between 1187-

1228 at Douglas, on the east coast of Man, during the reign of King Reginald.45

The Douglas Priory was contemporary in architecture with the thirteenth- century cathedral of St. German on Peel Island.46 The nunnery was clearly in

41. “The Institute Generalis Capitula,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux: An Edition, Translation, and commentary, Studia et Documenta IX (Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999), ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, C, 469. XXXIII De vicinitate abbatiatiarum. Si cui ad abbatiam oblatus fuerit, non praesumat accipere, nisi prius eum distare a caeteris abbatiis nostris Ordinis decem leugis Burgundiae pro certo cognoverit. Grangiae autem diversarum abbatiarum distent inter se ad minus duabus leugis. One Burgundians league equals about four kilometers, two miles.

42. Ibid.

43. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196.

44. Older Manx scholars have associated a Brigitine tradition with the nunnery: McNeil, Saints and Sites, 19; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 31; Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 54. Easson and Davey both place the house of nuns as Cistercian: Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 349.

45. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197, 238; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362. In 1192, the monks of Rushen went to Douglas for four years; however, this was too close to Rushen to build a monastery. It has been put forth that this may have been an intention to cause confrontation with the new house at Mirescoge, or that their dwellings were converted to the Cistercian nunnery. Yet neither of these hypotheses can be confirmed and the former seems unlikely as Rushen did obtain the lands at Mirescoge around that time.

46. Joseph Train, An Historical and Statistical Account of the Isle Man, from the earliest time to the present date with a view of its ancient laws, peculiar customs, and popular superstitions, vol. 2 (Douglas: Quiggins, 1806), 50.

140

existence by 1230 as a stone monument on its lands was inscribed:

“Cartesmunda, Virgo immaculata, A.D. 1230.”47

As is true of a number of British nunneries that claimed to be Cistercian, documentation on the Douglas nunnery is scarce. Some of those houses of nuns claimed membership and followed strict Cistercian customs in order to obtain

Cistercian privileges yet were never recognized by the General Chapter.48 Yet

Douglas enjoyed the support of the bishops and royal family49 and was built at a time when Hill and Burton state that Cistercians began to enroll nuns.50 The house of nuns, like all Cistercian monasteries, was dedicated to St. Mary and is described as Cistercian in 1414.51 Its visitor may have been the Bishop of Man and the Isles,52 or, given its close relationship to Rushen, the abbot of Rushen probably sent a monk-priest or parish priest to the house, as was appropriate for a recognized Cistercian monastery of nuns.53

47. Ibid.

48. C. H. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism: Forms of Religious Life in Western Europe in the Middle Ages. 3rd ed. (Longman: London and New York, 2001), 227-231; Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 101

49. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 54; Salter, Castles and Old Churches, 31.

50. Lawrence, Medieval Monasticism, 227; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons, 101.

51. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 238.

52. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362.

53. The prioress was noted to have gone to Rushen Abbey to sign official documents, although no woman was supposed to step foot in a Cistercian monastery. This seems to suggest that there were ties between Rushen and the house of nuns and that, at least within the precinct,

141

Robert the Bruce was said to have accepted the hospitality of the nuns of

Douglas in May 1313, before he attacked Castletown in the south of Man the following day.54 A prioress is first mentioned by name in 1408, when Christina signed a document at Rushen as prioress of Douglas.55 She was considered a

Baron of Man, and as such held the same temporalities as other barons.56 The house of nuns obtained the advowson of the church of St. Conchon from Antony

Beck, Lord of Man (1298-1310), and thereafter received one-third of the tithes of that parish and appointed its priest.57 The prioress must have been one of the most powerful women on the Isle of Man. At the dissolution, the prioress,

Eleanor Calcotte, and three or four sisters were expelled from Douglas and pensioned off on the same day as the Rushen monks.58

the prioress was welcome. “Declaration of the Bishop, Abbot, and Clergy, against the Claim of Sir Stephen Lestro,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 247.

54. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 r.; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 361-2.

55. “Declaration of the Bishop, Abbot, and Clergy, against the Claim of Sir Stephen Lestro,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 247. See also Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 54; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362; “Declaration of the Bishop, Abbot, and Clergy, against the Claim of Sir Stephen Lestro,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 247.

56. Lex Scripta of the Isle of Man (Douglas: 1819), 5. See also Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 48; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197.

57. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 54; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362.

58. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 54; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 197; Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 1, Appendix E, 225-7; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 362-3.

142

Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the Late Eleventh Century

Cult of Saints and Miracles

Cults of Celtic saints and remnants of Celtic practices were widespread in areas of the British Isles; one of the places where this was true was the monastic city of Maughold. The Chronicle of Man makes reference to the monastic city, which had been a safe refuge during the invasion of Somerled in 1158.59 Gilcolm, a chieftain (þang) in Mann, had wanted to drive off Maughold’s to supply his army. That night, Saint Maughold appeared in a dream to Gilcolm and pierced his heart with a staff. Gilcolm awakened and ordered his men to go to Maughold and have the priests bring the staff, a relic of their patron saint, so that they might intercede and absolve him of his sin. The monks of Maughold rejoiced and sent clerks with the staff, preventing Gilcolm by the power of the saint from attacking the monastery’s property.

Jocelin of Furness wrote of miraculous events occurring in the cemetery of

Maughold, where, he stated, there was a stone from which flowed a spring of water ad infinitum.60 Within the monastic city, a Manx stone cross had been carved with an inscription to commemorate the finding of the “eternal well” by

59. Chronicle of Man, f. 38 r. – f. 39 r. The staff, whether genuine, is one of the only Manx reliquaries. See also Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 174-5; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 116-118; McNeil, Saints and Sites, 17-18.

60. Jocelin of Furness, The Life and Acts of St. Patrick, clii, 170. See also Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 176-7. Jocelin states that King Magnus Barelegs tried to have the stone, which miraculously produced an everlasting source of water, removed. However, his attempt was unsuccessful as the stone well could not be damaged.

143

someone named “Branhui.”61

Survival of on Mann

Peter Davey has recently declared that the persistence of pre-Roman

Christianity after the Viking raids on Mann cannot be decisively proven.62 Some estimate, however, that Celtic Christianity can be determined through archaeology and documentation of the monastic communities at Maughold and

Peel, which continued after the raids and into the period of Norse settlement on

Mann. The dating of architectural finds at Maughold to the thirteenth century, as well as primary sources from runic inscriptions of the twelfth and thirteenth century, should be sufficient proof of their continuance.

What is uncertain is how long the Celtic community at Peel lasted, but it was surely extinct by the Norman Age.63 St. Maughold’s monastery seems then to have existed well into the twelfth century and was certainly viewed as a holy site by the monks at Rushen.64 Why did one Celtic community survive and flourish, while little of the other remained but ruins? Under the Crovan dynasty,

61. Manx Museum Classification no. 169: Branhui’s Cross references this well. A. M. Cubbon, The Art of the Manx Crosses (repr. Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1996), 9; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 115. It is said that Branhui found water at this place at the sarcophagus of Maughold, also called a holy well, and archaeological traces of a stone-lines conduit found have been in this location. The stone is of the late eighth to early ninth century.

62. Peter Davey, "Medieval Monasticism," 349.

63. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 103.

64. Chronicle of Man mentions St. Maugholds, especially the miracles associated with the monastic center. Megaw, “The Monastery of St. Maughold,” 171; Ashely, The Church in the Isle of Man, 9; Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 59-63, 83-122.

144

as mentioned, the kings of Man brought Christian observances under the authority of the Roman Church.65 St. Patrick’s on Peel, established by Celí Dé, failed to survive, perhaps because Celtic monastic customs seemed too unorganized to the monks of the new Orders.66

If Dugdale is correct in suggesting that St. Patrick sent out itinerant monks to keeills,67 this diffusion would have infringed upon the lands of the new bishopric and of Rushen. There would likely have been little desire for a site that might cause conflict with the new Roman Christian authority after Olaf I brought hierarchical oversight to Mann, and he may have disbanded the monastery himself. On the other hand, St. Maughold’s had strong ties to the cult of saints, which still existed throughout the island. St. Maughold, patron of the older site, enjoyed as much veneration on the island as did St. .68 Furthermore, at least two miracles were associated with Maughold,69 and if there was anything that confirmed a site’s sanctity, it was miracles. Thus, St. Maughold’s remained

65. See Chapter IV, Section “Church Reforms on the Isle of Man,” 109-111.

66. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 108-110; E. D'Alton, E. “,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia, accessed December 7, 2012, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04563b.htm.

67. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins, 108-110.

68. Mathew H. Hammond, “Royal and Aristocratic Attitudes to Saints and the Virgin Mary in 12th – and 13th- century Scotland,” in The Cult of Saints and the Virgin Mary in Medieval Scotland, ed. Steve Boardman and Elia Williamson, Studies in Celtic History 28 (Cambridge: Boydell Press, 2010), 61-67.

69. See Chapter V, Section “Cult of Saints and Miracles,” 143-144.

145

and was in fact revered by the monks of the new Orders.70

By the fourteenth century, as seen in the Furness Coucher Book, the monastery had been turned into a parish church.71 I propose that Rushen profited from Maughold’s connection to the saints, as a Rushen eyewitness miracle was recorded, conveniently, soon after the mid-twelfth century account of Maughold’s miracle.72 Harald, son of Godred Don, forced the Manx chieftain

(þang), Donald, to escape persecution by taking sanctuary in the Abbey of St.

Mary at Rushen. The king, however, lured him away with a promise of safe conduct, but imprisoned Donald in a prison near Mirescoge. Donald prayed to the Virgin Mary, and through her intercession, the guards became inattentive and his chains fell off immediately. He escaped and returned to the monastery of

Rushen again, praising Mary and God. This account is recorded in a different hand than the main scribe, but the scribe recorded it as Donald himself told it:

“This we have written just as we learned it from [Donald’s] mouth.”73 Once

Rushen had a miracle story of its own recorded in the Manx Chronicle, it allowed

St. Maughold’s monastery to be closed and the building converted into a large

70. Chronicle of Man, f. 38 r. – f. 39 r; Jocelin of Furness, The Life and Acts of St. Patrick, clii, 170.

71. “Marc, bishop of Sodor, confirms to the monks of Furness the appropriation of the churches of Kirkmichael and Maughold,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. John Brownbill, vol. 2, pt. 3, Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919) no. 9, 713-14. (1299.)

72. Miracle at Rushen, Chronicle of Man, f. 47 v. - f. 48 r. (1242.) See also Miracle of St. Maughold, Chronicle of Man, f. 38 r. – f. 39 r, Chapter V, Section "Cult of Saints and Miracles,” 143.

73. Chronicle of Man, f. 48 r.: Hec sicut abore eius didicimus scripsimus. Broderick, Chronicle of Man, ix: A second scribe wrote this section.

146

parish church, leaving Rushen as the preeminent monastery on the Isle of Man.

Monastic Houses Outside the Isle of Man

Galloway

The founder of Rushen Abbey, Olaf I, was married to the daughter of

Fergus, Lord of Galloway.74 This Scoto-Norse lord had founded many reformed monasteries in his lands,75 some of which had received endowments from a few nobles of Mann.76 A case has been made that Fergus sponsored the foundation of the Cistercian monastery of Dundrennan in 1142 by monks of Rievaulx.77 Fergus is also given credit for first establishing the Premonstratensian Order in Scotland, when he founded the community at Soulseat in 1172.78 The ancient bishopric of

Galloway, Whithorn, was revived in 1128 under the influence of Fergus,79 who

74. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v.; William Sacheverell, “Barony of Saint Trinian in Kirk Marown,” in Journal of the Manx Museum IV, no. 60 (1940) 175-176.

75. Andrew McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders: Patterns of Monastic Patronage in Twelfth-Century Galloway and Argyll,” in Albion vol. 27, no. 2, ed. Michael Moore (Chicago: The North American Conference on British Studies, 1995), 187-220.

76. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 42-48. Reginald; Bishop Nicholas of Meaux; Bishop Simon; Olaf II: their charters can be found in Stringer’s appendix.

77. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 74-5; McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 197. Eassons states that David or Fergus could have founded Dundrennan, while McDonald makes a case for only Fergus.

78. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 197; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 102; Laurent Cottineau, Repertoiré topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieureś (Macon:̂ Protat freres,̀ 1939), 3070.

79. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 211-2; McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 198; R. Andrew McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 1187-1229: King Rognvaldr and the Crovan Dynasty (Dublin: Four Courts Press Ltd, 2007), 195; Sacheverell, “Barony of Saint Trinian in Kirk Marown,” 175-176.

147

also eventually founded a reformed house of Augustinian canons there, which in

1175 became a Praemonstratensian abbey.80 In his preference for reformed

Orders, Fergus may have been influenced by current waves at court, by Ælred of

Rievaulx, or even by marital connections with his son-in-law Olaf I, who had also given land for Rushen Abbey.

When the bishopric of Whithorn was first revived in 1128, the Bishop of the Isles, Wimund from Furness, may have felt his authority was being encroached upon.81 Although, as the bishopric of the Isles was created later, this seems likely that he needed an excuse to invade Scottish lands. Wimund’s claim that he was the earl of Moray’s son led to a series of expeditions into Southern

Scotland.82 Wimund demanded tribute from the bishop of Whithorn, Gille

Aldan, and when he did not receive it, attacked Whithorn. Gille Aldan prevailed and Wimund was captured, mutilated, and sent to Byland Abbey, an estranged daughter house of Furness.83

Further associations between the two regions proved more hospitable.

80.. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 198; R. Andrew McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 1187-1229: King Rognvaldr and the Crovan Dynasty (Dublin: Four Courts Press Ltd, 2007), 195; Sacheverell, “Barony of Saint Trinian in Kirk Marown,” 175-176. Easson only alludes to the Augustinian priory in connection with the bishopric but states that no date can be given. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 211-2.

81. Richard Oram, The Lordship of Galloway, (Edinburgh, 2000), 164-76.

82. William of Newburgh, Historia rerum anglicarum, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed Richard Howlett, Rolls Series no. 82, (London, 1884-9), 1.24, 73-74; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 101.

83. William of Newburgh, Historia rerum anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1.24: “Of bishop Wimund, his life unbecoming a bishop, and how he was deprived of his sight.”

148

Grants of land and fishing rights passed from the Isle of Man to Whithorn.84

Between 1210 and 1247, Manx kings and bishops granted or confirmed grants to

Whithorn Priory, of St. Ninian’s church of Ballacgniba (later named St. Trinian), about one hundred and forty acres in the parishes of Kirk Marown and Kirk

German, the Hospital at Ballacgniba, Balhamer, and St. Ronan’s (the old church of Kirk Marown).85 These grants of churches in the Isle of Man forged strong ties between Galloway and the Kings of Mann.

England

Manx kings gave lands and privileges to monastic houses in England other than Furness Abbey. Henry, the son of , founded the

Cistercian monastery of Holm Cultram near Carlisle, in Cumbria, in 1150.86

Between 1154-1260, the Manx kings Godred, Reginald, Olaf II, and Magnus issued many grants and confirmations of commercial rights and privileges to

Holm Cultram.87 Holm Cultram’s monks also enjoyed freedom from tolls and

84. Keith Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria: Contrasts, Connections, and Continuities (Whithorn: Friends of the Whithorn Trust, 2003), 30.

85. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 42-46; Sacheverell, “Barony of Saint Trinian in Kirk Marown,” 175-176; Caine, Notes on the Manx Monasteries, 58; McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 195.

86. McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 196; Geraldine Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link” in Cîteaux: commentarii cistercienses 32 (Belgium: Abbaye des trappistes de Westmalle, 1981): 39.

87. “The Register: The 'Foundation Charter,” Register & Records of Holm Cultram (1929), 91-92, accessed December 7, 2012, http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=49528.

149

fishing rights in the Isle of Man.88

Godred granted lands at Eschedale and Asmundertofes to the Benedictine

Priory of St. Bees on St. Bees Head, the geographically closest English land to the

Isle of Man. In exchange for the land of Euastad, near Ballure, and the church of

St. Olaf at (both together on a narrow piece of land in Ramsey area),

Godred gave the monks the lands of Eschedale and Ballelin (both larger lands in the south Ramsey area).89 King Reginald of Mann confirmed these lands c. 1154, and added to them half of the lands of Ormeshan (near Port Cornaa).90 Olaf II granted the monks of St. Bees license to purchase in Mann each year sixty oxen

(or the equivalent in sheep or pigs).91 St. Bees also held land near Maughold

Head, within sight of St. Bees on a clear day.92 Although in England, this priory held an important position in the Isle of Man as a landed Baron because its land holding gave it a monastic presence.93

88. Ibid.

89. The Register of the Priory of St. Bees, ed. J. Wilson (Durham, Surtees Soc. 126, 1915), no. 43, 497. See also Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 60; McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 196.

90. The Register of the Priory of St. Bees, ed. J. Wilson, no. 44, 497. See McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 196.

91. The Register of the Priory of St. Bees, ed. J. Wilson, no. 45, 497. See also McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 196; Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 26.

92. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 26.

93. Ibid.

150

Argyll

Another prominent Gaelic-Norse figure, Somerled of Argyll (c. 1115-1164; r. 1158-1164),94 had an impact on the monasteries of the Irish Sea. Somerled began a resurgence of Iona’s religious community based on traditional Irish monastic customs.95 While Somerled was a traditionalist, his son Reginald founded monasteries of the new reform Orders.96 Reginald placed Benedictine monks in the monastery at Iona and also founded a house of Augustinian canonesses there.97 He installed his sister, Beatrice, as the first prioress there.98

Somerled and his son may have desired to return Iona to its ancient position of authority. If so, their hope came close to materializing when the bishopric of Man and Sodor was vacant after the drowning of bishop-elect Laurence in 1247, when the abbot of Iona gained control of the bishopric.99 Innocent IV decreed that Iona

94. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v. Somerled, Ruler of Argyll, and for a short time the Isles (1154- 1164). He married a daughter of Olaf I, King of Man, and had four sons by her: Dougal, Reginald, Angus, and Olaf. The Chronicle of Man calls this marriage the cause of the collapse of the entire Kingdom of Man (que fuit causa ruine to tius regni insularum).

95. Regesta Regum Scottorum, vol II. The Acts of William I, King of Scots, 1165-1214, ed. GWS. Barrow (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1917), 141. See also McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 207; R. Andrew McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles: Scotland’s Western Seaboard c. 1100-1336 (East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 1997), 216-217.

96. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 209.

97. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 207, 221; McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 198.

98. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 208-9, 224.

99. Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Letters, ed. W. H. Bliss et al (London, 1893-), I, 231, 504. See also Alan MacQuarrie, “Kings, Lords and Abbots: power and patronage at the medieval monastery of Iona,” Transactions of the Gaelic Society of Inverness, 54 (1984-6), 358-9 and McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 214.

151

govern during this time and temporarily authorized “the abbot of the venerable monastery of St. Columba in the Sodor diocese” the “use of the mitre and ring.”100

In 1207, Reginald provided a site for the foundation of Saddell Abbey above Carradale bay in the Kintyre peninsula of Scotland.101 This abbey, the only

Cistercian house founded in the west highlands,102 had connections with Rushen and was once mistakenly thought to have been colonized by monks from Rushen

Abbey.103 Its relations with Mellifont in Ireland, especially Mellifont’s right of confirming Saddell’s abbot, give modern scholars reason to affirm that its motherhouse was in fact Mellifont.104

Ireland

Relations between the nobles of the Irish Sea led to the foundation of

100. “Innocent IV” in Arch. See. Vatican Epistulae 55 trans. in Chronica Rogum Mannia, et Insularum ed. P. A. Munch (Douglas: Manx Society, 1874); A. MacQuarrie, Iona through the Ages (Society of West Highland & Island Historical Research, 1983), 15.

101. A. McKerrai, “A Chronology of the Abbey and Castle of Saddell, Kintyre,” in Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, vol. 86 (1951-52), 115; McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 209, 221; McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 198.

102. Ibid.

103. Leopold Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, CCLIII, 101. See also Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196. See also McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 213, 221; Abbe L. Brown, “Cistercian Abbey of Saddell,” Innes Review, vol. 20. 2 (1969), 130-1.

104. Cottineau, Repertoiré topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieureś ; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196. See also McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 213, 221; Abbe L. Brown, “Cistercian Abbey of Saddell,” Innes Review, vol. 20. 2 (1969), 130-1.

152

several monasteries in Ireland, in addition to those of Galloway and Argyll.

Reginald of Argyll granted protection to the monks of St. Mary’s Abbey in

Dublin, both on land and on sea, wherever he ruled.105 St. Mary’s was originally founded in 846 as a Benedictine house and became a Savigniac house in 1139 under the influence of St. Malachy and in 1147 became Cistercian.106 Bangor and

Sabal (two abbeys in Co. Down, Ireland, which are usually united in Manx ventures) held a barony in the Isle of Man which consisted of land, originally seven quarterlands, in Kirk Patrick.107

Affreca, the daughter of Godred II, king of Man, married John de

Courcy,108 the Lord of Ulster, in 1180.109 Legend has it that while she was crossing the Irish Sea to Ireland, a storm arose and put the ship in danger.110

Affreca prayed that if they survived she would found a monastery in Ireland, and in 1193, she founded Grey Abbey in County Down.111 The abbey was

105. McDonald, Manx Kingship in Its Irish Sea Setting, 197.

106. Aubrey Gwynn and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland (London: Longman Group Limited, 1970), 130.

107. Caine, “Notes on the Manx Monasteries,” 60

108. Chronicle of Man f. 39 v., f 41 r. John de Courcy was an English lord and friend to Kings of Man, Godred II and his successor, Reginald. He married Godred II’s daughter, Affrica, and they resided in Co. Down, Ireland.

109. Chronicle of Man, f. 41 r.

110. L. McKeown, The Monastic Houses of Co. Down, in Down and Connor Historical Society's Journal (Belfast: P. Quinn and Co, 1936), 3; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 134. No references given, not mentioned in Janauschek.

111. L. McKeown, The Monastic Houses of Co. Down, 3; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 135; Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 37.

153

colonized by Cistercian monks from Holm Cultram in Cumbria and was its only daughter house.112 Grey Abbey became a significant source of affluence for its motherhouse and other monasteries on the Irish Sea, spiritually as well as economically. Twice, Grey Abbey supplied Holm Cultram with an abbot.113

John de Courcy founded Inch Abbey on Strangford Lough for the few remaining monks of Erenagh (Iniscourcy, the Celtic monastic house) in 1180,114 the same year in which he married Affreca. Inch may have influenced his decision to invite Furness Abbey to build its monastery and to supply additional inmates.115 Furness soon replaced the Irish religious community with reformed

English monks and refused to accept Irishmen into their ranks.116 Apparently the prohibition was not observed, as the early rules at Inch Abbey seem, at the least, to have been lax, for in 1228, Stephen of Lexington, the Cistercian appointed visitor of Ireland, visited Inch and mandated that no Gaelic abbot be appointed,

112. L. McKeown, The Monastic Houses of Co. Down, 3; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 134; Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 37

113. L. McKeown, The Monastic Houses of Co. Down, 3; “Grey Abbey,” at The Cistercians in Yorkshire, http://cistercians.shef.ac.uk/abbeys/grey.php (accessed April 14, 2008).

