Thomas De Cantilupe

ON ST. THOMAS DE CANTILUPE, BISHOP OF HEREFORD IN ENGLAND,

AT MONTEFIASCONE IN PAPAL TUSCANY.

IN THE YEAR MCCLXXXII.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Thomas de Cantilupe, bishop of Hereford, at Montefiascone in Papal Tuscany. (S.)

BHL Number: 8254

BY C. S.

§ I. The place of his see, and formerly of his chief cult; commemoration in the Martyrologies; Lives not to be published; the Process of canonization, from which a compendium of his life and his miracles are to be given.

Herefordia, commonly Hereford, an episcopal city of Great Britain, or England, under the metropolis of Canterbury, This holy Bishop of Hereford, of which a notice is given, sits in the county of its own name, of which it is the head, called by the English Herefordshire, set, as Camden speaks in his description of the same county, between most pleasant meadows and most fertile fields, almost girdled by rivers, on the North and West by a nameless one, on the South by the Wye, which hastens hither out of Wales. Camden has more in the same place concerning the beginnings and growth of the same city, and from him our Henschen at the XX day of May, on St. Ethelbert, king of the East Angles and martyr, taken from the living in the year 793 and buried there, and honoured for his merits with a notable church, which is the cathedral, by Milfred or Milefrid, king of the Mercians. To the same Milefrid John Brompton, in the Life of the praised holy king edited by Henschen, num. 13, and Camden attribute the erection of the episcopal see; which Henschen, in the Annotations, letter e, thought should be taken of its stable foundation, because others hold that Putta was bishop of that place already from the year 680. That old church was destroyed by a hostile hand in the year 1055 and then raised up again, either by Robert Losinga, bishop of the same city, as Francis Godwin writes in the Commentary on the Prelates of England, page 529, or by Reinelm, his successor after Gerard, as Camden affirmed.

[2] had his see in the 13th century, It will help here to have heard Camden. He speaks thus: Bishop Reinelm, in the reign of Henry the First, set up this beautiful church which is now seen, and his successors enlarged it, a neat college being added, and handsome houses of the prebendaries. For besides the bishop, who presides over three hundred and two churches, there are in this church a dean, two archdeacons, a precentor, a chancellor, a treasurer and twenty-eight prebendaries. In the church we saw almost no monuments except those of the bishops; but we have learned that Thomas Cantelupe, bishop, born of a noble house, had a mausoleum; who, having been enrolled among the Saints for his holiness, came little short of outshining the royal martyr Ethelbert in the opinion of piety. These things Camden wrote of that cathedral church as it was at the beginning of the 17th century; Godwin, who lived at the same time, adds at page 540 that that mausoleum stood, of marble, in the Northern part of the transept towards the East, and says moreover: This honour was paid him (St. Thomas) by his successors, that from that time on they used his family arms as the arms of their see; namely, on a red field, three golden leopards' heads inverted, bearing as many lilies in their mouths.

[3] Among the bishops of the church of Hereford, therefore, after the middle of the XIII century, there shone forth St. Thomas, who died on the 25th of August, but is venerated on the 2nd of October born in England of the illustrious family of the Cantilupes, conspicuous for learning, holiness of morals, and unconquered fortitude of mind in vindicating the rights of his church. Him, having departed this life near Montefiascone in the year 1282, on the XXV day of August, while he was staying at the Apostolic See for the same cause, and then shining with very many miracles, Pope John XXII solemnly inscribed in the roll of holy confessors in the year 1320, and commanded his annual feast to be celebrated on the sixth day before the Nones of October. On which account in the Roman Martyrology, on this latter day, together with the place of his former chief cult, not of his death, it is read briefly thus: At Hereford in England, of St. Thomas, bishop and confessor. Peter Galesinius had gone before Baronius, saying at the same day thus: At Hereford in England, of St. Thomas, bishop, famous for holiness of life and for miracles. Likewise the Lübeck-Cologne editions of the Usuardine Martyrology, and those of Greven and Molanus, had gone before, the first of which has thus: In England, of St. Thomas, bishop and confessor; and the two others more clearly thus: In England, of saint Thomas, bishop of Hereford and confessor, famous for life and miracles.

[4] More ancient than all these, our manuscript Florarium of the Saints, and he is inscribed in the Martyrologies, in some of which as having been completed in the year of Christ 1486, mentions the same holy Prelate rightly indeed at the 2nd day of October, but straying as to the place, thus: In Scotland, of saint Thomas, bishop and confessor. Constantine Ghini also keeps the second day of October in the Natales of the holy canons, where he composed his eulogy from the Surian Collection of the Lives of the Saints. John Wilson, an English Catholic priest, in his English Martyrology, of the edition of the year 1608, commemorated our St. Thomas twice; first at Montefiascone at the XXV day of August, as his day of death; and again at the 2nd of October at Hereford under the title of translation; but in the other edition of the same Martyrology, made in the year 1640, he retained only the 2nd day of October, as that of his deposition at Hereford. At yet another day, namely the XV of February, under I know not what title, Peter Galesinius, praised above, mentions him thus: At Hereford, of St. Thomas, bishop, the holiness of whose life and his deeds divinely wrought having been plainly known, John XXII, Supreme Pontiff, duly inscribed him among the Saints. In the Annotations there he praises the Annals of the English; but why he treats of him at the aforesaid day of February, or what festivity he here designates, he does not explain.

[5] Finally, in our Florarium of the Saints the canonization of the same Saint is recorded at the XVII day of April in this manner: he is also commemorated on other days. Likewise the canonization of St. Thomas & Fordiensis (read of Hereford), made by John XXII at Avignon in the V year of his Pontificate, of Salvation MCCCXX, from the passing of the most holy Man the XXXVIII. He was a noble man, a doctor in Decrees and a master in Theology. For the V year of the Pontificate of John substitute the IV year, and that all is otherwise in order will be established from what is to be said. Further, my Predecessors commemorated St. Thomas, bishop of Hereford, in the Passed-over at the XV day of February from the mentioned Peter Galesinius, at the XVII of April from the Florarium of the Saints and another of the Charterhouse of Brussels, and at the XXV of August, which was truly the Saint's day of death, from Wilson's English Martyrology, and deferred him to the 2nd day of October, because the Supreme Pontiff John, praised above, in the Bull of his canonization affixed his feast to that day, on which he is also inscribed in the Roman Martyrology. Why, however, the Pontiff designated this day above the others is wholly unknown to me. Certainly on it he neither died, nor was translated from a humble burial into the marble mausoleum, nor was enrolled among the Saints, nor do we know of anything done on that same day which gave cause for this Pontifical decree; unless perhaps on that day his bones, while they were being translated from Italy, were brought into England or into his cathedral church.

[6] the manuscript Lives, and the one edited by Surius, to be passed over; The Life of St. Thomas, or more truly a compendium of his Life, we received from a Ms. of Rouge-Cloître, very like which Laurence Surius had one, which, given his own style, he published in the Lives of the Saints on this day. The author, who is anonymous with him equally as with us, he rightly called worthy of trust; for what that anonymous writer brings forward he seems to have drawn chiefly from the process of the canonization of the same, of which he makes express mention. Adrien Baillet used only Surius's edition in the Life of the same holy Bishop given in French in tome 3 of the Lives of the Saints at the 2nd of October. We have besides obtained another brief Life of him from the same monastery of Rouge-Cloître, collated with the Ms. of the canons Regular of Corsendonck. Its author, likewise anonymous, after the Preface, the beginning of which is: It is wholesome to commit to writing the life and conversation of the Saints for the edification of readers, took almost the rest from the Bull of canonization, which we shall give in its place. It would therefore be superfluous to publish that Life, nor would it be any more worth the effort to give the first-named one or the Surian; since I have at hand the process from which I said it was compiled, and of which we must now treat.

[7] but from the process of canonization, made under Clement V, While our Predecessors Godfrey Henschen and Daniel Papebroch were staying at Rome in the year 1661 to procure instruments for their Work, they found in the library, if I am not mistaken the Vatican, the manuscript codex 4015, containing the process for the canonization of Thomas de Cantilupe, made in England in the year 1307 by Apostolic commissaries by order of Pope Clement V, and from it they had those things copied which they judged would be useful for illustrating the deeds of the same Saint. But afterwards, since they believed these had been lost, Conrad Janning, staying at Rome in the year 1686, collected the same things anew; whence it has come about that we have some things copied twice. Besides this I have found that no other was ever made for the canonization of St. Thomas of Hereford, although his canonization was not completed by Pope John XXII until the thirteenth year after. There will be room below to speak at sufficient length of the manner in which the same process was instituted and of its other circumstances; meanwhile receive a few things which pertain more to this place. In the annotation added by my Predecessors this is the division of the book, or codex 4015, which is inscribed on the back Process concerning the life of the Lord Thomas de Cantalupo. PS.; perhaps here PP is to be read, that is, Pars prima. It begins: In the name of the Lord. Amen. To the honour, etc. Three hundred and twenty-three witnesses depose, of whom the first sixty-two treat almost of the life, some miracles, however, being inserted here and there; from whose depositions I have excerpted almost the things which they testify from sight, either immediately or at least mediately, namely what they heard immediately from those who saw. And these sixty-two witnesses constitute the first part of the book up to folio 123, which folio has thus.

[8] PS. Here begins the second part of this Process, concerning the proof of miracles. which we have from the Roman codex, And it proves seventeen miracles by the witnesses from the sixty-third to the one hundred and seventy-seventh, in all one hundred and fifteen, different ones attesting different miracles in order. After these are placed the Rubrics of the miracles placed here and there in the first part. Afterwards are placed thirteen miracles. Hence the Quaternion of miracles begins at folio 247. Then the Letters of Innocent, etc. Afterwards from folio 265 to 309 are placed certain things not produced. In the last place the Letters and the Compendium of the process of excommunication. Thus far the praised Notice. It would be long and tedious to print all these things, especially since in so great a number of witnesses the same assertions must necessarily recur; and therefore my praised Predecessors, by prudent counsel, had copied only those things which they judged necessary for their purpose, or at least fitting and useful. And what these are I shall set out partly, and chiefly, here, partly in their places in my Preliminary Commentary.

[9] Among the witnesses who, having taken the oath, were questioned and examined by the Apostolic commissaries, the sworn testimony of Bishop Richard, as a kind of compendium of the Life there is recounted in the sixty-first place the Reverend father, the lord Richard, by the grace of God bishop

of Hereford and master in Theology, sixty years old and more, who was of the robes and household of the lord Thomas for about fourteen years. This Richard, surnamed de Swinfield, was the next successor of the same St. Thomas in the see of Hereford, in which he is said by Godwin, among the bishops of Hereford, page 540, to have sat until the year 1316. He had been, moreover, of the robes and household, that is, in the service and one of the domestic household, of his holy Predecessor himself for about fourteen years, not, however, living with him continuously that whole time, but by turns, because he was meanwhile occupied with scholastic studies, as he himself asserted in his testimony, in which also he counted only about XIII years, instead of XIIII, as thus spent in the Saint's service. However that may be, he certainly could have been thoroughly instructed in the deeds of his Prelate during so long a time, nor can he without injury be judged, in so grave a matter, bound also by the religion of an oath, to have wished to lie before the Apostolic commissaries, or to have dared lightly to testify things not ascertained.

[10] His testimony I have copied twice; in it, answering the questions of the commissaries, I shall print: from the same process and codex I shall give the miracles, he left a kind of compendium of the Life, beginning from his stock and nativity and going up to the translation of his bones from his first burial into the marble tomb, which he himself carried out. This testimony, therefore, which may be permitted to be called the Compendium of the Life, I shall publish in the first place, and illustrate with due Annotations, taken both from the testimonies of others and from elsewhere. Thence I shall go to the Miracles, which are indeed many and great, as may be conjectured from the anonymous writer in the Life which I said was adorned by Surius with a more polished style, and which in our Ms. has thus: But the miracles which after his death almighty God deigned to show to sinners for the praise and honour of his name, I saw, as it were infinite, in various volumes in the place of his rest, among which he raised sixty dead, gave light to forty-one blind, restored fifty-two crippled to health, cured twenty-one paralytics, and made twenty-three blind and dumb, having received the desired health, praise God. I also saw in one volume in the aforesaid place, of various miracles and kinds of diseases which had been wrought and shown through St. Thomas, four hundred and twenty-five.

[11] which, according to the division of the same codex, I would not indeed vouch for all these; yet whoever reads the letter given by the Apostolic commissaries after diligent examination to Pope Clement V on this matter, which is to be recited below, will not deny, I think, that St. Thomas shone with many and great miracles. I shall recount no others but those which are read in the process praised above and in the Roman codex, and which are indeed in great number, and I shall divide them all into four parts. In the first Part I shall give the seventeen miracles which are had in the first place in the same codex according to the division set out at num. 8. The Rubrics of the miracles which follow I shall put off into the Appendix, because on account of their brevity they must here and there be set out more at length from the witnesses. In the second place I shall set down certain other miracles, likewise examined and proved by the same commissaries. The third part will follow, which comprises some other miracles which were obtained in various places, and duly announced in the church of Hereford, and referred into the process. The fourth Part, finally, contains those things which were not brought into the Process, nor examined by the commissaries on account of the shortness of time, except in so far as the things contained in these … had been abbreviated … and set in the preceding quaternions of miracles, returned on the XIII day of the month of November before the aforesaid commissaries.

[12] I shall divide into four classes or parts. Hence the reader will easily judge, first, that in this latter Part various miracles already given before must recur; second, that those of them which have not been given before are not supported by the same authority as the rest. But concerning the miracles in general it must be observed that the places in which they are said to have been done have here and there been sought by me in vain in Lexicons and topographical maps, of which there may be a threefold cause; namely either that those lesser places have changed their names in the lapse of four centuries, or have perished, or have been badly copied for us. Some other things also could be observed here, which I shall do in the Annotations. Now, as regards the writing of this Preliminary Commentary, the testimony of the aforepraised Richard, bishop of Hereford, will above all be of great use to me, to which will be added other witnesses also, all likewise contemporaries of the Saint, of whom some knew him, others also lived in his service and familiar companionship, or even stood by him as he died. For his posthumous glory there will also serve the letters given by Clement V for instituting the process of his canonization, and those which the commissaries named by him afterwards wrote back to him; and finally the Bull which Pope John XXII published for his canonization.

§ II. The Saint's illustrious parents, brothers and sisters; time and place of birth; pious education; literary studies in England, then at Paris; attendance at the council of Lyons; he becomes a Pontifical chaplain; he hears Laws at Orléans.

The Saint had as father William de Cantilupe The parents of St. Thomas Richard Schinfeild, his next successor in the see of Hereford, set forth in the Compendium of the Life, num. 2 and 3, in these words: The lord Thomas had been sprung from the noble stock of the barons of the kingdom of England; and the father of the lord Thomas himself was called the lord William de Cantilupo, and he was a great baron, having in annual revenues fully two or three thousand pounds sterling. And the mother of the said lord Thomas was called the lady Melisenta, who had been countess of Évreux in Normandy, and the said lady had been sprung from very noble persons of Normandy or of France. And after the death of the count of Évreux she married the said lord William. Other witnesses also agree, and by name William de Cantilupe, the thirty-seventh sworn witness, the Saint's own nephew through his brother John, who, asked by the Apostolic commissaries praised above from whom Thomas had drawn his origin, answered that the father of the said lord Thomas was a knight and baron, and was called the lord de Cantalupo, and had as wife a certain great lady of Normandy, who was the lady of Everoys.

[14] In like manner the fifty-sixth witness, master Robert of Gloucester, a powerful baron of England, who seems to have sprung doctor of Decrees and chancellor of Hereford, asked of what parents Thomas was born, answered that of a noble progeny of barons, and that the father of the said lord Thomas was called the lord Willellmus de Cantalupo, knight and baron, who was a powerful man and of great authority, and seneschal of the lord Henry IV, king of England. For Henry IV, Henry III must here be substituted, or at least is designated, as is clear from the reckoning of time: because the Henry commonly called the IV was first born after the middle of the XIV century. Perhaps, however, Robert called Henry III the IV by reason of Henry the Younger, who was crowned king in the lifetime of his father Henry II, but died before him, and on that account is not customarily reckoned to increase the number of the kings of England of his name. Concerning the Saint's paternal family, Bishop Richard, in the place just cited, says besides: And the grandfather of the said lord Thomas was said to have drawn his origin from Normandy.

[15] Wherefore it is most probable that the great-grandfather or great-great-grandfather of the same Saint was one of those Normans from the Normans who subjugated England under William the Conqueror; who, crossing into England in the year 1066 with William, duke of Normandy, surnamed the Conqueror, subjected it; especially since John Brompton, abbot of Jervaulx, in the Chronicle at the same year, also recounts Cantelou among those of whom he had there premised this: Then King William gave the lands of the English to the magnates and knights and other men of his of France and Normandy who had been with him in his conquest. Very many of whose surnames, still sufficiently known and frequent in England, as I found them written, I have thought it worthy to insert here. William Camden also mentions the Cantilupes honourably in the Description of Great Britain, in which he inserted them in the catalogue of the more illustrious families of England, and in the description of the county of Northampton, page 80, following the course of the river Welland, says thus: Afterwards it flows past Harringworth, formerly the seat of the Cantelupes, now of the barons Zouch; who, descended from Eudo, the younger son of Alan de la Zouch of Ashby, grew up into a most ample family of barons. To whom very much honour accrued from marriages with one of the heiresses of Cantelupe, and with another of the baron of Saint Maur, who also derived his stemma from the heiress of the lord Zouch of Ashby and from the Lovels, lords of Castle Cary in the county of Somerset. See also, if you please, in the same place page 488, in the description of the county of Monmouth.

[16] and as mother Melisinda de Gournay, Let us return to the mother of the holy Prelate. William Cantilupe, in the words given at num. 12, agrees that she was a great lady of Normandy, who was the lady of Everoys; but, which you may wonder at, he said that he did not remember her name. But if the name of his grandmother had then slipped from this grandson, Bishop Richard rightly named her Melesinta in the Compendium of the Life, num. 7; nor must it be said to have happened otherwise than from a slip of memory or of the pen that, at the testimony of the just-praised William Cantilupe, it is read noted in our apograph that she was called Margaret by the XII witness, Richard de Kimberle, who was in the service of St. Thomas, unless perhaps she had two names. And by what means this noble woman was made countess of Évreux, and from what family she was born, Robert of Gloucester, cited at num. 14, taught thus: But the mother of the said lord Thomas was countess of Évreux in Normandy, daughter of the lord Godfrey de Gurnay: for the said lady had first married the count of Évreux, and he having died, the father of the said lord Thomas took her to wife. And the said lady retained the name of Countess according to the custom of England, because she had been the wife of a count.

[17] widow of the count of Évreux. James William Imhoff, in the genealogical History of Great Britain, table LXI, which is of the family of Montfort, names Amalric V, count of Évreux, who sold his county in the year 1200 to Philip Augustus, king of France, and attributes to the same Amalric as first wife Mabel, daughter of William I, earl of Gloucester, and as second Melissenda, daughter of Hugh de Gournay. I do not know which of the two has given the forename of Melisinda's or Mellessenda's father more correctly; but it is sufficiently clear that the Mellessenda praised by Imhoff is that very one whom Robert of Gloucester, after the death of her husband, the count of Évreux, to William de Cantilupe

asserted had married, and from him had borne St. Thomas. Further, Ebroicum, now commonly Évreux, is a city of France in Upper Normandy on the river Iton or Ittona, which Richard I, duke of Normandy, formerly erected into a county in favour of his son Robert. We have, therefore, the father and mother of St. Thomas born of illustrious families; but how long Amalric lived after selling his county, or after the year 1200, or in what year Melisinda was married to William de Cantilupe, I have not so far discovered.

[18] That William, from this lawful marriage (so Bishop Richard continues) with Melisenta, begot the said lord Thomas, and the lord Hugh, He had four brothers, of whom one was seneschal of Aquitaine, his brother, a man of great authority and learning, and three most vigorous knights, and three or four ladies, placed in marriage with the more noble barons of the kingdom of England. William de Cantilupe, the thirty-seventh witness in the process, agrees: From them descended the said lord Thomas and the lord John, father of the said witness (William himself), and master Hugh, who was a cleric and rich, a contemporary of the said lord Thomas, the lords William and Nicholas, knights. Master Robert of Gloucester speaks a little more clearly, who said besides that the said lord Thomas had had four brothers, namely the lord Hugh, archdeacon of Gloucester; the lord William, the firstborn, who was seneschal of the duchy of Aquitaine in the time of the lord King Henry (namely of England, the second of this name, to whom St. Louis, king of France, restored part of Aquitaine in the year 1259), and the lord John and the lord Nicholas, knights and barons. And all were of great reputation; and it was said that they were very faithful, Catholic and devout.