114. Ethna Ward, Frank Mulligan, and Morna Aspley, Inch Abbey (QUB Teachers' Centre), 25; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 132; Inch Abbey, “The Cistercians in Yorkshire,” http://cistercians.shef.ac.uk/abbeys/inch.php (accessed April 14, 2008). De Courcy had first destroyed the monastery of Erenagh (Iniscourcy) in 1177 and made recompense by rebuilding it as the reformed Inch Abbey in 1180.

115. Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 132 and Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 37.

116. “Inch Abbey,” at The Cistercians in Yorkshire, accessed April 14, 2008, http://cistercians.shef.ac.uk/abbeys/inch.php.

154

no meat be eaten, lay brothers not converse with monks, lay people not be allowed within the enclosure, and no monk speak to a woman at the monastery gate.117 If true, these were all were serious infractions of the Cistercian Rule.

Stephen did submit Suir (Inishlounaught), Waterford, to the oversight of Furness

Abbey,118 installing a Furness monk as abbot but not expelling the Gaelic monks.119 This must have caused some conflict as the prior was banished by

August120 and the new abbot warned by Stephen to keep calm.121

The Relationship amongst Reformed Monasteries in the Irish Sea Region

Political Patronage

The friendly relations between the monasteries surrounding the Irish Sea did not result only from ties of filiation: otherwise, a Cistercian monastery like

Rushen would not have donated land and bestowed favors on a Augustinian

117. Ward et al., Inch Abbey, 37. She does not mention her source for Stephen and I could not find within his letters, my references found are to Inishlounaught.

118. Stephen of Lexington: Letters from Ireland 1218-1229, trans. and ed. Barry W. O’Dwyer (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982), no. 6, 24-5 “we transfer to the house of Furness the full possession of whatsoever rights and powers are known to obtain in relation to a daughter house according to the rules of our Order.” See also Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 135.

119. Stephen of Lexington, n 15, 34-6. “You should not be surprised that we did not apply ourselves to expel the Irish...it would be against your interests and that of the Order. For it is necessary that we eradicate them little by little and in stages lest perchance the beasts of the field increase in number against us.”

120. Stephen of Lexington, n 66, 130-1. “Do not receive Brother D, who was prior into your house in the future. If you consider it advantageous and if it will be for your peace, place old Brother J. in charge of the guest service.”

121. Stephen of Lexington, n 66, 130-1. “Do not disparage… and to not allow them [Justicar and Irish] to be disparaged in your hearing, no matter what they say or do, lest perhaps they be incensed against you or yours on this account; but armed always with patience and kindness.”

155

(later Premonstratensian) house like Whithorn or with a Benedictine priory such as St. Bees.122 Their shared noble patrons contributed to their association. Viking rulers had many reasons for establishing and endowing monasteries in the Irish

Sea region beyond spiritual benefits. The twelfth-century revival of monasticism coincided with the reemergence of Viking control of the Isles in the “Second

Viking Age” and created fertile ground for the establishment of the reformed

Orders who thrived in frontier regions.

The foundation patterns and connections between patrons demonstrate the close political relationships amongst the leading aristocracy of the Irish Sea region. Either Rushen in 1134 or Whithorn priory, if the Whithorn Augustian priory was indeed founded around the time the Whithorn bishopric was revived in 1128, was the first of the new monastic houses to be founded by a regional king.123 The first political relationship was formed between Fergus and Olaf I when Olaf wed Fergus’ daughter, Africa.124 However, Fergus had known Ælred of Rievaulx from the court of David I, which Ælred left in 1134 to enter the

122. See the section on Galloway and England above, 144-47.

123. There is no reference to the date of foundation to the Augustinian priory. A few secondary sources date 1144 but that is non-conclusive without primary sources. Archibald Duncan, Scotland: Making of the Kingdom, The Edinburgh History of Scotland 1 (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd), 268; Barrow, Kingdom of the Scots: Government, Church and Society from eleventh to the fourteenth century (Edinburgh: Edward Arnold), 196-7; William Croft Dickinson, A Source Book of Scottish History: Form earliest times to 1424 (London: Nelson, 1952), 45. Easson only includes it under Praemonstrastensien but mentions an unknown dated Augustian past. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 101.

124. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v.; William Sacheverell, “Barony of Saint Trinian in Kirk Marown,” in Journal of the Manx Museum IV, no. 60 (1940) 175-176.

156

monastery of Rievaulx,125 and this connection was almost certainly known to

Olaf. The land for Rushen was first given to Rievaulx,126 probably for the same reason it was given to Furness: because the “reputation of your sanctity spread throughout the whole world.”127 Just like Bernard of Clairvaux on the continent,

Ælred may have influenced the prominent regional lords around the Irish Sea.

Trade among Irish Sea Monasteries

Many of the monasteries located on the coast of the Irish Sea had filiation ties with houses in England, which fostered economic relations between these monasteries: Rushen and Inch from Furness,128 Grey from Holm Cultram,129 and

Dundrennan from Rievaulx.130 The Cistercians frequently traversed sea routes between England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and the Isle of Man to import and export goods.131 Inter-monastic trading on a similar scale and the commercial

125. Rev. S. Baring-Gould, The Lives of the Saints, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: John Grant, 1914), 178.

126. Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 122; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, 11; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433. Certa terra in Mannia data fuit Abbatie de Rievalle ad construendam Addatiam de Russin, postea tamen dat a fuit Abbatie Furnesie ad construendam eam de ordine Cisterciensi ubi modo scituata est et sic non de Rievalle sed de Furnesio exivit.

127. Oliver, “Letter of Olave I to the Archbishop of York. A.D. 1134,” Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 4-6; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 2, 709; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. Fama sanctitatis vestre orbem terrarum circumquaque.

128. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 176; Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 135.

129. Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 135

130. McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 187-220.

131. Geraldine Carville, “The Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” Cîteaux 32 (1981): 37-73.

157

exploitation of donated lands had not been seen before in the Irish Sea region: no secular trade in the Isles was as extensive as that of the White Monks.132

Importing and exporting across the Irish Sea was a perilous venture; there was the sea itself, with its treacherous winds and waves, and rocky shores that could sink a straying vessel, not to mention the main danger, pirates.133 The

Manx monks had to request the permission of the Crown to import or export certain goods from or to England.134 They also required safe conduct (a convoy or guard) or protection (a writ or passport) from the crown.135 Owing to the omnipresent threat of piracy, many travelled in a convoy with two of their own ships.136

Imports from Ireland

Extant lists of trade goods reveal the items that monastic houses of Britain and Scotland imported from Irish ones. Furness and Holm Cultram imported from Ireland such edibles as wheat, corn, and flour.137 Whithorn and

132. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 62.

133. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 44.

134. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 44, 57-58 and C.V. Graves, “The Economic activities of the Cistercians in Medieval England,” in Analecta Cisterciensia, XII (1957): 58.

135. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 44.

136. Ibid, 44-47. The ships of the abbey were galleys of either forty or sixty oars. (Carville, 44).

137. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 37-73, esp. 38, 41, 51. Other victuals meant fish and salt usually.

158

Dundrennan both also imported Irish wheat.138

There were three main centers of medieval monastic trade in Ireland:

Strangford Lough, Dublin, and Drogheda. Strangford Lough was the most active area of commerce, importing food, and then Drogheda, located near an emporium importing items such as yarn, hides, cloth, pottery, and metals. From what is seen in extant documents, St. Mary’s, the Savigniac/Cistercian house in

Dublin, seems to have been the least of these, importing only fish.139

Three Cistercian monasteries existed on the banks of Strangford Lough

(probably in violation of the regulation of the Order that monasteries were to be at least ten miles apart):140 Grey, Inch, and Comber. It was demonstrated above141 how important political matters were in the foundation of an abbey of the new

Orders at Strangford Lough; below we shall show how the new Orders were also connected with the Cistercian trade routes. To reach the Lough from England by sea could take only one day, and from Mann only six hours.142 The three monastic houses all supplied English houses with a vast resource of fish and salt

138. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 30-1.

139. Gwynn and Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland, 130; Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 53.

140. “The Instituta General Capituli,” in Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Cîteaux, ed. Waddell, C, 469. XXXIII De vicinitate abbatiatiarum. See note 41.

141. See Chapter V, Section "Ireland,” 152-155.

142. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 41.

159

(victuals).143 Drogheda was more associated with commerce such as tile exports, but also imported wheat and other victuals.144

Exports from England and Mann

It is more difficult to ascertain the commodities that the English and

Scottish monastic houses sent to Ireland and Mann; most evidence has been found through archaeological discoveries, and although there are a few documents that recorded the manifests of a galley storage-hold, it is known that

Furness sent iron ore and building stone along with masons to Ireland.145 Furness owned two furnaces for the smelting of iron ore, which was one of their principal commodities along with decorated building material,146 and was granted use of mines in Mann.147

St. Bee’s and Holm Cultram also had a good trade economy in Mann.148

143. Ibid, 54-57. The archaeological remains of medieval nets show that vast catches of fish were pulled from the Lough, giving the monks a large supply. Environmental archaeology shows that a fringe of salt marsh supplied them with boundless salt.

144. Furness Abbey held lands in Ireland at Drogheda south of the : Beymore, Bey Beg, Colp West, Colp East, Donacarney Little, Donacarney Great, and Morington. Walter de Lacy, the Lord of Meath, granted ninety acres to Furness with a tower, a mill, and fishing boat at Morington. Furness also owned shops within the walls of the medieval city of Drogheda, which shows their commercialism. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,”60 and Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 31-35).

145. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 49. Some masons’ marks at Inch and Furness are identical.

146. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 38, 49-47.

147. “Charters of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 79-80. See also Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 25.

148. Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 25.

160

Their exports would most likely have been in fish; Stringer states that no fewer than five kings of Man gave fishing rights and protection to these two abbeys.149

That Rushen, being local, had this right as well, may have caused some friction, except that St. Bees and Holm Cultram probably would have used Ramsey port, which was closer to their Manx lands rather than Ronaldsway, Peel, or Douglas used by Rushen, and would have been more in conflict with each other. Rushen

Abbey controlled a lead smeltry near Ronaldsway, a southern port on Mann.150

Rushen also had a lively economy in agriculture and livestock as well as its stone quarries and lead and iron mines.151 Being placed strategically in the middle of the Irish Sea trade routes, Rushen probably had a more lucrative emporium than others in the area.

Rushen Abbey’s Relationship with Geographically Close Monastic Houses

On the Isle of Man, Rushen Abbey was the most important religious house. Its foundation marked the end of Celtic religious communities such as the

Celí Dé keeills that had spread across the island. Foundations, for instance, the

Celí Dé center on St. Patrick’s on Peel Island and St. Leoc’s in Ballasalla, died out or may have been suppressed in favor of the Roman tradition.152 St. Maughold’s

149. Ibid, 26. Stringer does not give the charters for the five kings.

150. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 38.

151. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church, 99-100; Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 26.

152. See Chapter V, Sections “St. Leoc,” 133-135 and “Survival of Celtic Christianity on Mann,” 144-147.

161

was the exception and survived because of its connections to the cult of saints and its two recorded miracles,153 both of which continued to be revered at least until Rushen had its own miracle.154 Rushen increased its influence by acquiring lands at Mirescoge and assisting the establishment of the Cistercian house of nuns at Douglas.155 From its foundation, Rushen held a strong position on the

Isle of Man, which only increased throughout the Crovan dynastic period.

Rushen and trade relations, filial ties, and common regional noble patrons placed Rushen Abbey within a friendly monastic network.156 Of these, patronage and trade were especially important to the frontier monasteries founded in the

Irish Sea region in solidifying their position as an influential establishment.157

The close relationships of royal patrons to their monastic houses often led to further endowments and to the establishment of local monasteries as well as the foundation of houses throughout the Irish Sea region.158 The close ongoing connections between Manx and the border reformed monasteries encouraged a regional trade system spanning the Irish Sea.159 These connections benefited

153. See Chapter V, Section “Cult of Saints and Miracles,” 143-144.

154. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Christianity on Mann,” 144-147.

155. See Chapter V, Sections “Mirescoge,” 138-140 and “Cistercian Nunnery at Douglas (Douglas Priory), 140-142.

156. See Chapter V, Section “Political Patronage,” 155-157.

157. Ibid.

158. See Chapter V, Section “Monastic Houses outside the Isle of Man,” 147-155.

159. See Chapter V, Section “Trade among Irish Sea Monasteries,” 157-161.

162

Rushen Abbey and the other Irish Sea monasteries by giving more economic stability to their houses in a frontier region.

163

CHAPTER VI

RUSHEN ABBEY’S RELATIONSHIP WITH SECULAR POWERS

Patrons of Rushen Abbey

Royal Patronage and Land Grants1

Land gifts and privileges given to Rushen and its motherhouse Furness are recorded in The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys as the “dona,”2 one of the

Latin words for gifts or grants. The monks used this particular term to signify lands that had been donated. King Olaf I of Man initiated the royal patronage of both Rushen and Furness by donating to Furness land on Mann for Rushen

Abbey and simultaneously establishing the bishopric of the Isles.3 Olaf I gave land to Furness to found Rushen in free and perpetual alms, commonly referred

1. See Appendix Table 1, p. 245 and Figure 2, p.249.

2. Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles, BL Cotton Julius A.vii.

3. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. See also: “Charter of Olave,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae , ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, directs that the bishops of the Isles shall be chosen by the church of St. Mary of Furness,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. John Brownbill London. vol. 2, pt. 3, no. 1 Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), 708-9. Secondary sources referring to the charter: Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v; William Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 46; Francis Grose, Grose's Antiquities, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 162; Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 1774), 126; Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (Furness: 1890), 59; Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893), 34-5; Joseph G. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 36. This letter was written in the first year of the abbacy of Eudo de Sourdeval, 1134. The establishment of the bishopric will be further discussed in the chapter.

164

to by the term frankalmoigne.4 This gift was the keystone of Olaf I’s religious reforms,5 and in giving it he explicitly stated that his foundation would allow the

Catholic faith to “be more perfectly and more strictly observed.”6 A bull of Pope

Eugenius III in 1153 describes the area of land in Mann which had been given by

Olaf I to Furness as “the lands of Carneclet as far as the monastery of St. Leoc, with their appurtenances, the village of Thorefil Asser, the village of Great

Melan, the village of St. Melii, the village of Narwe, Stainredale, with their appurtenances, the land of St. Corebric and Fragerw.”7 How much of this land was initially given to Furness and later transferred to the established Rushen

Abbey is not known, because the Celtic St. Melii and St. Leoc were within

Rushen’s boundaries as described in the papal bull.8 It is probable, given the

4. Frankalmoigne comes from the Norman French fraunch aumoyne, “free alms,” meaning giving land in free and perpetual alms; sometimes called tenure by free alms, this was a tenure held in perpetuity on the promise by a religious organization holding lands given to them and their successors forever usually in compensation of praying for the soul of the donor and his heirs.

5. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v. in perpetuam elemosinam erogavi liberrimam.

6. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. Quod etiam ut melius fieret et firmius teneretur quandam partem terre mee ad Abbatiam construendam.

7. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio. See also: The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, ed. John C. Adkinson, vol. 1, pt. 3, Chetham Society 14 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1888), 591-5. In Mannia, ex dono nobilis viri Olavi Regis Insularum, terrae de Carncelet usque ad monastenium sancti Leoc, cum appendiciis suis, villam Thore flu Asser, villam Melan magni, villam sancti Melii, villam Narwe, Stainredale curn appendiciis suis, terram sancti Corebric et Fnagerwl.

8. Olaf I granted the lands of “Carneclet as far as the monastery of St. Leoc with all its appendices” in “Bull of Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A. D. 1153,” in The Coucher Book 1:3, 591-5. The parish Malew begot its name from an early Celtic missionary, St. Leoc: Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 165

bull’s date of 1153, that at least some of the above mentioned land, if not most, was granted at Rushen’s foundation.

The first act of Godred II on his accession in 1154 was to confirm the charter of his father, Olaf I, for “it is the duty of good children to follow in the footsteps of religious parents.”9 In addition to confirming the land gift to Rushen,

Godred II granted Furness land at Escedala, on the outskirts of near

Douglas.10 Once his throne was secure, Godred II married Fingola,11 the daughter of MacLoughlin, son of Muirchertach, King of Munster.12 He had already been living with her for many years and they were most likely married in a Celtic “handfasted” fashion, which did not require a priest and so was not acceptable to the reformed Church.13 Handfast marriages in which couples were

1774), 112; McNeil, Saints and Sites, 12; Kniveton, Rushen Abbey, 8; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man, 4, 7; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 433; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 9; William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958), 68.

9. “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Charter of Godred, 1154,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 13-14; “Godred, King of the Isles, confirms the grant made by his father Olaf, regarding of a bishop of the Isles,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, no. 4, 710-11. Bonorum filiorum est religiosorum patrum inherere vestigiis...

10. “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; see also Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness. London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844.

11. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. See also William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958).

12. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78. MacLoughlin, son of Muirchertach (c. 1050 – c. 10 March 1119), King of Munster and later self-declared High King of Ireland, was the great-great-grandson of Brian Boru.

13. William Temple, The Thanage of Fermartyn (Aberdeen: D Wyllie and Son, 1894), 308; Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51.

166

betrothed for one year and a day were common, even among royalty, before the general acceptance of Roman customs.14 In 1176, Vivian, the Cardinal Legate of the Apostolic See under Alexander III, while on his way to Ireland, spent a fortnight in Mann and learned of this “illicit” union.15 Therefore, in 1176,

Silvanus, Abbot of Rievaulx, joined the two by the sacred rite of matrimony.16 On the day of the wedding, Godred II gave Abbot Silvanus a piece of land at

Mirescoge, which was later given to the abbey of St. Mary at Rushen.17

Reginald, eldest son of Godred II, also confirmed Olaf I’s charter and its land grants and privileges.18 In a charter of 1188, Reginald granted to Furness the lands of Ormeshan,19 and in return for the grant, he declared he desired the

“salvation of my soul, and of the souls of all my kindred and friends.”20 Later,

14. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51.

15. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78.

16. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78.

17. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78.

18. “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 47; “Reginald, King of the Isles, confirms the privileges granted to the monks of Furness by his grandfather Olaf,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 5, 711.

19. “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 5, 711. Ormeshan was an old name for Onchan, at the north end of Douglas Bay, Isle of Man.

20. “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 5, 711. Noverit universitas vestra me divine pietatis intuitu pro salute animae mee, et animarum omnium parentum et amicorum meorum concessisse...

167

other kings had similar requests for salvation of the soul in mind for their grants to Furness and Rushen. In 1219, following the 1213 surrender by John King of

England of Kingdom of England to the pope in fee for 1000 marks,21 Reginald of

Mann presented the Kingdom of the Isles and Man to the pope as a fief.22

Pandulph, , Honorious III’s legate, oversaw the transaction.23

By the terms of this letter, Reginald and his heirs were to hold the Isles in fee from the in perpetuity for the rent of twelve marks sterling to be paid

Furness Abbey every year on the feast of the Purification of the Virgin Mary.24

Reginald and Olaf II, the youngest son of Godred II, vied for kingship in the early part the thirteenth century.25 Olaf II claimed to be the rightful heir of the Kingdom of the Isles and Man, on the grounds that his parents had been married in the Church and that he had been publically proclaimed as heir apparent. How much truth there was in these claims is uncertain; the Manx

Chronicle may have stated this to assert the legitimacy of the lineage descended

21. “The Copy of the Letter Obligatory that King John made over to the Pope,” in John Foxe, The Acts and Monuments of the Church (London: Charthouse Square, 1838), 156.

22. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53. See also: West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128-9; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, in Manx Society vol. 33, no. 31 (Douglas), 299-300; Arthur W. Moore, History of the Isle of Man (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1900), at A Manx Note Book ed. Francis Coakley, 2001, http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/fulltext/hist1900/index.htm.

23. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53. See also West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128-9; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, 299-300.

24. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53. See also West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128-9; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, 299-300.

25. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. - f. 44 v.

168

from Olaf II because the person who commissioned the Manx Chronicle perhaps belonged to that line.26 When Godred II died, Olaf II was still young, and

Reginald became king by acclamation of the consent of the Manx people.27 As king, Reginald strengthened his political ties with the Church, issuing grants to parishes, abbeys, and the papacy. Reginald’s brother, Olaf II, after civil war, began to co-rule with Reginald in 122328 and was often at odds with Furness

Abbey.29 He did not renew the charter of the first Olaf and showed disrespect for the Church outright on at least one occasion.30 Olaf II was brusque and even threatened the dean and chapter of York in an attempt to get his bishop-elect consecrated, but was not successful.31 Yet at his death, Olaf II was buried at

26. George Broderick, Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1996), vii- ix and R. Andrew McDonald, “Rognvldr, Olaf and the Manx war: family, succession, and kin-strife in Man and the Isles,” in Manx Kingship in its Irish Sea Setting 1187-1229 (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2007), 99-100. If a Manx King commissioned the chronicle, Godred II is the only plausible person to have commissioned it sometime before his death in 1187. (The monks would never have spoken of Reginald’s wife as seminatrix if Reginald commissioned it and Olaf II is too late as there are eyewitness accounts through the Reginald and Olaf strife, during which Reginald controlled Mann.)

27. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.

28. Chronicle of Man, f. 43 r.

29. Olaf II attempted to elect his own bishops without referring to Furness or Rushen, even when his brother Reginald was King. See Chapter VI, Sections “A Tale of Two Bishops,” 189-193 and “Civil War” below, 193-199; and notes 134; 149; 152.

30. “Letter of the King of the Islands Directed to the Chapter of York Respecting his Bishop Elect,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 49-51 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Robert, dean, and the chapter of York, to send back to his people Nicholas, bishop, elected and consecrated. The monks of Furness has raised objections,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 3, 709-10.

31. “Letter of the King of the Islands Directed to the Chapter of York Respecting his Bishop Elect,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 49-51 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Robert, dean, and the chapter of York, to send back to his people Nicholas, bishop, elected and consecrated. The monks of Furness has raised objections,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 3, 709-10. 169

Rushen Abbey; no doubt the monks still considered burying the king a duty owed to their original founder and the royal family.32

The next king, Harald, in 1245 reconfirmed earlier confirmations of the abbey charters and made it known that he was the protector of all the “religious and secular people”33 and goods of the abbey. The next year, he issued another charter of renewal for “the salvation of my soul, and of those of all my ancestors and successors, for a free, pure, and perpetual alms.”34 This charter also authorized the use of “all kinds of mines” and “free transit” throughout the

Kingdom of the Isles with no taxation, but “free from toll and all other custom.”35

The renewal of the extraordinary mine grant made by Harald in 1246 is the only other extant grant to Furness or Rushen from the Crovan kings.

Magnus, last of the Crovan line, followed Harald as king of the Isles for a short time and made a grandiose grant to the bishopric, yet no extant charter records any gifts to the abbeys. Magnus’ presence at the dedication of St. Mary’s Church of Rushen Abbey in 1257 does, however, suggest that the royal family continued

32. “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77- 78 and “Charters of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 79-80. See also Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Chronicle of Man, f. 44 v.