[19] Of William, the Saint's eldest brother, I have nothing further to note, another archdeacon of Gloucester, two others vigorous knights, except that Richard de Kimberle, the twelfth witness in the process, affirmed that he was lord of Abergavenny, and received from his annual revenues about two thousand pounds sterling. Hugh, the Saint's other full brother, who according to the testimony of William Cantilupe recited at num. 17 was Thomas's contemporary, is also said by the same William to have been older than he; from which you may gather that Hugh was a little older indeed, but almost of equal age with him; for this is what the word contemporary signifies here. Thomas, therefore, was born only in the third place among his brothers and sisters, if not also in some later one. That Hugh just named was his holy Brother's companion in the studies of letters and arts, and, having embraced the ecclesiastical state, was made archdeacon of Gloucester, as has just been said; but the discourse will return to him below. John, another of the same brothers, was the father of the aforesaid William Cantilupe, and died before Thomas, who, the same William testified, was the executor of his testament, and he praised him for this office justly discharged. Receive the words from the process.

[20] Asked (William) concerning the faith of the said lord Thomas working through love, and one of these the father of William, who testified in the process; he answered that he had been very law-abiding, and that he would not have acted against his conscience for his own father… Afterwards he said that it came to his memory that the aforesaid lord Thomas had been appointed executor in the testament of the father of the witness himself; and the mother of the aforesaid witness wished to have the horses and some harnesses (perhaps saddles, or other similar things) of her deceased husband; and the said lord Thomas would not consent, because it did not seem consonant with his reason, nor with the will of the testator: but he said that he would give (that is, was about to give) to her from his own. Of Nicholas, who is named in the last place among the brothers, I have learned nothing from elsewhere.

[21] Of the sisters the praised William called only one by her name, Juliana, [likewise three sisters, married to the barons de Tregoz, de St. John and Gregonet.] who he said was the wife of the lord John Tregoz, baron. Richard de Kimberle also asserted the same thing, but named Juliana's husband not John but Robert de Tregoz, baron; and he added that another sister of St. Thomas, whose name he kept silent, but who is called Agnes by Robert Deynte, the sixtieth witness, was married to Robert, baron de Saint John, and that from these was born John de Saint John, baron and seneschal of the duchy of Aquitaine under Edward, king of England, the successor of Henry III. Likewise one of the sisters, says Hugh le Barber, the sixth witness, was married, or at least betrothed, to Robert Gregonet, a baron of England: and finally we shall see below that the above-mentioned Juliana and one other of the sisters were widowed of their husbands while their holy Brother was still living.

[22] Thomas was born about the year 1218 in his father's house In what year of Christ the Saint was born none of the witnesses indicated; yet from his final age as assigned approximately by two, and from the certain year of his death, we cannot stray far if we hold that this took place about the year 1218. For from what is to be said, he certainly died in the year 1282, when according to the testimony of one he was sixty-three years old or a little more; but according to that of another, sixty-six years or thereabouts. The testimony of the first, however, which is that of Richard, bishop of Hereford, seems to be preferred. We know his birthplace more certainly, which the witnesses agree was Hameldene, where his father had a manor, and which place was on that account afterwards held in veneration. It will help to have produced two or three testimonies. Richard, prelate of Hereford, in the Compendium of the Life to be given, num. 3, asked Where the said lord Thomas was born and baptized, answered that he had heard from him that he had been born in the diocese of Lincoln, in a certain manor, then his father's, in the township of Hameldene. And he said that he believed that he was baptized there, where the earl of Cornwall *, namely the lord Edmund, son of the lord Richard, formerly king of Germany, built an oratory out of reverence for God and for the said lord Thomas, whom in his lifetime he reputed a saint; as the same lord bishop said he had heard from the said earl. And in the said oratory the Lord is said to work miracles for the said lord Thomas.

[23] in the township of Hameldene in the county of Buckingham, William de Cantilupe, the Saint's own nephew through his brother, similarly questioned, answered that at Hameldene, of the diocese of Lincoln, and in the said place, in a certain chapel built by the earl of Cornwall in the place in which the said lord Thomas is said to have been born, God is said to work miracles for the lord Thomas himself. And the same witness said that he had seen in the aforesaid place the signs (that is, votive offerings) of some miracles which God is said to have wrought through the said lord Thomas. Likewise, asked Where the said lord Thomas had been baptized, he answered that he believed in the parish church of the said place of Hameldene. Robert of Gloucester assigned the site of the birthplace a little more clearly, who, asked like the others In what place the said lord Thomas had been born and baptized, answered that in the county of Bukinghuam, of the diocese of Licoln, in a certain township which is called Hameldene, about three or four miles from Wycombe; as he said he had heard it related by the same, as regards his origin.

[24] of the diocese of Lincoln, where an oratory was afterwards erected. Camden in his Britannia, describing the county of Buckingham, commonly Buckinghamshire, makes no mention of Hameldene, whether because this township has changed its name, or because it seemed of too little moment to obtain a place in the same description. He did, however, recount the town of Wicombe, which, he observed, is elsewhere, but less correctly, called Highwickam, and he says it is situated on a little stream which mingles with the Thames near the town of Marlow. Hameldene, then, will have been situated three or four English miles from the town now called Highwickam, in which the praised witnesses assert that St. Thomas was born and baptized, and in memory of which they testify that an oratory was erected there by Edmund, earl of Cornwall, son of Richard, elected king of Germany, that is, of the Romans or of Germany, which, as we shall show in its place, was also frequented by pilgrims for the same cause. Of the same oratory Hugh le Barber, the sixth witness in the process, said that there was painted in it an image of St. Thomas, and that he had seen people who made pilgrimage thither for the sake of devotion. Thomas's father, as has been said, had a manor there, which word Henry Spelman, an Anglo-British knight, interpreted thus in his Glossary: Manor… From remaining (a manendo); among the English it is the seat of a Baron, lesser as well as greater, containing some splendid portion of estates, within which that baron or lord of the manor renders predial justice to his tenants and vassals (we call them TENANTS) according to the customs of the kingdom and of that manor. For the rest, Lincoln, in whose diocese this place is said to have been, is a city of England, otherwise also called Lindocolnia and Lindum, now commonly called Lincolne, the head of the county of Lincoln, or Lincolnshire, and distinguished by the bishopric of an ample diocese.

[25] From the Saint's time and place of birth I proceed to his education. He is educated first by a pious noble matron, then by his paternal uncle Richard, bishop of Hereford, testified in the Compendium of the Life, num. 4, that he had heard it related by persons worthy of trust, and also by the same lord Thomas, that in his infancy he had been nursed by a certain very devout, noble and holy matron, named… This lacuna stands thus in both our apographs; from which it may be gathered that it is also in the Roman codex, or at least that the name of that matron in it is so worn away or obliterated that it could not be read. But after seven years or thereabouts (so the bishop of Hereford continues), when he was being handed over to be formed in letters, he was handed over to good masters with his said brother Hugh; and they heard Mass every day and the canonical Hours. And when they had advanced in age, they said the aforesaid canonical Hours. The lord Richard de Kimberle, who had been in the service of the holy Prelate for ten years, and is numbered the twelfth witness in the process, attributes some part of the same education to his paternal uncle Walter, bishop of Worcester in England. And the said lord Walter (he says) was the paternal uncle of the lord Thomas; and he heard it said that he had brought up, and afterwards kept in the schools, and beneficed the said lord Thomas and a certain brother of his, namely master Hugh, archdeacon of Gloucester.

[26] He had premised there concerning the same Walter: He was reputed a man of holy life, bishop of Worcester, who is reported to have foretold his clerical state to him: and for whom God is said to work many miracles; who also was of great austerity of life, as the aforesaid witness said he had heard from his father, who had been in the service of the said lord Walter, and after the death of the lord Walter himself had a hair-cloth girdle,

which the aforesaid lord Walter used, and he left it in the custody of the said witness. The aforepraised Robert of Gloucester also mentions him honourably, asserting that he had seen the lord Walter, formerly bishop of Worcester, paternal uncle of the said lord Thomas; and he was, he says, reputed a man of holy life, and God is said to work miracles for him; and before the tomb of the lord Walter himself, the said witness said, he had seen many signs of miracles hanging. William de Cantilupe adds a kind of prophecy of Walter concerning Thomas's future clerical state. For the same witness (William) said that he had heard it related that, when the aforesaid bishop, asking the said lord Thomas and his aforesaid brothers, while still little boys, what state they wished to have, received from the lord Thomas himself the answer that he wished to be a knight, the same bishop said that he should be a knight of Christ, and that he should do knightly service to God and to St. Thomas the martyr, archbishop of Canterbury, in the clerical order.

[27] concerning which uncle some things are observed here. Thus far they; I, however, although I cannot deny that that Walter was a bishop of good life, have nowhere read of his cult, nor would I dare to vouch for the miracles asserted by the praised witnesses. Nay rather, he is deservedly blamed because, in that turbulent time of England in which some of the nobles of the kingdom attempted to prescribe laws to their king Henry III with armed hand, he himself with some other bishops adhered to their party; for which reason he was both interdicted from sacred things, or even struck with anathema, by the Apostolic legate Guy, who was afterwards Supreme Pontiff, called Clement IV, and by his legate Ottobono Fieschi, Cardinal deacon of St. Adrian, as may be read at more length in Matthew of Westminster in the Flowers of histories at the year of Christ 1265. Walter nevertheless came to his senses and obtained pardon; for, as the same Westminster witnesses in the same place, The lord Walter, prelate of Worcester, placed at the point of death, said that he had erred in favouring the party of Simon de Montfort; and concerning this he directed letters to the legate, asking the benefit of absolution, which he obtained, and died. He therefore washed away this fault of his by penance and absolution, nor can it stand in the way of his having lived holily both before it, and of his having departed piously from this life after it.

[28] he studies the arts at Paris with his brother Hugh, The holy Youth, abundantly imbued with humane letters, was sent to Paris, to apply himself together with his brother Hugh to the higher sciences in that celebrated university, as Richard testifies in the Compendium, num. 4. Very similar things are had in the testimony of Robert of Gloucester, from which I have excerpted the following: He had been in the university of Paris in his youth, and had incepted there in arts. And the aforesaid lord Hugh his brother, who was older than the lord Thomas himself, and had also incepted in arts, dwelt in the same house. And they kept a great hospice, and had in their household and at their expenses and robes (that is, in their service and for managing domestic affairs) upright men, among whom was master Peter de Buttevilt, master in arts, who was afterwards seneschal of the said lord Walter, bishop of Worcester. Before I proceed, I observe at the words, He had incepted there in arts, that in other places of this process the verb incipere, placed in a similar manner, is used for the baccalaureate, as they call it, or the licence, or the mastership or doctorate obtained in some science; so that I do not doubt that here too it is indicated that Thomas was created bachelor, or rather master, in arts.

[29] [and having gone with him to the council of Lyons, he becomes chaplain of the Pontiff:] Meanwhile Pope Innocent IV had proclaimed the I general council of Lyons, which he himself, present there, also celebrated in the year of Christ 1245. St. Thomas, from what we said above concerning the time of his birth, could then have counted about the 27th year of his age, and his brother Hugh have been a little older, when both went thither and were taken by the same Innocent among the Pontifical chaplains. We have again as witness Bishop Richard in the Compendium, num. 4, where he says this: Afterwards both went to the council of Lyons, celebrated by the lord Pope Innocent the fourth; and there both were made chaplains of the lord Pope himself. It is probable that Thomas then obtained from the same Pontiff a dispensation and faculty to obtain several ecclesiastical benefices and to hear the civil laws publicly, both of which the sacred canons otherwise forbade, and he was at that time certainly a cleric, and probably also a priest. So I suspect, because the Saint, having returned from the council of Lyons, either at once or not so very long after, devoted himself to hearing the laws, and because the proctor of the cause in the process is said to have produced four letters under the bull of the lord Pope Innocent the fourth, and a certain letter patent of the lord Fulk, formerly bishop of London, concerning the dispensation made with the said lord Thomas for a certain time regarding plurality of benefices and the hearing of laws. And that several ecclesiastical benefices were possessed together by the same Saint will be established from what is to be said.

[30] At that time the science of civil law flourished and was publicly taught in the city of Aurelianum, then he hears civil law at Orléans. called by the French Orléans, thirty-three French leagues distant from Paris to the South, which today still retains a university or academy. Thither, therefore, Bishop Richard in the Compendium, num. 5, hands down that Thomas betook himself, and other witnesses agree. Among these Robert of Gloucester said this: After the aforesaid, the said lord Thomas transferred himself to the university of Orléans, and there studied in laws, and made such progress that he entered as substitute for his master, who was called the lord Guy. And the witness himself heard it related (as he said), thirty years and more having now elapsed, before he was in the service * of the said lord Thomas, at Gloucester, by master Gregory de Carewent, professor of Laws, who was afterwards auditor of the lord Robert, Cardinal bishop of Porto, who in those times was in the university of Orléans, that when the aforesaid Thomas was on a certain day about to lecture for the said lord Guy, his master, on the preceding night it was seen in dreams by the aforesaid master Gregory that he saw the aforesaid lord Thomas lecturing in the chair of the said master Guy, having an episcopal mitre on his head, full of crosses round its circumference.

* i.e. Cornabiæ of Cornwall

* in obsequio in the service

§ III. He teaches at Oxford the canon law which he had heard at Paris; he becomes chancellor of the university, then of the kingdom of England, and counsellor of two kings; at Paris he hears Theology, which he afterwards teaches at Oxford; he again becomes chancellor of the university; he sets out for Lyons to the council.

After acquiring skill in civil law at Orléans, St. Thomas returned to Paris, to apply equal effort to the study of the Decrees, or canon law; but whereas before he had lived together with his brother Hugh, now by his own and his friends' will (as Richard has it in the Compendium, num. 4) each of the said brothers kept a hospice and a great household for himself; he studies canon law at Paris, lives piously, whether because the renown and opulence of the family from which they were born so counselled, or because it seemed expedient for whatever other cause. Both nevertheless continued to devote themselves to studies there, and, the praised Richard being witness, they studied at Paris, the said lord Thomas in Decrees, in which faculty he was licensed there; and the other brother in Theology. And how Christianly he ordered his life amid literary studies may be gathered from the testimony of Hugh le Barber, who is the sixth witness in the process, and is said to have been in the service of the Saint himself, to have seen him studying at Paris, to have come with him into England, to have been his table-companion for four years at Oxford, to have kept his chamber, made his bed, and lived with him before and after he received the bishopric. He, then, among other things, deposed on oath the following.

[32] he feeds the poor, is visited by King St. Louis. The lord Thomas, in the aforesaid university of Paris, and in all other places in which the said witness saw him, had with him continually in his household and of his robes a chaplain, who continually celebrated Mass for the said lord Thomas very early and before he went to the schools and to any other places. Likewise he said that in the said universities he continually gave to eat to at least five poor persons in his house, and sometimes thirteen; and at least two poor scholars lived on the fragments and crumbs of his table. And concerning the aforesaid the said witness deposed from sight: and that he also gladly helped poor and honest scholars, and asked great lords on their behalf. And asked about the said poor scholars benefited by the said lord Thomas, he named one who was called Peter the Clerk, who had been of the bishopric of Chichester, and another who was called Norman. And afterwards the said lord Thomas, when he had withdrawn from the university of Paris, received them into his household and did them good. A notable indication also of his and his brother Hugh's probity, and at the same time of their illustrious race, is, if it be true, what Robert of Gloucester testified that he had heard, namely that blessed Louis, then king of the Franks, had visited them in their hospice. For the rest, what has been said here is to be referred partly to the first, partly to the second or third sojourn of the Saint in the city of Paris.

[33] [returned to Oxford, he publicly explains the Decrees; and with the chancellorship of the university,] I continue with Richard in the Compendium: Having obtained, he says, the licence in Decrees at Paris, he incepted in the said Decrees, and taught as regent at Oxford for some years, and was chancellor of the said university (of Oxford); and in the office of the chancellorship, and in every state of his which he had before and after, he conducted himself justly and holily, etc. Others also affirmed the same things; and since it is established from these that he discharged the chancellorship in the university of Oxford, it is fitting to note here some things concerning this most weighty office. Oxonium, otherwise also Oxonia, commonly called Oxford, is an ample and cultivated city of England, situated on the river Thames in the county which from it is called Oxfordshire, in English Oxford-Shire, and it is celebrated for its ancient university, which flourishes to this day. Anthony à Wood published the History of the same university, and in its book 2, from page 386, also wove together the Fasti of its magistrates. There he teaches that chancellors were formerly accustomed to be taken from the masters of arts or professors of any faculty who were staying at Oxford; but that afterwards bishops discharged that office, and at length even laymen; and that the power of electing was and is with the regent and non-regent masters, with this difference, however, that the elect, unlike now, formerly had to be confirmed by the bishop of Lincoln. He teaches finally that this office, which is now perpetual, was formerly only biennial, sometimes

even annual.

[34] Of the dignity and power of the chancellor he speaks thus in the same place: concerning which office a few things are noted, To this supreme Magistrate the kings of England, the Roman Pontiffs, the bishops, etc., granted most ample privileges (as we have shown here and there elsewhere in this Work of ours); so that our chancellors were held in the greatest observance by all, as placed in the highest grade of dignity. He is, namely, regarded as the supreme magistrate in the municipality, and more honoured than the mayor of the town, even when sitting in the forum or court. Chancellors formerly employed gowned men as a kind of auxiliaries, now fewer, now more, as there was need, even though they themselves were present and dwelling in the academy. And they used their help in declaring the law and in performing the other things which pertained to their province. These for the most part were called in ancient times Deputies, sometimes Commissaries (I find them denoted by that word in the first and second year of Edward III): but the name last mentioned at length alone prevailed, until Vice-chancellor, a word now worn by long use, obtained, etc. Read more there.

[35] Further, in the praised Fasti Wood recorded St. Thomas as chancellor in the year of Christ 1262, discharging it in the year 1262 and perhaps the following, saying that it is so established from a certain writing of the abbot and convent of Osney, made in this year, and treating of the dwellings of the Friars of the Penance of Jesus. After the same year the Fasti there are vacant up to the year 1267, in which master Nicholas de Ewelme is recorded; and therefore Wood thought that our Saint held the same office for some intervening years afterwards, since he confirmed with his name as witness some charters (he says) seen to have been drawn up after this. And indeed I cannot deny this for two or three years; otherwise for more, on account of the calculations to be produced below. Perhaps, however, some of the said charters, whose years Wood did not know, pertain rather to the second chancellorship of St. Thomas, likewise unknown to Wood, which I shall nevertheless prove in its place from the process. To both pertain certain general things, and to one or the other also certain particular things asserted by the witnesses on this argument.

[36] Richard, prelate of Hereford, in the Compendium, num. 30, questioned about him, he shows himself fair to all, whether he was just and God-fearing, answered that he was; and concerning this he said that he had been commended by the lord Robert, then archbishop of Canterbury, before the university of Oxford, which the same archbishop brought forward as witness; because (St. Thomas) had been chancellor of the said university, and by reason of the said chancellorship had to exercise justice and juridical acts upon scholars and others (that is, to carry out), and in the said office he had not been seen to deviate from justice for favour or other cause. And the aforesaid witness said that he believed, and that it was notorious in the aforesaid university, that the commendation of the above-mentioned archbishop rested on truth. This public commendation took place when the Saint was inaugurated master or doctor in Theology at Oxford, on which matter consult what is to be said at num. 48. Hugh le Barber, the sixth witness in the process, speaks a little more explicitly, in whose testimony the following is to be read.

[37] he chastises offenders, The aforesaid lord Thomas … afterwards was made chancellor of the university of Oxford, and governed the university of Oxford very well, and punished delinquent scholars very well, and had their arms taken away from them when they carried them: and to those who were defamed as governing themselves badly he would not return the said arms; but to others, who were of good fame, he returned them. And the same witness said that he had at one time twenty together, partly bows, partly swords and blades, thus taken from the said scholars, in his custody. And he said that he had had, by gift of the said lord Thomas, the sword of Roger de Horn, a scholar, who was very dissolute, and who sometimes dared to face twenty scholars opposing him; so vigorous and bold was he. As these things indicate the great care of the holy Chancellor for keeping the peace of the commonwealth and chastising the wicked, so the things which the lord John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, the fifty-seventh witness in the same process, affirmed manifest no less his meekness when his own cause was at issue.

[38] he passes over an injury done to himself. He said that he had heard it related that he had conducted himself well in the office of the said chancellorship; and he narrated that, when there was discord in the university of Oxford between the scholars of the Northern and the Southern party, and the said lord Thomas interposed himself for (making) peace between them, a certain one of the Northern party struck the said lord Thomas; and before his breast, from the said blow (he does not know whether made with a sword or how), there appeared a certain rent in the cope which the said lord Thomas was wearing. And although it was said to have been done injuriously and with ill will, the said witness, who was then in the university of Oxford and frequently came to the house of the said lord Thomas, did not see nor hear (as he said) that the said lord Thomas cared about this, or murmured, or that he wished to seek vengeance; saying that he believed that, had he wished, he could have avenged himself; namely, as I think, because that striker was not of such condition as could procure him impunity for his crime. What is signified here by the scholars of the Northern and Southern party the seventeenth witness, Thomas de Ylleye, of the Order of the Friars of the B. V. M. of Mount Carmel, indicated on another occasion, teaching that all the English alumni of the university of Oxford were by old custom counted in one or other class, Northern or Southern, according to the region of their birth. These are the few things which we know of his deeds in the chancellorship at Oxford.

[39] Counsellor and chancellor of Henry the third, king of England Not long after he had first held this magistracy, he was taken up by King Henry III to a much ampler one, namely the chancellorship of the whole kingdom of England. For Richard testified in the Compendium, num. 6, that Thomas was counsellor and chancellor of the lord Henry, then king of England; and at number 30 he expressly asserts that he discharged this most ample office in the year 1265. At the same year his name is read in the Fasti of the Chancellors of England which Henry Spelman published in his Glossary at the word Cancellarius. I pass over other witnesses from the process; I add one, Robert of Gloucester, from whose testimony it is said there: He conducted his business with mature and deliberate counsel, communicated to those assisting him, and was not fanciful nor headstrong; that * by reason of the said discretion and prudence he had been taken up into the council of the lord Henry, king of England, and was his chancellor. While he discharged this office, he gave a specimen of the integrity of mind with which he was accustomed to adjudge to each his own, and how greatly he abhorred gifts. It will help to have related this in so many words from Richard, bishop of Hereford, an eye- and ear-witness.

[40] The Compendium, num. 30, has thus: Likewise he narrated that, [made chancellor in the year 1265, he spurns gifts; he prefers to resign the office rather than wound equity.] when the said lord Thomas was chancellor of King Henry, certain monks, having business at the royal court, offered a certain precious jewel (that is, a necklace or gems) to the same lord Thomas; who, spurning it, courteously rebuked them, because they wished to induce him, with peril to his soul, to receive what did not become him to receive, as if they thought him corruptible and pliable. At which things the said witness said that he had been present in the year one thousand two hundred and sixty-five. Another example of the most upright Chancellor, preferring to abdicate his office and fall from the king's favour rather than wound equity, was given by him, as William Cantilupe testified, when, bidden to say in what manner he had discharged the office of chancellor, he answered that he had heard that he did it well, and that on one occasion he had returned his seal to the aforesaid king, when the lord king ordered a certain letter to be sealed which did not seem to the said lord Thomas to be one that should be sealed. Since Cantilupe said no more, and others are silent on this matter, it remains in doubt whether the king then assented to his abdicating, or complied with him as he urged better things; the latter is more probable.

[41] The anonymous writer of the Life in our apograph of Rouge-Cloître mentions the same magistracy of Thomas honourably, He did not discharge that office up to the death of the said king, saying: His fame being spread everywhere, he is made chancellor of King Henry the third, although unwilling. For he was truthful in speech, provident in counsel, faithful in the ministry entrusted to him. From then on, therefore, he began daily to grow in good things, and in every business and cause to shake his hands wholly free from the acceptance of gifts. Attending to the pride of the swelling rich, he did not decline from the truth, and inclining the hearing of his ear to all the poor, he stretched out the hand of mercy. King Henry having died, St. Thomas returns to Oxford, and, applying himself to the studies of Theology, merited to have the master's degree. These things are read in so many words in John Capgrave in the Legend of the Saints of England, and, with the style changed, in Laurence Surius. Hence Baillet wrote without doubting that the Saint remained in that office up to the death of the aforesaid King Henry, which took place in the year of Christ 1272, as he also noted in the margin. But Thomas neither held the chancellorship of England beyond a year, nor remained with Henry up to his death.

[42] The first is clear from the praised Fasti of Spelman, in which after Thomas, as some have believed; but afterwards he was counsellor of King Edward, inscribed in them at the year 1265, presently another is recorded at the year 1266, another at the year 1267, another at 1268. The reason is that Henry had been compelled by the rebelling barons of England to make this magistracy only annual; as Matthew of Westminster hands down in the Flowers of histories at the year of Christ 1265. The other, namely that Thomas withdrew before the death of the same king in order to add Theology also to his other sciences, I shall presently prove. Before I do so, the similarity of the argument counsels that I set down here beforehand the few things I know about the Saint's other office, namely that of counsellor, which he discharged with the greatest integrity under King Edward I, otherwise IV, son and successor of Henry, although these pertain to another time. In the first place Bishop Richard narrates in the Compendium, num. 26 and following, that the Saint, while he discharged that office, on a certain day, when he was already vested ready to offer the sacrifice, messengers having been sent by the praised king and urging that, the Sacrifice being put off, he should go to him without delay for the sake of consultation, answered unhesitatingly that he wished first to serve the most high King in the office aforesaid rather than the earthly king, their lord; and added that the aforesaid messengers might say this, if they wished, to their said lord the king.

[43] [to whom he answered freely, and for the counsel he suggested he was held in veneration:] That religious freedom moved the king, who accordingly, when he came to him after the sacrifice of the Mass was finished, rebuked him for the delay, and yet nothing else,

than he had received through the messengers, was the answer he brought back from him. But that indignation of the king was turned into the praise of God and of His Servant. For Thomas, having heard the cause for which he had been summoned, suggested a counsel which all approved; and the king himself (to use Richard's words), who had been somewhat disturbed by the said delay incurred in coming by the mentioned lord Thomas, gladdened and consoled by the said counsel given by the same lord Thomas, said to him that God should do well by the lord Thomas himself, and that blessed was that most high King whom the lord Thomas himself had served; and would that he himself could fittingly serve that God for a long time! Another deed of his is narrated by the first witness in the process, Raderus, or, as is written elsewhere, Rudolph de Hengham, justiciary of the same Edward, king of England, on his bench (or royal tribunal), canon in the churches of London and Hereford, a famous jurist, of seventy years or thereabouts; whose testimony I subjoin.

[44] on another occasion he also freely dissuaded the same king, Likewise he answered that the said lord Thomas was just, God-fearing and merciful; and he gave the cause of his knowledge, because he had seen this in the conversation and familiarity had with the said lord Thomas while both were counsellors of the said lord king: adding that on one occasion the said lord king of England, on the advice of some of his council, wished to grant to a certain knight, who had been a Jew, and was called Henry of Winchester, a convert, that * he should have testimony or record (which is the same as to say, to have such authority and power that at his word and testimony or record others could lose life and limbs) against Christians who clipped or falsified the money of the said lord king. And the aforesaid lord Thomas, who was in the said council, rose and said to the aforesaid lord king that it was not fitting that the aforesaid convert and Jew should have such power over Christians; and that he himself would not give counsel, nor consent in this; asking with tears leave of the said lord king that he might withdraw from his council.

[45] lest to a certain one of the Jews converted to Christ And then the said lord king, moved by the counsel and tears of the said lord Thomas, desisted from the aforesaid things which he intended to do and grant to the said convert: and he commanded the said lord Thomas that he should sit and not withdraw from his council. The same witness subjoining that in this example the said lord Thomas could be marked as just and also merciful and God-fearing. Namely because he judged it unworthy and least pleasing to God that Christ's faithful, born of Christian parents, should be subject to a man lately converted from Judaism to Christ, and that their life and the integrity of their limbs should be in the power of such a man, whose conversion and fairness he perhaps held suspect on account of Jewish perfidy and the old hatred of the race towards Christians. Asked in the same place about the time, place and those present, the praised witness answered that it was about twenty-eight years ago, and that this had been near the city of London at Westminster, in the palace of the said lord king, in his chamber, in which he held his council and parliament; and that he did not believe that any of the prelates, barons and other counsellors of the said lord king who had been present at the said council was now surviving, except the witness himself.

[46] And he named some prelates who he said had been present at the aforesaid with the witness himself. he should grant power over Christians. If the time has been rightly noted, the council will have been held about the year 1279, which will come out if you take 28 years from the year 1307, in which the aforesaid lord Hengham testified. And these indeed are the few things which we have learned were done by the Saint in the chancellorship and council of the two kings of England, Henry and Edward; but from these it is permitted to gather enough and more than enough what kind of man he showed himself in the other affairs also of both offices; a Man, namely, whom an uncommon skill in divine and human law and in the sacred letters, drawn from long study, had rendered most fit for them, and whom those two most powerful engines for turning minds away from what is fair, gifts spontaneously offered and the fear of losing the royal favour, could in no way shake. These things having been inserted partly out of the order of time, let us return to the road.

[47] Richard, in the Compendium, num. 5, recounting in series the various literary studies of St. Thomas, He returns to Paris, where he hears sacred Theology, passing over the chancellorship of England, which we have said was held by him, continued thus: Afterwards he returned to Paris to hear Theology; and the lord Thomas was then forty-four years old or thereabouts. Further, since, from the calculations of the same Richard, the Saint, dying in the year of Christ 1282, counted 63 years of his age or a little more, this return of his to the city of Paris would have to be fixed about the year 1263, unless something else stood in the way. For it stands in the way that, as we have seen, Thomas was chancellor of the university of Oxford in the year 1262, and in the year 1265, Richard himself being witness, chancellor of the kingdom of England; and the intervening time, or two years, which elapsed between the two magistracies, would not suffice for this sojourn at Paris, in which he is said by the same Richard in the place cited to have then studied Theology and lectured for several years. An error in the years must therefore be acknowledged here, and in place of forty-four or thereabouts there must be restored forty-seven or thereabouts, which is the number of years the Saint must be said to have had when, after holding the chancellorship of England in the year 1265, he returned to Paris in the year 1266.

[48] Then there accompanied him Richard, already often praised, his successor in the bishopric of Hereford, and he publicly interprets the sacred Scripture. who had already lived with him for two years, and from whom we know that the Saint then studied Theology at Paris for several years, and read, or publicly explained, cursorily the Epistles which they call Canonical. Brother Edmund de Aumari, of the Order of St. Dominic, the twenty-third witness in the process, testified that he was among his hearers, and that he heard the same interpreting the Apocalypse publicly. Receive the words from the process: Afterwards he saw him in the university of Paris, and he read the Apocalypse there cursorily; and the said witness heard many lectures from him. As regards the time spent on all these things, which Richard calls several years, it could not have been a whole seven years, since we shall presently show that the Saint certainly returned from Paris to Oxford no later than about the beginning of the year 1273. For Richard in the Compendium, num. 5, proceeds thus: And when he had studied in Theology for several years, and had read there cursorily the Epistles which they call Canonical, returning to Oxford, he incepted and taught as regent there in Theology for one year and four months, before the council of Lyons was celebrated by the lord Pope Gregory the tenth, on the occasion of which council, the lecturing being given up, he went to the council above-mentioned.

[49] After this, returned to Oxford, he is initiated into the mastership of Theology, Instructed, therefore, in the sacred Theological science, he went back to his homeland, to communicate it to his countrymen in the most celebrated university of England. And when he was to be adorned with the mastership of Theology there, there hastened thither, being asked, Robert de Kilwardby, a man of great learning, who for many years had been his confessor, and who, from the Order of Preachers, had then lately been raised to the archbishopric of Canterbury, and afterwards died as Cardinal bishop of Porto of the H. R. C. More about him may be seen in Jacques Échard in the Library of the praised Order of Preachers. This Robert, further, wished himself to deliver the eulogy of the new Doctor before the academics in that solemnity, as custom bore, in which he left a notable testimony to his integrity of soul and body, which Richard, an ear-witness, left to posterity in the Compendium of the Life, with me num. 9 and following. Nicholas Trivet, or Trevet, a writer of the Order of Preachers, contemporary or nearly so with the Saint, also mentions the same matter in the Chronicle which he carried from the year 1136 up to 1307, and which d'Achery published in the Spicilegium of ancient writers, tome 3, from whose page 209 I have excerpted what I subjoin.

[50] on which occasion Robert de Kilwardby delivered a panegyric on him, He (Thomas), sprung from noble birth, lived devoted to God from a boy. And, acquiring skill in letters by the exercise of study, he taught as regent first in the liberal arts, then in Canon law, and at length transferred the whole intention of his mind to Theology. In which, having been licensed to the mastership, when he had decided to incept under Brother Robert de Kilwardeby of the Order of Preachers (whom, while he had been Provincial, he had as a very familiar friend), a delay of the business intervened, the aforesaid Brother being in the meantime taken up to the prelacy of the church of Canterbury. Under whom, nevertheless, coming to Oxford after his consecration, he incepted in the church of the Friars Preachers according to the fulfilment of his desire; in whose commendation, which is customarily made of bachelors who are to be made masters before the principium, after the disputation which is called Vespers, the aforesaid archbishop, whom the said Thomas had had as his confessor from of old, asserted that he had not felt the contagion of any mortal sin; and of how great merit he was before God the glory of his increasingly frequent miracles had demonstrated with undoubted faith *. So Trivet; but you have Robert's words in the Compendium in the place praised above.

[51] archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 1273, We have the year of the mastership taken up from Richard's words given at num. 47, in which the Saint is said to have taught as regent at Oxford for one year and four months up to the holding of the council of Lyons. This general council, the II of Lyons, was celebrated by Gregory X, Roman Pontiff, in the year 1274, from the VII day of May up to the XVII of July: therefore, if from the VII day of May of the same year you subtract one year and four months, you will arrive at the VII day of January 1273, about which day, accordingly, the Saint would have to be said to have begun his mastership. But some difficulty arises from what Trivet says; for Échard, in the Library just praised, rightly proves that Robert de Kilwardby was consecrated archbishop not in the year 1272, as had seemed to some, but, by our manner of computing, in the year 1273, on the XXVI day of February; and if St. Thomas began his mastership at Oxford after this day, we shall seek in vain hence those sixteen months up to the council of Lyons, begun on the VII day of May in the year 1274 and completed in the month of July of the same year. To reconcile these things I see no more apt way than if we begin those sixteen months not from the day of the mastership taken up, but from the Saint's arrival at Oxford, and take them for that whole time which, having returned from the city of Paris, he then spent at Oxford up to his departure for Lyons.

[52] For the rest, the age of fifty-four years or thereabouts, while the Saint was about 54 years old: in the same or the following year at which he is said in the Compendium to have begun his mastership, agrees rightly with the time

num. 10: for, these 54 years being subtracted from his final age, that is, from 63 years, there will remain 9 years, which, if we add them to the year of Christ 1273, we shall have the year 1282, in which Thomas, the same Richard being witness at num. 35 of the Compendium, departed from the living at the age of sixty-three years or a little more. To the same year 1273, or to the beginning of the following, seems to be referred the Saint's second chancellorship in the university of Oxford, which Robert of Gloucester asserted in the process in these words: The said lord Thomas was in the university of Oxford, and taught there as regent in Decrees; and he was chancellor of the university (in the year 1262, as was proved above); and afterwards he studied there, and taught as regent in Theology, and was again chancellor of the aforesaid university.

[53] These things are clear, and said by a suitable witness, who had known the Saint at Oxford; he held a second chancellorship of the university of Oxford: I add, however, another also, Richard de Kimberle, who spent some years in the service of the same Saint, whose testimony has thus: He was twice chancellor of the said university of Oxford; namely while he taught as regent in Decrees, and afterwards when he taught as regent in Theology: and all this concerning Oxford the aforesaid witness said that he had seen and heard. To one or other year, therefore, namely to 1273 or 1274, this second chancellorship seems to be assigned, or rather to the latter, because Wood, who did not know of it, in the Fasti of the same university praised above placed William de Bosco at the year 1273, and produced him again at the year 1274 from mere likelihood, because he knew of no other. If this is so, the Saint must be said to have held that office when he set out for the II council of Lyons.

[54] As he set out thither there accompanied him his nephew through his brother, William Cantilupe, having gone to the council of Lyons, he becomes chaplain of Pope Gregory X. a witness already frequently praised; from whom we know besides that on that occasion he was co-opted by the Roman Pontiff Gregory X into the number of his chaplains; for so it is said in William's testimony: He went with the same to the council celebrated at Lyons by the lord Pope Gregory the tenth; and in the said council the aforesaid Thomas was made chaplain of the aforesaid lord Pope. With the same honour, therefore, which we saw above at num. 28 was conferred on St. Thomas in the year 1245 by Pope Innocent IV in the first general council of Lyons, Gregory X also deigned to honour him in the second council of Lyons, celebrated 29 years afterwards.

* perhaps &

* i.e. ut

* or demonstrat?

§ IV. The ecclesiastical benefices which the Saint obtained before the episcopate and administered holily; the manner and time of his receiving the episcopate; the habit and care of his body; his exceptional chastity.

The Saint, before he was bishop, many ecclesiastical benefices Before I proceed to the episcopate of St. Thomas, the things which we read in the process concerning the other ecclesiastical benefices obtained by him before the prelacy must be set forth. The testimony of Richard, bishop of Hereford, with me in the Compendium, num. 6 and 7, has thus on this argument: He also said that the aforesaid lord Thomas had had a very great and honourable state before the episcopate, and about a thousand marks of silver of annual revenue in ecclesiastical benefices and dignities, which he obtained by dispensation of the Apostolic See, which the same witness asserted that he had seen. For he had been precentor and canon in the church of York, archdeacon and canon in that of Lichfield, and canon in the churches of London and Hereford; and he obtained several ecclesiastical benefices. In like manner it is read in the testimony of Robert of Gloucester: The said lord Thomas before the episcopate had been almost as rich as when he was bishop: for he was precentor and canon of York, and archdeacon of Stafford and canon in the church of Lichfield, canon of London and of Hereford; and he obtained the said benefices canonically, and several others, by dispensation of the Apostolic See: for he had been dispensed (as was publicly said) by the lord Pope Innocent IV concerning the plurality of the said benefices.

[56] he possessed together by dispensation of Innocent IV: Lest anyone should think that the two praised witnesses disagree, since by the first he is said to have been archdeacon and canon in the church of Lichfield, and by the other archdeacon of Stafford and canon in the church of Lichfield, it must be observed that Stafford is indeed the head of the county of Stafford in England, yet is not an episcopal city, but situated in the diocese of Lichfield, whose bishop's see is the city of Lichfield, founded in the same county of Stafford. Richard, therefore, called St. Thomas archdeacon in the church of Lichfield from the diocese in which he discharged that office; and Robert called him archdeacon of Stafford from the city of Stafford, which was the portion of the same diocese assigned to his archdeaconry and jurisdiction; for in some dioceses more than one archdeacon were established. Hence Hugh le Barber, the sixth witness, rightly says: He was archdeacon of Stafford in the church (that is, in the diocese) of Lichfield. Of the other places in which he possessed other benefices besides, some will be named in the course of this Commentary. Concerning the dispensation made by the Apostolic See for possessing them all, it was established in the process from the letters of Innocent IV, which the proctor of the cause exhibited to the Pontifical commissaries.

[57] It will help now to hear how holily he administered all these benefices, defended their rights, and spent their revenues not on luxury or delights, which he cared for diligently and munificently, both by himself and by others, but on their utility. Besides the things which you have in the Compendium, num. 7, Robert of Gloucester, asked how he conducted himself in the above-mentioned benefices, answered that very well, carefully and diligently; and that he frequently went about through the several places in which he was beneficed; and very devoutly celebrated and preached in them, and kept great hospitality there, as regards receiving the greater and middling folk, and making large alms to the poor; as the aforesaid witness said he had seen. He also said that he had seen and heard that the said lord Thomas very manfully and fervently and in good faith defended the rights and liberties of the said benefices, and built in those benefices where there was need of buildings, and repaired and rebuilt what needed repair and rebuilding, and was very diligent in seeking out and having good and sufficient vicars to govern the said benefices for him. And all the aforesaid, the same witness said, he had seen several times before he was with the said lord Thomas; that is, before the year 1276, in which he was received among his household by him, when he had been advanced to the bishopric of Hereford.