33. “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77- 78. Oliver's English translation; no Latin supplied.

34. “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 79- 80. See also Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. Oliver's English translation; no Latin supplied.

35. “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 79- 80. See also Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. Oliver's English translation; no Latin supplied.

170

to patronize the abbey, or at least visit on formal occasions.

The Bishopric and Its Connection with Rushen

Olaf I, King of Man, began Manx royal patronage of both Rushen and

Furness and simultaneously established the bishopric of the Isles in 1134.36

Having been raised in the English court,37 Olaf I desired a complete reform from the Celtic belief system of the Isles to the organized religion of the Papal See.38

He also wanted an episcopal see situated in his domain and Wimund, as the first bishop, was chosen from amongst the inmates of Furness and Rushen to spread the Catholic faith amongst the inhabitants of the Kingdom of the Isles.39

The charter of Olaf I, which established the bishopric of the Isles, gave the abbot and chapter of Furness a unique electoral right.40 The abbot and his prior

36. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Olave,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae , ed. John Robert Oliver, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3 and “Olaf, King of the Isles, directs that the bishops of the Isles shall be chosen by the church of St. Mary of Furness,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919), 708-9. See also: .Church in the Isle of Man, 12; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 46; Grose, Grose's Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162; West, The Antiquities of Furness, 126; Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness, 59; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 34-5; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 36; Donald E. R. Watt, "Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review 45 (1994): 111. Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v.

37. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51; Benjamin Hudson, Irish Sea Studies, 900-1200 (Dublin: Fourt Courts Press, 2006), 226; Chronicle of Man, f. 35 r.

38. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See Chapter III, note 55 for full charter.

39. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See Chapter III, note 55.

40. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See Chapter VI, Section, “Electoral Right of Bishopric,” 187-207 below and Chapter IV, Section “Bishopric of 171

journeyed to Mann to consult with the king concerning the new bishopric and there received Olaf’s grant of land enabling Furness to found Rushen Abbey on

Mann.41 The abbot and prior of Furness are the first witnesses listed at the end of the charter and likely represented “the wise and ... the good” whose assent Olaf I sought in writing his charter.42 The lands were given in “free and perpetual alms” with no written request for recompense, although the royal family was already in the monks’ prayers as benefactors.43 It seems that Furness asked

Rushen’s approval of their elect, and in 1217 the abbot, prior, and seven monks of

Rushen, as well as the of Man, testified that they approved of Nicholas of Meaux’s election.44 In later years, the abbot of Rushen was sometimes also elected as the Bishop of the Isles.45

Furness’ right of election was royally confirmed by Manx kings Godred II

Sodor,” 117-18.

41. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See also Anne Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man (York: St Anthony's Publications, 1958), 13.

42. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. See also Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13. Iccirco ego Olaph sapientium consilio et bonorum assensu decrevi et statui ut iu regno meo christiana religio a suo potius Episeopo in unum conservetur quam sub advenis et tanquam mercenariis sua quippe et non domini querentibus divisa desoletur.

43. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9. Quod etiam ut melius fieret et firmius teneretur quandam partem terre mee ad Abbatiam construendam, predicte ecclesie sicut alia testatur Cartula in perpetuam elemosinam erogavi liberrimam.

44. “Testimony of Russin for Nicholas as elected bishop of the Isles,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 7, 722.

45. This occurred with the first bishop of Man, Wimund, sometime between 1134-40, then Nicholas of Meaux in 1217 and in 1348 with William Russell. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v and 51 v. See also Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 53 and “Introduction,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, xii.

172

in 1154 and Reginald in 1188, and by Pope Eugenius III in 1152, and re-confirmed by bulls of Urban III in 1186 and Celestine III in 1194.46 The election right was exercised by Furness Abbey with papal approval, therefore, during the civil war between Reginald and Olaf II, which increased political instability that threatened to infringe on Furness’ election rights.47

Elected Bishops during Crovan Dynasty48

A monk of Furness Abbey, Wimund (c. 1134-c. 1152),49 moved to the Isle of Man to work on the foundation of Rushen.50 He was chosen to be bishop by

Furness, Olaf I, and the people of Man, and was accordingly consecrated by

Archbishop Thurstan of York as the first of the Bishop of the Isles.51

As bishop, Wimund changed his name to Malcolm MacHeth for his own

46. “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50.; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15-16; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24. See also J. G. Cumming, Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man; Bishop Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 110; Watt, "Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111-12.

47.Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, ed. William Farrer and John Brownbill, vol. 2 (London: 1908), 116.

48. See Appendix Table 2, p. 246 and Table 3, p. 247.

49. The date of Wimund's tenureship is unknown. occurred after the 1134 charters, while a new bishop was denied while he was still in office in 1148, and in 1152.

50. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 53; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 115. It is uncertain if Wimund was the first abbot of Rushen or just one of the twelve founding monks.

51. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1:24. See also: Roger of Wendover, Flower’s of History: The History of England. vol. 1. trans. J. A. Giles (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1862), AD 1151, 506; Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 65; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

173

purpose.52 Upon entering the bishopric, Wimund, as the earl of Moray’s son, claimed the earldom as his birthright.53 As a bishop and a nobleman, he gathered a host of men from the islands and led a series of expeditions to the southern lands of King David I.54 Bishop Wimund (Malcolm MacHeth) won some southern land and ruled it for a short time before he was seized by his own subjects, mutilated, and blinded.55 Exiled to the monastery of Byland, he told his story to William of Newburgh.56

While completely absorbed in his quest for Scottish lands, Wimund undoubtedly neglected his insular diocese. Olaf I could hardly have been pleased with his new bishop.57 Furness and Rushen were probably mortified at the want of propriety of one who was their own monk and appointee. Olaf I appears to have attempted to procure a new bishop, yet his petition was rejected by the

52. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

53. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1:24; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

54. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1:24. See also: Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 65; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Watt, "Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

55. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1:24, Rolls Series; Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History 1237: A.D. 1151. See also: Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 65; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111- 16.

56. William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. Howlett, 1:24. The chronicler William of Newburgh gives a very detailed account of Bishop Wimund's life.

57. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117.

174

archbishop of York: Olaf’s nominees were a certain Nicholas (1148)58 and John59

(1152) to no avail and of whom nothing is known. Gamaliel (1154) became the first recognized bishop of the Isle after Wimund’s infamous episcopacy.60

Bishop Reginald I (c. 1154-1170) was elected around the time Godred II became king. Reginald was a Norwegian and may have been named bishop by

Godred II when Godred set sail from Norway to avenge the murder of his father,

Olaf I.61 Reginald I was the first bishop to serve under the recently instituted metropolitan see of Nidaros and the first to recognize Norwegian suzerainty.62

Reginald I is credited with starting the building of St. German’s Cathedral on St.

58. Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 116. Two documents, both undated. The first, from Olaf I to “T, Archbishop of York," states that he and the people had decided to elect a bishop from the Furness community and in the second from Olaf I to the Dean and Community of York, he makes threats if “Nicholas, our bishop elect,” is not “consecrated by the hands of your Archbishop.”

59. Roger of Wendover, Flowers of History 1237: A.D. 1151; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 116-7. Not known to have possessed his See. He was probably a candidate of the Archbishop of York who proved unacceptable to King Olaf. Roger of Wendover stated that John, a monk of Seez, was declared the 2nd Bishop of the Isles in 1151; which, in itself, is interesting since if Furness and Rushen were choosing the Bishop they would have chosen one of their own inmates. If this is to be believed at all, John would have had to be the king’s choice only, which would be a reason for York to disagree.

60. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117.

61. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117-8. The Norse bishop may have been placed in office by Godred II, who was a vassal of the King of Norway from 1152-53. Watt, bishops in the isles, 111

62. Early Sources of Scottish History, 500 to 1286, ed. A. O. Anderson, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1922), 381-2; O. Kolsrud, Den Norske Kirkes Erkebiskope og Biskoper indtil Reformationem (DN, xvii B, I Christiania, 1913), 321-2; Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v.: he was the first bishop of the Isles mentioned in Islandic Annals. See also Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117-8.

175

Patrick’s Isle.63 It is also said that he instated a tithe to the bishopric.64 His successor, Christian (1170-1190), was consecrated at York, not Nidaros.65 Michael

(c. 1194-c. 1203) followed Christian in being consecrated at York.66 At the same time, according to the Manx Chronicle, Nicholas of Argyll (1194-1217) was elected by the clergy and people of Mann despite the protests of the monks of Furness and Rushen and was consecrated by the archbishop of Dublin. The counterclaims of the two bishops caused the first major disturbance in the bishopric of the Isles; later this will be discussed at length.67 Nicholas was referred to in Icelandic annals as Koli.68 When Furness’ candidate, Michael, died, Nicholas de Meaux

(c. 1217-c. 1226), the abbot of Furness, was elected by the monks of Furness in a bold assertion to assure their right of election would continue.69

63. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117-8. It is unknown what size or type of cathedral or church this was, except that it was built in the same place as the St. Germans that Bishop Simon expanded during his term.

64. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117-8. The tithe was set in a three part division; one third went to the Monks of Rushen Abbey for education and the poor, one third to the bishop, and one third to the parish priests.

65. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. See also Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 118. Annals only mention Nicholas of Argyll and Bishop Reginald.

66. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. See also Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 118-19.

67. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117 (28); Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78. The discussion is continued below in Section “A Tale of Two Bishops,” 184-88.

68. Early Sources of Scottish History, 500 to 1286, ed. A. O. Anderson, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1922), 381-2. The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), note 54, 112.

69. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v.; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 8, 712-13. See also Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 118-19.

176

By Reginald’s reign (1188-1226), the bishopric was almost as powerful as the king. In 1217, Bishop Reginald, nephew to Kings Reginald and Olaf II, was consecrated by the archbishop of York.70 Soon afterwards, Bishop Reginald

(1217-1226) made a visitation of the churches of the Isles.71 Olaf was glad to greet him, his sister’s son, and ordered a feast to be prepared for him.72 At the time,

Bishop Reginald declared that he would not eat with his uncle until the church dissolved Olaf’s unlawful marriage.73 Bishop Reginald asked his uncle, “Know you not that you lived long with the cousin of her whom you now have as your wife?”74 Olaf replied that he knew he was sleeping with his wife’s sister; Bishop

Reginald canonically separated Olaf from Lauon.75

The next Bishop of the Isles, Simon of Argyll (1229-1244), upon his consecration secured amiable relations between Norway and the King of Man, and enjoyed a peaceful episcopal tenure.76 Simon is best known for holding a diocesan synod at Kirk in 1229, at which thirteen canons dealing with

70. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r.

71. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r.

72. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r.

73. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r.

74. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r. – f. 42 v. Non communicabo tecum frater, donec ab illiciti matrimonii vinculo canolonice catholica te soluat ecclesia. Ei addidit, An ignoras qua consobrinam mulieris quam nunc habes uxorem ante habuisti?

75. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r – f. 42 v.

76. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 82.

177

wills and clergy dues were enacted.77 The only canon that affected Rushen was that “Of Vicars of the Religious,” which decreed that vicars were to be appointed by religious houses to the parishes churches they owned.78

By Simon’s time, the bishopric was centered at two locations in Mann: St.

German’s Cathedral on St. Patrick’s Isle and Bishopscourt, just north of Peel.

Simon rebuilt or perhaps expanded the Cathedral of St. German on St. Patrick’s

Island near Peel, which was considered the episcopal seat.79 The bishop’s residence, however, was at Bishopscourt in Kirk Michael, because it was “so well situated that it is possible to visit any part of his diocese and return the same day.”80 Bishop Simon also established the first cathedral chapter in the Isles because the arrangement with Furness had previously made a cathedral chapter a point of contention, which will be discussed more below.81

77. William Dugdale, ‘Rushen Abbey’ in Monasticon Angelicanum, vol 5. ed. Caley, Ellis, and Bandinel (London: 1825), 253-6; Oliver, Chronicon Manniae et Insularum in Monumenta de Insulas Manniae, vol. I. Manx Society 4 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860), 175-201. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 82; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. Most of the ecclesiastical statutes dealt with: (1) the fee for proving a will; (2) the effects of intestates; and (3) mortuary dues. There were also tithes on livestock, grain, beer, and woven cloth.

78. Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 180; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. This statute employs Alexander III’s “ad audientiam” in which it is directed that if the of the mother church neglected appointing a proper curate to the subject church, then the bishop must provide one. This statute only indicates appropriated churches.

79. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 17; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 172.

80. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 18; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. Both Ashley and Moore take the quote from Bishop Wilson's history: Bishop Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 106.

81. “The Bull of Pope Gregory IX, 1231,” in Appendix, Proceedings of the Isle of Man 178

Secular Disputes Concerning Rushen Abbey

Metropolitans

York over Canterbury

When Olaf I founded Rushen Abbey, he also noted in the foundation charters his desire to establish a bishopric of the Isles on Mann under York.82 The original charter petition establishing the bishopric of the Isles was sent to

Thurstan, archbishop of York.83 Why Olaf would choose York over Canterbury, especially in light of his father’s, Godred Crovan, supposed oath of “canonical obedience to Canterbury” is not fully understood.84 Having been brought up at the court of William Rufus in England, Olaf I would have known of Canterbury’s historic primacy over York.85

In 1070, the Norman Archbishop Lanfranc of Canterbury raised the issue of primacy for Canterbury over York and the entire English church after Thomas

Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol. 5, no. 1 (1948): 14. “Moreover, that which by the common consent of your Chapter, or the more sensible (sanioris) section of the Council, shall have been canonically ordained by you or your successors in your diocese, we wish to remain ratified and secure.” This will be further explored later in Chapter VI, Section “Cathedral Chapter,” 204- 207.

82. Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. Oliver, “Charter of Olave, King of the Islands, A.D. 1134,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 1-3; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 1, 708-9; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123. See also “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6.

83. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6.

84. Baronius, Annales Eccles. in Manx Society 23, 266-68. Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

85. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51; Chronicle of Man, f. 35 r.

179

of Bayeux had sought consecration as archbishop of York and claimed jurisdiction over the dioceses of Dorchester, Worcester, and Lichfield, all within

Canterbury’s jurisdiction.86 The two archbishops traveled to Rome to consult

Alexander II, who referred the matter back to England.87 Lanfranc made friends with King William the Conqueror, who held a council at Winchester in the presence of the papal legate on Easter 1072 and declared in favor of Lanfranc, ordering Thomas of York to make canonical profession to Canterbury, though

Thomas avoided any reference to successors in his archbishopric having to vow obedience.88 In 1120, Callixtus II sent a bull to Archbishop Thurstan declaring that York did not owe canonical profession to Canterbury.89 Yet, still there was debate as Becket was able to procure a bull stating Canterbury’s primacy from

Eugenius III.90

Evidence for the choice of York is found in the words of Olaf’s letter to

Thurstan:

The reputation of your sanctity spread throughout the whole

86. Paul Rapin de Thoyras, The History of England, trans. Nicholas Tindal, vol. 1 (London: 1743), 312.

87. Paul Rapin de Thoyras, The History of England, trans. Nicholas Tindal, vol. 1 (London: 1743), 313; H.E.J. Cowdrey, Pope Gregory VII, 1073-1085 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 64; H.E.J. Cowdrey, “Lanfranc, the Papacy and the See of Canterbury,” in Lanfranco di Pavia e l’Europa del secolo XI nel IX centenario della morte (1089-1989), ed. G. d’Onofrio, Italia sacra: studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica 51 (Rome, 1993), 464-73.

88. Thoyras, The History of England, 313; Cowdrey, Pope Gregory VII, 64.

89. Caritatis bonum on March 11, 1120, in Phillip Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum an condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum MCXCVIII. 2 vols (Graz: Akademische Druck – U. Verlagsanstalt, 1956), n. 6831.

90. Jaffé, Regesta pontificum romanorum, vol. 2, n. 11286.

180

world, which both the illustrious renown of your predecessors and your own virtue in private as well as public acts do not allow to remain hidden, has in no small degree rejoiced us. We praise therefore the wonderful works of the almighty king, giving him thanks, and we glorify the Lord for what he has done for you, who has exalted you in dignity and sanctity above all our neighbors. For the rest, we signify to you, that the lord Eudo, abbot of the monastery of Furness, from whose boundaries we are not far distant by sea, at our tripartite petition and persuasion, the fame of the religion of the said place having been reported to us, entered with confidence upon the arduous undertaking, and has come to us at great labor for the fruitful occupation of extending the church, under the inspiration of the almighty. Finally, it has been determined among us, both by our decree, and the solemn advice of the people, that a bishop should be chosen from among his people, who may direct the spread of Christianity through the Isles. Therefore we call upon you, and humbly implore the grace of your benevolence to ratify by the imposition of your hands, that which by common diligence has been so providentially procured to be done, to the honor of God and the salvation of our souls, namely, that our bishop may be promoted, as soon as possible, to the rank of bishop under the authority of your seal, for the love of God and of us. The lord Abbot therefore relating to us such wonderful and holy things of you, and saying that he was unwilling and unable to go to any other pious [archbishop], but to you, his father, filled with great joy for all things, we have rendered thanks to God as far as we are able.91

Olaf I first states that he has heard of the renown of Thurstan and York and

91. “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6. Fama sanctitatis vestre orbem terrarum circumquaque pertingens, quam et majorum vestrorum insigne preconium et virtus vestra cum privatis turn publicis actibus illustnis in abscondito latere non sinunt, nos quoque non parum letificavit. Collaudamus igitur Regis omnipotentis magnalia, gracias agentes ei, quia magnifica vit dorninus facere vobiscum, qui vos super omnes vicinos nostros dignitate atque sanctitate exaltavit. De cetero significamus vobis, quod dominus abbas Eudo Furnensis cenobii a cujus finibus non longe per mare distamus, audientibus nobis famam religionis ejusdem loei, tripartita peticione, persuasioneque nostna iten quamvis arduum tarnen confidenter aggressus, compensato itaque et itinerandi onere laborioso, et labore super ecclesia dilatanda fructuoso, Domino aspirante, ad nos usque pervenit.Denique et nostro decreto et plebis consultu sancitum est inter nos, ut ex suis pontifex eligeretur, qui christianitati per insulas gentium propagande preficeretur. Quapropter ad vos conclamamus, vestrae que benignitatis graciarn humiliter implorarnus, quatinus imposicione manuum vestrarum ratum fiat quod communidiligencia tam provide procuratum est fieni, ad honorem Dei, et salutem animarum nostrarum, scilicet, ut episcopus noster ad episcopi gradum sub auctonitatis vestre signaculo pro Dei amore et nostri, quam cicius fieni potest permoveatur. Narrante nobis igitur domino Abbate tam mira, tamque sancta de vobis, dicenteque se nolle nec posse ad alium quem piam ire, nisi ad vos patrem suum, gaudio magno repleti pro universis, gracias Deo nostro prout potuimus, persolvimus.

181

closes the letter by identifying his source, Abbot Eudo of Furness, who had pressed him to seek the oversight of York rather than that of Canterbury. We can hypothesize that Eudo of Furness influenced the decision by refusing to accept anyone other than “his father,” Thurstan, of York. Olaf I was prudent enough to see that a connection that was beneficial for Furness Abbey would also benefit his kingdom; York was closer to the Isles than Canterbury and, being situated in

North England, better equipped to handle the frontier region, and being near the border with Scotland also had to deal with situations similar to those faced by

Olaf.

The Archbishopric of Nidaros

Toward the end of Olaf’s reign, the between Stephen and

Matilda deprived Mann of its most powerful protector, the King of England.92 As a result, Olaf I’s upstart relations from Dublin with pretensions of gaining control of the kingdom were able to threaten the Isle of Man.93 This led Olaf to contact Norway in 1152 and send his son, Godred II, to do homage there to Inge

Haraldsson.94 The disruption in politics interrupted the connection of the Manx church with the archbishopric of York and soon shifted ecclesiastical oversight officially to the new archdiocese of Nidaros.

92. Charles Frederick Partington, The British Ecyclopaedia of the arts and sciences: including treatises on the various branches of natural and experimental philosophy, the useful and fine arts, mathematics, commerce, &c. (London: Orr & Smith, 1835), 738.

93. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. - f.36 v. Three sons of Harald, Olaf I’s abjured brother, who were raised in Dublin, gained forces to take power from Olaf I.

94. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. - f.36 v.

182

Norway itself was in disorder at the time. A period of anarchy followed the death of the Norwegian King, Harold Gille, in 1136, pertaining to the King’s three sons.95 Pope Eugenius III sent Nicholas Breakspear, an Englishman and later Pope Adrian IV, as a legate to the distressed country in 1152.96 While in

Norway, Nicholas founded the archiepiscopal See of Nidaros, which encompassed not only Norway but many outlying islands, including Iceland,

Greenland, the Faroes, the , the Orkneys and the Sudreys, which includes the Isle of Man.97 Godred II of Man, the heir of King Olaf, being in

Norway at this time,98 probably took part in the transfer of the bishopric of the

Isles from York to Nidaros.99 The new archbishopric was confirmed by Pope

Anastastius IV on November 30, 1154;100 by that time, Godred II was King of the

Isles.101 In 1253, Innocent IV confirmed and renewed the foundation bull of the

See of Nidaros in extensor,102 and in 1266 another charter transferred rulership of

95. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 74. Harold’s three sons, Inge, Sigurd, and Eystein had been creating civil unrest in Norway.

96. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 74; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 14.

97. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 74; Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 14.

98. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. See also Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 14; Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

99. Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 111.

100. Bull of Pope Anastastius IV in no. 23 “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), 274-284. See also Moore, History of the Isle of Man; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 74.

101. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 v.

102. “Innocent IV. to the Chapter of the Church of the Sudreys; notifying the consecration 183

the Isle of Man to Scotland and affirmed Nidaros as its ecclesiastical metropolitan.103

York over Nidaros

The monks at Furness and Rushen Abbey fought for English rather than

Norwegian prelacy. The abbeys continued to have their bishops-elect consecrated at York instead of Nidaros.104 Around 1154, Bishop Reginald I, being from Norway, was the first to recognize Norwegian suzerainty.105 This Norse bishop may have been placed in office by Godred II, who from 1152-1153 had briefly been a vassal of the King of Norway.106 The Icelandic Annals record Bishop

Reginald I’s death as occurring in 1170.107 The fact that they mentioned him at all was likely due to his submission to Nidaros.

After 1154, the consecration of bishops oscillated, curiously, between

Dublin and York, not Nidaros. Nicholas of Argyll, influenced by Olaf II and despite the protests of the monks of Furness and Rushen,108 was consecrated by

of Bishop Richard,” in no. 23 “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), 315-16.

103. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 14.

104. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 53; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78.

105. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 r. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77.

106. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77.

107. Early Sources of Scottish History, ed. Anderson, 381-2; Kolsrud, Den Norske Kirkes Erkebiskope og Biskoper indtil Reformationem, 321-2. See also Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203,” 117-8 and Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 77.

108. “Olaf, King of the Isles, desires Robert, dean, and the chapter of York, to send back to his people Nicholas, bishop, elected and consecrated. The monks of Furness raised objections. 184

the archbishop of Dublin in 1194.109 He was called Koli in the Icelandic Annals and is one of the only bishops of the Isles mentioned.110 The Icelandic Annals may have acknowledged the bishops consecrated at Dublin over those at York because the Dublin Vikings had familial connections to Iceland, whose writers would be interested in Hiberno-Norse relations.