[58] Illustrious also are the things which Hugh le Barber, bound to his service for many years before and after his entry upon the episcopate, having the greatest care for the sick and the poor, left testified in the process. Among other things he also said that, from the said compassion (or mercy), whenever he turned aside to some place in which he had a benefice, he had it inquired whether there were any sick in the said place; and the better and more delicate foods which were in his house sent to them. Asked how he knew this, he said that he had seen and heard this several times, and by command of the said lord Thomas had inquired of the neighbours whether there were any sick in the said places. Asked about the places, he said at Hampton, Suyterfeld, Schyrebourne, Kemeseye, and that he did the same when he stayed at Oxford, when he knew that any poor scholars were sick; asked, however, about the names of the said scholars, he said that he did not now remember, but at the aforesaid times he remembered (as he said). And he deposed that the aforesaid things were for many years before the said lord Thomas had been taken up to the episcopate…

[59] Likewise he said that, when he could not turn aside to his benefices to which, even when absent, he ordered alms to be distributed, to hold feasts in them and make banquets for his parishioners, as he had been accustomed to do when he turned aside to the said benefices, then he had corn (that is, wheat) or beans and peas given to the poor parishioners of his said churches. Asked how he knew this, he answered that he had seen and heard when the said lord Thomas commanded this to his bailiffs; and that the witness himself, while he was sick in the places concerning which he deposed above, had the corn, beans and peas threshed, that they might be given to the aforesaid poor. Asked where he had seen and heard that the said lord Thomas commanded the aforesaid bailiffs, he said at Doderhult, Hampton, Aston, Wyntringhuam, Dyghton. And one of the said bailiffs was called (as he said when asked) William Wycher, another was called Alan de Kymberle, another Robert de Wodeford, another William de Kymberleye: of the names of the others he said he did not remember. Of the time he said that as long as he was a scholar (that is, from that time at which he began to apply himself to higher studies up to the episcopate.)

[60] and taking care to establish suitable ministers in those churches, Of the quantity of what was given in the several parishes, he answered that according to the quantity (or number) and quality of the poor; and that commonly to each poor person there was given a certain measure of the said corn, or of the said beans or peas, which measure commonly contained as much as the common provender or livery of one horse for a night contains. Provender and livery, or libratio, are of the same signification, and signify the measure of oats or fodder which sufficed for a horse for one night, and was accustomed to be given. Of his care to establish fit and worthy ministers in the churches committed to him, William Cantilupe says this: In his churches which he had before he was bishop he wished that there should be priests knowing how to preach, who were of good and honest conversation; and he gave them some of his garments, and charged them to be solicitous in the care of souls.

[61] and defend their rights. Nor indeed did he neglect the other part of his office, which consisted in preserving and vindicating the rights of the churches over which he presided. We have a twin example of this from the testimony of the praised Cantilupe, who (to use again the words of the process) specified that, before the said lord Thomas was bishop, for the right of his church of Ryppel, of the diocese of Worcester, which the said lord Thomas held, he litigated against the bishop of Worcester; and master Gregory, the official of the said bishop of Worcester, gave sentence against the said bishop his lord, and had restored to the said lord Thomas a certain cow or ox by reason of a mortuary due to him by reason of the said church of Ryppel; and this he deposed from the relation of another. Concerning the mortuary Du Cange may be consulted in his Glossary, where, adducing examples, he proves that it is a certain right of the rectors of churches to receive one ox or

horse, or some other of the things which any of their parishioners leaves when dying. Likewise he specified (so it is read again in the testimony of the same Cantilupe) from the relation of another, that while the said Thomas was rector or parson of the church of Suynterfeld, of the diocese of Worcester, he litigated for the small tithes against the dean of Warwick, and won; and had from it two marks of silver. See more in the Compendium, num. 7. Thus far of St. Thomas not yet bishop.

[62] The bishopric of the church of Hereford being vacant, The bishopric, which he had long merited by many titles and had never canvassed for, he was at length compelled, almost unwillingly, to take up. That it had been foretold to him both two years before by John Breton, or le Breton, his immediate predecessor in the see of Hereford, and formerly in his youth by Walter Cantilupe, his paternal uncle, bishop of Worcester, Richard observed in the Compendium, num. 22 and following, which see there. William le Wayte de Bosco Arso, the Gayta or watchman of the aforesaid John, bishop of Hereford, and then also of St. Thomas himself, the fifty-eighth witness in the process, produced besides another presage of the same John. For he narrated that the lord John le Breton, the immediate predecessor of the said lord Thomas, with whom the witness himself was then staying as watchman, two years before the death of the lord John himself, on a certain feast of the Nativity, when the said lord Thomas was about to depart thence and was taking leave of him in the hall, the said lord John said to the aforesaid lord Thomas, in the hearing of the witness himself and of many others, that he had a gift which he wished to give him *; and he asked him not to refuse it.

[63] He answered him that there could be a gift in which he was canon, which he would admit, and such a one as he would not. Then he expressed that he wished to give him a little prebend in the church of Hereford, and that he was to be bishop after him. He answered him that he would receive the prebend, but not with that burden; praying God that He would preserve him from such a burden. So it is there; but I do not dispute whether these predictions of the bishops John and Walter are to be taken for prophecies, or, as could easily have been the case, for mere probable conjectures of theirs, born from the Man's merit, and which the event proved. That prebend, however, or canonry, which made him one of the bosom of the college of the canons of Hereford, could have been the occasion of his being elected to the bishopric of the same church two years later. Concerning the canonical manner of election by which he came to this dignity, all the witnesses agree who were questioned by the Apostolic commissaries on this matter, of whom it will help to have heard one frequently praised, William Cantilupe, who was then present at Hereford with his holy Uncle.

[64] He, asked by the commissaries in what manner the said lord Thomas had obtained the bishopric of Hereford, he is elected bishop, unwilling, by the canons to whom it had been compromised answered that, the see being vacant, while the said lord Thomas was archdeacon of Stafford and canon of London, and was residing at London, he went to the said church of Hereford, in which he was a canon. And when the day for electing had been fixed, the lord Thomas preached (to exhort his fellow canons to make a fair election, as another of the witnesses has it); and although he had many companions and squires, he would not have them go with him when he went to preach, except the lord John his chaplain, and the witness himself, and a certain other squire. That day the canons could not agree; on the morrow they compromised upon certain canons of the said church of Hereford: and all the said compromissaries said that they wished to have Thomas as bishop. And because in the said church there were many canons who were called Thomas, aspiring to the aforesaid bishopric, the last of the said compromissaries said that he himself understood Thomas de Cantilupo; and the others answered that they too understood the same. And so he was elected in concord, and, resisting and weeping, and alleging that he was not sufficient, he was carried, the witness himself being present, to the altar; and Te Deum laudamus was sung.

[65] From his testimony gather in what manner is to be taken in the year 1275, what is read in the Life in Laurence Surius: But when the church of Hereford had been bereft of its pastor, elected by the votes of all in the year MCCLXXV he was consecrated bishop. Baillet was even more liberal than Surius when, having before his eyes the merits of St. Thomas, not a suitable author, he says in French words: The Saint, who was known in the whole region, being sought for the vacant see by the common voice of people and clergy, was raised to it by all the votes of those to whom the election belonged. The year of his election and consecration Surius rightly noted from his manuscript Life, and after him Baillet, and our apographs have the same, and John Capgrave in the Legend of the Saints. Nicholas Trevet of the Order of Preachers, a contemporary of the holy Prelate, agrees, who in his Chronicle at the aforecited year, in d'Achery's edition, tome 3 of the Spicilegium of ancient Writers, page 206, noted this event with a brief but notable eulogy of the Saint. Receive his words.

[66] as is the common assertion of all: There died in this year John Brutoun (by others he is called Breton and le Breton), bishop of Hereford, who, very skilled in the laws of England, wrote a very useful book on them. To whom succeeded master Thomas de Cantilupo, doctor in sacred Theology, a man noble in race, but much nobler in morals and in virtue of mind. These things agree excellently with the duration of his see, which the praised Trevet, rightly connecting his death with the year 1282, enclosed within seven years, saying: In this year Bl. Thomas, bishop of Hereford … snatched from the present wicked world, passed to the heavenly kingdoms, when for seven years he had ruled with solicitous care the flock committed to him. Matthew of Westminster, with Trevet, placed at the same year 1275 the death of John and the succession of St. Thomas, although he deferred the death of the same Saint later than is right, to the year 1287. In the former place he says briefly: There died in this year John Bretoun, bishop of Hereford, who, very skilled in the laws of England, wrote a book on them, which is called Le Bretoun. To whom succeeded Thomas de Cantalupo.

[67] and he is ordained (as a certain one says) on the 8th of September, I refrain from more, because this year is certain, even with those who thought that the Saint's death is to be fixed beyond the year 1282, and accordingly ascribed to his see a longer space than seven years. The day of his episcopal consecration I have found assigned by no one except Francis Godwin in his Commentary on the Prelates of England, with me page 536, where he writes that John Breton departed from the living on the XII day of May of the year 1275, and presently, proceeding to his successor, whom he numbers forty-fourth among the bishops of Hereford, subjoins: On the VIII of September following, Thomas Cantilupe, archdeacon of Stafford, and chancellor of England and also of the academy of Oxford, was consecrated. Godwin could have learned that day from the records of the church of Hereford, and in the year 1275 the VIII day of September was a Sunday, suitable for the consecrations of bishops. But when he here called St. Thomas chancellor of England and of the academy of Oxford, interpret this of both offices held by him before that time.

[68] in the 56th or 57th year of his life. The Saint was then passing the fifty-sixth or seventh year of his life, since, from what has been said above and is to be said, when the year of Christ 1273 was a few months begun he was fifty-four years old or thereabouts; and when he died in the month of August of the year 1282 he was sixty-three years old, or a little more. Further, since we have brought the Saint from his very boyhood, through the studies of letters and sciences, masterships and offices, and the ecclesiastical benefices which he obtained, through those 56 years up to the episcopate, it is now fitting to set out with what virtues chiefly he was furnished when he entered upon the episcopate and adorned it up to his death. For although I have already before this mentioned some of them, as opportunity was given, I have yet put off many more, both lest I should be compelled frequently to interrupt the narration which pertained to the series of his life, and because many of them were exercised by him both before and after he received the prelacy, and concerning others it remains uncertain to which part of his life they are to be referred.

[69] The natural habit of his body Brother Robert of St. Martin, sacristan of St. Bartholomew's in London, The habit and care of his body. the thirtieth witness in the process, more than fifty years old, who had known him for four years as a canon of London, described briefly thus: He had as it were an angelic countenance, and was fair and ruddy, well bearded, with a long nose; and the hairs of his beard and of his head were partly white and partly reddish. In the outward care of his body he did not differ from men of his race and condition; for, as Hugh le Barber, his domestic already praised elsewhere, asserted, he was not a hypocrite, or papelard, nor did he show himself better than others or of more excellent life; but he conformed himself in outward garments, and in the furnishing of his bed and other things, to his equals, and wore a mantle within the house at dinner, and a garnache, as prelates wear, while he was in the aforesaid studies, because he was archdeacon of Stafford in the church of Lichfield; and he used furs of vair in his garments, and also in a certain coverlet of his bed lined with the said vair. Vair, which some interpret as squirrels, others as Pontic mice, have precious little skins, from which a fleece was made up and sewn into the garments of nobles. Fodratum, or foderatum, is an Italian word from the verb foderare, to sew in; whence it is clear what a coverlet, or blanket, of the bed lined with vair is. Finally, garnachia is likewise an Italian word; in Latin it is a gown, or ankle-length garment.

[70] I shall follow in general the order of the virtues which Richard kept in the Compendium of the Life, He cultivated virginity wonderfully, of which a notable testimony excepting, however, those which pertain more closely to episcopal cares, which I shall recount after the rest, so that I may then proceed to the holy Prelate's death and the things which followed it, the series of events being again preserved. Richard's words, however, which can be read in the Compendium, I shall only touch lightly, but I shall confirm them from the testimonies of others as often as it has seemed worth the effort, and I shall add the things worthy of record which they testified besides. Richard, therefore, beginning from the angelic virtue, from num. 8, did not hesitate to affirm that he believed that he was chaste and clean in mind and body, and had remained a virgin at the time of his death. As reasons for his assertion he alleged that, having lived with him most familiarly for many years as one of the household, he never noticed anything in him from which even the slightest suspicion to the contrary could have arisen; that the modesty of his morals and the bashfulness of his words sounded of nothing but a virgin; that wanton and lighter sayings in others were chastised by him, the company of women avoided, even of his sisters, whom neither to

admit to a kiss nor to stay long in his house would he permit — these were not doubtful indications of his virginal chastity.

[71] Finally he praised the testimony of Robert de Kilwardby, archbishop of Canterbury, then Cardinal bishop of Porto of the H. R. C., which was given publicly by the archbishop of Canterbury, afterwards Cardinal. of whom I have already made mention above, who, from his long-standing knowledge of the same Saint's conscience, dared to commend him thus in a public assembly of the academics at Oxford: So help me God, as this Man is as clean today as regards chastity of mind and body as on the very day on which he was born from his mother into the world. He was then, as Richard rightly observed in the same place, fifty-four years old, or thereabouts. Robert of Gloucester and William Cantilupe also expressly mention the same testimony of Kilwardby, both professing that they were present and heard it when it was publicly uttered by the praised archbishop of Canterbury. Nicholas Trevet also mentions it in the words which we gave above. Brother Edmund de Aumari of the Order of Preachers, the twenty-third witness in the process, set forth a singular case in which Thomas, while he was still living in the academy of Paris, happily escaped snares laid for his virginity.

[72] at Paris, compelled to spend the night outside his own hospice, The matter went thus. Brother Edmund de Aumari likewise narrated (the words are the process's) that he had heard it related by persons worthy of trust that, while the aforesaid lord Thomas was a scholar at Paris and then in want of money, he had had a certain burgess of Paris asked to lend him money until money should be brought to him from England; and the loan not yet obtained, the companions of the lord Thomas himself had persuaded him to go to the burgess's own house, so as to obtain the said loan more easily and more quickly, and to ask him about the aforesaid; and the said lord Thomas, thus persuaded, had entered the house of the said burgess and had not found him; the wife of the aforesaid burgess, who was reputed very beautiful, receiving him courteously, honourably and kindly, and looking on his handsomeness, urged him effectually to remain to lie (that is, to sleep) in the aforesaid house, because the hour was late for returning to the lord Thomas's own house, and he would find the gate * of the city shut; so that, if he wished to return to his own house that night, he could not. The burgess, namely, that is, that citizen, lived in the suburb of Paris, and Thomas in the city, or the reverse.

[73] he drives an unchaste woman from his bed, And when the said lord Thomas, not acquiescing, withdrew, and by the contrivance (as is said) of the said woman the said gate had been shut before the time, and he could not return to his own house, and was anxious in what place he should lie that night, at the persuasion of his said companions he returned to lie in the house of the said burgess, and was placed in a fine bed and in a fine chamber. When the hour of sleeping was now at hand, and he was believed by the wife of the said burgess to have fallen asleep, the said wife, entering cautiously by a secret door, placed herself naked in the same bed with him. But since he was not sleeping, but pretended to sleep, and the said woman drew near to him in the bed, he, fleeing her, fell out of the bed onto the floor: which done, the aforesaid woman went away. And when on the morrow the said lord Thomas wished to return to his house, and the wife of the said burgess asked him how it had gone with him that night, he answered that very badly, and that he had never had so bad a night, because the devil had tempted him.

[74] and corrects her: chaste in words and deed Then she asked urgently that he tell her the truth, and she in turn would tell him: and he promised that he would tell the truth. After which the said woman asked him whether he was awake or asleep when he had the aforesaid temptation: and he answered that he was awake; and she added that she had been that devil who had tempted him. Which said, the aforesaid woman, thanking him, promised that thenceforth she would live honestly: and so she is said to have kept it. So Brother Edmund de Aumari, from the relation, as was premised, of persons worthy of trust. It is credible that the chaste Youth set out to the woman the foulness of her deed, and, having sharply rebuked her, drove her to promise amendment, and perhaps also to perform it in fact thereafter. Robert of Gloucester also commended the Saint's modesty, who, bidden to say whence he knew it, answered that from the conversation which he had had with him; and because he had never seen or heard a sign or deed of his from which he could detect the contrary; nay rather, by certain indications, his meek simplicity, declared sometimes in words through many circumlocutions when his companions spoke of women in his hearing, indicated that he had always been a stranger to every illicit contagion.

[75] And when the lady Juliana Tregoz, and a certain other lady, he avoids even the company of his sisters, and keeps his sister from a kiss. his sisters, who were baronesses and widows, came to visit him scarcely once a year, he conversed very little with them, saying that the conversations of women were vain. And if they stayed * beyond one day in his house, he courteously induced them to depart; nor did he permit any other women, however old or aged, to stay in his house. The testimony of William Cantilupe agrees, who besides this handed down to memory concerning the aforesaid baroness, visiting her holy Brother. When the lady Juliana, wife of the lord John Tregoz, baron, the uterine and legitimate sister of the lord Thomas himself, who was a most beautiful lady, had visited the said lord Thomas once after he was bishop, and had come to visit him in the manor of the bishop himself called Bosebury, and wished to kiss him on the mouth, the same lord Thomas did not permit it, but held out his hand to her that she might kiss it. And the said lady, disturbed at this, began to weep: and those standing by asked the said lord Thomas to permit his said sister to kiss him, because it was lawful and honest; and he would by no means acquiesce.

[76] Moreover, because it belongs to chaste minds to have chaste ears, He reproves indecent sayings, even in an illustrious man, the holy Prelate did not let anyone go away unpunished if he had uttered an unchaste word in his presence. We have here again as witness his familiar domestic Hugh le Barber, who also said that, if any of his relations or friends had said some lie, or indecent word, or wished to disparage another, the said lord Thomas immediately set himself against the liar and the disparager and the one saying indecent words, and defended the others. And asked how he knew this, he said that he had seen and heard it; and, being asked, he specified that once, while the said lord Thomas was eating with the lord Robert Gregonet, a baron of England, who had espoused a certain sister of the said lord Thomas, and a hiccup had come upon a certain young lady sitting at table, the said baron said to the said young lady in foul vernacular that this signified that she required the company of a man; and the said lord Thomas publicly rebuked the said baron there for the said foul speech.

[77] From this public reproof of so illustrious a man anyone will easily conclude and his nephew, not modest enough, that the Saint did not suffer similar things silently in his domestics, nor would he retain in his service and company those who, chastised by him for a fault of this kind, had neglected to amend themselves. In fact Brother Edmund de Aumari, just praised, produced an example of severity of that kind. The lord Thomas (he says) greatly detested the sin of the flesh in his familiars and kinsmen and others… And he had a certain nephew whom he kept in the schools, and (this nephew) incepted in arts at Oxford and finished at Paris. And he kept a master for his said nephew; and because in those times the said nephew advanced well in life and knowledge, the said lord Thomas loved him much, and the aforesaid nephew also had great familiarity with the said lord Thomas. And the said witness had seen this frequently in the house of the said lord Thomas.

[78] he removes from his company. But after the said lord Thomas was made bishop, and directed … his steps to the Roman curia, the same witness asked the aforesaid lord Thomas why he did not keep and did not take with him his aforesaid nephew, and did not hold him as familiar as before; and the same lord Thomas answered that he had heard some sinister things of him, adding that: "These young men are not so modest as they used to be. For when I was young, if some beautiful woman had looked at me, I would have blushed, and would have turned my eyes away from her, and would have drawn my hood over my face, so as not to see her: but these young men do not do so." From which words the aforesaid witness suspected that the aforesaid lord Thomas had noted in the aforesaid nephew some such things as had not pleased him, and that for this he had repelled him from his familiarity. And although the said witness was of the same age as the said nephew, and they had been contemporaries in the university, and the aforesaid lord Thomas loved and gladly saw the said witness; yet at the prayers of the witness himself he would not bring back the said nephew to his familiarity.

* i.e. eidem to him

* i.e. portam gate

* i.e. hospitarentur lodged

§ V. The Saint's severe abstinence from food and drink; chastisement of the body by hair shirts, night vigils and lying on the ground; the gift of tears while offering the sacrifice; daily prayers.

Given beyond measure to sobriety The agreement of the witnesses is unanimous concerning the wonderful temperance of St. Thomas in diet. Richard, at num. 12 and the two following, recording more on this matter, testified that he had … in excellence a sobriety, frugality and abstinence in food and in drink such as he had never seen any healthy man have, such namely as he was. From the same man's testimony, his daily diet was moderate; his ordinary drink thin ale, or, if this were not at hand, wine very much watered. Having tasted a little of delicate foods, he ordered the rest to be distributed to the sick poor: he supped very rarely; in the afternoon he abstained from drink, and if at any time the presence of great men required otherwise according to the custom of the country, he knew how, raising the cup to his mouth, to satisfy courtesy by a pious pretence. Such, moreover, was the sparingness in living of the Man, who from the constitution of his body had an appetite for food, that Richard marvelled how he could live with so little nourishment; and in the same man's judgment his whole life was passed in fasting on account of his sobriety and abstinence. See the rest there; I shall now confirm the same things here from the testimonies of others.

[80] William Cantilupe said that he had frequently seen, for many years he never rose from table except hungry; while he was with the aforesaid lord Thomas, that he came to the table at which his familiars or others were eating; and when he saw them eating well, he sometimes said that he had an appetite for eating; and he did not eat, but went into his chamber. The same witness also said that he had heard it related by the lord William Daubeney that the aforesaid lord Thomas had said to him that he had not eaten to satiety for thirty years before his death; but that afterwards he had repented … (as the aforesaid lord William related) that he had said the above-mentioned things to him, although he was very much his familiar. The matter, as it happened, is narrated a little more fully by Richard, who had been present, in the Compendium, num. 14, where that lord is called, perhaps by a Latin name, William de Albaniaco. I go on reciting the testimony of Cantilupe. Of delicate foods he did not eat except a little, as it were two or three mouthfuls; but he smelled the said foods and put them aside, talking and practising continence, and saying with himself: Shall I eat? I shall not eat. And so he put aside the said delicate foods, and ate pottages; that is, vegetables or pulse.

[81] And sometimes, when he had various pottages or various sauces, he fed on meaner foods, he sometimes made a mixture of them; and the same witness believes (as he said) that he made the said mixture in order to find less savour in the said sauces and pottages. And the aforesaid he said he had seen frequently while he carved before the said lord Thomas at table, before the said lord Thomas was bishop, and after. A similar abstinence of his from more delicate foods was commended by another example by the lord Nicholas (elsewhere he is called Aicardus) de Warewik or Warevik, justiciary and counsellor of Edward, king of England, a jurist and the fifth witness, of whom it is read in the process: Likewise he said that the aforesaid lord Thomas loved lampreys of the Severn (the Sabrina is a river of England, rising in Wales) above other fish, as the aforesaid witness himself said he had heard from him; and the familiars of the lord Thomas himself said this; yet the said witness saw several times, when he was eating with the aforesaid lord Thomas, that he abstained from the aforesaid lampreys, and also from other delicate and costly foods. Here also belongs what Hugh le Barber testified, that he had seen and heard several times, before the said lord Thomas was bishop, that he ordered partridges and other fowls to be prepared for him; and when they had been prepared, he abstained from them altogether, or sometimes ate one mouthful. The witness added that these things had been observed by him in several places, and he named Oxford, Suyterfeld, Hampton and Schirebourne.

[82] I return to Cantilupe's testimony. Likewise he said that on Wednesday he did not eat meat, he observed various fasts; and that on Friday he ate nothing but bread and pottage, and fasted; he does not know, however, whether he drank wine (namely mixed with water, as he had premised) or ale on the said Friday. On Saturday he fasted and ate fish. On the vigils of Bl. Mary he fasted on bread and water; and he fasted in Advent before the Lord's Nativity with the common fast; and he rarely supped, and of all things which he ate, whether they were fruits or other things, the first mouthful which he was about to take he set aside for alms. Thus far he, to whom I add another witness also, varying somewhat in a few points. John Bute, the fifty-ninth witness, who was one of the household of the holy Prelate, and whose known truthfulness other witnesses also commended on oath to the Apostolic commissaries, deposed concerning his former Lord that he had been most vehemently sober in food and in drink; and that he ate and drank very little; and at table he had set before him one drink of white wine, and another * of water; and sometimes, when he was believed to be drinking wine, he drank water, or weak ale.

[83] sparing in drink as in food, he rarely supped; And the cup with which he drank wine was a very small one of silver, and contained in quantity scarcely more than one middling salserium (that is, salt-cellar, to the English saltseller) would contain: nor did he drink it all at one draught, and he did not commonly drink at table more than two such cups of wine, and a little of ale. And he rarely supped, and then he did not eat * one or two vipae in wine much watered. What is meant here by vipae we learn from Hermolaus in Du Cange in the Glossary, saying: Among the ancients breakfast was a mouthful soaked in wine, which kind the barbarians call Vippa, from VINO and PANE. Vipa, therefore, is here said by John Bute to be a morsel of bread dipped in wine diluted with water. So also Robert of Gloucester says of this same Saint of ours: He rarely ate except once a day; and then, when he ate twice, he took scarcely anything at supper except a little bread put in ale. Now receive the rest of John's testimony.

[84] and on certain days, while it was permitted, he took only bread and water. Delicate foods he ate in the scantiest quantity; yet he tasted one or two mouthfuls of them. On Friday he did not drink wine, but weak ale: the Vigils of Bl. Mary he fasted on bread and water; he celebrated and observed the fast of the Lord's Advent before the Nativity, and the fast of the Apostles, namely for nine days before Pentecost. So much there. For the rest, the diversity which occurs in the assertions of both may have arisen partly from this, that they speak of various circumstances of the Saint's age, health and other similar conditions. Thus Richard in the Compendium, num. 13, expressly asserts: But on the vigils of Bl. Mary (on which the aforesaid testified that Thomas was accustomed to fast on bread and water) and on Good Friday his physicians did not allow him to fast simply on bread and water; but he ate bread with pottage in a moderate quantity, and drank wine very much watered, or weak ale. To reconcile these things it is most probable that the Saint formerly indeed was accustomed to observe that rigid fast on the aforesaid days, but afterwards, on account of weakness of stomach and of strength, prudently tempered it according to the judgment of the physicians.

[85] His friends admonishing him to take more food, It would be long and tedious to recount the testimonies of all; yet I add one or another in which the Saint is said to have been admonished by his friends about his excessive sparingness of food and drink. Robert of Gloucester, bidden by the Apostolic commissaries to say whence he knew that Thomas excelled in that virtue, answered that he had been with him for about three years in his house and at his table, and saw the aforesaid. And when once the same witness, at the side of the aforesaid lord Thomas at Arlee near Reading (it is a town of England in the county of Berkshire), of the diocese of Sarr (that is, of Salisbury), said to him: Lord, you eat and drink too little; you will not be able to last; and the said lord Thomas answered nothing, and the said witness had repeated the aforesaid again, the same lord Thomas answered him *: Eat, drink what pleases thee, and be silent, and leave me in peace. And the said witness rejoined: Lord, I will not, because I would not that you should fail, for I should lose the promotion which I hope for from you. And then the said lord Thomas replied: Thou wishest to flatter me; thus namely imposing silence on the troublesome admonisher.

[86] The other testimony is that of Brother Nicholas de Wichio, by his answer he imposed silence, priest, monk of the cathedral church of Worcester, who had been clerk of the chapel of the same Saint for five years before he was bishop. He said that he had heard it narrated by the lord William de Montfort, a kinsman of the said lord Thomas, who was of the greatest state, and had more than a thousand marks sterling annually, that the same lord William, on a certain occasion sitting at table near the said lord Thomas, and noticing and marvelling how he ate and drank so little, said to the aforesaid lord Thomas that he wished he would not take it ill if he should say to him * some words. And the said lord Thomas answering that he might say it, because he did not believe he would say anything but honest and lawful words, the aforesaid lord William said that he marvelled how the lord Thomas, who ate and drank so little, and so greatly weakened his body, dared to undertake such great and arduous deeds as he had done in having a lawsuit with the earl of Gloucester and with the archbishop of Canterbury.

[87] And the said lord Thomas answered: Kinsman, thou oughtest not to pry at table how much allowing them to take as much as they wished. I eat nor drink; but thou, when thou shalt be a great prelate, eat and drink what thou wilt: yet because thou art a priest, as I am, I will tell thee one thing, which thou shalt not reveal in my lifetime, but after my death thou mayest tell it if thou wilt: Thirty-two years have elapsed since I rose from table without being more hungry than when I set myself to eat at the said table; and yet I am so strong that I would dare to undertake a battle against thee. By this answer he courteously repelled the importunate inquirer, and insinuated what was likewise fitting for him. Further, the praised Brother de Wichio, asked in what place and time, and before whom, the aforesaid lord de Montfort narrated these things, answered that in the hostelry (that is, in the hospice of pilgrims) of the priory of Worcester, there being present the lord Simon, formerly precentor of Worcester, the witness himself, and several others now dead. And these things were narrated about three years after the death of the said lord Thomas.

[88] That Thomas also used another remedy for restraining the flesh and for propitiating God commended in the sacred Letters, He wore a most rough hair shirt on his bare flesh, namely the hair shirt, various witnesses testified in the process; which matter Bishop Richard also briefly mentioned in the Compendium, num. 20. Certain is the testimony of John Bute, who himself found his hair shirt hidden in his bed and handled it with his own hands, at the time when the Saint had set out into France to Pontigny (which is a village and abbey, commonly Pontigny, in the province of Champagne) to honour there the body of St. Edmund, archbishop of Canterbury, of whom we shall have to treat in our Work at the XVI day of November, on which he is announced in the Roman Martyrology. I subjoin the words of the process from the testimony of the praised John. Likewise he said that when, in the aforesaid times, the said lord Thomas, having set out on pilgrimage to St. Edmund, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, at Pontigny *, had left

the custody of his chamber and the lordship (that is, the administration) of his things to the witness himself; and, his return having been heard of, the aforesaid witness wishing to prepare the bed of the lord Thomas himself, found among the straw, deep at the head of the bed, a certain hair shirt of white hairs, fine and knotted.

[89] which was found stained with his flesh and blood; And unfolding the said hair shirt, he found it as it were stained with flesh and blood, and some particles of flesh adhered to it ; and in it were many lice. And the said hair shirt was so long that it could reach down to the middle of the thigh, and it had sleeves beyond the middle of the arm. Which hair shirt he put back in the same place. When the said lord Thomas had returned, and had sat upon the bed, and the said witness had drawn off his shoes and boots, putting his hand to the place in which the said hair shirt was, he said to the witness himself: Now I know that thou hast not lain in my bed. Namely, because he had felt that his hair shirt had remained in the same place in which, when about to depart, he had left it through carelessness, he seems not unwillingly to have thought that it had not been detected by John. On the same argument the sixtieth witness, Robert Deyntè, was better instructed than all the others, a familiar domestic of St. Thomas and chamberlain under Nicholas de Hodinet, the principal chamberlain, both of whom set out with their holy Lord to the Roman curia, on which journey the same Saint and Nicholas died. From the testimony of this Robert the process has thus.

[90] and he had several hair shirts, which he always used once he was bishop. The lord Thomas wore a knotted hair shirt, the roughest that could be found. And when he had first had the hair shirt of the lord Walter, bishop of Worcester, his paternal uncle, and it did not seem to him rough enough (which likewise was knotted and of the hairs of animals), he sent the witness himself to Oxford to have a rougher one made for him. And so he did, and brought it to him * at his manor of Prestebury. And this he said was within one month or thereabouts after the same lord Thomas had obtained possession of the bishopric and been consecrated bishop. Asked whether before the episcopate he used a hair shirt, he answered that he did not; but girdles of hair cloth as broad as the palm of a man's hand. Asked whether he used the said hair shirt continually up to his death after he was bishop, he answered that he did. And he had several hair shirts, and the same witness washed them; and there were sometimes as many lice in the said hair shirts as could be received in one hand or palm of a man, as it seemed to him. Likewise asked whether he lay (that is, was accustomed to sleep) with the said hair shirt, he answered that he did. From the same man's testimony I have found the following excerpted besides: When the body of the lord Thomas was washed after his death by the witness himself, he saw there the traces and certain impressions of the knots of the above-mentioned hair shirt.

[91] There are also believed to have been his girdles, one of iron, It will help, in the last place, to have heard also the twelfth witness, the lord Richard de Kimberle, who spent ten years in the service of the holy Prelate, to whom a hair shirt and an iron girdle which the latter was believed to have used came, and remained after the same Saint's death. He, bidden by the Apostolic commissaries to say whether he had noted any … austerity … of life in him, answered that Robert Deyntè, a layman (just praised), who lay in the chamber of the said lord Thomas after the lord Thomas himself was bishop, and before he took the road to go to the Roman curia on account of the discord which he had with the lord archbishop of Canterbury, once handed to the witness himself a certain little sack, to be kept by the witness himself, not, however, sealed; in which sack the same witness found (as he said) a piece of an iron panchera (that is, part of an iron cuirass, from the Italian words pezzo, a piece, and panciera, a cuirass), made in the manner of a girdle, with which a man could be girded next to the flesh by means of certain straps existing at the ends of the said iron girdle, having in breadth about three fingers; and it was rusty. And the aforesaid witness said that he believed that the aforesaid lord Thomas had worn at some time the said iron girdle next to the flesh under his hair shirt.

[92] But afterwards the said Robert did not ask for the said sack, from forgetfulness, and another of hair cloth, as he believes, nor got it back from the aforesaid witness. The said witness also found in the aforesaid sack a certain other girdle, made of knotted threads or cords, of which knotted hair shirts are composed; and the said girdle was, from the multiplication of the said threads, almost as thick as are the cords with which the Friars Minor are girded outwardly: and the said cord was also, besides the little knots which were in the several threads or cords, knotted, as are the cords of the said Friars Minor; as was evident from the inspection of the part of the said hair girdle which the said witness exhibited at his examination and deposition, saying that he believed that the aforesaid lord Thomas had at some time worn the aforesaid hair girdle; the said witness, however, did not see the said lord Thomas using the aforesaid iron and hair girdles.

[93] Asked what he had done with the aforesaid girdles, he answered which after his death were held as relics. that he had for the greater part distributed and divided up the hair girdle among many nobles of the kindred of the said lord Thomas, who asked the witness himself for it out of devotion. But the iron girdle he had given (as he said) to the canons of the church of Christ of the diocese of Winchester, in which there are canons Regular, who hold the said girdle in veneration as relics of the said lord Thomas. Thus far the testimony of Richard de Kimberle, who rightly believed that both those girdles were St. Thomas's, who, it is established from the foregoing, used hair girdles, and concerning whom also the thirtieth witness, Brother Robert of St. Martin, sacristan of St. Bartholomew's in London, asserted that he had heard from a certain chamberlain of his who was called William, … that he also wore iron around his loins. The same witness, in conformity with the sayings of others, also asserted from hearsay that the Saint was also sometimes accustomed to wear a shirt and drawers of hair cloth down to the feet. I also add a passage from the testimony of Aicardus or Nicholas de Warevik, which has thus: The same witness heard it said that the earl of Cornwall formerly had a certain hair shirt of the said lord Thomas, which, as was related, the said lord Thomas had ordered someone to throw into the fire in the illness of which he died, and it could not be burned. But of these things enough now.

[94] To the daily abstinence from food and the affliction of the body by hair garments were added night vigils usefully spent, He spent the greatest part of the night in reading or writing, which, when necessary sleep pressing interrupted them, not rarely an uncomfortable lying received. Concerning his vigils see Richard in the Compendium, num. 15, with whom agreeing, and adding other things, the eye-witness Robert Deyntè, asked whether the holy Prelate was accustomed to sleep clothed in the hair shirt, answered that he was, and that he lay clothed either upon the bed or near the bed upon a carpet. And he said that he lay rarely and for a short time; but, sitting upon the bed or near the bed, and having his books about him, and studying in them, or writing, or composing collations (that is, sermons to be delivered to the people), he dozed. Asked whence he knew these things, he answered because he lay in his chamber, and frequently came to him to prepare the light with which he studied, in a lantern *; and the said witness was so wearied, as he said, by the vigils of the said lord Thomas, that he sometimes proposed to withdraw from him stealthily. He also said that the said lord Thomas did not sleep by day.

[95] and in general lay not in bed but on the ground. To Robert Deyntè I add another witness, likewise an eye-witness, John Butè. He did not cease (says he) at suitable times from being occupied in prayer or reading; and many times, when he was believed to be sleeping and lying in bed, he lay on the ground before the bed, some cloths being placed between himself and the ground, and some at his head, and some over him. And this the said witness said he had frequently seen in Normandy in a place called Funtaynes, in which the said lord Thomas made a stay for a year and a half, and the witness himself then with him, then his panetier and butler, and sometimes acting in place of his chamberlain. And he said the aforesaid was about two years before the death of the said lord Thomas. The panetarius is he who makes the bread, or baker; the butelarius the keeper of the wine, called in English buttler, in Italian Bottigliere, in French bouteiller.

[96] In celebrating Masses he always shed pious tears, Another thing in which Bishop Richard declared in the process, or with me in the Compendium, num. 15, that St. Thomas excelled is zeal for prayer, and devotion in celebrating the divine mysteries with the gift of tears, which from tender piety and living faith he was then accustomed to enjoy. This same thing was also asserted by the fifty-seventh witness, the lord John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, one of the familiar domestics of the Saint, from whose testimony I have excerpted the following. Likewise he said that he had been attentive in prayer and in saying his canonical Hours, even singing them for some years before he was bishop; and in composing sermons; and that he was very devout. And he never saw him celebrating Mass without shedding tears before the elevation of the Body of Christ; and he said that he believed that he, the witness himself, had served him * at Mass, or had assisted him as minister of the altar, a hundred times and more. And the last Mass which the said lord Thomas celebrated he said at Montefiascone in the church of the Friars Minor for a certain deceased member of his kindred; and although very many of the familiars and squires of the lord Pope and of others were round about the altar, and saw him and looked him in the face when he celebrated, he nevertheless celebrated with his accustomed devotion and with the greatest profusion of tears.

[97] as was observed by various persons: Likewise an eye-witness, the thirteenth in the process, Brother Roger de Hunneden, subprior of the Friars Hermits of St. Augustine in the convent of London, said that when he had been ordained priest by him in the church of Leominster, of the diocese of Hereford, he both then celebrated the said Orders very devoutly, and, from the time he began the Canon of the Mass, it seemed to the said witness (as he said) that the tears did not cease from his eyes; and he wiped them with a certain taballiola (it seems toballiola should be read, from the Italian word Tovaglivola, which in Latin is a small napkin) lying upon the altar. And the said witness approached the altar (as he said) before the others

ranked with him, because he was weak on account of an infirmity which he had suffered, and by reason of the nearness of the place he attended (as he said) more diligently to the aforesaid. There is added the testimony of Robert of Gloucester, saying that he had seen, while he stayed with the said lord Thomas, and believed it to be known to all who had seen the said lord Thomas celebrating Mass, that he celebrated with great devotion and outpouring of tears. I add also William Cantilupe, whose words these are: He himself frequently celebrated, and wept much at Mass, and said long Masses.

[98] Concerning the daily prayers which he was accustomed to discharge, the aforepraised Robert of Gloucester added this: [To the canonical Hours, which he always discharged with chant, he added other prayers, etc.] He said his whole Office and the canonical Hours very devoutly with note, or singing, and beyond this, without note (or without chant), he said daily the seven Penitential psalms with the Litany, and the Office of the dead. The lord John de Kemeseya added besides that he had been seen by him, while he heard Mass in church, his hood drawn over his face so as not to be seen, praying with sobs, and that when he had withdrawn after prayer, the place where he had been was found stained with some fallen tears.

* alium another

* add: nisi except

* i.e. ei to him

* i.e. ei to him

* & [and]

* quod what

* Pontiniacum Pontigny

* i.e. eidem to the same

* ei to him

* ei to him

* laterna lantern

* illi to him

§ VI. The Saint's meekness in bearing and forgiving injuries and the defects of others; his zeal for reconciling concord among others; his mercy towards the poor and the sick.

A Man of meek mind, insults, Besides the virtues already mentioned, Richard in the Compendium briefly commended in our Saint humility, meekness, kindness, love of peace, patience and others; which other witnesses also did. Of the meekness with which he bore with even mind the injuries inflicted on him, I have already given an example above at num. 38; you have others in the Compendium, num. 18 and 33, and John Butè, the fifty-ninth witness, produced another, who, speaking of the lawsuit which the holy Prelate had with the lord baron Peter Corbet for vindicating the rights of his church, as will be said at more length below, says that, while that lawsuit was pending, the aforesaid baron was heard by him saying to the Saint: "Either thou art full of the devil, or thou art too intimate with God;" and that he answered him kindly and meekly that he used no art of the devil; but that in hope of divine help he was prosecuting the rights of his church. William Cantilupe likewise testified that he, while he was acting as Theologian at Oxford, was undeservedly rebuked by one of the other masters, and that the same, when among other things it was said to him that he was very rustic, answered kindly and patiently that he said the truth.

[100] This virtue he exercised even more at the time and he bears grave injuries patiently: when he bore grave troubles from John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury, his metropolitan, from whom he differed concerning the rights of his bishopric, and who wished him to be held as excommunicated. I shall set out the controversy more fully below; let us hear meanwhile with how great meekness of mind the Saint conducted himself in this matter. Raderus or Rudolph de Hengham, a witness already praised above, answered that he had been very mild, patient and kind; and, being questioned, he gave the cause of his knowledge from his own sight and hearing; and that Brother John de Pecham, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, persecuted the said lord Thomas unjustly (as the said witness said he believed, and that people * also commonly said this); and the said lord Thomas did not seem on this account to have any ill will against the said lord archbishop, nor did he break out in words against him; nay, he suffered it kindly. And the said witness said that when the aforesaid lord Thomas went to the Roman curia by reason of the persecution of the said lord archbishop, the witness himself rode and went on foot with the lord Thomas himself, riding or going on foot, for four English leagues: and although they spoke of various things touching his bishopric of Hereford, yet he had not heard that he said anything sinister of the above-mentioned archbishop.