Nicholas of Meaux, Abbot of Furness, was elected by the monks around

1217 and was consecrated probably at York.111 Simultaneously, Bishop Reginald

II was consecrated at Dublin, probably at the instigation of Olaf II.112 In 1226, after the disturbance brought to the diocese by having two claimants to the episcopal seat of Mann and the Isles, Bishop Simon of Argyll restored ecclesiastical peace and secured amiable relations with Norway.113 Following

Simon’s death in 1244 or 1247, Archdeacon Lawrence of Man was elected by the bishop of the monastic chapter and sent to Norway for approval by the king and

1140-1144,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 3, 711. Furnensium vero clamor sive injusta querimonia vos nullatenus disturbet.

109. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117 (28); Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78.

110. The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, note 54, 112.

111. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 8, 712-13. See also Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 53; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78. He is normally mentioned only in England and the Furness area, as the contesting bishop Reginald had too powerful an influence in the islands. While the monks of Rushen wrote to Furness in his support, he is not named in the Manx Chronicle, which may signal Rushen’s desire not to come into conflict with its patrons.

112. Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, in Manx Society 33, no. 31 (Douglas), 296-8.

113. The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, note 56, 243-46. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 82. There is no mention of where Simon was consecrated.

185

consecration by the archbishop.114 The king and bishop-elect drowned on the way back to Mann, however, and a new election was not held again.115

Although Nidaros was the metropolitan for the bishopric since 1152, bishops were still consecrated at York, as well as at Dublin. In 1244, Innocent IV issued a bull confirming that the Bishop of the Isles was ordinarily to be consecrated “by the Archbishop of York or the Archbishop of Nidaros, according to the change of occasion.”116 Furthermore, the pope stated, the archbishop of

York should be allowed to consecrate candidates presented by Furness as “the

Church of Nidaros is very remote from the Church of Man and separated from it by a perilous sea.”117 The next Bishop of the Isles, Richard, was consecrated in

1253 by Innocent IV while the archbishop of Nidaros was in Rome.118 In this way, the pope ended the metropolitan controversy between Nidaros and York. This was significant as the different metropolitans had a role in creating multiple claimants to the bishopric and therefore confusion. Thereafter the Bishops of the

114. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117 (27); Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19.

115. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v.

116. “Innocent IV. to the Archbishop of York; giving him Faculty to consecrate the Bishop-Elect of Man,” no. 19 in “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), 309-10. quem interdum Eboracensis, aliquando vero Nidrosiensis archiepiscopus consecrate pro varietate temporum consuevit...

117. “Innocent the IV to the Archbishop of York,” no. 19 in “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 309-10. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 14. pro eo maxime quod ecclesia Nidrosiensis multam est ab eadem ecclesia periculosissimi maris interjectione remota.

118. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 88; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; “Vatican Archives,” in Manx Society 22 (Douglas), 315-16.

186

Isles were invariably consecrated by the pope119 or by a papal representative, such as a cardinal in the case of in 1387120 and John Spoten in

1392.121

Electoral Right of Bishopric

The only true dissent between the kings of Mann and the abbots of

Furness and Rushen arose over the rights of episcopal election. Controversy first arose in the thirteenth century after two kings, Godred II in 1154 and Reginald in

1188, and two popes, Eugenius III in 1153 and Urban II in 1186, had confirmed the 1134 charter of Olaf I assigning electoral right to the Abbey of Furness.122 The issuance of each of the papal and royal confirmations followed significant events: the charters of both kings, Godred II in 1154,123 and Reginald in 1188,124 were

119. “April 27 Clement VI to William; notifying the election of William to the See of the Sudreys,” no. 29 in “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), 336-43.

120. Fasti Ecclesiae, Scotinanae Medii Aevi ad annum 1638, eds. D.E.R. Watt & A.L. Murray, The Scottish Record Society, New Series, vol. 25. Rev. ed., (Edinburgh: The Scottish Record Society, 2003), 262-3.

121. Konrad Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi, vol. 1, Monasterii Suptibus et typis librariae (1913), 457.

122. “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15-16. See also: The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 4, 710-11; Karen Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” (M. Phil. Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002), 34-5.

123. “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 4, 710-11.

124. “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 5, 711.

187

issued after they had inherited and secured their title as King of Man.125

Eugenius III’s confirmation of Olaf I’s “Charter of Olave” around 1153126 was probably issued in response to the unstable climate in which Furness found itself during the civil war between Stephen and Matilda in England and in the frontier land of Cumbria.127 Urban II’s confirmation in 1186 of Olaf’s “Charter of Olave” was issued around the time of Godred II’s death.128 Each event would have spurred Furness and Rushen to seek papal and royal confirmation of their properties and privileges.

The years following Godred II’s death were not peaceful. Discord grew between his eldest son, Reginald, King of the Isles, and his younger half-brother,

Olaf II.129 When Reginald became king, he sent Olaf II to William, King of

Scotland, and Olaf II remained there as a prisoner until the Scottish king died in

1214.130 Reginald then granted Olaf the island of Lewis and married him to

Lavon, the sister of his own queen and a cousin of Olaf II’s first wife.131 These

125. Chronicle of Man, f. 36 v. and f. 40 r.

126. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio. 1153. Partington, The British Ecyclopaedia of the arts and sciences, 738.

127. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio, Partington, The British Ecyclopaedia of the arts and sciences, 738.

128. “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15-16 and Chronicle of Man, f. 40 v. and f. 41 r.

129. McDonald, “Rognvldr, Olaf and the Manx war: family, succession, and kin-strife in Man and the Isles,” in Manx Kingship in its Irish Sea Setting 1187-1229, 70-100; Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117.

130. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r.

131. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r. See also West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128.

188

events eventually led to quarrels that impinged upon the rights of the bishopric and of the abbey, and led to appeals to Rome.

A Tale of Two Bishops

In 1194, Olaf II, while still a prisoner at Scotland but considering himself the rightful King of Man, attempted, when Bishop Christian died, to install a new bishop, Nicholas of Argyll, in the Manx See by having him consecrated at

Dublin.132 Nicholas of Argyll must have attempted but been refused assent at

York, for Olaf II had sent a very rude letter to the dean and chapter of York demanding his choice be consecrated immediately.133

In all charitable haste, therefore, for the honor of God and the dignity of our mother church, which we think you should never suffer to be diminished, consider how you may contrive to send to us, Nicholas, our bishop-elect, consecrated by the hands of your Archbishop, putting aside all pretext and without any delay. Otherwise, which God forbid, the mutual devotion of spiritual love which we promised you for your exultation, within a certain time, according to the decision of our clergy and people, will perish forever without hope of recovery.134

132. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117 (28); Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 78. The discussion is continued below in Section “A Tale of Two Bishops,” 184-188. In 1194, the date in the Manx Chronicle, Olaf was still a prisoner of Scotland. He claimed to be King of Man, representing a bishop-election with the first name starting with N which can only be Nicolas of Argyll. Olaf II must have had connections in Scotland to be able to conduct such a scheme; even so, his youth is indicated in the poor form in addressing the Dean of the Chapter of York.

133. “Letter of the King of the Islands Directed to the Chapter of York Respecting his Bishop Elect,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 49-51.

134. “Letter of the King of the Islands Directed to the Chapter of York Respecting his Bishop Elect,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 49-51. In omni ergo caritatis sollicitudine ad honorem Dei et matris vestre Ecclesie dignitatem quam diminuere sicut rem, nequaquam debetis, attencius pensate, qualiter Nicholaum electum nostrum Archiepiscopi vestri manuum imposicione consecratum, omni occasione et dilacione remota, ad nos mittere laboretis. Alioquin quod absit, mutua delectionis devocio spiritualis, quam promisimus ad vos exaltandum, sub termino juxta cleri et populi nostri decretum, absque spe recuperandi, in eternum peribit.

189

Reginald of York refused to receive Olaf’s bishop-elect, and Nicholas’ investiture at Dublin brought howls of protest from the monks of Furness.135

Pope Celestine III, at the monks’ request, confirmed the election right of

Furness in 1194, assuaging their outrage.136 He declared: “Moreover, in the election of a bishop for the Isles, we confirm by our apostolic authority, the liberty which their kings of good memory, namely, Olaf and Godred, his son, gave to your monastery, as is contained in their authentic [writings].”137 Before

Nicholas’ appointment, Furness had already, sometime around 1194, elected as bishop their own abbot, Michael of Dalton (c. 1194-1203). The Cistercian General

Chapter of 1194 was not pleased to discover that one of their own had been made a bishop of the Isles in competition with Nicholas of Argyll and expelled the unnamed bishop (who we can deduce was indeed Michael) from the Order.138

Even though expelled and no longer a Cistercian, Michael continued as Bishop of the Isles.139 An appeal may have been made on Michael’s behalf, for Pope

135. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 3, 711. Furnensium vero clamor sive injusta querimonia vos nullatenus disturbet. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, vol. 2. 117.

136. “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24. Preterea in eligendo episcopum insularum libertatem quam reges earum bone memoric videlicet Olaws et Godredus filius ejus monasterio vestro contulerunt, sicut in autenticis eorum continetur, auctoritate vobis apostolica confirmamus.

137. “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24.

138. Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter, ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 2003), Lil 1194/51, 300-1. Monachus de Fornaio, qui fecit de dolose in Episcopum du mans consecrari adhuc viuente Episcopo civitatis isitius, expellatur de ordine; iniungitur autem Abbati Savigniaci ut eum denuntiari faciat excommunicatum et eiectum de ordine Cisterciensi.

139. Chronicle of Man, f. 41 r. 190

Celestine III affirmed Furness’ right to elect and declared that royal interference in the episcopal election had caused a second bishop to be created.140

As successor to Bishop Michael and having waited for the death of the imposed Bishop Nicholas of Argyll, the monks of Furness then again chose as bishop their own abbot, Nicholas of Meaux (1217-1226), who had just returned from the Cistercian General Chapter.141 In 1217, Nicholas of Meaux issued two charters from Furness. One was a charter of acquittance, stating that he had been legitimately elected Bishop of the Isles by the monks of Furness and had received from the abbey the bishop’s regalia and books, which had been held there since the death of Bishop Michael in 1203.142 The witnesses included the prior, sub- prior, and sacristan of Furness Abbey, who had likely served under Nicholas of

Meaux before he became bishop.143

Bishop Nicholas of Meaux’s second charter, of the same date, laid claim to

140. “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24. Since the same thing happened again with Nicholas of Meaux, who was not expelled from the Cistercians, Michael may have been pardoned and the only knowledge of Nicholas was an extant abbey letter with his name on it after his time as bishop. Michael, however, died during his tenure as bishop of the Isles.

141. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, vol. 2. 117; Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 53; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 79.

142. “Bishop Nicholas' Letter, of Acquittance to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1193,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, 1 Box A, no. 94; “Bishop Nicholas’ Letter, of Acquittance to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 38-39; “Nicholas, bishop of Sodor, acknowledges the receipt of books and under the will of M[ichael] his predecessor, from N[icholas] abbot of Furness,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, no. 8, 712-13.

143. “Bishop Nicholas' Letter, of Acquittance to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1193,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, 1 Box A, no. 94. See also: “Bishop Nicholas’ Letter, of Acquittance to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 3, 38-39.

191

the full episcopal right given by Olaf I and confirmed by popes:144

Be it known to all of you, that we approve whatever liberty has been heretofore in electing Bishops of the Isles, the Episcopal seat of which is called Sodor, which illustrious men, Kings of the Isles, have voluntarily conferred on the monks of the church of Holy Mary of Furness; which liberty also the popes have confirmed by their authority to the said monks. Since, therefore, the aforesaid Episcopal see has become vacant, the aforesaid monks to whom the right of election belongs by right, have unanimously agreed in the election of our person, and have devoutly accorded us their common assent, through the mediation of God.145

It is not surprising that Nicholas defended the right given to the abbey. As the former abbot of Furness who had been elected by the monks of that abbey to be the Bishop of the Isles, Nicholas apparently sought to forestall future challenges to his position as bishop and to the electoral rights of Furness Abbey: “Lest, therefore, in time to come, anything be done to the prejudice of the said monks, we have affixed our seal to the present document to strengthen the testimony of its validity.”146 Disagreement on the right of election did not end there, as

144. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III. to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15- 16; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Nicholas, Bishop of the Isles. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 19-20; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24.

145. “Charter of Nicholas, Bishop of the Isles. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 19-20 and “Nicholas, elected bishop of the Isles by the monks of Furness, testifies to the fact,” in The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 6, 711-2. Noverit universitas vestra nos ratum habere et gratum, quicquid libertatis super eli-gendis imperpetuum Episcopis Insularum quarum Sedes Episcopalis Sodorensis appellatur, yin illustres reges Insularum mona- chis ecclesie Sancte Marie de Furnesio caritative contulerunt. Quam libertatem etiam summi pontifices suis auctoritatibus eisdem monachis confirmaverunt. Cum itaque predicta sedes episcopalis vacasset, prefati monachi ad quos jus eligendi de jure spectat in electione personne nostre unanimiter convenerunt, et communem assensum mediante deo nobis devote prebuerunt.

146. “Charter of Nicholas, Bishop of the Isles. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 19-20. Ne ergo aliquid in prejuclicium eorundem monachorum fiat 192

Nicholas of Meaux had suspected.

Civil War

Undaunted, Olaf II, in 1217, made a second attempt to establish a bishop of his choosing, this time nominating his nephew, Reginald (1217-1226).147 Olaf II sent his nominee to Dublin, where he was consecrated, and again there were two bishops of the Isles: Nicholas of Meaux and Reginald.148 Olaf II’s interference in ecclesiastical affairs caught the attention of King Henry III of England and Pope

Honorius VI, both of whom intervened. In 1218, Henry III cautioned Olaf II not to challenge the abbot and monks of Furness and threatened Olaf if he persisted in interfering in the rights of the monastery.149

The next year, 1219, Honorius III confirmed Furness’ right in a bull addressed to the concerning the monks of Furness’ right of election after the appointment of Nicholas of Meaux, “our beloved son of the monastery of Furness, to whom belonged the election of the bishop of the

Isles.”150 Honorius III continued by admonishing the “prince,” not the “king,” of

Mann, apparently a slur on Olaf II, as Honorius III refers to Reginald as “king” in

imposterum ad veritatis testimonium roborandum presenti scripto sigillum nostrum apposuimus.

147. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 80.

148. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 80.

149. “Henry the III to Olave, AD 1218,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 42. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Moore, History of the Isle of Man.

150. “Honorius III. to the Bishops of Carlisle and of Norwich,” in no. 11, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 196-98. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, 296. dilecti filii Conventus de Furnesio, ad quos Insularum Episcopi electio pertinebat

193

other manuscripts of this time.151

The prince, however, of the land, and certain others of the diocese of the Isles, unmindful that there is no power given to lay persons even though they be religious over churches and churchmen whom they are bound to obey but have no authority to command, in order to prevent his obtaining possession of the bishopric forbade the aforenamed clergy to receive him, threatening to cause injury and grievous evil to them and their church if they did. Now, since We neither wish to pass over, nor ought We to close our eyes to the undeserved hardships of our brethren and fellow-bishops, We commend to your prudence, through these our Apostolic Letters, so to provide by admonition and efficacious inducement that the said prince and other persons, laying aside such presumption, shall in no wise by themselves or through others, prevent the said bishop from enjoying peaceable possession of his bishopric, and that they make adequate amends for the loss and injuries he has sustained; and if need be, to compel them by ecclesiastical censures, without appeal; any decree of a General Council notwithstanding.152

Furness probably asked for this confirmation, having just had their right of election encroached upon for a second time within twenty-four years, and the bishop they had canonically elected continued to preside over the see.

In light of the actions taken by his brother, Olaf II, Reginald of Man, in

151. “Princeps” in “Honorius III to the Bishops of Carlisle and of Norwich,” in no. 11 “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 196-98 versus “Regi” in Letter of Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1220, in no. 12, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 299-300 and Letter of Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1223 in no. 13, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 301-02.

152. “Honorius III to the Bishops of Carlisle and of Norwich,” in no. 11, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 196-98. Princeps autem terræ ipsius et quidam alii dicecesis Insulanæ, non attendentes quod laicis quamvis religiosis super ecclesiis vel personis ecclesiasticis nulla est attributa potestas, quos ohsequendi manet necessitas non auctoritas imperandi, ut eam impedirent, quominus possessionem ipsius eppatus obtinere valeret, ne ipsum reciperent clero prohibuere præfato, alias sibi et ecclesiæ suæ damna gravia et injurias irrogandi. Quia vero fratrum et coepiscoporum nostrortnm gravamen indebitum conniventibus oculis pertransire nec volumus, nec debemus, discretioni vestræ per apostolica scripta mandamus, quatenus praefatum principem et alios, ut a presumptione hujus modi desistentes, nullatenus per se vel per alios impediant gnominus proedictus episeopus episeopatus sui paeifica valeat possessione gaudere, competenter satisfacientes sibi de damnis et injuriis irrogatis, moneatis prudenter et efficaciter inducatis, et si necesse fuerit, ipsos ad hoc per censuram ecclesiasticam, appellatione remota, sicut justum fuerit compellatis. Non obstante constitutiones concilii generalis, etc.

194

1219, turned to Rome and sought to secure favor with the pope.153 Imitating the action of King John of England, he presented the Kingdom of the Isles to the pope as a fief.154

Be it known to your Holiness, that we, in order that we may be partakers of the blessings which belong to the Roman Church, at the admonition and exhortation of our beloved Father, lord P[andulph], Bishop elect of Norwich, your chamberlain and legate, we have given and presented to him, as your own representative of the Roman Church, have given and offered to him by name, and to your Catholic successors, our Island of Man, which belongs to us by hereditary right, and for which we are bound to do no man any service, henceforth we and our heirs will forever hold in fee the said Island from the Roman church, and will perform homage and fealty for the same, and in recognition of her sovereignty, we and our heirs in perpetuity shall annually on the feast of the Purification of the Blessed Mary pay the sum of twelve marks sterling, under the title of tribute, to the Roman Church, at the abbey in Furness of the Cistercian Order in England.155

Reginald wrote his letter while at the House of the in London and may have sought advice from King John before doing so.156 Despite this appeal, in 1220, Honorius IV reproached Reginald when he issued a bull to King

153. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53.

154. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53. See also Moore, History of the Isle of Man.

155. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53. Noverit sancta paternitas vestra, quod nos ut participes simus bonorum, que fiunt in ecclesia Romana ad monitonem et exhortationem dilecti patris domini P. Norwicensis Electi, camerarii nostri et legati vestri dedimus et obtulimus ei nomine, et ecclesiae Romanae, et vestro et Catholicorum successorum vestrorum Insulam nostram de Man, quae ad nos jure hereditario pertinet, et de qua nulli tenemur aliquod servitium facere, et deinceps nos et haeredes nostri in perpetuum tenebimus in feodum dictam Insulam ab ecclesia Romana, et faciemus ei per hoc liomagium, et fidelitatem, et in recognitionem domini nomine census, nos et heredes nostri in perpetuum annuatim solvemus ecclesiae Romanae duodecim marcas sterlingorum in Anglia, apud Abbatiam de furnis Cistertiensis ordinis in feste purificationis beatae Marie.

156. “Letters to our Lord the Pope, Anno IV, Epis. 629,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 53.

195

Reginald concerning the patronage of churches under the king’s care:

Because it has reached our ears that certain churches of your Kingdom, all of which you are the patron, are said not to possess free land, we beg, we advise, we exhort Your Highness, as earnestly as possible, since it appears in every way unbecoming that the said churches should be entirely free from a sufficient dower.157

Reginald seems to have corrected any papal misgivings, for in 1223, the same pope in another bull declared himself pleased with all Reginald had done for the church:

… the disposition of ready faith and devoted attachment which you have exhibited in a laudable manner to exhibit towards the Roman church, worthily deserves, that, embracing your person with sincere benevolence, we should further you with the special favor of the Apostolic See, favorably assenting to your supplications.158

The dispute between Kings Reginald and Olaf II had by then escalated into civil war. Bishop Reginald visited Olaf II at Lewis and presided over his divorce. The chronicle would have the reader believe this action came as a surprise to Olaf II, yet he benefited greatly from the actions of the nephew whom

157. Letter of Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1220, in no. 12, “Appendix,”of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 299-300 and “Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1220 Honorius, Etc, to Illustrious King of Man. Anno VII. Epist. 76,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 62-63; and Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, (1864), II. 21. Cum igitur sicut nostris est auribus intimatum quedam ecclesie Regni tui quartim omnium es patronus, non habere terram liberam asserantur, serenitatem tuam roganmus, monemus, hortamur attente quatinus, cum indecens omnimodis videatur, ut ecclesie memorate competenti dote penitus sint experts.

158. Letter of Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1223 in no. 13, “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 301-02; “Pope Honorius to Reginald, A.D. 1223 Honorius, Etc, to Illustrious King of Man. Anno VII. Epist. 164,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 64-66; and Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, (1864), I. 21. Promptae fidei, et pronae devotionis affectus, quem erga Romanam ecelesiam studes in effectu laudabiliter exhibere, digne meretur, ut personam tuam sincera benevolentia complectentes, te speciali sedis apostolicae gratia prosequamur tuis supplicationibus favorabiliter annuendo.

196

he had installed as bishop.159 By subsequently marrying Scristina, the daughter of Ferkar, earl of Ross,160 Olaf II formed an alliance with Ross and was able to challenge King Reginald’s supposed usurpation of his royal prerogative. They ended the schism by dividing the rule of the Kingdom of the Isles between them:

Reginald retained the island of Man and the title of King, and Olaf II held half of the islands.161

Meanwhile, in 1224, Bishop Nicholas de Meaux, Furness’ elected bishop, sought permission to resign his see on the grounds that he could not return to the

Isles because the lord of the lands, and others, did not recognize his authority.162

The answering bull refers to Olaf II as “lord,” not as king.163 Honorius IV, in recognizing Nicholas of Meaux as Bishop of the Isles, declared he would allow him to “render up his bishopric, and reserved to him the use of pontificals” if what Nicholas of Meaux claimed was proven true; Honorius had charged the archbishop of York to “examine the circumstances.”164 By 1226, Bishop Nicholas

159. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 r. - f. 42 v.

160. Chronicle of Man, f. 42 v. See also West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128. Ferkar was earl of Ross, a medieval Gaelic lordship in northern Scotland, from c. 1224-31.

161. Chronicle of Man, f. 43 r. See also West, The Antiquities of Furness, 128; Moore, History of the Isle of Man.

162. “Pope Honorius to the Archbishop of York on the Expulsion of Bishop Nicholas. A.D. 1223,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 67-68. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 80.

163. “Pope Honorius to the Archbishop of York on the Expulsion of Bishop Nicholas. A.D. 1223,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 67-68. domino terre.