[101] the inconsiderate words and deeds even of his ministers Now, as regards his domestics, he so reproved them when they did wrong that he bore their light defects patiently, and readily pardoned them when they were penitent. Robert of Gloucester, bidden to testify on this matter, deposed that he had not seen, at the time in which he lived with him, anything for which he could be marked with the contrary. And he frequently saw that, when his clerks or other familiars of his answered him *, when he commanded something, with disturbed mind and impatiently, the said lord Thomas patiently and kindly tolerated and bore with them, and said some placatory words to soothe them. Presently, for the sake of example, he subjoins what had happened to himself. When (he says) the lord Thomas himself had commanded the witness himself and master Roger de Sevenak, his companions, that they should conceive and dictate and write the form of a certain arbitration or amicable composition made between himself and the bishop of St Asaph, the lord Edward, king of England, intervening, and each of them had neglected it on account of the other; and the day coming on which the form of the said composition was to be exhibited, the said lord Thomas wished to see the said form of composition before the exhibition, and asked for it; and the said master Roger said that he believed master Robert had dictated it; and the said Robert in turn said that he believed the said master Roger had dictated it; the aforesaid lord Thomas said: Now I see how my affairs go. Bring me parchment, incaustum (or ink) and a pen; and I will dictate.

[102] he bears gently and passes over, These having been brought by the said witness and placed upon his bed, when the said witness, having returned to his chamber, had put himself in bed to sleep after midday, after a little the said lord Thomas, who had said nothing to the witness himself when he had placed the parchment, ink and pen upon his bed, but had looked on as though in wonder, saying nothing, coming to the chamber of the witness himself with the aforesaid parchment, ink and pen, said to him patiently and rousing him: Rise, rise, and dictate this instrument. And although great matter for impatience had been given him in the aforesaid deed, both because he had not dictated as he had commanded, and because the said witness had brought him the said parchment, ink and pen almost in derision, since he had not asked that they be brought to him with the intention that he himself should write (as the same witness thinks; since he had not been accustomed to write or dictate such things; but had asked rather to correct and hasten them), he bore it patiently and kindly; nor did he murmur on this account against the witness himself and the aforesaid master Roger.

[103] The holy Man's meekness in forgiving was likewise praised from experience by Hugh le Barber, and them, begging pardon for their faults, his domestic, who (as the process has it), asked whether he gladly remitted to those who inflicted or said injuries or offences to him *, answered that he did: and asked how he knew these things, he said that he had seen and heard this several times, when it was asked of him that he should spare those who had offended him; because he spared quickly. And he specified that the witness himself, and Anselm the Marshal, and a certain other familiar of the said lord Thomas, wishing to wander abroad one night, since they could not go out by the gate, went out over the wall of the house of the church of Hampton, in which the said lord Thomas then was. And when on the morrow they had been accused before him, he reproved and rebuked them, and wished to expel them from him. And when they urgently asked pardon, he spared them; yet so that, if this should happen to them again, they should be perpetually excluded from his household. The same Hugh subjoins another example also, which it will likewise help to have related in so many words.

[104] While the said lord Thomas was in the university at Oxford and taught there as regent in Decrees, he readily receives into favour, he turned aside once to the city of London, and invited to dine the lord Edward, then son of the lord Henry, king of England, and many earls and barons and justiciaries of the king. And the said witness brought his silver vessels to the said city of London; and when he had put them down in the court (that is, in the buildings of the courtyard) of the house in which the banquet was to be made, and in which the said lord Thomas then was, there thrust himself forward a certain one, who seemed from his habit and bearing to be a noble and courtly squire, to help the said witness to arrange and put away the said silver vessels with him; and the aforesaid squire then stealthily and fraudulently stole a certain silver-gilt cup with a cover, of the weight of seven and a half marks of silver, with which the same lord Thomas drank; and fleeing with the said cup, from then on he could not be found by the witness himself. And when on the morrow it had become known to the said lord Thomas, and the said witness, much grieving and sad at the said stealing of the cup, asked his pardon, he spared him, first, however, reproving him for negligence, and after pardon was given, commanding that he show himself more cautious thenceforth in similar matters.

[105] More gravely had Adam de Kyngeshuam, a jurist, sinned against him, and obtained pardon, as also another, whom he even took among his domestics, who is named in the process in the eleventh place among the witnesses, and said that the witness himself and his people, on occasion of the said gardia, had robbed (that is, seized or despoiled) and mutilated some of the people of the said lord Thomas; and the witness himself asked pardon and mercy of the said lord Thomas, and he spared him. And the aforesaid he said was *, thirty years will be at the end of this month of July, namely of the year 1307, in which Adam testified these things, and so these things will have happened in the year 1277. Gardia in Latin is custodia; but since I do not have the whole of Adam's testimony, I do not grasp what is indicated by those words on occasion of the said gardia; unless perhaps they are to be referred to the lawsuit which he had just premised that the Saint brought against the baron Peter Corbet, who had violently carried off serfs and cattle of the church of Hereford in the places about which there was contention. However that may be, since Adam is said in the process to have been of the household, or of the domestics, of Thomas after his entry upon the episcopate, beyond doubt he had inflicted those grave injuries on the Saint before he had been admitted into his household; which commends not a little the meekness of the same Saint.

[106] and bestowed another benefit on him. Those at variance This grace the pious Prelate then also increased by a new benefit; for, as follows there, the witness himself was bound in ten marks of silver to the said lord Thomas; and when he went to

the curia (namely the Roman), and the same witness was receiving leave from him (or bidding him farewell) at Prestebury, of the diocese of Worcester, the said lord Thomas said to the same witness that in his testament he had remitted to him those ten marks if it should happen that he died before he returned into England. And the said witness said to him: Lord, you will return, if it please God. And the said lord Thomas answered: I do not believe so. And he said it in a very pious manner, and as he foretold, so it followed; for he died in the parts beyond the mountains. So he. From so mild a mind, moreover, was born a love of reconciling peace among others also, concerning which I find a few things in the process. Brother Thomas Ylleye, of the Order of the Friars of B. M. of Mount Carmel, master in sacred Theology, the seventeenth witness, deposed that, while the Saint was engaged in studies at Oxford, sharp feuds arose between the Southern and Northern scholars; but that he, who was eminent among the Southerners, not only would not defend their party, but laboured with all his strength to reconcile those at variance.

[107] he brings back to concord and friendship. He was still devoting himself to studies in the same university when he brought two priests back to concord, and, to strengthen it the more, entertained them at a banquet. So we learn from the testimony of Hugh le Barber, who, asked whether he gladly pacified the discordant, answered that he did; and he specified that at Hampton he reconciled and pacified two priests at discord with one another; and one was called the lord Peter, and the other the lord Robert. Asked how he knew of the said concord, he answered that he had been present when the said priests ate with the said lord Thomas on the day on which they were publicly said and asserted to have made the aforesaid peace by the familiars of the said lord Thomas who had been present at the above-mentioned. And he said the aforesaid was at the time at which the said lord Thomas was staying in the university of Oxford. The same Hugh being witness, he specified and reconciled John de Ludhuam, a squire, with the friends and parents of Matilda de Valoyes, daughter of the lord John de Cantalupo, brother of the said lord Thomas, which Matilda the said squire had espoused without the knowledge of the parents of the same Matilda. Asked how he knew this, he answered that he had seen and heard the aforesaid at Suyterfeld, the said lord Thomas not yet being bishop. Thus far Hugh le Barber: Robert of Gloucester says more briefly: He gladly brought the discordant back to concord; and he (the same witness) specified that he had brought back to concord the lord Hugh de la Suche, a baron of the diocese of Lincoln, and his wife, who were at discord.

[108] Much more did his mercy towards the poor shine out in him, Daily he fed some poor people before him, whom he not only helped with common alms, but also refreshed with food in his presence. Certainly Bishop Richard, at num. 31 of the Compendium, affirmed that Thomas, both before and after he took up the episcopate, had many poor persons eat before him every day, and nonetheless was accustomed to distribute alms to other poor according to his ability. Other witnesses agree, some of whom I shall name here. Robert of Gloucester said that he had seen that he had large alms made both to Religious and to others; and beyond this many poor ate before him every day. William de Cantilupo says: Many poor, before he was bishop and after, ate every day before him in his hall. The lord Adam de Kyngeshuam, his domestic praised above, says: He had some poor eat before him. John Butè added the number of the needy whom he fed daily either before him or in his house, saying: He continually gave to eat in his house to thirteen poor and seven little children, and beyond this gave alms on alternate days.

[109] The Saint was accustomed, moreover, to call all the poor his brothers, whom he called Brothers and wished to be so called; and wished them to be so called by his domestics and familiars; of which there is extant in the process a notable testimony of Raderus or Rodulph de Henghuam, which deserves to have a place here. He spoke as humbly to the poor and to his servants as to others, and called the said poor Brothers; and he had frequently reproved the witness himself and his other familiars when they did not call the said poor Brothers; the same lord Thomas asserting that they only were poor whom God hated; And those whom you call poor (the holy Prelate said) are richer than we. And when on a certain day the said lord Thomas was eating and had before him five or seven poor persons eating, he commanded Robert de Wytacre, his familiar, to go to the gate to see whether there were any brothers there, and to have two come up. And the said servant went to the gate, and did not find there any Religious, whom he believed to be called Brothers: and he reported to the said lord Thomas that there were no Brothers of any Order at the said gate.

[110] And the said lord Thomas said to him, reproving him: [and he destined the first mouthfuls of the dishes and the delicate foods for the needy.] Are there not there such brothers as are these who eat here, showing him the poor eating before him? And that Robert answered that there were fully twenty such brothers at the gate: and he commanded then that he have five of them come up; and so it was done. And he said the aforesaid was at Hampton, of the diocese of Worcester, done in the presence of the witness himself and of several other familiars of the said lord Thomas, fully sixteen years before he was promoted to the episcopate. Moreover he had it established as a custom to destine for the poor the first mouthful of the dishes, and whatever of the more delicate foods at length remained in the platters. Hear Hugh le Barber again testifying in the process. Sometimes he pretended to drink good ale and eat good foods; and he put them aside and gave them to others, or had them put in the alms; and this more frequently than that he sent them to others, unless there was a scant supply of delicate foods; because then he first gave of the said costly foods to his companions and others eating with him; and if anything remained to him, he had it put in the alms. He also said that he never took any food without first setting aside * for alms the first mouthful which he was about to take; and when pottages were served to him, he put a piece of bread in them, and afterwards put the said piece of bread in the said alms.

[111] He also relieved the want of nobles And these indeed are things concerning the daily alms which he was accustomed to distribute to the common poor, to which must be added the things above at num 32, where the pious life of the Saint while occupied with literary studies was treated, and others which I have already set out in § IV concerning his conscientiousness in administering ecclesiastical benefices. Concerning poor of another condition, again, this is to be read in the process from the testimony of John Butè: He also said that he had seen that to nobles who through some misfortune had come to poverty he made secret alms of corn (that is, of wheat) and of money; and he named one, namely Alan de Walinton, to whom he commanded to be given, in the hearing of the witness himself, half a quarter of wheat, and money, he does not know in what quantity: and he said this was at the manor (or house or township) of the said Bishop of Prestebury: and he did similar things in his other manors, as he said he had heard.

[112] and of Religious. The word quartus or quartum seems to signify the same as quarta, which Spelman writes in the Glossary was among the English the fourth part of a modius; and if this is so, a half quarter will be only the eighth part of a modius, and it will seem a slight alms made to a noble man, unless that modius was of a great measure. In the enlarged Glossary of Du Cange the word quartus is sometimes used for the fourth part of the fruits which lords received annually from their fields, which they let out to others to be cultivated on that condition. What if the holy Bishop received such a fourth part of wheat from some field of his church at Prestebury, and granted the half part of it to the praised noble man as alms? Nor did the pious munificence of the Saint pass over the Religious, whom their profession had made poor. For all Religious (the words of the process are from the testimony of Robert of Gloucester) he honoured much, as he said he had seen several times: and quite often he ate in the houses of the Friars Preachers and Minors, and there fed them.

[113] He remits fines to various persons, grants a loan of corn, garments John Butè added also that, when his subjects had been fined by his seneschals, many times he remitted it wholly; and when they were in need of corn, he had some of his corn delivered to them as a loan, that they might return corn for corn in the following year; and when they could not pay on account of poverty, he remitted it to them. Another care of St. Thomas was of clothing the needy, concerning which William Cantilupe, an eye-witness, says this: In the parishes which he had before he was bishop he had garments given to his poor parishioners, and he had done the same after he was bishop. These garments were, as is read in the same place, of coarse cloth and of various colours; and he charged his people (that is, his ministers) to divide the said cloths well among the poor in the places from which he received benefices. Concerning the places in which the praised William had seen these things done, he had premised there: Before he was bishop he gave the aforesaid garments in the parishes of Hampton and Suterfeld; and after he was bishop, at Bosebury.

[114] to the poor, and to needy priests, With similar liberality he also succoured priests who were not sufficiently provided for to procure themselves garments suited to their state. Let us hear again Hugh le Barber, his old domestic, who, asked by the Apostolic commissaries whether he gave the said robes to priests serving in his benefices or to others, said that sometimes to those and sometimes to others; that the same witness by command of the said lord Thomas carried a mantle of bluet, lined with minever, to a certain vicar who was not in the churches or services of the said lord Thomas; but of his name he said he did not remember, because forty-six years had now elapsed since the aforesaid happened. That the reader may understand the barbarous words, Bluetum is the blue colour, called by the French bleu, by the English blue. Foderatum from the Italian foderare, to sew in, as I said above; and finally minuti varii, in French menu-vair, is a fleece made of precious white and blue little skins. And so a mantle of bluet, etc., is a little cloak of blue cloth, perhaps violet, in which such a fleece was sewn on the inside, to procure warmth and splendour alike.

[115] The praised Hugh continues in the same place, subjoining another gift of that kind, and to others, to bring one back to right living, he gives generously. which St. Thomas made to a certain man while he lived at Paris,

not so much to succour one in want as to call the same back from a looser life to right living. Receive the words. He also said that, when the said lord Thomas was in the university of Paris, and the witness himself with him (fifty years have now elapsed), he gave to William Plantefolie, a maker of cakes and a follower of taverns and a player at dice, a mantle, a surcoat and a hood, lined with minever, and also a tunic of good bluet of Ypres; whereupon indeed William promised him * and swore that for a year he would abstain from the game of dice and from entering taverns. Explain the barbarous words from the foregoing; and when bluet of Ypres is said, I think there is indicated a blue cloth woven and dyed at Ypres, a city of our Austrian Belgium in the county of Flanders, in which the manufacture of cloths was formerly celebrated.

[116] To mercy likewise pertains the care of the sick, He takes exceptional care of the sick: for whom how solicitous he was it will be possible to gather from a twofold testimony. The first, which is William Cantilupe's, has thus: He had much compassion on the sick of his household and of his parishes; and of the delicate foods which were prepared for himself he sent to them, and commanded his people that they should have good care of the said sick. And the aforesaid he said he had seen several times, even before the said lord Thomas was bishop; and he himself visited the aforesaid sick. Asked whether he could specify any case of visiting the said sick, he answered that the said lord Thomas did the aforesaid generally, and that he had visited the witness himself when sick. The other testimony is Hugh le Barber's, who also said that he had much compassion on the sick; and when anyone of his household (that is, of his domestics) fell sick, he himself visited him personally frequently, and had great care taken of him; and quantumcumque (read qualiscumque, of whatever kind) was the sick man's state, he had medicines prepared for him. And this he said happened in the person of the witness himself, who was sick for a year and four months at Hampton and Kemeseye and Aston. Of the names of others he said he did not remember, because he did not lay this to heart, since he visited all the sick of his household everywhere. Go also to this Commentary above at num. 58, where I have already recounted the rest of Hugh's words that pertain here.

[117] he acts against the Jews harmful to Christians. John Butè, the fifty-ninth witness in the process, among the works of his mercy also related his deeds against the Jews, who, by adulterating the royal coinage and extorting usuries, had reduced many Christians to want. He obtained, therefore, from the king of England, Henry III, or his son Edward, licence that Christ should be preached to them, and that those obstinate in their superstition should be driven from the kingdom. Nor did he suffer himself to be overcome by the abundance of money with which, after their custom, they tried to buy from him impunity for their iniquity. The process narrates the deed thus: The lord Thomas, seeing that the Jews were perpetrating many evils in the kingdom of England, procured with the king that he should preach to them, and that those who would not be converted should leave the kingdom of England. For they had falsified the royal coinage, and many in the kingdom of England had been disinherited through them on account of the extortion of usuries. And, the witness himself being present, five hundred of the Jews met the said lord Thomas, begging and offering money that he should desist from the persecution of them. And he answered that he would not do so unless they were converted; because they were enemies of God and rebels against the faith. So there; but what end these pious endeavours had I have found neither here nor elsewhere.

[118] He hears the confessions of the poor before the rich. Further, the tender affection with which he everywhere embraced the poor, whom he had been accustomed, as has been said, to call by the name of Brothers, and which he showed so kindly and munificently in sustaining their want, in soothing the pains of their bodies, and in warding off the injuries of the malevolent, he showed no less paternally in curing the diseases of souls. A proof is what Nicholas de Wichio, monk-priest of the cathedral church of Worcester, deposed on oath before the often-praised commissaries. He conducted himself, he said, as kindly and humbly towards the poor as towards the rich. And he said that he had seen that, while he was in his church of saint Augustine of Wichio, of the diocese of Worcester, and many of his parishioners wished to confess to him, he heard the confessions of the poor first, before those of the rich. And when a certain noble and rich man in the aforesaid place had said to the aforesaid lord Thomas that it did not become him to speak with such poor people, the lord Thomas answered, in the hearing of the witness himself, that he was as surely to render account to God for the souls of the poor as for those of the rich. Asked (the witness Nicholas) about the time at which the aforesaid words were said by the said lord Thomas, he answered that eight years before he was bishop, and it is now forty years or thereabouts,… and that he who was confessing to the said lord Thomas was crippled, and could not go without two staves.

* i.e. homines men, people

* ipsi to him

* ei to him

* i.e. contigisse to have happened

* i.e. reponeret should set aside

* i.e. illi to him

§ VII. The Saint's episcopal cares and virtues; just severity towards stubborn offenders; observance of the sacred canons; the rights of the church of Hereford vindicated against the earl of Gloucester.

Made bishop, he cares diligently for his flock, The virtues of our St. Thomas which I have so far recorded pertain to the various states of his life; now I proceed to those which are more proper to bishops. Richard in the Compendium, num. 21, declared almost only generally that he diligently fulfilled all the parts of a holy bishop; and then set out at more length the things which the same man carried out bravely as well as happily for defending and restoring the rights of his church. Wherefore I shall set forth first a few things handed down a little more explicitly by other witnesses, before we come to those contentious matters. Robert of Gloucester, a sworn witness, asked how in the episcopate he governed himself and the church and people committed to him, answered that very well… And he said that he had seen him governing well himself in the exercise of virtues, his house and his household, and that he had defended well the rights of his church; he visited the diocese, and in visiting he celebrated with the greatest weeping, and preached fervently and devoutly, and heard confessions, and duly performed the other things incumbent on the episcopal office.

[120] In like manner William Cantilupe answered the same question, [he visits the diocese, preaches, hears confessions, confers the Sacrament of confirmation] and gave the reason for his answer, that he had seen that he heard and said Matins and Mass and the other Hours with note (that is, with chant), and frequently he himself celebrated, and wept much at Mass, and said long Masses, and many times preached and heard the confessions of his subjects. And this he said he had seen and heard before the said lord Thomas was bishop, and after, in various places; and especially at Bosebury, where there is a church pertaining to the table of the bishop of Hereford, and at Suyterfeld, Doderbult, Hampton and Kemeseye, in which places the said lord Thomas was beneficed before he was bishop. Singular is what he also asserted in the same place concerning his readiness to confer the Sacrament of Confirmation, saying thus: When he rode, he always carried a stole at his neck under his cope or his Rodeundellus (otherwise called Rodundellus and Rotundellus, and it is a kind of cloak), and he was girded with the said stole in the manner of a cross on the inner side, and he carried the said stole that he might be ready to anoint with chrism the children who met him, whose confirmation was asked.

[121] He had also premised this: When he rode through his diocese, he confers it on little children, rebukes and chastises offenders, even nobles; and some poor man or some poor little woman came with some little child which she asked to have confirmed, he got down from his horse, and confirmed the said little child, and spoke very courteously and humbly to them. From these few things it will be easy for anyone to conjecture with how great pastoral solicitude he cared for the flock committed to him. No less did he fulfil the other part of his office, which consists in the rebuking of offenders and the chastising of the stubborn. He corrected (says Robert of Gloucester) and reproved his subjects, the greater as well as the middling and the lesser. And asked (Robert) to specify cases, if he knew any, he narrated that he had excommunicated, for the vice of incontinence and some other things inflicted on himself and his people while he was visiting his diocese, the lord Reginald Fitz Peter, knight and baron of the diocese of Hereford; and he kept him excommunicated until he underwent due correction, returning to the precepts of the lord Thomas himself. Go also to the Compendium of the Life, num. 25.

[122] he excommunicates an adulterer, and has him, stubborn, shut in prison. Another layman of Hereford also experienced his just severity, who, having substituted a concubine for his wife, and not at all obeying the holy Bishop's admonition, was bound by him with the bond of anathema, and then, since even so he persisted in his stubbornness, was cast, by the same man's management, into the royal prison. We have as witness Richard de Kymberlè, of whom it is read in the processes: He said that when a certain burgess of the city of Hereford, of whose name he said he did not remember, having left his own wife, cleaved to a certain other woman; and, admonished and rebuked, had been excommunicated by the said lord Thomas, and had endured the excommunication for forty days with hardened mind, the aforesaid lord Thomas, the forty days having elapsed, had the same man taken and imprisoned through the royal court. And the aforesaid witness said he had heard the aforesaid from the ministers of the said lord Thomas.

[123] A powerful baron, on account of an old crime, Under the same holy Prelate the baron Roger de Clifford was at length compelled to wash away by public penance the outrage which he had committed against Peter de Aquablanca, the second predecessor of Thomas himself in the see of Hereford, and had borne unpunished for many years. John de Leoministre, the fifty-fourth witness in the process, affirmed the deed, whose testimony on this matter I transcribe in so many words. He narrated that when the noble and powerful man, the lord Roger de Clifford, a baron neighbouring the diocese of Hereford, had seized, for the sake of gain and extortion, in the time of the general war * which was in England, the lord Peter de Aquablanca, formerly bishop of Hereford; and the same baron had come to the said lord Thomas for the sake of reconciliation, he could not prevail with the said lord Thomas, although he offered a hundred pounds sterling, that he should not do public penance in the sight of the whole people in the church of Hereford. And he went in a tunic without a hood, barefoot, with a procession through the whole church of Hereford and through the cloister of the church; and the said lord Thomas followed him with a rod in his hand until he was at the high altar, driving him on. And this the aforesaid witness said he had seen once, and

had been present at the aforesaid: but of the said hundred pounds he said he had heard by common report.

[124] he compels to public penance, The captivity of Peter Nicholas Trivet records in the Chronicle at the year of Christ 1263, that is, about twelve years before the episcopate of St. Thomas, and sets out its cause and manner in these words: Edward, son of the king of England (Henry III), when he had gathered a copious army against the prince of Wales, and the latter, fleeing to woody and marshy places, gave no opportunity for battle, is recalled into England by his father. Simon, earl of Leicester, having been made captain of the barons rising against the king, had begun to plunder the goods of those adhering to the king, and especially of those who, belonging to the queen, had been brought by her into England, whom they called Aliens. Certain also of the barons' party, having taken Peter, bishop of Hereford, a Burgundian by nation, in his cathedral church, led him to the castle of Herdesleya, likewise dividing his treasure. For the rest, Francis Godwin in the Commentary on the Prelates of England gave the same bishop the vernacular surname de Egueblank, and says he died in the year 1268, John Breton, the immediate predecessor of St. Thomas, succeeding him.

[125] Another offence of the same baron against ecclesiastical immunity, and its penalty, Robert of Gloucester recorded, and he set other examples of just severity, bidden to testify concerning the justice of the Saint. For in confirmation of his sayings he added (as is read in the process) that when the lord Roger de Clifford, knight and baron of the diocese of Hereford, on account of the detention of a certain cleric imprisoned in the castle of Erdesleye of the said baron, had been excommunicated by the witness himself, then being official of the said lord Thomas, and, the cleric having been released, had asked to be absolved by the said lord Thomas, although he was great and powerful, he would not absolve him; but sent him back to be absolved by the aforesaid official: namely, that that baron might humble himself the more, and ask pardon from him against whom perhaps, on account of the sentence of excommunication passed, he had been too violently incensed. On the same argument of the correction and just severity of the holy Prelate John Butè makes mention, who, when he asserted his vindicatory justice before the commissaries, gave the cause, because, as he says, he had seen many publicly doing penance before the said lord Thomas in their shirts, to whom for favour or prayers he would not remit the above-mentioned penance, lest justice be wounded. Other examples of this kind we shall produce below, where we must treat of the Saint's unconquered fortitude of mind in vindicating the rights of his church against anyone whatever.

[126] Thus far of lay persons chastised by the holy Prelate; and he drives from his diocese a monk refusing to clear himself of charges. one example concerning a monk was brought forward by Richard de Kymberlè, the twelfth witness, which is recorded in the process thus: Likewise he said that when the aforesaid lord Thomas was visiting the priory of black monks at Leominster, he found Brother William of Winchester, a monk of the said place, gravely defamed of dishonest conversation with a certain nun of Lingebrok; and since he would not clear himself with the said lord Thomas, he had him removed from the said place, in which he was subdean, and transferred to Reading, of the diocese of Salisbury. Of the priory of Leominster Roger Dodsworth and William Dugdale treat at more length in tome 1 of the Monasticon Anglicanum, page 420 and following, where it is said to have been a cell of the cenobium of Reading of the Order of St. Benedict, situated in Herefordshire. Under this title St. Thomas had at length obtained with much labour, as due to himself, the right of visiting it, which the monks had denied to his predecessors, as is narrated in the Compendium, num. 24; and for that cause, adding nothing more here, I only observe that that monk, accused whether rightly or wrongly, and refusing to clear himself before the holy Bishop, was sent away by him from his diocese to the monastery of Reading, to which the priory of Leominster was subject, that he might render account of his conduct to his abbot.

[127] Clerics possessing several benefices against the sacred canons There had also crept into the diocese of Hereford, as into other dioceses of England, that abuse by which, against the decrees of the sacred canons, clerics obtained several ecclesiastical benefices without dispensation of the Apostolic See. To remove it, he admonished them either to give up some, or to exhibit a dispensation obtained from the Supreme Pontiff, or at least to seek one; and those refusing he himself, using his power, penalized. We have as witness the often-named doctor of Decrees and chancellor of Hereford, master Robert of Gloucester, whose assertions I subjoin according to custom. Likewise he said it came to memory, exemplifying the aforesaid correction, that when the above-mentioned Hervey (namely Hervey de Borhuam, dean of the church of London and precentor of Hereford, who had aspired to the bishopric when St. Thomas was elected) held without dispensation the precentorship of the church of Hereford, which was reputed a dignity there, together with the deanery of the church of London, the said lord Thomas, from zeal for justice, deprived him of the aforesaid precentorship.

[128] without dispensation, he deprives them of part of them, Likewise he specified that when master Richard de Gravesende, archdeacon of Northampton in the church of Lincoln, held without dispensation the parish church of Ros, of the diocese of Hereford, the said lord Thomas deprived him of the same church. Likewise he specified that when master James de Vitri, formerly archdeacon of Salopshire * in the church of Hereford, held together with the said archdeaconry the half of the church of Ledebury, which church was accustomed to be divided between two canons, and the said master James had absented himself from the diocese of Hereford, and, asked and admonished, would not reside, nor exhibit a dispensation concerning residence and concerning the plurality of benefices with cure which he held together with the said archdeaconry, he deprived him of the said archdeaconry and of the portion which he held in the above-mentioned church of Ledebury.

[129] he abhors even the shadow of simony. Nor can it be doubted that the holy Prelate, whom we saw in §4 was most solicitous before his entry upon the episcopate to place suitable ministers in the churches, many of which he held by Apostolic dispensation — it cannot be doubted, I say, that when afterwards made bishop he provided the same with no less care for his most ample diocese of Hereford, and proceeded cautiously and with integrity in conferring ecclesiastical benefices. Indeed, how far removed he was from simony and respect of persons we learn from the testimony of the same Robert, from which it is abundantly clear that he abhorred even the mere shadow of simony. His testimony is this. He likewise narrated (Robert of Gloucester) that when once the said lord Thomas had refused, at the suppliant urgency of the lord Roger de Mortimer, a great baron of his diocese, to provide a certain cleric with a certain quite modest ecclesiastical benefice; and the witness himself and other companions of the same lord Thomas said to the aforesaid lord Thomas that it would have become him to please the aforesaid baron concerning the above-mentioned benefice; he answered that he had refused because, on account of the prayers which the said baron was putting forward, he thought he had received gifts.

[130] The injured rights of his church, after mature examination, Another evil the holy Prelate detected in his diocese, and vigorously set about removing it; namely the possessions and rights of his church unjustly occupied by the more powerful through force and authority: for however much he was a lover of peace, he was yet far from suffering the rights of his bishopric to be diminished through an unseasonable desire of peace, or more truly through sluggishness and sloth, or from not caring that those injured before should be restored. Nay rather, as often as equity so demanded and it could not be obtained otherwise, taking no account of the power and ferocity of the adverse party, he brought lawsuits, and spared no labours, no expenses, until he had won the cause. Nevertheless, lest anyone suspect that he proceeded more lightly than was fair in pursuing lawsuits of this kind, it will help to have set forth beforehand the sayings of some witnesses on this matter. Brother Nicholas de Wichio, the sixty-second witness, asked whether the same lord Thomas had been naturally discreet and prudent, answered that he had been prudent in the things which pertained to the world, and more prudent in the things which pertained to God. And he gave the cause of his saying; because he had with him good and prudent counsellors, with whose counsel he conducted those things which pertained to the world, and he himself was occupied with the things which pertain to God; and he charged the said counsellors and their consciences when they should deviate from the true and right.

[131] William Cantilupe speaks more clearly, by whose testimony he vindicates against anyone whatever. he, before he began any lawsuit, took counsel whether he had right before he moved the lawsuit; and the same William adds that he had seen this … at London when he moved the lawsuit against the earl of Gloucester. Robert of Gloucester similarly praised his prudence in conducting affairs; that he conducted his business with mature and deliberate counsel, communicated to those assisting him; and that he was not fanciful nor headstrong; that by reason of the said discretion and prudence he had been taken up into the council of the lord Henry, king of England, and was his chancellor, and afterwards was counsellor of the lord Edward, king, son of the said lord King Henry. I pass over more, because from what has been alleged above St. Thomas was a man of too eminent knowledge in both laws, and of too proven prudence, justice and holiness, for the suspicion to be able to fall upon him that he lightly undertook litigious business beyond what was fair and seemly.

[132] In num. 16 and the two following of the Compendium to be published there is set out in the first place the lawsuit The hunting-right of the church of Hereford, unjustly usurped by his father, which he moved against Gualbert, otherwise Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, and won, and which must be explained here, because more has to be set out concerning it than the annotations to the Lives, according to our custom, can hold. Whether this was the first of all those which he undertook in the episcopate I cannot indeed affirm; but its beginning certainly seems to be referred to the earlier years of his see, and its end about the year 1280; since the witness presently to be produced says that it ran for four or five years, and counts twenty-eight years from its end (so far at least as it appears to me) up to the year 1307, in which he was testifying. The cause of the litigation was this. There was in the county of Hereford, towards the Malvern hills or mountains, which there separate the Eastern side of the same county from Worcestershire, the town of Lydbury or Ledbury, belonging to the church of Hereford, together with the right of hunting in the neighbouring Malvern forest. Adjacent to this ecclesiastical possession were the estates of Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, whose father already from the times of two or three of St. Thomas's predecessors had unjustly claimed that right for himself by his force and authority, the bishops not daring on account of the man's power to proceed against him at law. Gilbert followed in his father's footsteps, and if he caught any hunters of the bishop of Hereford there, he carried them off captive, and demanded what price he wished for their liberty.

[133] And indeed that Gilbert, earl of Gloucester, was a man of the greatest power and of equal audacity, and greatly to be feared even by the kings of England themselves, Henry III and his son Edward, the earl of Gloucester, a powerful and fierce man, was unjustly withholding; whom he at one time held captive, so that the praised Edward

when king, afterwards gave him his daughter Joan to wife, that he might bind him more closely to himself by this bond of affinity. With so great and such a man, therefore, the holy Prelate remonstrated about the injury done to his church, and when he refused to give satisfaction he summoned him to law before the royal tribunal. And the earl indeed tried to call him back from what he had begun, both by threats and by the offer of a huge sum of money, but in vain. Of the threats made by him Robert of Gloucester makes express mention; and this is not at all to be wondered at in a man who, the same Robert being witness, was the most powerful of the kingdom of England after the king, and a cruel and harsh man. Of the money offered by the same it is read in the testimony of John Butè: The said earl had offered great money to the said lord Thomas that he should desist from the aforesaid lawsuit; and the said lord Thomas answered that for no gold would he give up prosecuting the rights of his church.

[134] him the Saint, fearing nothing, summoned to law, Let us hear now Raderus or Rudolph de Henguam, who is placed first among the witnesses, and is said to have been justiciary of the king of England on his bench, canon in the churches of London and Hereford, a famous jurist, of seventy years or thereabouts, and who was himself deputed by King Edward to decide this lawsuit. He, then, said also that the lord Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, formerly usurped the rights of the church of Hereford in the woods of the church at Malvern concerning huntings and other things; and the predecessors of the said lord Thomas had done almost nothing about prosecuting their rights against the said earl. But the aforesaid lord Thomas, when he had been taken up as bishop of Hereford, seeing that in this the rights belonging to himself and the church of Hereford were perishing, had on this account a great contention and lawsuit with the said lord of Gloucester, who was then the greater earl, and the more powerful and richer of England. And the said witness was deputed by the aforesaid lord king as justiciary and definer of the said cause and contention.

[135] and notwithstanding his power, he won the suit. And finally, justice requiring it, when they had litigated four or five years, the said lord Thomas, on account of his manly and bold prosecution, and because he did not fear the said earl, had in his favour the sentence and judgment given by the witness himself; and he recovered the rights of his church. And being asked (the witness Robert) he said that twenty-eight years had now elapsed since the aforesaid took place. He added besides that he did not believe that there was then in the kingdom of England any archbishop or bishop, earl or baron, although there were many more powerful than the said lord Thomas, who would then have dared to undertake the aforesaid lawsuit, and so prosecute it against the above-mentioned earl, which earl the said lord king also feared and dreaded (or was afraid of); because whatever the said earl undertook against the said king or others, he obtained; and he had conquered and captured the said king (Edward I) and his father (Henry III) in the battle of Lewes (fought by the rebel barons). And afterwards he turned to the said king, and in another battle made at Evesham he conquered the lord Simon de Montfort (earl of Leicester, and then leader of the rebel barons) and his accomplices, and delivered them to death; and he freed the said king who now is (Edward) and his father from the prisons of the aforesaid: whence the said lord king gave his daughter to the aforesaid earl to wife, and said publicly that he gave her to him in order that he might have peace in his kingdom.

[136] Concerning that civil war of the English, which does not pertain to our purpose, A narration of the same deed from another eye-witness, the Writers of English History may be consulted; it will be enough for me here to have noted that the mentioned captivity and liberation of King Henry III and his children took place before the episcopate of St. Thomas; whence it may be gathered how formidable an adversary he attacked and overcame by his constancy and fortitude of mind at the royal tribunal. Others also asserted the same things in the process, whose testimonies, lest I weary the reader, I pass over, except some circumstances passed over by others which Hugh le Barber left testified. First of all, concerning the injuries inflicted by the earl, he says this: Violently and with armed hand he seized and caused to be seized the people of the said lord Thomas hunting in the said woods, and made them ransom themselves at his will. And the father of the said earl had done the same in the times of three predecessors of the aforesaid lord Thomas, as was commonly related and reputed, and is still reputed notorious in those parts… For the said earls were so high and powerful that others of the kingdom of England did not dare to resist them.

[137] The same witness said, moreover, that he had been present in the castle of the said bishop, Ledebury, adjoining the said wood, who, some circumstances on a certain occasion on which the said earl Gilbert came with his armed people to the said wood, and the said lord earl said to the same lord Thomas many imperious and proud words, and threatened him, and called him Clergiaster (as if to say contemptible cleric), and said that he would chastise him as he had chastised other clergiasters, because no clergiaster should take from him that which he and his predecessors had held and possessed for long times peacefully and quietly. And the aforesaid lord Thomas answered the aforesaid earl that on account of his threats he would not omit to prosecute the rights of his church of Hereford. And the king's justiciaries were then present there, and before them the aforesaid threats were made. And when the earl had then had certain royal letters (perhaps forged) presented to the said justiciaries of the king, who had called together before them a multitude of the people of that province to know who was the stronger in right as regards the said matters in contention, and in order that according to the record (that is, the verdict and proof) of those called to testimony they might decide the said lawsuit and contention; in which letters of the king indeed it was commanded to the said justiciaries that they should stay and defer determining the aforesaid.

[138] This heard, the same lord Thomas, returning to a certain place quite near in the said wood, omitted in the former relation, in which his clergy was, put on his pontificals, taking the mitre and the crozier (or pastoral staff) and the other episcopal apparel, and also had his clergy prepared and clothed in copes and priestly and clerical vestments; and, going before his said clergy with lighted candles in their hands, he came to the place in which the said justiciaries and the earl with his people were sitting; and there, the candles being extinguished, with the said clergy likewise having lighted candles in their hands and afterwards extinguishing them, he publicly and solemnly excommunicated and anathematized all and each who on the aforesaid day should impede and disturb in the said woods his right and that of the said church of Hereford: and the said sentence was general, and the said earl was not named in it, nor anyone specially… And the said sentence having been passed, the aforesaid earl immediately mounted his palfrey (horse), and withdrew immediately with his people. And the people of the country, who had assembled for making the said judgment, rendered there, according to the custom of the country, their testimony and record for the right of the church of Hereford; and the king's justiciaries, following the aforesaid testimony and record, gave in the said place, before they withdrew thence, and rendered judgment for the said lord Thomas and the church of Hereford.

[139] he recorded besides. And then the said lord Thomas, who had had many huntsmen and hunting dogs gathered, that day and the three following had hunting done openly and publicly in the above-mentioned wood. And although the said lord earl had threatened at his aforesaid withdrawal that whoever should come to hunt in the said wood would find obstacle and encountre (that is, force set against him; for to the English encounter is in Latin a contest, conflict, etc.), and should have armed people with him, yet he set no impediment then, nor even afterwards, in the aforesaid against the said lord Thomas or his successors (read successor, because the Saint's next successor, Richard Swinfield, was still living when Hugh testified these things). And he said that these things were done publicly and notoriously, and are public and notorious in those parts, … and that on the aforesaid day the said lord Thomas had with him many barons and nobles of his kindred; and he named the lords Geoffrey de Lucy, John Tregoz, Nicholas de Zegraue, Fulk de Lucy and others. Thus far Hugh le Barber; a few things which happened besides after the lawsuit was decided are read in the Compendium, num. 17 and 18, where I shall confirm them from other witnesses. For the surname de Lucy perhaps de Lacy should be read, a family of which name, as also Tregoz and Segrave, Camden numbers among the more illustrious of England.

* i.e. belli of war

* i.e. Salopiae of Shropshire

§ VIII. Other lawsuits and deeds of his for the possessions and rights of the church of Hereford; the beginnings of dissension with John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury; withdrawal into Normandy.

He wins another lawsuit for his church against the baron Corbet, In the often-mentioned Compendium there follows a brief narration of another lawsuit which the Saint won for his church against the baron Peter Corbet, who, as Richard says there, had usurped great pastures of five or seven miles in the place called the Long Mynd in the time of the predecessor prelates of Hereford. Other witnesses also mentioned the same lawsuit, of whom Robert of Gloucester said: When the lord Peter Corbet, knight and baron, and his father, namely the lord Thomas Corbet, had occupied in the times of the predecessors of the said lord Thomas about four hundred acres of land near the forest (that is, the wood) of the said lord Peter and the castle of the said lord bishop of Ledebury … and the predecessors of the said lord Thomas had not been able to recover their rights against him on account of his power, the said lord Thomas, having moved a lawsuit, won against him; and the aforesaid witness said that he had been present at these things. Acre, in Spelman in the Glossary, is said to be derived from a Saxon word, and to be among the English a measured portion of land, formerly uncertain, but now, by the statute of the XXXI year of Edward I (that is, long after the death of St. Thomas, but before the process of his canonization was begun), containing twice eighty perches. Of the town or castle of Ledebury see what was said above.