164. “Pope Honorius to the Archbishop of York on the Expulsion of Bishop Nicholas. A.D. 1223,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 67-68. Venerabilis frater noster N. Mannie et Insularum Episcopus, per suas nobis lineras humiliter supplicavit, ut cum jam longo tempore ab ecclesia sua exulare coactus illue redire non valeat, domino terre, ac aliis sibi adversantibus, universis, sibi 197

must have resigned, for in witness to a charter he signed: “Nicholas, quondam

Manniae et Insularum episcopus.”165 In the same year, the rival bishop, Reginald, died and was buried at Rushen Abbey.166 Bishop Reginald was of the royal line, nephew to both King Reginald and Olaf II,167 and a stone sarcophagus discovered at Rushen Abbey in the style of this period may have been his.168 In

1228, the final battle between Reginald and Olaf II occurred at Tynwald, near

Peel. King Reginald was slain; his body, found by the monks, was later buried at

Furness Abbey as he had requested.169 After King Reginald died, Olaf II ruled the

Kingdom, yet continued the war over hereditary rights with Reginald’s son,

Godred Don past 1228.170 By 1231, the Isles were embroiled again in civil war, which ended with Godred Don’s death.171

The next royal influence of which there is documentation occurred in the

cedendi episcopali oneri licentiam largiremur, usu sibi pontificalium reservato... per apostolica scripta mandamus quatinus hujusmodi cause circumstantiis provide circumspectis, ei auctoritate nostra concedas licentiam postulatam si tamen videris expedire.

165. Document mentioned in Munch, The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, 241; Proceedings of National History and Antiquarian Society, vol. 3 (Douglas: 1897), 321; Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 80: no primary source is extant. A second letter that year was mentioned in Munch citing Dean and Gloucester Archives of York, folio 104.

166. Chronicle of Man, f. 44 v.

167. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r.

168. William Cubbon, “Figure 43,” Rushen Abbey (Douglas: 1927), 86.

169.Chronicle of Man, f. 44 r. - f. 44 v.

170. Alan Orr Anderson, Early Sources of Scottish History: A. D. 500 to 1286 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1922) 313–314, 459-46, 471-78; Peter A Munch, The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch (Douglas: 1860), 78–79, 191, 193, 196.

171. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 124; The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 196.

198

episcopal election of 1231, for Pope Innocent IV felt obliged to remind York that at these elections “[monks of Furness] have the sole right of electing a bishop for the cathedral church of Man in accordance with an ancient and approved custom hitherto peacefully observed.”172 This time, Bishop Simon (1231-c.1244) was elected, who established a cathedral chapter on Mann.173 Confirmation of

Furness’ electoral right usually occurred during a time of political unrest or during the election of a new bishop: the 1231 bull dated to the time of civil war with Godred Don and the election of Simon.

The Effects of the Civil War on Election Rights

In 1244, Innocent IV again confirmed Furness Abbey’s right to election.174

After the death of Bishop Simon, sometime between 1244-1247,175 the monastic chapter elected Lawrence, . He travelled to Norway to be approved by Harald, the King of Man,176 and consecrated by the archbishop of

Nidaros, Sigurd.177 “However, Harald on account of certain letters that had been

172. “Innocent IV to the Archbishop of York ; giving him Faculty to consecrate the Bishop-Elect of Man,” in no. 19, “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 309-10. ad quos solummodo jus eligendi episcopum in ecclesia cathedrali de Mannia de antiqua et approbata consuetudine hactenus pacifice observata pertinet.

173. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 82.

174. “Innocent IV to the Archbishop of York ; giving him Faculty to consecrate the Bishop-Elect of Man,” in no. 19, “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 309-10.

175. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v.

176. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also A. O. Anderson ed., Scottish Annals from English Chroniclers, 500-1286, (London, 1908), 381-2.

177. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117 (27); Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19. 199

sent from Mann against [Lawrence], refused to agree to the election until

[Lawrence] should return with him to Mann and be elected in the king’s presence by all the clergy and people.”178 On the return voyage, Harald and bishop-elect Lawrence both drowned, leaving the kingdom with neither temporal nor spiritual ruler.179 Harald’s brother, Reginald II, succeeded him as king two years later in 1249.180 Yet the royal conflict had not ended. The fact that

Reginald II did not assume the throne until two years later suggests resistance to his hereditary claims.181 Reginald II began to rule on May 6, 1249, and on May 30,

1249 was attacked by a group of Manx men and killed by a certain Sir Ivar in a meadow near Holy Trinity church to the south of Rushen Abbey.182 Harald, son of Godred Don and grandson of Reginald I, took control of Man.183

During these years the bishopric of the Isles remained vacant until 1253.

This may have been due to a distressed state of affairs in the Kingdom of Man after the death of its King, with other claimants vying for the kingship after the

178. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. Sed Harald propter quasdam litteras que contra illum de mannia transmisse fuerant, nullatenus electioni eius assensum prebere voluit, donec iterum cum ipso rediret ad manniam et ipso presente ab omni clero et populo eligeretur.

179. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

180. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 r. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

181. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 r. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

182. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 r. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

183. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 v. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

200

civil war.184 In 1247, Pope Innocent IV resolved the situation by authorizing the

Abbot of Iona to accept the “mitre and ring” of the Sodor diocese.185 Iona retained jurisdiction over the bishopric of the Isles for six years, until Pope

Innocent IV appointed a new bishop in 1253.186

In that year, 1253, the archbishop of Nidaros was in Rome to receive the pallium, and the pope seized the occasion to name Richard, an Englishman, the next Bishop of the Isles.187 The only recorded connection Bishop Richard had with Rushen was in 1257, when he consecrated the abbey church of St. Mary.188

Building the church had been begun one hundred thirty years earlier and its church was the final resting place of many Manx kings. It is probable the church had not been completely finished, or had had to be altered since the 1192

184. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

185. “Innocent IV. to the Abbot of Iona; granting the use of mitre and ring to him and his successors,” in no. 21, “Appendix,” of The Chronicle of Man and the Sudreys, ed. Peter Munch, 312- 12; Theiner's Vetera Monumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum, 309-10. See also: Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. The first abbot of the Benedictine abbey at Iona in 1204 is Cellach and the next named abbot is Fionnlagh in 1320, so the abbot during 1247 isn’t known. Cum igitur Romana ecclesia sibi subjectis humiliter venientibus ad eandem consuevit esse pizematris affectu favorabilis ac benigna, et dignum existat ut tanti labor itineris munere compensetur gratiæ specialis, tuae devotionis supplicationibus inclinati tibi et successoribus tuis annuli, et in divinis ofiiciis, diebus, horis ac locis competentibus, mitræ usum, quodque in prædicto et aliis monasteriis ordinis beati Benedicti ac etiam ecelesiis secularibus monasterio memorato subjectis, Clero et populo, legato sedis apostolicæ aut archiepiscopo vel episcopo non præsente, benedictionem possis dare solleinnem, auctoritate præsentium duximus concedendum.

186. Chronicle of Man, f. 49 v.

187. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 88; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; “Vatican Archives,” in Manx Society 22 (Douglas), 315-16.

188. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90; Grose, Grose’s Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

201

buildings.189 Bishop Richard died on his way home from the Council at Lyons in

1274, making him the last bishop of the Crovan dynasty.190

The See of the Isle of Man was transferred to the oversight of Scotland in

1266, when, as the annals of Furness reveal, the monks attempted to reclaim the right of election by taking the matter up with the King of Scotland:191

The abbot of Furness went to the King of Scotland and claimed his right concerning the election to the bishopric of Man; and the King of Scotland received the abbot with courtesy and deceived him with false promises. But with guile and treachery he commanded the clergy and people of Man on pain of grave peril not to dare to receive anyone elected by the abbot and of Furness. Meanwhile the clergy and people of Man agreed upon the election of a bishop and unanimously appointed Master Gilbert, abbot of Rushen. But the King of Scotland, contrary to the canons, set aside his election and intruded one Master Mark, a relative of the bailiff of Man; and immediately sent him, with letter from himself and letters extorted from the clergy and people with their seals, to Norway to his metropolitan the Archbishop of Trondheim to be consecrated, but what has been done about it is not yet known.192

Master Mark was consecrated at Nidaros c. 1275.193 The unique election right of

Furness and influence of Rushen had come to an end, but their influence of

189. Grose, Grose’s Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162.

190. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19.

191. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19 (52); Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 38.

192. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19 (52); Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 38. No Latin text was given.

193. “Letter of Marc, Bishop of Sodor. A.D. 1299,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 132-134; “Marc, bishop of Sodor, confirms to the monks of Furness the appropriation of the churches of Kirkmichael and Maughold,” The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 9, 713-14; Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 20; Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,”38.

202

Rushen’s motherhouse over religious affairs in the Isles was still substantial.

Furness’ possessions, rights, and local daughter house had an influence on the new bishop, which may have made him uneasy. In 1299, having spent little time on Mann, Mark gave the appropriations of the churches of the Manx Kirk

Michael and Maughold to Furness Abbey.194 In the charter, Mark declared that he did so of “his own free will.”195 This grant surely made him unpopular with his sponsor, the Scottish king, and with the Manx people, and this certainly makes it seem that, despite his assertation, these churches were granted under duress.196

Over the course of two hundred years, Furness Abbey had held the very unusual right of being able to elect to the bishopric of the Isles. Although they received papal approval throughout the years, opposition by the King of the Isles grew after the Manx civil wars that had begun with Reginald and Olaf II.197 The

194. “Letter of Marc, Bishop of Sodor. A.D. 1299,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 132-134. See The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, no. 9, 713-14; Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also William Cubbon, “The Cistercian Order and its Influence in the Isle of Man,” Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol. 2, no. 4 (1925), 509-51; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,”38.

195. “Letter of Marc, Bishop of Sodor. A.D. 1299,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 132-134. Nos igitur appropriationem ecciesiaruin Sanctorum Michaelis et Michaldi in Mannia nostre dyocesis Abbati et Monachis de Furnesio per nos cx concensu tociiis den nostri tenore prescencium factam confirmatam et ratificatam per nullamcompulsionem coactionem factas vel faciendas vel pene timorem ejusdem Abbatis quanquam tempore appropriacionis custodiam insule Mannie habuisset vel quorumcunque aliorum, sed ex mera nostra voluntate et libera ob honorem dci et beate virginis et anime nostre meritum et parenttim et amicorum nostroruin et specialiter pro anima Domini Iticardi pie memorie predecessoris nostri qui in basilica prefati monasterii sepelitur sponte rite et integraliter absque retentione tertie partis predictarum ecclesiarum esse factam in verbo Dei veraciter protestamur.

196. Cubbon, “The Cistercian Order and its Influence in the Isle of Man,” 501-51.

197. Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 116; Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 123; Oliver, Monumenta Manniae, vol. II, I.

203

monks of Furness repeatedly applied, after political strife and between episcopal elections, to numerous popes for papal confirmation of their right and were never refused.198 Yet, as discord escalated in the Isles, Pope Innocent IV eventually intervened and sent his own candidate, already consecrated by the archbishop of Nidaros at Rome, and so effectively removed ecclesiastical oversight from Furness Abbey.199 Furness tried to regain its electoral privilege when the Crovan dynasty surrendered governance of the Isles to Scotland in

1265, but was refused, and when the Scottish King appointed the new bishop,

Mark.200 After two hundred years of exercising powerful influence as electors of the Bishops of the Isles, Furness and Rushen had been the most powerful houses in the Irish Sea region, influencing the region in religious as well as political matters.

Cathedral Chapter

There is no evidence that the bishopric of the Isles during these two centuries had its own diocesan chapter201 elect the Bishop of the Isles.202 In the

Chronicle of Man, Bishop Simon is credited with establishing a diocesan chapter for Sodor when he rebuilt St. German Cathedral on St. Patrick’s Isle, near Peel, in

198. See note 122.

199. See notes 186 and 187.

200. See notes 191-193.

201. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 19. A “chapter” usually refers to a permanently constituted body of clergy connected with a cathedral.

202. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 18.

204

1230;203 there is no specific mention of this chapter’s function other than the

Synod of 1229.204 A bull of 1231 recognized the establishment of the chapter:

“with the common assent of the chapter.”205

The period followed the disruptive rule of bishops Nicholas of Meaux

(1194-1226) and Reginald II (1217-1226).206 After Bishop Simon died in 1144,

Lawrence was elected by a “chapter.”207 The “chapter” of the Isles, mentioned by the Chronicle of Man during the election of Archdeacon Lawrence in the thirteenth century, may have been the monastic chapter of Furness, which was the rightful elector of the bishopric, or Simon’s new diocesan chapter.208 The

Manx Chronicle says that the monastic chapter was in full consent with

Lawrence’s election and Furness did not object to this; objection was made by certain unnamed Manx citizens.209 It is hard to conceive that Simon’s chapter elected Lawrence. When the choice was announced, the Manx people and clergy,

203. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v.

204. Chronicle of Man, f. 50 v; “Appendix A: Synodal Statutes of Bishop Simon,” in William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 173- 175.

205. Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 37.

206. Nicholas of Meaux (King Reginald and Furness’ elect) and Reginald II (King Olaf II’s elect).

207 . Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. Quo mortuo communi consilio et assensu totius mannensis capituli laurentius quidam qui tunc archdiaconus fuit in mannia in episcopatum electus est. Capitulum could mean religious or cathedral chapter.

208. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 18-19; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” 37; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. We know this as shown by the Abbey’s being in agreement with the Chapter and not attempting to gain their electoral rights back at the time.

209. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. There is no extant objection in the Furness Coucher Book.

205

not Furness, petitioned King Harald against the election.210 Rushen and Furness’ involvement is demonstrated by their acquiescence to the chapter’s decisions and by their failure to attempt to regain their direct electoral right, which they would have protested losing.211 In 1231, Pope Gregory IX decreed the election of Bishop

Simon’s successors should be continued as it had canonically been observed in the past, which would confirm Furness’ rights.212 In 1244, Gregory IX issued a bull to the archbishop of York, stating:

The Archbishop of York is ordered, to entreat the abbot and assembly from the Furness monastery of the Cistercian Order, to whom alone the right of choosing the bishop in the cathedral church of Man concerns, if he finds the distinguished person canonically suitable, at that time with the consent of the Archbishop of Nidaros he may confirm and may also choose the consecration service. , 1144.213

The circumstances surrounding Lawrence’s election all seem to point to an election by the monastic chapter which superseded the cathedral chapter’s election as stated by Gregory IX, despite the fact that Lawrence was the

210. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v.

211. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. There is no mention at all in The Coucher Book, yet at any other time the monks of Furness would have had evidence if their rights were infringed upon.

212. “The Bull of Pope Gregory IX, 1231,” in Appendix, Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, vol. 5, no. 1 (1948): 14. “We decree also that in the election of your episcopal successors no violence, no influence of king or prince intervene; nor in the promotion of bishops let anyone obtain the office of the prelacy, but let that man be set over the vacant see, whom those to whom the right of election properly belongs shall have judged most suitable by his learning and character, the canonical form in election having been observed.”

213. August Potthast, Regesta pontificum romanorum inde ab a. post Christum natum MCXCVIII ad a. MCCCIV. vol 2 (Berlin, 1875; rp. Graz, 1957) no. 15 (11258), 958. Archiepiscopo Eboracensi mandate, ut, praetendibus abbatas et conventu monasterii de Furnesio Cisterc. Ord., ad quos solummodo ius eligendi episcopum in ecclesia cathedrali de Mannia pertineat, electionem, si eam invenerit canonice de persona ideonea celebratam, cum assenu (Sigurd) archiepiscopi Nidrosiensi confirmet ac electo munus consecrationis impendat. Xv kal mart.

206

archdeacon, not a monk, and a more likely candidate to gain approval of a diocesan chapter.214 However, were regularly witnesses at Rushen:

Jocelin, abbot of Rushen, and Archdeacon Deremod both signed as witnesses a charter of King Reginald in 1188, so this is not inconceivable.215

By 1253, when the pope appointed the Bishop of the Isles, Innocent IV commended his appointee Bishop Richard “to the chapter, clergy, and people of

Sodor,” the usual reference to Furness, Rushen, the clergy, and the Manx people.

If Bishop Simon’s cathedral chapter did elect Lawrence, which cannot be proven and is unlikely, the chapter’s control of elections was short-lived and had no successful appointee. Less than a quarter of a century later, the pope directly appointed Richard without reference to any local chapter,216 monastic or cathedral, and after Mann passed to Scotland in 1265, the Scottish King simply chose the next bishop, Mark.217

214. As Simon died in 1144, the monks probably attempted to get confirmation from York, which accounts for the bull since it appears they encountered resistance. The bull clearly states with the authority of Nidaros, but since the king of Man had received letters of objection by the people while in Norway, Sigurd declined. So the story was drawn out for three years.

215. “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30 printed in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 17.

216. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 88; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man; “Vatican Archives,” in Manx Society 22 (Douglas), 315-16.

217. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 20; Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, 117; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,”38.

207

The Secular Affairs of Rushen Abbey

Trade

In addition to their pervasive religious influence, Rushen Abbey was the only trade organization on the Isle of Man during the Crovan dynasty or, at the least, held a monopoly on trade on the island, employing common Cistercian economic ventures such as agriculture, livestock, quarries, lead and iron mines, and fishing.218 Rushen operated a fortified warehouse located at for importing and exporting.219 Trade roads led from the abbey to Ronaldsway, the southern port, where the monks had developed a lead smeltry,220 through

Douglas in the east, to Ramsey in the north, as well as to Peel in the west of the island.221

The monasteries also formed a convoy system along sea routes to avoid physical hazards and pirate attacks.222 The abbeys obtained licenses to export or import items from Ireland because they owned the ships but needed licenses to transport their own goods.223 These ships were manned by seafaring monks, lay

218. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 99-100.

219. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 99-100; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 78.

220. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 99-100; Stringer, The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria, 25; Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 38.

221. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 99-100.

222. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 44-47, 58-59.

223. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 58-59.

208

brothers, or servants of the abbey.224 After 1247, licenses were issued by the

crown for the abbey’s servants, mariners, and ships.225 During the Bruce Wars

between 1319-1323, the trade routes declined and licenses were no longer

issued.226 Trade rights and privileges were accorded by the monasteries to other

friendly religious houses, allowing them the free right to fishing and exemption

from disembarkation taxes.227

Allocations and Tithes

As elsewhere, the tithes of the Manx people were divided in three parts.228

One part of the tithes was allocated to the maintenance of the bishopric, one to

Rushen Abbey for the education of the young and alms to the poor, and one to parochial priests for their sustenance.229 The Manx people were reported by close second-hand sources to be “very respectful to their clergy, and pay their tithes without the least grudging.”230 Clergy were compensated around £60 per annum.231

224. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 59.

225. Ibid.

226. Ibid.

227. Carville, “Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” 44, 57-58.

228. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 16; Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51; Cumming, Castle Rushen, 1857; Grose, Grose’s Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 53, as to abbey’s share; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

229. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 16; Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 51; Cumming, Castle Rushen, 1857; Grose, Grose’s Antiquities, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 162; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 53; Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man.

230. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: 209

At the time of its sixteenth-century dissolution, Rushen Abbey had on its lands five parish churches for which they had to provide curates.232 In possessing these five churches, Rushen gained income in addition to their one-third of the tithe; this may have been spent to sustain the parish.

Abbots as Barons and Judges

All baronies on the Isle of Man were held by land-holding ecclesiastics;

there were no lay baronies.233 Rushen, the Bishop of the Isles, and the prioress of

the Nunnery in Douglas were barons. The abbot of Furness held a barony near

Greeba; the abbot of Bangor and Saball in Ireland held a barony near Dalby; the

prior of Whithron held the Church of St. Trinian and a small adjoining estate;

and the prior of St. Bee’s in Cumberland held lands between Dhoon and Corna

rivers, north of Laney.234 Each baron was entitled to a position at Tynwald with

the King of the Isles during the yearly promulgation of laws.235

Manx Society, 1871), 30; Old historians, Cox’s, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 87.

231. Thomas Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et nova, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 87. Quoted from Thomas Cox’s Magna Britannis et Hibernia, antiqua et nova.

232. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 16.

233. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 45; Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 87; Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 107.

234. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90.

235. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90.

210

The abbot of Rushen held court over the monastery’s temporalities and the tenants on their lands.236 He had the right to demand custody of a prisoner from the King’s Court if the person was his own tenant and to try his case by a jury of his tenants.237 A charter of 1257 gave the bishop and other barons the right of jurisdiction over the tenants to hold a “court of life and limb.”238 The involvement of the abbot as head judge in secular cases did not conform to the

Cistercian ideal of disengagement with the secular world.

Monastic Tenants

Rushen Abbey had more tenants, in more parishes, than the bishopric of the Isles. The abbey had tenants in six parishes—Malew, Rushen, Aire, Braddan,

German, and Lonan—and among them they counted women.239 Most of what is known about tenants comes from “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in the Registry of Deeds.240 Malew, the parish in which

Rushen is located, had the largest number of Rushen tenants by far, one hundred fifty-nine; German, the seat of the bishopric, had seventy-nine.241 The other

236. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13.

237. Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 45.

238. Cumming, “Abbey of Rushen,” in The Story of Rushen Castle, 52; Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13.

239. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot (London: Oxford University Press, 1924), 87- 91.

240. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 87.

241. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of 211

parishes of Rushen Abbey had fewer holdings: Rushen had sixteen; Aire, twenty- six; Lonan, fourteen; and Braddan, sixteen.242

There were three types of land holders: “demayne tenants,” “farm land tenants,” and “cottages.”243 Only Malew had all three types of holdings, with thirty demayne holders, eighty-nine farmers, and thirty-nine cottages.244 Almost all other parishes had only farmer tenants, making them the most numerous.245

German, however, had thirty-four farmer tenants and forty-five cottages, yet no demaynes.246

Each parish contained localized family groups, some of them quite large.

In Malew, the Bell family unit show twelve holdings of the same name and the

Byrdsonn group eight holdings.247 Most other families, however large, had only six or fewer holdings.248 Sometimes women held Rushen farms, as did Margarett

Bytchell of German, who apparently rented the farm outright.249 Four cottages

The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 87, 90-91.

242. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 87-91.

243. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 87.

244. Ibid.

245. Ibid.

246. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 90-91.

247. Ibid.

248. Ibid.

249. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 90. 212

were rented by women in German.250 The bishopric, in contrast, had only thirty- six tenants in nine locales and not one of them was a woman.251

Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships

Rushen Abbey’s general interaction with the Kings of Man seems to have been cordial, perhaps because the abbey was well protected by its powerful benefactors.252 Nearly every Manx ruler successively granted the abbey lands and privileges, and throughout the Crovan dynasty confirmed its previous rights.253

Many grants in free alms were given for the salvation of the souls of the benefactor and his antecedents and descendants.254 Olaf I founded Rushen

Abbey in 1134 and granted Furness Abbey,255 and by extension Rushen Abbey,256

250. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 90-91.

251. “The tenants of the abbey lands of the monastery of Rushen,” in The Manorial Roll of The Isle of Man, Appendix F. ed. Theophilus Talbot, 87-96.

252. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen Abbey,” 164-173.

253. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,”; “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77-78; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77-78.

254. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1245,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77-78; “Charter of Harald, A.D. 1246,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 77-78.

255. “Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Letter of Olave I. To the Archbishop of York,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 4-6. See also Chronicle of Man, f. 35 v.

256. See Chapter VI, Section “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 171-173. 213

the right of episcopal election in the Isles. This was confirmed by subsequent royal and papal decrees.257 Discord between patrons and the monastic house did not occur until the thirteenth-century civil war between the two sons of Godred

II: Reginald and Olaf II.258 After the arrival of Olaf II on the political scene, disagreement between the royal house and the abbeys always concerned episcopal election rights.259 Olaf II is also conspicuously absent from the company of his fellow kings, not issuing a single charter to Furness confirming their rights, and he was not deferential to the archbishop of York when he refused to consecrate Olaf II’s candidate for bishop.260 The privilege of consecrating the Bishops of Sodor moved from one archbishop to another until after the end of the Crovan dynasty, when the election right had been assumed by the pope on the grounds of regional instability.261

The secular activities of Rushen Abbey on the Isle of Man went beyond those of the ideal Cistercian house, yet were not outside the boundary of their

257. “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey,” Ex chartulario de Furnesio; “Charter of Godred, 1154,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 50; “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey, 1186,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 15- 16; “Charter of Reginald, 1188,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30; “Charter of Nicholas, Bishop of the Isles. A.D. 1193,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 19-20; “Bull of Pope Celestine III. To Furness Abbey. A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 21-24.

258. See Chapter VI, Section “Electoral Right of Bishopric,” 187-207.

259. See Chapter VI, Section “Royal Patronage and Land Grants,” 164-171.

260. “Letter of the King of the Islands Directed to the Chapter of York Respecting his Bishop Elect,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, ed. Oliver, vol. 2, 49-51.

261. See Chapter VI, Section “York over Nidaros,” 184-187.

214

Savigniac forebears. Preaching was characteristic of their former Congregation, and so not wholly inconceivable.262 Trade was constantly dominated by the

Cistercians. The abbey was the main, if not the only, trading emporium on the island, something very common among Cistercian houses.263 Rushen collected one-third of the tithes of the Manx people and provided alms, and they held land allocations on which they also collected tithes.264 Rushen Abbey and Furness

Abbey both held powerful baronies on the Isle of Man.265 Rushen had tenants on their land and held courts over them.266 While tithes had been granted when the house was Savigniac and preaching was a staple of the Savigniac ideal, the secular status and worldly affairs of a baron conformed to neither Cistercian nor

Savigniac ideals.

262. See Chapter II; “Purported Differences,” 48-51.

263. See Chapter VI, Section “Trade,” 208-09 and “Chapter V, Section “Trade among Irish Sea Monasteries,” 157-161.

264. See Chapter VI, Section “Allocations and Tithes,” 209-210.

265. See Chapter VI, Section “Abbots as Barons and Judges,” 210-211.

266. See Chapter VI, Section “Monastic Tenants,” 211-213.

215

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

That Rushen Abbey exerted influence on ecclesiastical institutions and secular persons within the area of the Irish Sea, yet was also influenced by those same institutions and persons during the Manx Crovan dynasty, is shown by the evidence given in the preceding chapters. The importance of Rushen as a

Cistercian monastic house in the Savigniac tradition in the frontier borderland of the Irish Sea region was significant. Its close filiation with its motherhouse,

Furness in Cumbria, associations with other monasteries situated in Iona,

Whithorn, Holmcultram, St. Mary’s of Dublin, Inch, and Grey in the Irish Sea region, and close connections with their patrons placed Rushen advantageously within a greater regional system of trade networks. Rushen, assisting with

Furness’ unique electoral right over the bishopric of the Isles, exercised ecclesiastical and secular influence that most Cistercian houses did not possess.

Rushen had good relationships with its patrons, the Manx kings, which resulted in many grants and donations, although only the electoral right of Furness over the bishopric of the Isles did cause some disagreement between royal patrons and monastic houses.

Previous Knowledge of Rushen Abbey

Existing information about Rushen Abbey has been gathered primarily through archaeological evidence, charters, and The Chronicle of Man. Rushen was founded in 1134 free of perpetual alms by Olaf I, King of Man, when he gave

216

lands to monks of Furness Abbey.1 Early sources state only that Rushen was a

Cistercian house, yet, like Furness, it was originally Savigniac and became

Cistercian after 1147.2 Rushen’s motherhouse, Furness,3 founded in 1124 by

Stephen of Blois, was the premier Savigniac house in England4 and second in wealth and in power only to Fountains in Yorkshire among Cistercian houses.5 It was one of the largest landowners in Northern England and the most powerful

1. Charter of Olave,” Cartae Miscellaneae, in the office of the Duchy of Lanchashire, vol. I., fol. 30. John Robert Oliver, “Charter of Olave, King of the Islands, A.D. 1134,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, Manx Society 7 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1861), 1-3; The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, vol. 2, pt. 3. ed. John Brownbill, Chetham Society 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1919) xxx-xxxxii, 11-12, 708-9; Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness (London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844), 123.

2. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871): from which is taken Dugdales' Monasticon Angelicanum, p. 46 and Grose's Antiquities, p. 162 (These can also be found in William Dugdale, ‘Rushen Abbey’ in Monasticon Angelicanum, vol 5. ed. Caley, Ellis, and Bandinel (London: 1825), 252-256 and Francis Grose, ‘Antiquities of the Isle of Man,’ in Antiquities of England and Wales, 8 vols. (London: 1773-87), vol. 6, 197-214 and vol. 8, 161-162.) Joseph G. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), 50; Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man” in Archaeologia Cambrensis vol. XII, 3rd Series, no. XLVIII (1866): 432-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 35-7; Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880), 59; Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893), 34; William C. Cubbon: “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 510; Cubbon, “History of Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla. Isle of Man. -1134 A.D.,” in Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 4, no. 1 (1935): 98; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 3-4; Leopold Janauschek, Originum Cisterciensium, vol. 1, CCLIII (Vienna, 1877; rpt. Ridgewood, N.J.: Gregg Press, 1964), 101; Gordon Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: Manx Experience, 1988), 7.

3. Frederick M. Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” in The Victoria History of the County of Lancashire (VCH), vol. 2, ed. John Brownbill and William Farrer (Kent: Dawson, 1991): 114.

4. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 103; F. M. Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” in The Victoria History of the County of Lancashire, vol. 2, ed. M. A. Brownbill and William Farrer (Kent: Dawson, 1991), 114.

5. Bennett Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth Century (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1968), 103.

217

force in the border territory of Cumbria.6 The monks of Furness were very vocally opposed to the 1147 merger with Cîteaux.7 However, by 1148, the abbey had submitted to papal mandate and the Cistercian General Chapter.8 The

Cistercian and Savigniac Orders had been founded on similar principles: strict observance of the Rule of St. Benedict, manual labor, and simplicity of life.9 A comparison between the two Orders can be found in Chapter II under

“Cistercian and Savigniac Orders: Compared.”10

6. Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 103; Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH 114.

7. John C. Atkinson, The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, vol. 1, pt. 1 Chetham Society 9 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886), 9; Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, 5: 246; Deneen and Swietek, “The Roman Curia,” 345-349; Terrence M. Deneen and Francis R. Swietek, “Pope Lucius II and Savigny,” Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 15-17; Deneen and Swietek, “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered,”372-4; Powicke, “The Abbey of Furness,” VCH, 15; Léopold Delisle, “Documents Relative to the Abbey of Furness, Extracted from the Archives of the Abbey of Savigny,” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 6 (1851), 420-21; Guilloreau, “Le démêlé entre Serlon,” 138-39; Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 105-107. See Chapter Two, Section “Controversy over Merger, particularly with English Houses,” pages 21-25.

8. Paul Hermann Müller, ed., Päpstliche Delegationsgerichtsbarkeit in der Normandie (12. und frühes 13. Jahrhundert) Studien end Dokumente zur Gallia Pontificia, 4 (Bonn, 1997): 93, no. 6; and mentioned in the secondary sources Deneen and Swietek, “The Roman Curia,” 345-46 and Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 100-08.

9. Some scholars think that the customs of Savigny were very close to those of the Cistercians: Laveille, Histoire de Savigny, 2: 168-78, 200; Buhot, “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny:” 104-121; Knowles, The Monastic Orders in England, 202; Swietek, “The Role of Bernard:” 296-97; Deneen and Swietek, “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” 298 and the primary sources Ex Chronico Savigniacensi, in Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France XII, ed. M. Bouquet (Paris, 1840-1904): 781; Orderic Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica VIII: 27, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973), 330-3; Chronicon Savigniacense, ed. Baluze, 1: 326; and Robert of Torigny, Chronicque de Robert de Torigni, ed. Léopold Delisle, Sociéte de l’histoire de Normandie 2 vols. (Rouen, 1872-73), 2: 184: Hic beatus vir modernas institutiones in aliquibus cisterciensibus smiles monachis suis imposuit. Others assert that the Savigniacs were more like the Cluniacs than the Cistercians: Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 90-104 and Suydam, “Origins of the Savigniac Order:” 94-108.

10. See Chapter II, Section “Cistercian and Savigniac Orders: Compared,” 46-51.

218

Early sources, such as the Itinerarium of William of Worcester (c. 1415– c. 1482) and Francis Grose’s The Antiquities (1731–1791), suggest Rushen was just a satellite of Furness.11 William of Worcester stated it had only three monks though does not specify a time;12 if true, this is markedly different from regular reformed monastic custom13 and the number of Rushen witnesses on a single document, the size of the dormitory, and the abbey’s hierarchy attest.14 At the sixteenth century dissolution, there were still six monks.15 Arthur Moore, in 1893, restated Grose’s theory that Rushen was merely a cell dependent upon Furness, which had all the power and not an independent abbey.16 In the eighteenth century, however, Thomas Cox insisted that Rushen had been a prominent abbey consisting of at least an abbot and twelve monks, the minimum number specified for a new foundation in the rules of Cistercian legislation.17 In 1866, James Gell stated Rushen was an autonomous abbey that had a filial relationship with

11. William of Worcester, Itinerarium, ed. James Nasmith (Cambridge: James Nasmith, 1778), 312 and Francis Grose, “Grose's Antiquities,” in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, ed. William Harrison. Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 162.

12. William of Worchester, Itinerarium, ed. Nasmith, 312.

13. See Chapter III, section “Foundation from Furness,” 84-87, and Chapter IV, section “Abbey Industries,”120-123.

14. George Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum (Douglas: The Manx Museum and National Trust, 1979), ix.

15. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 351-2; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196.

16. Moore, Diocesan Histories, 34.

17. Thomas Cox, “Cox's Magna Britannia,” in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, ed. William Harrison. Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871), 87.

219

Furness.18 Peter Davey made a similar statement in 2015, stressing the close daughter house relationship Rushen likely had with its motherhouse.19 Rushen’s full complement of monks at its foundation is examined in detail in my Chapter

III under “Foundation from Furness.”20

There are few records by which to trace the details of Rushen Abbey after its foundation apart from a few references in the Manx Chronicle.21 In order to develop an historical background for Rushen, some older sources and a few recent guidebooks have applied generic Cistercian customs and history to

Rushen.22 They have not researched any Manx sources for this Cistercian observance but have based their claims on the Cistercian custom, according to which all houses usually followed the same horarium, had similar architecture,

18. Gell, Introduction to Parr’s Abstract, 3.

19. Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. By Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015), 366-368. See Chapter III, “Foundation from Furness,” 84-87.

20. See Chapter III, “Foundation from Furness,” 84-87.

21. The Chronicle mentions: (1134) Foundation of Rushen; (1176) Foundation of Mirescoge, late given to Rushen; (1192) monks of Rushen moved to Douglas, returned to Rushen after four years; (1228) the monks of Rushen retrieved the body of King Reginald from the battlefield and brought it to Furness Abbey; (1237) King Olaf II was buried at Rushen; (1240) Gospatrick was buried at Rushen; (1249) Reginald II was buried at Rushen; (1249) the Miracle of St. Mary related at Rushen Abbey; (1257) the church of St. Mary of Rushen was consecrated; (1265) Magnus was buried at Rushen.

22. William Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 516-18; Christian Cubbon, “A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited,” 2nd Edition. Douglas: Island Development Company Limited, (1938), 14-15; Lawrence Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey. (1938) Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Isle of Man Examiner Ltd., 1978), 16; Gordon Kniveton, Rushen Abbey: A History and Guide (Douglas: Manx Experience, 1988), esp. 16-18; Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997), 4-17.

220

and followed identical principles of simplicity, manual labor, and seclusion.

Although the Cistercians held granges supervised by lay brothers, some historians have debated whether Savigniac houses, and therefore Rushen, had had lay brothers before the merger. Having examined archaeological plans of both, I discovered both houses did in fact have laybrothers.23 Rushen Abbey was, in structure, a very small Cistercian monastery, which all usually had similar architectural plans.24 The church, cloister, dormitory, refectory, chapter house, and lay brothers’ range were all smaller than was usual.25 Most older scholars claimed the abbey was consecrated upon its completion in 1257;26 however, archaeological evidence shows that stone buildings existed at the site much earlier.27 It seems likely that the church was enlarged in 1192, then building continued or the abbey was renovated, resulting in another consecration at this

23. Savigny was a hermitage society before Abbot Geoffrey began instituting changes that paralleled Cistercian regulations, so laybrothers would not have appeared until that time. [Hill, English Cistercian Monasteries, 86-87, 103.]

24. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 510-16; Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999), 98; Davey, “Rushen Abbey,” 356.

25. Davey, “Rushen Abbey,” 358.

26. Chronicle of Man, f. 49 v.; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 53; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37. The Manx Chronicle has this as the church’s consecration date that King Magnus attended, which does not mean that another church was not consecrated and used before that; it probably was, since the abbey had existed for over 100 years, as even Cumming admits in The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 53.

27. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513-516; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

221

later date.28

In 1176, Godred II donated Mirescoge, land inland and north of Douglas, to Rievaulx.29 Mirescoge was subsequently transferred to Rushen,30 and modern research suggests it was used as a large grange of Rushen.31 All agree with the

Chronicle of Man that in 1192 the monks of Rushen moved to Douglas for four years, after which the community returned to Rushen.32 The prevalent belief, which corresponds to archaeological dating, is that the buildings of Rushen were enlarged during this time.33 These may have been the building years for the first stone buildings.34 Two sources state that the monks may have stayed during this time at the Douglas Cistercian nunnery in new buildings and surrendered their

28. Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513; Christian Cubbon, “A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited,” 9.

29. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Grose, Grose's Antiquities in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 163; Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 165-4; Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 35-6; Davey, Rushen Abbey, 351.

30. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r.; Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Davey, Rushen Abbey, 351.

31. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196; Davey, Rushen Abbey, 351.

32. Chronicle of Man, f. 40 r. See also Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,”; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,”; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 217; Davey, “Rushen Abbey,” 362.

33. William Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 46; Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man” 513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

34. Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 510-16; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report, 98.

222

Douglas habitation to the nuns upon leaving.35 Rushen made no foundations.

Janauschek incorrectly states Rushen Abbey founded the Saddell Abbey in

Scotland in 1220.36

Like Furness, Rushen Abbey was also involved in broader ecclesiastical matters, notably the election of the bishopric of the Isles, at least until 1247, when

Lawrence, Archdeacon of Man, was elected Bishop of the Isles by a monastic chapter that never consulted with the secular clergy or the Manx people, who protested in writing to King Harold, claiming that they should have the right to refuse an elected bishop.37 The king refused to allow Lawrence to be consecrated until the clergy and the people had elected him in the king’s presence.38 This never occurred, however, because the king, his retinue, and the bishop-elect drowned on the way back to the Isle of Man from Norway.39 It was widely known that the abbots of Rushen were barons of the Isle of Man40 and entitled to sit in positions at Tynwald, the body that governed the land.41 The abbots also

35. Douglas Meeting Report of the Cambrian Archaeological Association for 1864-5 (London: Cambrian Archaeological Association, 1866), 413; Davey, Rushen Abbey, 362.

36. Leopold Janauschek, Originum cisterciensium, CCLIII, 292.

37. Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v. See also Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man, 58.

38. Ibid. [Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v.]

39. Ibid. [Chronicle of Man, f. 46 v.]

40. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13; Dugdale, Monasticon Angelicanum, in ed. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 45; Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 87; Wilson, ‘The History of the Isle of Man’ in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, 107.

41. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, 90.

223

held court over temporalities and tenants on their lands.42

Rushen was the burial site of the royal family during the Crovan dynasty.43 The Chronicle of Man confirms that Reginald, bishop of Sodor and Man and the nephew of Olaf I (1225), Olaf II (1237) and his son, Reginald (1249), and the last Norse king of Man, Magnus (1265), were all buried within the abbey’s grounds.44 Because of its function as a royal mausoleum, Peter Davey recently referred to Rushen as the of the Manx Kings.45

In 1313, after the Crovan dynasty had ended, of Scotland pillaged Rushen castle and surrounding areas.46 Furness in Cumbria was also subjected to Scottish raids throughout its history, while Rushen dealt with the

Scottish only in 1313.47 On April 9, 1537, Furness was dissolved on orders of

Henry VIII;48 three years later, on June 24, 1540, Rushen became the last

Cistercian house to be dissolved in the English realm.49

42. Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man, 13.

43. Chronicle of Man; Coppack, “The Planning of Cistercian Monasteries,” 197-209; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 357. See Chapter III, Section “Rushen: Royal Mausoleum?” 90-91.

44. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r.; f. 44 v.; f. 47 r.; f. 48 v.; f. 49 v. Mentioned in Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey,” 433; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

45. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 357.

46. Chronicle of Man, f. 51 r. See also Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 190-1.

47. Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880), 49, 95-96.

48. West, The Antiquities of Furness, 163-73; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369-70.

49. Moore, A History of the Isle of Man, 351-2; A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited, 2nd Edition (Douglas: Island Development Co., 1938), 19; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of

224

Older Research and Documentation on Rushen Abbey

Primary Sources50

Most pre-modern information on Rushen Abbey comes from the British

Library manuscript Cotton MS Julius A. VII, The Manx Chronicle, or The Chronicle of Man, which was composed at Rushen in the fourteenth century.51 Chapter I of this dissertation describes the importance the chronicle as the only primary historical document for the Isle of Man during the Middle Ages. Peter Munch published a critical edition of it in 1860 and George Broderick another in 1979.52

Other primary sources include bulls, charters, and letters. While primary sources are scarce, and others not extant, some can be found in compilations such as the indices of Munch’s Manx Chronicle or Oliver’s Monumenta. In 1860, John

Oliver compiled all the primary sources relating to the Isle of Man in his three- volume Monumenta de insula manniae.53 Bulls, charters, and letters are located in

Man,” 196; Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 369-70. Except for Manx religious houses, which were all dissolved the same day in June, the last English house to be dissolved was Waltham on April 10, 1540.

50. A much expanded and detailed account of all primary sources is included in Chapter I: for Rushen primary sources see Section “Manx Sources: Primary Sources,” 4-10; for archaeology see “Archaeological Reports,” 13-14; for Furness accounts see, “Sources on Furness Abbey,” 14-21.

51. Chronicle of the Kings of Man and the Isles, BL Cotton Julius A.VII: this is the only extant copy of the Chronicle of Man.

52. Peter A. Munch, The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys: Edited from the Manuscript Codex in the British Museum, ed. Dr. Goss, Manx Society 22 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860); George Boderick, Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum (Douglas: The Manx Museum and National Trust, 1979).

53. John Robert Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, 3 vols. Manx Society 4, 7, 9 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1860-2).

225

the second volume. Archaeological discoveries by Joseph G. Cumming in the nineteenth and William C. Cubbon in the early twentieth centuries contribute to our knowledge of Rushen gained through the first excavations at the abbey, and detailing the first material culture finds in situ, before stratigraphy layers were disturbed, allowing for better dating for artifacts and buildings.54

In 1412, John Stell, a monk of Furness, recorded the charters and deeds of his abbey.55 In 1886, this Furness Coucher Book was edited by John Atkinson,56 and in 1915, John Brownbill published a second volume entitled The Coucher Book of

Furness Abbey: Volume Two, which includes charters and documents involving places at a distance from Furness, including holdings of Rushen on Mann.57

There are useful guidebooks to Furness Abbey, from Garton’s in 1943 to the current guide and history by English Heritage in 1988.58 The most modern

54. Joseph G. Cumming, “Notes on Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man” in Archaeologia Cambrensis vol. XII, 3rd Series, no. XLVIII (1866): 432-39; William C. Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” Manx Society 15 (1868), 37-55; Cubbon: “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2, no. 4 (1925), 509-517; Cubbon, “History of Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla. Isle of Man. -1134 A.D.,” in Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 4, no. 1 (1935): 98-109.

55. Walford D. Selby, ed., Lancashire and Cheshire records preserved in the Public Record Office, vol. 7 (London: Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 1882).

56. John Christopher Atkinson, ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London, Chetham Society, vol 1, pts. 9, 11, 14 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886-8).

57. John Brownbill, ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original Preserved in the Record Office, London. Chetham Society vol. 2, pts. 74, 76, 78 (Manchester: Chetham Society, 1915-9).

58. Samuel James Garton, Furness Abbey, Lancashire (London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1943); John Compton Dickinson, Furness Abbey (London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1965); Stuart Harrison, Jason Wood, and Rachel Newman, Furness Abbey (English Heritage, 1988).

226

treatment on Furness Abbey is Mary Buck’s 1996 master’s thesis, which examined the abbey in its role as a twelfth-century reformed monastic house, as a

Savigniac House, and as a frontier monastery in Cumbria.59

Secondary Sources60

In 1871, William Harrison collected seven of the best-known sources for the history of the Isle of Man in The Old Historians of the Isle of Man.61 Arthur W.

Moore wrote the first ecclesiastical history of the Isle of Man from early Celtic times to the nineteenth century in 1893.62 He used little historical evidence, however, and made a number of wrong assumptions. In 1958, William Dempsey wrote The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man, claiming the church had been most prestigious during the time of the Crovan dynasty.63 A year later,

Anne Ashley wrote The Church in the Isle of Man, detailing the transition of the

Manx Church from the Irish tradition to Roman authority during the Viking

59. Mary E. Buck, “Twelfth-century Cistercian and Savigniac foundations in England and the Isle of Man a comparative study,” (M.A. thesis, University of Guelph, 1996).

60. A much expanded and detailed account of all important secondary sources is included in Chapter I: Manx secondary sources can be found at the last paragraph of “Manx Sources: Primary Sources,” 9-10 and “Manx Sources: Secondary Sources,” 10-13; Furness secondary sources can be found in section “Sources on Furness Abbey,” 19-21.

61. William Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, Manx Society 18 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1871).

62. Arthur W. Moore, Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893).

63. William S. Dempsey, The Story of the Catholic Church in the Isle of Man (Wigan: Birchley Hall Press, 1958).

227

Age.64

Publications on Rushen’s motherhouse include Thomas West’s The

Antiquities of Furness, in 1774,65 and Joseph Richardson’s second version of this history in 1880.66 In 1884, Thomas Beck published Annales Furnesienses, an extensive history of Furness with many facts and some charters taken from the

Coucher Book.67

The State of Modern Manx Research

Recent Research68

Beginning in the 1980s, publications on reformed monastic houses in the

Irish Sea region, closer examinations of the remains Rushen and Furness, and new excavations have yielded additional information. In 1981, Geraldine Carville wrote an article concerning economic activities of Cistercian monasteries along the coast of the Irish Sea.69 In 1993, Jeffery Long examined English and Welsh primary sources, calculating the quality of materials in pre- and post-Savigniac

64. Anne Ashley, The Church in the Isle of Man (London: St. Anthony’s Press, 1958).

65. Thomas West, The Antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St. Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right Honourable Lord George Cavendish (London: T. Spilsbury, 1774).

66. Joseph Richardson, History and Antiquities of Furness (J. Richardson, 1880).

67. Thomas Alcock Beck, Annales Furnesienses: History and antiquities of the abbey of Furness. London: Payne and Foss Ulverston, S. Soulby, 1844.

68. A much expanded and detailed account of recent sources is included in Chapter I: most can be found in “Manx Sources: Secondary Sources,” 10-13; others, “Archaeological Reports,” 13-14; “Cistercian Sources,” 21-24.

69. Geraldine Carville, “The Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link,” Cîteaux 32 (1981): 37-73.

228

and Cistercian houses and concluding that the later Cistercians had not been weakened by the merger with the Savigniacs.70 He hypothesized, however, that the flourishing cash economy and the Cistercians’ rising popularity led succeeding generations of monks to become less separated from society and that the Savigniac-Cistercian had the same experience.

In 1994, Donald Watt compiled a list of bishops of the See of Sodor and

Man with brief biographies.71 In 1998, Donald Dugdale published Manx Church

Origins on the early history of Christianity on the Isle of Man from earliest times to the sixteenth century.72 This is the only recent book to cover Manx ecclesiastical history. However, Arthur Moore’s Diocesan History from 1893 included more sources and did not speculate as much without supporting primary or secondary evidence.

In 2000, Karen Billings examined Furness as a frontier monastic house, relying on The Coucher Book as her primary resource.73 She looked at the relationship between Furness and Mann in only a few pages, relying on secondary sources and making assumptions without supporting primary evidence.

70. Jeffrey Michael Long, “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176” (M.A. Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1993).

71. Donald Elmslie Robertson Watt, “Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical Lists,” The Innes Review 45 (1994): 99-119.

72. Donald S. Dugdale, Manx Church Origins (Felinfach: Llanerch Publishers, 1998).

73. Karen Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” (M.Phil. thesis, University of Cambridge, 2002).

229

Archaeological research on the monastery has progressed with recent excavations at Rushen. Every summer excavations take place and as findings are analyzed, they may shed additional light on the history of the abbey. The year following a major excavation in 1998, Peter Davey edited the premier archaeological report on Rushen: Rushen Abbey: Ballasalla, Isle of Man, Historical

Archaeology Report.74 In 2015, Davey also used much of this knowledge in a few paragraphs on Rushen in his chapter on medieval monasticism in the third volume of the New History of the Isle of Man.75

Recently Addressed Issues Concerning Older Research

Modern research has corrected the older studies concerning Rushen

Abbey in many major respects. Rushen was correctly identified as a Savigniac house at its foundation, although this was not widely known until Glen Taylor’s

“The Monastic Orders of Rushen Abbey (Savignian and Cistercian),” in 1927.76

Saddell, earlier thought to be Rushen’s daughter house, had by then already been assigned to its correct motherhouse, Mellifont in Ireland.77

74. Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999).

75. Peter Davey, “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. by Sean Duffy (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015).

76. A. Glen Taylor, “The Monastic Orders of Rushen Abbey (Savignian and Cistercian),” in Proceedings of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society vol. 3 (Douglas: 1927), 250- 57.

77. Easson, Medieval Religious Houses Scotland, 196. See also McDonald, “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders,” 221; Abbe L. Brown, “Cistercian Abbey of Saddell,” Innes Review, vol. 20. 2 (1969), 130-1.

230

There has been debate over the years as to whether Rushen was simply a cell of Furness or an autonomous house.78 Thomas Cox was the first to regard

Rushen as a full-fledged autonomous Cistercian monastery in its own right.79

James Gell and recently Peter Davey consider Rushen an autonomous monastery, claiming that it had only the normal filial connections any daughter house had to its motherhouse.80

Archaeology has provided evidence that lay brothers were a part of the

Rushen community.81 Although older scholars thought that the stone monastery was not completed until the 1257 consecration, this has had to be revised in light of archeological discoveries.82 It now seems that a wooden church and monastic buildings had already existed, replaced with stone buildings in 1192, and what was completed in 1257 was probably an expansion.83 The lay brothers had, as

78. See Chapter III, “Foundation from Furness,” 84-87.

79. Harrison, The Old Historians of the Isle of Man, “Cox's Magna Britannia,” 87 (from Thomas Cox, Magna Britannia et Hibernia, antiqua et Nova, 6 vols. (London, 1720-31).

80. James Gell, Introduction to Parr’s Abstract, Manx Society 12 (Douglas: Manx Society, 1866), 3 and Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 349-50.

81. “Plan of Furness Abbey,” by William Henry St. Hope and Peter Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999).

82. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Guide to Rushen Abbey,” 9; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man” 513-16; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4.

83. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50-3; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Guide to Rushen Abbey,” 9; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man” 513-16; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4. See above note 33.

231

previously stated,84 enlarged their first wooden settlement at Rushen in 1192, a date which corresponds to the construction of most of the stone buildings.85

Issues Addressed by This Dissertation

Through new historical and archeological research, many of the older assumptions in the historiography of Rushen have proven to be mistaken and have been corrected. While research on Savigniac houses in general is still meager, modern research has focused on the differences between the Savigniac and Cistercian Orders, whereas most accounts before the twentieth century examined Rushen only as a Cistercian house. This dissertation is the first to analyze Rushen within both the Savigniac and Cistercian traditions.86 While the influence of Furness, this abbey’s powerful motherhouse, had been noted by previous historians, the role of Rushen in Savigniac history has not previously been analyzed.87 Rushen has been examined here both before and after the

84. Cumming, The Story of Rushen Castle and Rushen Abbey, 50; Cumming, “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man,” 37; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man,” 513; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Easson, “Religious Houses in the Isle of Man,” 196; McDonald, The Kingdom of the Isles, 217. See Chapter IV, Section “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-130.

85. Cubbon, “Guide to Rushen Abbey,” 9; Cubbon, “Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man” 513-16; Cubbon, Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A short sketch, 9-10; Butler, A Guide to Rushen Abbey, 4; Davey, ed., Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological Report (Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999), 98.

86. See Chapter II, “Cistercian and Savigniac Orders: Compared,” 46-51.

87. See Chapter VI, “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

232

merger, to discover its level of conformity to the Cistercian Order, and to ascertain any lingering Savigniac practices.88

While archaeological reports provide the most abundant resource material for modern researchers on Rushen, this dissertation is the first study on Rushen to take advantage of archaeological discoveries and cross-reference them with all the available primary sources. For example, the architecture of the church has now, after excavations, been dated so that the 1257 consecration is shown to be indeed that of an expansion.89 In addition, by cross-referencing the Manx

Chronicle and the burials uncovered during excavations in the north transept, more members of the royal family than had previously been realized are known to have been buried at Rushen.90

Previous scholars overlooked Rushen’s connections to other monasteries in the Irish Sea region, other than its obvious filial relationship with its motherhouse, Furness, although even this has barely been touched upon by

Mary Buck in 1996, Karen Billings in 2002, and Peter Davey in 2015.91 This dissertation expands upon their research significantly, examining not only

88. See Chapter IV, “Conclusion: Adaptations and Effects of the Savigniac-Cistercian Affiliation on Mann,” 130-131 and Chapter VI, “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

89. See Chapter IV, “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-130.

90. See Chapter III,” Rushen: Royal Mausoleum?” 90-91.

91. Buck, “Twelfth-century Cistercian and Savigniac foundations in England and the Isle of Man a comparative study”; Billings, “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny”; Davey, “Rushen Abbey,” 2015.

233

Rushen’s relationship with Furness92 but also the connections that existed between Rushen, other Cistercian monasteries in the Savigniac tradition, nearby

Cistercians houses, and other religious houses on the Isle of Man and around the

Irish Sea.93 Prior research has addressed particular abbeys,94 but it has not examined the network of relationships among them; Buck and Billings, in particular, have failed to back up their claims with substantial up-to-date primary source material.95

This dissertation further examines the intricacies of diplomatic relationships Rushen had within the secular sphere: its relationship with the

King of the Isles and the influence of the king’s authority on it.96 Drawing from primary sources, this dissertation examines the circumstances surrounding the foundation of Rushen and the extraordinary royal gift to Furness of electoral rights over the bishopric of Sodor.97 It has uncovered the motives of the early

92. See Chapter IV, “Relationship between Rushen and Furness,” 113-115.

93. See Chapter V.

94. Samuel James Garton, Furness Abbey, Lancashire (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1943); John Compton Dickinson, Furness Abbey (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1965); Maureen Donnelly, Inch Abbey and Parish (Downpatrick, n.p.: 1979); Ann Elizabeth Hamlin, Grey Abbey, County Down (Belfast: Historic Monuments and Buildings Branch, Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland, 1979); Rushen Abbey (Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997); Stuart Harrison, Jason Wood, and Rachel Newman, Furness Abbey (English Heritage, 1988).

95. See Chapter V, Section “The Relationship amongst Reformed Monasteries in the Irish Sea Region,” 155-157.

96. See Chapter VI: “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215 will highlight the aspects of the chapter dealing with the subject.

97. See Chapter VI, Section “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 171-173.

234

Manx kings in making Rushen’s foundation and discovered that the relationship between the kings of Man and the abbey was good, except during the civil war over the right of election between the cathedral chapter and the two abbeys;

Furness and Rushen never surrendered that right.98

Building on previous scholarship, this dissertation shows that Rushen was not only an independent monastic house,99 but also a powerful religious institution on the Isle of Man.100 It details the influence Rushen exercised on monastic and secular society in the Irish Sea region, not least through its ties to the magnates of neighboring Ireland, Scotland, and England.101 The Isle of Man may have been overlooked by most modern scholars, but this dissertation has shown that Rushen’s trade, religious and secular connections, and overall success and survival of this small abbey on a remote frontier made it the dominant religious and arguably, at times, secular power on the Isle of Man during the Crovan Dynasty.102

98. See Chapter IV, Section “Church Reforms on the Isle of Man,” 109-111.

99. See Chapter III, Section “Foundation from Furness,” 84-87.

100. See Chapter V, Section “Political Patronage,” 155-157.

101. See Chapter IV, “Conclusion: Adaptations and Effects of the Savigniac-Cistercian Affiliation on Mann,” 130-131 and Chapter VI, “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

102. See Chapter VI,, Section “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 171-173.

235

How This Dissertation Increases Knowledge about Rushen Abbey

This dissertation shows that King Olaf, having heard of the great piety of the Roman Church and the reformed monastic Orders, founded Rushen Abbey and the bishopric of the Isles as a means of uniting religion in the Kingdom of the

Isles and Man under the aegis of the Roman Church.103 The reason Olaf turned to

Furness Abbey, Rushen’s motherhouse, is now known to be the renown of the reformed Orders, its close geographical proximity, and its reputation as a civilizing force in the Irish Sea region.104 This dissertation examines Rushen’s relationship with Furness, the limits and extent of Rushen’s dependence on

Furness105 and analyzes the diplomatic and secular roles Rushen played in Manx ecclesiastical affairs.106 Rushen and Furness had a close connection by virtue of the visitation rights spelled out in the Carta caritatis and subsequent Cistercian legislation, and General Chapter records show that Rushen was never cited for failure to obey these.107 As further evidence, I have cited documents in which witnesses declared that the two abbeys worked with each other closely.108 I have

103. See Chapter IV, Section “Church Reforms on the Isle of Man,” 109-111.

104. See Chapter IV, Section “Church Reforms on the Isle of Man,” 109-111.

105. See Chapter IV, Section “Relationship between Rushen and Furness,” 113-115.

106. See Chapter IV, Section “Relationship between Rushen and Furness,” 113-115; See Chapter VI, Section “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 171-173.

107. See Chapter IV, Section “Relationship between Rushen and Furness,” 113-115.

108. See Chapter IV, Section “Relationship between Rushen and Furness,” 113-115.

236

examined the network of monastic relationships,109 which included other religious houses on the Isle of Man110 and in the Irish Sea region.111

I examined Rushen’s connection with the two other Cistercian institutions on the Isle of Man: the nunnery at Douglas and property at Mirescoge.112 The nunnery was connected with Rushen not only in following Cistercian observances, but it probably relied on the abbot of Rushen to appoint its visitor and whose prioress signed official documents on occasion in Rushen.113 In examining new evidence of Mirescoge’s location and size, as well as Cistercian regulations, I conclude that it was more likely a satellite of Rushen than a “large grange.”114

Extracting information from archaeological records, I examined Rushen’s architecture in the light of Meredith Lillich’s guidelines for what is distinctive to a Cistercian monastery; to these Rushen adhered, albeit on a smaller than average size.115 After studying the buildings of Furness Abbey and comparing them to Rushen, I conclude that Rushen Abbey did not need to take special steps

109. See Chapter V, Section “The Relationship amongst Reformed Monasteries in the Irish Sea Region,” 155-161.

110. See Chapter V, Section “Other Monasteries on the Isle of Man,” 132-147.

111. See Chapter V, Section “Monastic Houses outside the Isle of Man,” 147-155.

112. See Chapter V, Section “Cistercian Houses during the Manx “Second Viking Age,”” 138-142.

113. See Chapter V, Section “Cistercian Nunnery at Douglas (Douglas Priory),” 140-142.

114. See Chapter V, Section “Mirescoge,” 138-140. Davey, “Medieval Monasticism,” 251.

115. See Chapter IV, Section “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-130.

237

to conform, like Furness, because its first stone buildings were constructed only after the merger and followed Cistercian guidelines.116 The archaeological reports, along with historical documents, support my claim that Rushen and

Furness adapted to Cistercian customs, and rather quickly, but only after

Furness’ initial heated protests against the merger of the two Orders.117

The earlier Celtic St. Maughold’s monastery survived into the twelfth century only because the monks of Rushen viewed it as a holy place, probably because of past and present miracles associated with the grounds and mentioned in the Chronicle of Man.118 If St. Patrick’s Isle had still existed when Rushen was established, it would have encroached upon the bishops’ and abbeys’ lands by placing keeills all over Mann.119 This might have been undesirable in the changeover from Celtic to Roman Christianity, and so Maughold may have been disbanded by the early Crovan kings in their support of Roman authority.120 By the fourteenth century, the Furness Coucher Book reports St. Maughold’s had been

116. See Chapter IV, Section “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-130.

117. See Chapter IV, Section “Architecture and Layout of Rushen’s Precinct,” 123-130; See also Chapter II, Section “The Merger of the Congregation of Savigny with the Cistercian Order,” 51-65.

118. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the late Eleventh Century,” 143-47. Chronicle of Man, f. 47 v. - f. 48 r.

119. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the late Eleventh Century,” 143-147.

120. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the late Eleventh Century,” 143-147.

238

turned into a parish church.121 I propose that Rushen profited from Maughold’s connection with miracles, and once Rushen had a miracle of its own, as recorded in the Manx Chronicle, St. Maughold’s monastery could be converted into a large parish church, leaving Rushen as the only abbey of men in Mann.122

In analyzing Rushen’s and Furness’ secular affairs, I show that Rushen was also consulted as part of Furness’ right to elect the bishops of the Isles.123

Furness sought confirmation of electoral rights and privileges during times of unrest and after the death of a bishop or king,124 because the monks wanted to secure their rights in times of challenge and kept these approvals securely noted in their coucher.125 I discovered that successive popes confirmed the immense privileges and lands to Furness: Eugenius III in 1153,126 Urban III in 1186,127 and

Celestine III in 1194.128 This dissertation reveals that the monks were on good terms with almost all of the kings of the Crovan dynasty and that the abbey was

121. The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey, ed. Brownbill, 2:3, 694, 713.

122. See Chapter V, Section “Survival of Celtic Monastic Traditions past the late Eleventh Century,” 143-147.

123. See Chapter VI, Section “The Bishopric and its Connection with Rushen,” 171-173.

124. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen,” 164-173.

125. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen,” 164-173.

126. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Eugenius III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1153,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 8-12.

127. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Urban III to Furness Abbey. A.D. 1186,”in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 15-6.

128. Oliver, “Bull of Pope Celestine III to Furness Abbey, A.D. 1194,” in Monumenta de Insula Manniae, vol. 2, 21-5.

239

well protected by its powerful benefactors.129 Every successive ruler granted

Rushen and Furness lands and privileges and confirmed previous rights, except

Olaf II during the time of the civil war between himself and his older brother,

Reginald.130

In Chapter VI, I attempted to pinpoint the exact date Furness lost control of the episcopal election.131 Extant information indicates that Rushen and Furness both had a hand in the election of archdeacon Laurence to the episcopate in 1147, as described in Chapter V.132 After bishop-elect Laurence drowned, Furness lost the right of election and Iona was given oversight of the Sodor See, until the pope assumed the right to appoint the next bishop six years later.133 On the basis of existing records, I contend that no cathedral chapter elected a bishop of the Isles during the Crovan dynasty.134 Further research, if enough primary materials for conclusive study were to become available, is needed to explore the circumstances surrounding the transfer of the right to elect the Bishop of Man and the Isles from

Furness and Rushen to the pope, from whom it was never regained by the monks.

What brought about that transition and what was the function of Bishop Simon’s

129. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen,” 164-173.

130. See Chapter VI, Section “Patrons of Rushen,” 164-173; See Chapter VI, Section “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

131. See Chapter VI, Sections “Cathedral Chapter ,” 204-207.

132. See Chapter VI, Section “Cathedral Chapter,” 204-207.

133. See Chapter VI, Section “Cathedral Chapter,” 204-207.

134. See Chapter VI, Section “Cathedral Chapter,” 204-207.

240

cathedral chapter if not to elect bishops would be interesting future subjects to explore,135 as would the feud between each of the two bishops (Michael vs.

Nicholas of Argyll as well as Nicholas of Meaux vs. Reginald).136 For now, anything said on that subject would be an educated guess without satisfactory evidence.

This dissertation examines Rushen’s social, religious, economic, and political relations with other monastic houses and the influence Rushen and its patrons had in the Irish Sea region.137 Along with close filial ties between monastic houses separated by the sea, I specify relationships in trade, politics, and patrons between other religious houses.138 Political and marital connections as well as friendships among nobility, maybe influenced by Ælred of Rievaulx, were factors behind the decisions to invite and patronize new monastic houses to the Irish Sea region.139

Like Furness, its motherhouse, Rushen drew wealth from Cistercian and

Savigniac enterprises.140 In typical White Monk style, Rushen was the largest

135. See Chapter VI, Section “Cathedral Chapter,” 204-207, which are the findings I have concluded from extant resources.

136. See Chapter VI, Section “A Tale of Two Bishops,” 189-193 and “Civil War,” 193-199, which are the findings I have concluded from extant resources.

137. See Chapter V, Section “Monastic Houses outside the Isle of Man,” 147-155.

138. See Chapter V, Section “The Relationship amongst Reformed Monasteries in the Irish Sea Region,” 155-161.

139. See Chapter V, Section “Political Patronage,” 155-157.

140. See Chapter VI, Section “Trade,” 208-209.

241

trade organization on the Isle of Man.141 This dissertation demonstrates how

Rushen was at the center of a trade system among reformed religious houses in the Irish Sea region.142

Applying the frontier paradigm to Rushen Abbey, I show that Rushen and

Furness had to adapt to survive in a hostile physical environment, even if that brought them into greater contact with the outside world than early Cistercian legislation had approved.143 Secular transactions of Rushen Abbey went beyond those of a normal Cistercian house, yet not all that far outside the boundaries of their Savigniac forebears:144 Rushen held parishes and appointed vicars or provided monk-priests for them, as preaching did not break Savigniac practices.145 While previous historians have revealed that all abbots, as major landowners, were barons in Mann, and only abbots and were granted baronies in Mann, I explain that this is an abnormal position for a Cistercian abbot or abbess.146 I expound how unusual this secular circumstance is to

Cistercians, yet Furness, Rushen, and Holm Cultram all possessed landed

141. See Chapter VI, Section “Trade,” 208-209.

142. See Chapter VI, Section “Trade,” 208-209.

143. See Chapter VI, Section “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

144. See Chapter VI, Section “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

145. See Chapter VI, Section “Allocations and Tithes,” 209-210.

146. See Chapter VI, Section “Abbots as Barons and Judges,” 210-211.

242

baronies in Mann and were also judges over tenants on their lands.147 Rushen not only had tenants, but they sheltered more tenants overall than the bishop and included female tenants.148 This secular power secured Rushen’s position in the frontier region, as they were regarded as a powerful institution by the Manx and their regional connections.149

Located in the center of the Kingdom of the Isles, the predominant place of authority during the Middle Ages, Rushen Abbey and its motherhouse

Furness profoundly influenced the medieval culture of the island and were a leading force in Christianizing on the Isle of Man, because of their connections throughout the Isles. Rushen was built as a civilizing force in a frontier region. It brought Roman Christianity to the island, created a massive trade network and, as barons, exercised leadership. Rushen should be considered Cistercian, as many other Cistercian monasteries had tenants, tithes, and parishes. The abbots’ involvement as judges and barons and the ecclesiastical affairs of the Sodor diocese are removed from the Cistercian ideal, but they may have been necessary if a Cistercian house in this extreme frontier region were to survive in a highly political world.150

147. See Chapter VI, Section “Abbots as Barons and Judges,” 210-211; “Monastic Tenants” 211-213.

148. See Chapter VI, Section “Monastic Tenants,” 211-213.

149. See Chapter VI, Section “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

150. See Chapter VI, Section “Conclusion: Overview of Rushen’s Secular Relationships,” 213-215.

243

APPENDIX

Tables and Figures

244

Table 1. Kings of Man and the Isles during the Crovan Dynasty

245

Table 2. Bishops of the Isles during The Crovan Dynasty

246

Table 3. Abbots of Furness Abbey

247

Figure 1. Map of the Isle of Man

*Sémhur, Free Art License, Isle of Man Sheadings and Parishes-en.svg, 2007.

248

Figure 2. Kings of Man of the Crovan Dynasty

249

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Apostolicae sedis in Bullarum diplomatum et privilegiorum sanctorum Romanorum

pontificum Taurinensis edition, 27 Vols. Turin-Naples: 1857-85.

Atkinson, J.C., ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original

Preserved in the Record Office, London. Vol. 1, parts 1-3. Chetham Society 9,

11, 14. Manchester: Chetham Society, 1886-8.

Baluze, Stephan, ed., Chronicon Savigniacense, in Miscellanea novo ordine digesta,

Lucca: 1761.

Bouquet, M., ed., Ex Chronico Savigniacensi, in Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de

la France XII, Paris: 1840-1904.

Brownbill, John, ed., The Coucher Book of Furness Abbey: Printed from the Original

Preserved in the Record Office, London. Vol. 2, parts 1-3. Chetham Society 74,

76, 78. Manchester: Chetham Society, 1915-1919.

Canivez, Joseph-Marie, ed., Statuta capitulorum generalium ordinis cisterciensis ab

anno 1116 ad annum 1786. 8 Vols. Bibliothèque de la Revue d’histoire

ecclésiastique 9-14, 14A, 14B. Louvain: 1933-1941.

Chibnall, Marjorie, ed., Orderic Vitalis, The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis.

Vol. 7 (Oxford: Oxford Medieval Texts, 1973).

Cronica Regum Mannie et Insularum. British Library. Cotton Julius A.VII.

———. Broderick, George, ed., Chronica Regum Mannie et Insularum. Douglas: The

Manx Museum and National Trust, 1979.

250

———. Munch, Peter A. The Chronicle of Man and The Sudreys: Edited from the

Manuscript Codex in the British Museum. Edited and revised by Dr. Goss.

Manx Society 22. Douglas: Manx Society, 1860.

Daniel, Walter. The Life of Ælred of Rievaulx, ed. F. M. Powicke. 1950. Reprint,

Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1994.

Flower, Cyril T. The Cowcher Book of Furness Abbey: Transcript of the Lost Folio 70.

Manchester: Chetham Society, 1935.

Harrison, William. The Old Historians of the Isle of Man. The Manx Society XVIII.

Douglas: The Manx Society, 1871.

Holtzmann, Walter, ed. Papsturkunden in England. Abhandlungen der Akademie der

Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse, II. 1935.

Jaffé, Phillip, ed., Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post

Christum natum MCXCVIII. 2 Vols. Graz: Akademische Druck – U.

Verlagsanstalt, 1956.

Müller, H., ed., Päpstliche Delegationsgerichtsbarkeit in der Normandie. 12. und frühes

13. Jahrhundert. Studien end Dokumente zur Gallia Pontificia, 4. Bonn:

1997.

Oliver, J. R. Monumenta de Insula Manniae. 3 vols. Douglas: The Manx Society, 1860.

Patrologia cursus completus, ed. J.P. Migne, series Latina, 221 Vols. Paris: 1844-55.

Potthast, August. Regesta pontificum romanorum inde ab a. post Christum natum

MCXCVIII ad a. MCCCIV. 2 Vols. Berlin, 1874-75; rp. Graz, 1957.

251

Ramackers, Johannes. Papsturkunden in Frankreich. Neue Folge 2. Band: Normandie.

no. 21 Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1937.

Raine, James, ed. The Historians of the Church of York and its Archbishops. 3 Vols.

Rolls Series 71. London: Longman & Company, 1879-94.

Robert of Torigny, Tractatus de immutatione ordinis monachorum, ed. L. DeLisle,

Chronicque de Robert de Torigni, 2 Vols. Sociéte de l’histoire de Normandie.

Rouen: 1872-73, 2:184.

Round, J. H. Calendar of Documents Preserved in France 918-1206, Vol. 1. London:

H. M. S. O., 1899.

Rouse, R.H. and M.A. The Registrum Anglie. London: The British Library, 1991.

Sammarthani. Gallia Christiana, XI. Abrincensis.

Sauvage, E. P. “Vita B. Vitalis et Gaufrid primi et secundi abbatum

Saviniacensium.” Analecta Bollandiana, (1882).

Tanner, Thomas. Notitia monastica. ed. James Nasmith. 1695. Reprint, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1787.

Waddell, Chrysogonus, ed. Narrative and Legislative Texts from Early Citeaux.

Studia et Documenta 9. Cîteaux: Commentarii Cistercienses, 1999.

———.Twelfth-century Statutes from the Cistercian General Chapter. Kalamazoo:

Cistercian Publications, 2003.

252

West, Thomas. The antiquities of Furness; or, An account of the Royal Abbey of St.

Mary, in the vale of Nightshade, near Dalton in Furness, belonging to the Right

Honourable Lord George Cavendish. London: T. Spilsbury, 1774.

William of Malmesbury, The Chronicle of the Kings of England, trans. J. A. Giles.

New York: AMS, 1968.

William of Newburgh, Historia Rerum Anglicarum, ed. and trans. P. G. Walsh and

M. J. Kennedy, Book 1, Ch. 15. London: Aris and Phillips: 1988.

Secondary Sources

Anderson, Alan O. “Wimund, Bishop and Pretender.” Scottish Historical Review 7,

no. 25. (1909): 29-36.

Auvry, Claude. Histoire de la congrégation de Savigny. ed. by Auguste Laveille. 3

Vols. Société de l’histoire de Normandie 30. Rouen-Paris: Société de

l’histoire de Normandie. 1896-1898.

Beaulah, G. K. “Thirteenth century Square-tile Mosaic Pavements at Cistercian

Houses in Britain,” in Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, Vol 4.

Cistercian Studies 134, 1-14. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1993.

Beckett, Lucy. Rievaulx, Fountains, Byland, and Jervaulx. Norwich: Canterbury Press,

1998.

Berman, Constance H. The Cistercian Evolution: The Invention of a Religious Order in

Twelfth-century Europe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

2000.

253

Billings, Karen. “Furness Abbey: Wayward Daughter of Savigny,” M.Phil. Thesis,

University of Cambridge, 2002.

Bouchard, Constance. “Cistercian Ideals versus Reality: 1134 Reconsidered.”

Citeaux 39 (1988): 217-230.

Braun, Hugh. English Abbeys. London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1971.

Buck, Mary E. “Twelfth-century Cistercian and Savigniac Foundations in

England and the Isle of Man a Comparative Study.” M.A. thesis,

University of Guelph, 1996.

Buhot, Jacqueline. “L’Abbaye normande de Savigny, chef d’Ordre et fille de

Citeaux.” Le Moyen Age XLV-XLVI (1936): 1-19, 104-114, 178-190, 249-272.

Burton, Janet. “The Abbeys of Byland and Jervaulx.” In Monastic Studies II, edited

by Judith Loades, 119-131. Bangor: Headstart History Publishing, 1991.

———. Monastic and Religious Orders in Britain, 1000-1300. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1994.

———. The Monastic Order in Yorkshire, 1069-1215. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1999.

Butler, Lawrence. “The Cistercians in England and Wales: A Survey of Recent

Archaeological Work 1960-1980,” in Studies in Cistercian Art and

Architecture, ed. by Meredith P. Lillich, Cistercian Studies 66, 88-101.

Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1982.

———. “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen: Excavations 1978-79.” Journal

of British Archaeologists Association 141 (1988): 60-104.

254

———. “Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: Interim Report on Excavations,

March 26th-April 14th 1989,” Cîteaux 39 (1988): 350-51.

———. “The early church on the Isle of Man c 500-1200,” in Church Archaeology:

research directions for the future, ed. John Blair and Carol Pyrah, CBA

Research Report 104. York: Council for British Archaeology, 1996: 46-47.

———. “The Cistercian Abbey of St Mary of Rushen, Isle of Man: Excavations on

the East Range 1988-89.” Journal of the British Archaeological Association 155.

(2002): 168-194.

Butler, Lionel and Chris Given-Wilson. Medieval Monasteries of Great Britain.

London: Michael Joseph Limited, 1979.

Carville, Geraldine. “The Cistercians and the Irish Sea Link.” Citeaux 32 (1981):

37-73.

Casey, Michael. “Bernard and the Crisis at Morimond: Did the Order Exist in

1124?” Cistercian Studies Quarterly 38, no. 2 (2003) 119-75.

Chauvin, Benoit, ed. Mélanges à la Mémoire du père Anselme Dimier. 6 vols. 1982 ff.

Clark, James G. The Religious Orders in Pre-Reformation England. Woodbridge:

Boydell & Brewer, 2002.

Constable, G. The Reformation of the Twelfth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1996.

Cook, G. H. English Monasteries in the Middle Ages. London, Phoenix House, 1961.

Cooke, A. M. “The Settlement of the Cistercians in England.” English Historical

Review 7 (1893): 625-676.

255

Coppack, Glyn. White Monks: The Cistercians in Britain, 1128-1540. Stroud:

Tempus Publishing Limited, 1998.

———. Fountains Abbey, The Cistercians in Northern Ireland. Stroud: Tempus

Publishing Limited, 2004.

Coppack, Glyn, Peter Fergusson, and Stuart Harrison. Rievaulx Abbey. London:

English Heritage, 2006.

Cownie, Emma. Religious Patronage in Anglo-Norman England, 1066-1135. London:

Royal Historical Society, 1998.

Cubbon, A. M. The Ancient and Historic Monuments of the Isle of Man. Douglas:

Manx National Trust, 1973.

Cubbon, W. C. “The Cistercian Order and its influence in the Isle of Man.”

Proclamations of the Isle of Man National Historical & Antiquarian Society 2,

no. 4 (1925): 509-518.

———. Rushen Abbey, Isle of Man: A Short Sketch. Douglas: Island Development Co

Ltd., 1927.

———. “History of Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man - 1134 AD,” Proceedings

of the Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, New Series Vol. 4

(1935): 98-115

———. A Guide to Rushen Abbey. Revisited. 2nd Edition. Douglas: Island

Development Company Limited, 1938.

Cumming, J. G. “Rushen Abbey in the Isle of Man.” Manx Society 15 (1868): 36-55.

256

Davey, Peter J. Rushen Abbey, Ballasalla, Isle of Man: First Archaeological

Report. Douglas: Centre for Manx Studies, 1999.

———. “Medieval Monasticism and the Isle of Man c. 1130-1500,” in New History

of the Isle of Man: Volume 3: The Medieval Period, 1000-1406, ed. Sean Duffy

(Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2015.

Davies, Stephen. Jervaulx Abbey. London: Expression Printers, n.d.

Deneen, Terrence M. and Francis R. Swietek. “Pope Lucius II and Savigny.”

Analecta Cisterciensia 39 (1983), 3-25.

———. “The Episcopal Exemption of Savigny, 1112-1184,” Church History 52

(1983): 285-298.

———. “A Savigniac Forgery Recovered: Lucius II’s Bull Habitantes in domo of

December 5, 1144.” In Studiosorum speculum: Studies in Honor of Louis J.

Lekai, edited by Francis R. Swietek and John R. Sommerfeldt, Cistercian

Studies Series 121, 363-387. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1993.

———. “‘Ab antiquo alterius ordinis fuerit’: Alexander III on the Reception of

Savigny into the Cistercian Order.” Revue d’histoire ecclesiastique 89 (1994):

5-28.

———. “The Roman Curia and The Merger of Savigny with Citeaux: The Import

of the Papal Documents.” Revue Benedictine 112 (2002): 323-355.

Desmond, Lawrence A. “The Appropriation of Churches by the Cistercians in

England to 1400.” Analecta Sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 31 (1975): 246-60.

257

Dickinson, John Compton. Furness Abbey. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary

Office, 1965.

Diemer, Paul. “The Witness of the Early English Cistercians to the Spirit and

Aims of the Founders of the Order of Cîteaux.” In The Cistercian Spirit: A

Symposium: In Memory of Thomas Merton, edited by M Basil Pennington.

Cistercian Studies 3, 144-165. Spencer: Cistercian Publications, 1970.

Dimier, Marie-Anselme. “Savigny et son affiliation á l’ordre de Citeaux.”

Collectanea ordinis Cisterciensium reformatorum 9 (1947): 351-358.

Donkin, R. “The Cistercian Order and the Settlement of Northern England.” The

Geographical Review 59 (1969): 403-16.

Donnelly, Maureen. Inch Abbey and Parish. Downpatrick, n.p.: 1979.

Dugdale, D. S. Manx Church Origins. Felinfach: Llanerch Publishers, 1998.

Elder, E. Rozanne, ed., Cistercians in the . Kalamazoo: Cistercian

Publications, 1981.

Elm, Kaspar, Peter Joerissen, and Hermann Josef Roth. Die Zisterzienser. Cologne:

Rheinland-Verlag, 1980.

Fletcher, Joseph S. The Cistercians in Yorkshire. London: Society for Promoting

Christian Knowledge, 1919.

France, James. Cistercians in Scandinavia. Cistercian Studies 131. Kalamazoo:

Cistercian Publications, 1992.

Freeman, Elizabeth. Narratives of a New Order: Cistercian Historical Writing in

England, 1150-1220. Turnhout: Brepols, 2002.

258

Garton, Samuel James. Furness Abbey, Lancashire. London: Her Majesty’s

Stationary Office, 1943.

Graves, Coburn V. “English Cistercian Nuns in Lincolnshire.” Speculum 54

(1979): 492-499.

Gasquet, Francis Aidan. The Greater Abbeys of England. New York: Dodd, Mead

and Company, 1908.

Gilchrist, Roberta and Harold Mytum, eds. The Archaeology of Rural Monasteries.

British Archaeological Reports 203. Oxford: Archaeopress, 1989.

Greeves, Lydia and Mary Mauchline. Fountains Abbey and Studley Royal. Stroud:

Tempus, 2006.

Guilloreau, Léon. “Les Foundations anglaises de l’abbaye de Savigny.” Revue

Mabillon 5 (1909): 290-335.

———. “Le démêlé entre Serlon, abbé de Savigny, et Pierre d’York, abbé de

Furness, 1147-1150.”Revue catholique d’histoire, d’archéologie et de litterature

de Normandie 25 (1916): 127-141.

Hamlin, Ann Elizabeth. Grey Abbey, County Down. Belfast: Historic Monuments

and Buildings Branch, Department of the Environment for Northern

Ireland, 1979.

Harrison, Stuart. Byland Abbey. London: English Heritage, 1999.

Harrison, Stuart, Jason Wood, and Rachel Newman. Furness Abbey. English

Heritage, 1998.

259

Hill, Bennett D. English Cistercian Monasteries and their Patrons in the Twelfth

Century. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1968.

———. “The Beginnings of the First French Foundations of the Norman Abbey

of Savigny.” American Benedictine Review 31 (1980): 130-152.

Hudson, Benjamin. Viking Pirates and Christian Princes. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2005.

Janauschek, Leopold. Originum cisterciensium Liber Primus. Vienna: 1877. Reprint,

Ridgewood: Gregg Press, 1964.

Knowles, David. The Religious Orders in England. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1959.

———. The Monastic Order in England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1963.

———. “The Primitive Cistercian Documents,” in Great Historical Enterprises, 199-

222. London: Nelson, 1963.

Lambert, M. “La date de l’affiliation de Savigny et de la Trappe à l’Ordre de

Cîteaux,” Collectanea OCR (1936).

Lawrence, C. H. Medieval Monasticism. 4th ed. New York: Longman, 2015.

Leclerq, Jean-Claude. “Passage supprimé par une êpître d’Alexandre III” Revue

Bénédictine 62 (1952): 149-51.

Lekai, Louis J. The Cistercians: Ideals and Realities. Kent: Kent State University

Press, 1977.

260

———. White Monks. Okauchee: Cistercian Fathers, Our Lady of Spring Bank,

1953.

Leyser, Henrietta. Hermits and the New Monasticism. New York: St. Martin’s Press,

1984.

Lillich, Meredith Parsons, ed. Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture, Vol 1.

Cistercian Studies Series 66. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publishing, 1982.

———, ed., Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture. Vol 4. Cistercian Studies Series

134. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publishing, 1993.

Little, Brian. Abbey and Priories in England and Wales. New York: Holmes and

Meier, 1979.

Long, Jeffrey Michael. “1147 Rejected. A Study of Cistercian and Savigniac

Possessions in England and Wales, 1127-1176.” M.A. Thesis, University of

Manitoba, 1993.

McDonald, R. Andrew. “Scoto-Norse Kings and the Reformed Religious Orders:

Patterns of Monastic Patronage in Twelfth-Century Galloway and Argyll.”

Albion 27, no. 2, ed. Michael Moore (1995): 187-220.

———. “The Western Seaboard meets Western Christendom: The Church and

Monasticism, c. 1100-1300,” in The Kingdom of the Isles. Scottish Historical

Review Monograph Series 4. East Linton: Tuckwell Press Limited, 1997,

200-33.

McGuire, Brian Patrick. Friendship and Faith: Cistercian Men, Women, and Their

Stories, 1100-1200. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002.

261

McKeown, L. “The Monastic Houses of Co. Down.” Down and Connor Historical

Society’s Journal’s Annual Report and Statement of accounts. Belfast: P. Quinn

and Company, 1936.

Megaw, B. R. S. “The Monastery of St. Maughold.” Natural History and Antiquarian

Society 2 (1950): 169-180.

———. “The original site of Rushen Abbey and its significance.” Edited by Peter

Davey in Recent Archaeological Research on the Isle of Man. British

Archaeological Report 278 (1999): 261-266.

Milliken, E. K. English Monasticism Yesterday and Today. London: George G.

Harrap and Company, 1967.

Moore, Arthur William. Diocesan Histories: Sodor and Man. London: Society for

Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1893.

Morris, J. P. Handy Guide to the Ruins of Furness Abbey. Ulverston: n.p., 1870.

Mullin, Francis Anthony. History of the Work of the Cistercians in Yorkshire, 1131-

1300. Washington: The Catholic University of America, 1932.

Newbolt, M. R. The Cistercians in Britain. Wantage: St. Mary’s Press, 1957.

Newman, Martha. The Boundaries of Charity. Stanford: Stanford University Press,

1996.

Norton, Christopher and David Park, eds. Cistercian Art and Architecture in the

British Isles. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Ó Conbhuidhe, Columcille S. Studies in Irish Cistercian History. Edited by Finbarr

Donovan. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1998.

262

O’Dwyer, Barry. “The Crisis in the Cistercian Monasteries in Ireland in the Early

Thirteenth Century.” Analecta Sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 31 (1975): 267-304.

Pigeon, Michel. “Savigny, Cîteaux…et Clairvaux.” Collectanea ordinis

Cisterciensium reformatorum 60.4 (1998): 355-361.

———.”Présence de saint Bernard à Savigny.” Collectanea ordinis Cisterciensium

reformatorum 52 (1990): 204-12.

———.”Sur la contemplation à Savigny,” Collectanea ordinis Cisterciensium

reformatorum 54 (1992): 234-49.

Platt, Colin. The Monastic Grange in Medieval England; A Reassessment. New York:

Fordham University Press, 1969.

———. Abbeys and Priories of Medieval England. London: Secker & Warburg, 1984.

Powicke, F. M. “The Abbey of Furness,” in The Victoria History of the County of

Lancashire, Vol. 2, ed. M. A. Brownbill and William Farrer. Kent: Dawson,

Schneider, Ambrosius. Die Cistercienser. Cologne: Wienand, 1974.

Richardson, J. History and Antiquities of Furness. London: J. Richardson, 1880.

Round, J. H. Studies in Peerage and Family History. London: J. Nisbet & Co., 1910.

Rushen Abbey. Douglas: Manx National Heritage, 1997.

Ryan, John. Irish Monasticism: Origins and Early Development. Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 1972.

Salter, Mike. Castles and Old Churches of the Isle of Man. Molvern: Folly Cottage

Publications, 1997.

263

Skillan, Helen. “How do the Medieval Floor Tiles from Rushen Abbey Compare

with Those from Other Religious Houses in the Irish Sea Area?” M.A. in

Manx Studies, University of Liverpool, 2005.

Sommerfeldt, John R., ed., Simplicity and Ordinariness: Studies in Medieval

Cistercian History, 5. Cistercian Studies Series 61. Kalamazoo: Cistercian

Publications, 1980.

Stringer, Keith J. The Reformed Church in Medieval Galloway and Cumbria: Contrasts,

Connections and Continuities. The Eleventh Whithorn Lecture 14th

September, 2002. Whithorn: Friends of the Whithorn Trust, 2003.

Suydam, Mary. “Origins of the Savignac Order: Savigny’s Role within Twelfth-

Century Monastic Reform.” Revue Bénédictine 86 (1976): 94-108.

Swietek, Francis R. “King Henry II and Savigny.” Citeaux 38 (1987): 14-23.

———. “The Role of Bernard of Clairvaux in the Union of Savigny with Citeaux:

A Reconsideration.” In Bernardus Magister: Papers Presented at the

Nonacentenary Celebration of the Birth of Bernard of Clairvaux, edited by John

R. Sommerfeldt, 289-302. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1992.

Theiner, “Vetera Monumenta.” Manx Society, Vol. 23. n.d: 290-4.

Wardrop, Joan. Fountains Abbey and its Benefactors, 1132-1300. Cistercian Studies

Series 91. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1987.

Watt, D. E. R. “Bishops in the Isles before 1203: Bibliography and Biographical

Lists.” The Innes Review 45 (1994): 99-119.

Williams, David H. The Welsh Cistercians. Pontypool: The Griffin Press, 1970.

264

———. Atlas of Cistercian lands in Wales. Caerdydd: University of Wales Press,

1991.

———. The Cistercians in the . Leominster: Gracewing, 1998.

Wilmart, André. “Le recueil des discourse de Serlon, abbé de Savigni.” Revue

Mabillion 12 (1922): 26-38.

Wilson, David. The Vikings and their Origins. London: Thames and Hudson, 1970.

Wood, Susan. English Monasteries and Their Patrons in the Thirteenth Century.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955.

Reference Sources

Bell, David N. An Index of Cistercian Authors and Works in Medieval Library

Catalogues in Great Britain. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1994.

Brooke, C. N. L. and David Knowles. The Heads of Religious Houses England and

Wales, 940-1216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Brownbill, M. A. and William Farrer, eds. The Victoria History of the County of

Lancashire. Vol. 1. London: Archibald Constable, 1906. Reprinted, Kent:

Dawson, 1993.

Brownbill, M. A. and William Farrer, eds. The Victoria History of the County of

Lancashire. Vol. 2. The Victoria History of the Counties of England.

London: Archibald Constable, 1908. Reprinted, Kent: Dawson, 1991.

Coakley, Frances. “The Manx Notebook.” Douglas: The Manx Society. Accessed

July 15, 2015. http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/ (2006,

updated 2010).

265

Cottineau, L. H. Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés. 2 vols.

Macon: Protat frères, 1935, 1937. Reprinted, Turnhout: Brepols, 1995.

Donkin, R. Cistercian Bibliography. A Check List of Printed Works Relating to the

Cistercian Order as a Whole and to the Houses of the British Isles in Particular.

La Documentation Cistercienne 2 (1969): 1-104.

Dugdale, W. Monasticon Anglicanum; or, The history of the ancient abbies, and other

monasteries, hospitals, cathedral and collegiate churches, in England and Wales.

3 vols. London: Turks Head, 1693.

Easson, David E. Medieval Religious Houses Scotland. ed. by Ian B. Cowan. 1957.

2nd ed. London: Longman Group Limited, 1976.

Ellis, Rodger H., ed. Catalogue of Seals in the Public Record Office: Monastic Seals.

London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1986.

Gwynn, Aubrey and R. Neville Hadcock. Medieval Religious Houses Ireland.

London: Longman Group Limited, 1970.

Knowles, David and R. Neville Hadcock. Medieval Religious Houses: England and

Wales, London: Longman Group Limited, 1953.

London, Vera C. M. and David M. Smith, eds. The Heads of Religious Houses:

England and Wales II 1216-1377. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2001.

Midmer, Roy. English Medieval Monasteries, 1066-1540: A Summary. London:

Heinemann, 1979.

266

Sheppard, Jennifer N. The Buildwas Books. Oxford: Oxford Bibliographical Society,

Bodleian Library, 1997.

Smith, David M., ed. The Heads of Religious Houses: England and Wales III 1377-

1540. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Tonnochy, A. B. Catalogue of British Seal-Dies in the British Museum. London: The

Trustees of the British Museum, 19.

267