[141] Hugh le Barber set out the same controversy thus: by whom it had been afflicted with great damages. The lord Peter Corbet, baron, formerly lord of the land of Caus, had usurped the rights of the church of Hereford in certain lands and pastures pertaining to the castle * of the said bishop and of a certain township called Ledebury; and when the said baron or his people found animals

of the said Bishop or of his subjects * in the said lands and pastures, they seized them and kept them for themselves, unless for the ransom of each animal ten formae of sterlings (they were a kind of silver money) were paid to them; and they had done this in the times of the two immediate predecessors of the lord Thomas himself and in his. Against which baron, after many treaties of concord, when they could not agree, the lord Thomas moved a lawsuit in the royal court, and won judicially against him. While the same lawsuit was pending, and probably already then inclining in favour of the Saint, there happened what I related above from the testimony of John Butè, namely that the aforesaid baron, full of indignation, hurled these words at him: Either thou art full of the devil, or thou art too intimate with God; and that he, in no way moved by these things, modestly replied that he used no art of the devil, but that in hope of divine help he was prosecuting the rights of his church.

[142] A third adversary, even more formidable than the two preceding, the Prelate of unconquered mind attacked, Llywelyn, prince of Wales, unjustly withholding three townships of the church, Llywelyn, called by others Leolinus, the last prince of Wales of the British race, who was withholding three townships of the church of Hereford, situated near Montgomery, a town of Wales and head of the county of Montgomery, unjustly occupied already from the times of the same Saint's predecessors. In our apograph of the testimony of John de Kemeseya these townships are called Astone, Chestrok and Multon, of which in the topographical Map of the county of Shropshire in Camden I found Aston in that place, not the two others, unless perhaps the name Multon was afterwards changed into Mathlinton, situated not far from Aston in the same county, and Chestrok likewise passed into Churchstoke, a village placed on the border of the county of Montgomery. There is also there in Shropshire, four or five English miles from the town of Montgomery, the little town of Bishop's Castle, which Camden says was so called because it belonged to the bishops of Hereford, whose diocese extends widely in this province. To this town or castle, therefore, the three aforesaid townships situated in adjacent Wales perhaps belonged. The Saint could not reclaim them by the ordinary way of law, by bringing a suit in the royal tribunals, from a powerful prince, to whom it was grievous even to acknowledge his principality as a fief of the king of England, and who, so as not to do so, was afterwards slain making war against King Edward. Thomas therefore turned to ecclesiastical arms, and took care that he should be excommunicated by the archbishop of Canterbury, and he himself also, using the same sword and his customary constancy, at length prevailed.

[143] and his subjects hostile to the same church These things being noted beforehand, let us hear the assertions of two witnesses, differing somewhat in the circumstances. The testimony of Hugh le Barber, who set out the matter more fully than Richard in the Compendium, num. 19, is this. Likewise he specified that the church of Hereford has three townships in Wales, of whose names, because the names of Wales are very foreign to the names of England, he said he did not remember; and the said three townships are worth as much to the bishop in revenues as the third part of the bishopric of Hereford, as he had heard said by Robert de Wodeford, then constable (that is, prefect or steward) of the said Bishop in his castle called Ledebury and in its district. And in the times of the predecessors of the said lord Thomas and in his, the Welsh (or the inhabitants of Wales, subjects of the said prince Llywelyn) had occupied, and held by violence as occupied, the said three townships, and withdrew from the said Bishop of Hereford his rights, and from the said three townships made war and damaged other people and places of the said bishop and of those round about.

[144] he publicly excommunicates And when on a certain occasion about a thousand of the said Welsh had taken a certain great booty in the land of the said Bishop in the parts of Ledebury, the witness himself, with other men at arms who were in those parts for the said lord Thomas, and with the neighbours round about, went back and took away and recovered the said booty by armed hand. And when they had made this known to the said lord Thomas, he turned aside with his clergy to the aforesaid places, and in a certain castle of the church of Hereford, destroyed of old by the aforesaid Welsh, near the said three townships, he solemnly excommunicated and anathematized the said Welsh, many lighted candles being thrown into the ditch of the said castle; and thence he withdrew. And when the said Welsh, gathered in a multitude to invade anew the land of the said Bishop, made their passage thence, and found the said candles thrown in a multitude into the ditch, stupefied thereat, terrified and disturbed, they went back, although they were fully two thousand.

[145] and so he recovers the townships from the subjects. Afterwards, within a few days, the head men of the said three townships signified to the witness himself and to others who were for the said lord Thomas of Ledebury that they wished to come to concord and make peace with them, provided that then they would help them against other Welsh, who wished to rob the said three townships, and provided that they would receive them and their families and animals and goods in the aforesaid castle: and so it was done. And the said lord Thomas recovered his rights and those of the aforesaid church of Hereford, and the bishop has and holds the said three townships peacefully and quietly. And the aforesaid he said is and was public, notorious and manifest in those parts. Now receive also the relation of John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, which I have transcribed from the same process. Likewise he specified concerning the lawsuit which he had had with Llywelyn, prince of Wales, for three townships, namely Astone, Chestrok and Multon, which he was striving to take away from the church of Hereford; and he had him excommunicated by Brother Robert, then archbishop of Canterbury, and the same lord Thomas, by commission of the said archbishop, denounced him excommunicated, with candles lighted and extinguished, in the pastures near the aforesaid townships, the aforesaid witness being present. And he said the aforesaid was in summer time, on a certain Sunday, but he does not remember the year nor the month in which he had the present lawsuit.

[146] From this varying narration of the two witnesses it may in some measure be doubted A few things concerning these whether the same or a twin excommunication, passed at different times by the holy Prelate against Llywelyn, is indicated. To me, however, it is more probable that the same is designated in both places, and that John de Kemeseya mentioned only the excommunicated Llywelyn, because he was the prince of the others and the author of the misdeed; and Hugh le Barber chiefly the Welsh, because they, terrified by the sentence of excommunication passed against them, Hugh himself contributing his help, entered into peace with their holy Bishop. Another difference in the relation of each is that Hugh says those three townships had been occupied by the Welsh already from the times of St. Thomas's predecessors; whereas John only asserts that Llywelyn strove to take them away from St. Thomas. However that may be, that they were in fact occupied by Llywelyn Richard also expressly teaches in the Compendium, num. 19, where he says that Thomas excommunicated the lord Llywelyn, prince of Wales, because he refused to give up and restore three townships of the church of Hereford near Montgomery, hostilely occupied.

[147] A little word must be added here concerning the castle of Ledebury, are observed: Llywelyn at length yields, broken by the Saint's constancy. which the praised Hugh mentions at num. 144 and following. We said above that the castle or little town Lidbury or Ledbury is situated in the county of Hereford near the Malvern hills, which separate the same county there on the East from Worcestershire. But since the aforesaid three townships are placed in a far different region, namely on the confines of the counties of Shropshire and Montgomery, the first of which closes the county of Hereford on the North, it is difficult to refer the things which the same Hugh says were then done to places so different in site. All difficulty would cease if the above-mentioned castle, which, because it formerly belonged to the bishops of Hereford, is called Bishop's Castle, that is, the Bishop's castle, had formerly also been called Ledebury; for I showed at num 142 that this is situated in the county of Shropshire, a few miles from the city of Montgomery, near which the same townships were. Further, Llywelyn, bound with the bond of excommunication, persisted in his stubbornness until, being ordered by the same Saint, when about to celebrate Mass before King Edward, to be excluded from the royal chapel, and overcome by his constancy, he pledged satisfaction and was absolved, as is read at more length in the Compendium, num. 20.

[148] A fourth lawsuit of St. Thomas Richard touches briefly thus in the Compendium, num. 19: He litigates with the bishop of St Asaph: Because the bishop of Assavensis (or of St Asaph, in the Welsh county of Flint) had usurped episcopal rights in those parts, the said lord Thomas moved a lawsuit against him in the Roman curia. Richard noted nothing more of it, except that the Saint died while it was pending. Equally obscure here is the narration of the other witnesses; but concerning its outcome Godwin, in the Commentary on the Prelates of England, page 658, under Anianus II, bishop of St Asaph, noted the following: In another lawsuit, raised between him (Anianus) and Thomas de Cantelupe, bishop of Hereford, on account of the jurisdiction of the territory of Horddor, he did not enjoy the same good fortune. Thomas of Hereford having died, with the assent of Richard de Swinfeild his successor, the matter was referred by compromise to the arbitration of Richard, bishop of London, who judged for the bishop of Hereford. Whence that region has from that time always been reckoned part of the diocese of Hereford. We saw above at num. 101 that St. Thomas ordered the form of a certain arbitration or amicable composition, made between himself and the bishop of St Asaph, the lord Edward, king of England, intervening, to be written. Another dissension could be in question here; or, if the same is in question, it must be said that that amicable composition was not brought to completion, or was afterwards dissolved.

[149] likewise with the bishop of St Davids and the baron Tregoz, Again, the Saint is read to have had another contention for preserving the rights of his church, about which Richard was silent, with the bishop of St Davids in the county of Pembroke in Wales. Robert of Gloucester in his testimony, to use the words of the process, specified concerning the contention which he had with the bishop of St Davids over the consecration of the church of the monastery of Dore; and although there were many archers against the said lord Thomas, he nonetheless consecrated the said church. The monastery of Dore, otherwise called St. Mary of Dore, is recounted in the Monasticon Anglicanum, tome 1, page 862, among the cenobia of the Cistercian Order, and is placed in the shire, that is, in the county, of Hereford. But by whatever title the bishop of St Davids arrogated to himself the right of consecrating the church of Dore, there joined himself to him John, baron Tregoz, the nephew of St. Thomas through his sister, who contended, by I know not what right, that certain rights which they call regalia belonged to him in the same place, if it could be proved that the monastery did not belong to the diocese and county of Hereford.

[150] whom, opposing him even with an armed band of soldiers, Led away by this hope, he helped the bishop of St Davids, not with words only, but also by flying thither with an armed band of soldiers, to keep his holy Uncle from the consecration of the same church. But he, in no way terrified by these things, and surrounded also by his own defenders, discharged his office there, and then won the suit before the judges. So we have it from Brother Walter Kinille, master of sacred Theology, who is named in the process the forty-seventh witness, and is said to have been familiarly known to the holy Prelate. When the said lord Thomas (he says) wished to consecrate the church of the monastery of Dore, which monastery he said was in the diocese of Hereford, the lord Thomas Beck, bishop of St Davids, contending that the said monastery was in the diocese of St Davids, opposed himself, and also the baron Tregoz, nephew of the said lord de Cantalupo, who contended that he ought to have regalia in the aforesaid place if it were, as he himself wished and contended, outside the diocese and county of Hereford.

[151] he consecrates the church of Dore, and obtains his cause before the judges. And to prevent the said lord Thomas de Cantalupo from consecrating the said church, as he had previously ordained, the said baron, having gathered a multitude of horse and foot, made an assault on the said lord Thomas de Cantalupo and his household and others whom he was taking with him for the sake of security and defence. This notwithstanding, he consecrated the said church, and finally, a lawsuit having been moved, won judicially against the aforesaid bishop of St Davids and baron. And in this deed, on account of the said assault, the aforesaid witness said that the aforementioned lord Thomas had been in bodily danger. I add that the holy Prelate, besides the accustomed unconquered strength of his breast, proved himself wholly a stranger to that vice of mind which too often causes the utility of churches to be put behind the emolument of kinsmen: for if he had been willing to yield this right of the bishopric of Hereford, he would have conferred a notable benefit on his nephew, the baron John Tregoz.

[152] The last, and that the gravest, dissension the Saint had with his metropolitan John Peckham, In the council of Reading he opposes the archbishop of Canterbury who, promoted from the Order of Friars Minor to the archbishopric of Canterbury by Nicholas III, Supreme Pontiff, had succeeded Robert Kilwardby, the old friend of the same Thomas, and wished to extend the rights of his see further than seemed fair to the Saint and the other bishops of England. A proof is the complaints of the same bishops, comprised in twenty-one articles, which they wrote by common consent to the same archbishop, demanding that satisfaction be given them on these points. These articles, together with as many answers of the archbishop, David Wilkins published in tome 2 of the Councils of Great Britain and Ireland, page 75 and following. But none of them dared to resist him so strongly as St. Thomas, who on that account incurred his grave indignation, and defended the cause of his church before the Apostolic See, first by letters and at length in person, as long as he lived. The first feud between them that I know of seems to have arisen in the council of Reading in the county of Berkshire, which Peckham, having called together all his suffragans, celebrated in the first year of his see, but of Christ 1279, in the month of July, if the chronological notes prefixed to it in the praised Wilkins, page 33, are accurate.

[153] At that same synod there was present with his holy Prelate Robert of Gloucester, who wished to decree certain things incongruously; and he, as is read in the process, whose words I use, afterwards asked by the Apostolic commissaries about the faith of the lord Thomas himself, answered that the lord Thomas had been very Catholic and faithful and a zealot of the Catholic faith and of ecclesiastical unity. And in corroboration of this saying of his he added that once, on account of some burdensome things which were being done by Brother John de Pechuam, then archbishop of Canterbury, in the council of Reading, among which the same archbishop wished to interpret the principal constitutions, the said lord Thomas said in the aforesaid council to the aforesaid archbishop that it was neither becoming nor lawful for him to intromit himself in the aforesaid (that is, to meddle with the aforesaid), and that he would do better to intromit himself in his own hierarchy; because this pertained to the Roman Church. Whatever the praised archbishop wished to decree here, this seems to have been the first dissension between him and the Saint.

[154] Robert then subjoined, and candidly confessed, he rebukes another for disparaging the Roman curia on that account. that on that occasion he had accused the Roman curia of sending prelates of this kind, and that he was therefore soon deservedly rebuked by St. Thomas. For there follows in the same place in his testimony: But after the aforesaid, when the said witness, sitting at table * at the side of the said lord Thomas in the manor of Rutherfeld, of the diocese of Lincoln, recalling to memory the things that had been done and said in the said council, said that so many foolish prelates were sent by the Roman Church throughout the whole world, both Religious and others, whom the said Roman Church provided with prelacies; that the said prelates did and decreed so many presumptuous and rash things that their subjects withdrew from obedience to them, and that they would do no more for the Roman Church than for the Sultan. Then the said lord Thomas, as if moved and kindled, rebuked the said witness, commanding that thenceforth he should not speak such things; and that the primacy of the Roman Church would always endure. Thus far he.

[155] The discord with the same archbishop growing, New causes of discord then arising, especially that John Peckham urged too vehemently the rights which he believed were due to him, the holy Prelate appealed to the Apostolic See, and meanwhile withdrew from England into Normandy, that from there he might plead his cause before the Roman Pontiff through letters and proctors. That he withdrew from England to this end we learn from Peckham's letters given to his proctors in the Roman curia, such as Wilkins exhibits in the above-mentioned collection of Councils, tome 2, page 81, where he speaks thus: Master de Pontisar, archdeacon of Exon. *, intimating it to us, we have learned that he, lurking in the parts beyond the sea, is obtaining through his proctors in the curia Apostolic letters against us concerning certain undue exactions and other injuries; which afterwards appeared in effect. The place of withdrawal John Butè, the fifty-ninth witness in the process, taught, who indicated on another occasion both this and the time of his stay, and certain other circumstances.

[156] The Saint withdraws into Normandy, For treating of the Saint's night vigils and lying on the ground, he said that he had … frequently seen these things by night in Normandy, in a place called Funtaynes, in which the said lord Thomas made a stay for a year and a half, and the witness himself with him, then his panetier and butler, and sometimes acting in place of his chamberlain. And he said the aforesaid was about two years before the death of the said lord Thomas. The same witness also narrated below that a boy drowned in the waters was restored to life or preserved by the said lord Thomas while living, about two years before his death, and while making a stay in the abbey of Lyre in the diocese of Évreux in Normandy; and he added that the same, after the aforesaid benefit of the boy preserved, remained in the same abbey for half a year or thereabouts. The family of St. Thomas, both paternal and maternal, as was said above, was of Norman origin, and his mother had been joined in first marriage to the count of Évreux; which reason, together with the easy crossing from England, could have induced him to choose Normandy for his withdrawal. The abbey of Lyre of the Order of St. Benedict survives today, situated in the diocese of Évreux beside the river Risle or Rilla, and there presided at that time the abbot Robert II de Gauville; concerning which the continuators of the Gallia Christiana may be consulted, tome XI, from col. 644.

[157] where he is believed to have restored to life What happened there at that time concerning the boy is related in the testimony of the praised Butè in this manner. Likewise he narrated that, while the said lord Thomas was living, two years before his death, and was making a stay in the abbey of Lyre in the diocese of Évreux in Normandy, a certain infant of about three years, who had frequently been accustomed to play with other infants before the gate of the said abbey, was drowned in a certain water (namely in the river Risle or Rilla) running before the gate of the said abbey, on a certain day before the said lord Thomas went to his table (that is, before he had come to dinner), and the parents of the said infant sought him and did not find him. And this, namely that the said parents were seeking and not finding the said infant, was made public in the house of the lord Thomas himself before he went to the aforesaid table. Afterwards, while he was at table, it was said before him that the said parents had found the aforesaid infant drowned and dead in the said water. Then the same lord Thomas, raising his hand and making the sign of the Cross towards the place in which the aforesaid infant was said to have been found, said: This infant shall live, God granting it.

[158] And the said witness, running with others to the said infant, a drowned boy. found him dead and having no sign of life, and full of water, and stiff. And when the same witness had had the mouth of the said infant opened with a little knife, and him held with his head hanging down to the ground and his feet raised upward, and there had come out water and sand, with which the body of the said infant was filled, to the quantity of two flagons of wine, the said infant began to move his limbs, and was carried to the fire and warmed, and lived. At that time this was ascribed to a miracle, that the said infant lived after the aforesaid drowning; but it was not ascribed to a miracle done through the merits of the said lord Thomas, nor even through the merits of any other Saint of whom it might then be said: but now the same witness said that he believed, on account of the other miracles done through the merits of the said lord Thomas, and because he directed the sign of the Cross towards the place in which the said infant had been found drowned, and foretold that he would live, he judges that the said infant miraculously lived after the said drowning through the merits of the said lord Thomas. Of the month, the day, the name of the infant, and from what parents he was born, he said when asked that he did not know; adding that the said infant lived for half a year or thereabouts, during which from then on the said lord Thomas stayed in the aforesaid abbey; he does not know, however, what happened from then on to the aforesaid infant, who was the son of a certain tavern-keeper dwelling near the aforesaid abbey. Thus far John Butè, who for the reasons alleged ascribed, not rashly, the life preserved or restored to the same infant to the merits of St. Thomas.

* ad castrum to the castle

* i.e. illius of him

* add: in castro in the castle

* i.e. praedari to plunder

* i.e. ad mensam at table

* i.e. Exoniensi of Exeter

§ IX. The causes of the discords between John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury, and his suffragans; the acts of his official against St. Thomas, on account of which the latter's above-mentioned stay in Normandy seems to have taken place.

John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury, If what we saw affirmed in the preceding § from the testimony of John Butè is true, that St. Thomas stayed about two years in Normandy, he must have been driven to it by grave reasons, because otherwise it is scarcely probable that so solicitous a Pastor was absent so long from his flock. He had already returned into England one year before his death, that is, in the year 1281, on whose feast of Pentecost the fifth witness, Nicholas or Aicardus de Warwik, justiciary and counsellor of the king of England, deposed that he solemnly celebrated Mass at Caleva, now commonly Wallingford, in the county of Berkshire, before the earl of Cornwall. John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury, also mentions his return in the letter already praised at num. 155, and presently to be recited. And his first meeting with Peckham was indeed peaceful; but, the latter promoting his rights, as he contended, more vehemently than before, such feuds blazed up between them that Thomas, after excommunication had been threatened against him by him, at length set out into Italy to plead his cause in person before the Roman Pontiff, then Martin IV, to whom he had appealed before.

[160] urging the rights of his church perhaps more vehemently than was fair, A eulogy of John Peckham, as a man eminent in learning and piety, was given by Luke Wadding in tome 5 of the Annals of the Minors at the year of Christ 1279, num. 13 and following, and there at num. 19 he says this to our purpose: John had some controversies, for various causes, as happens, with almost every one of the bishops, some of which we shall touch on elsewhere in their place; nay, even with all together. For the bishops thought that John had arrogated to himself many things in the cognizance of causes beyond the reason of law and to the detriment and diminution of their lawful power. Of which kind they collected those twenty-one grievances on account of which they complained that they were excessively pressed by him and that their ecclesiastical jurisdiction was disturbed and withdrawn. To which he answered each one specially, and the sum of his whole answer turned on this, that he said he had attempted nothing in any matter which did not cohere and agree with ecclesiastical law, with the institutions and examples of his predecessors, and with the amplitude of his power, which he exercised not only as metropolitan but as legate of the Supreme Pontiff (namely legatus natus by reason of the see of Canterbury).

[161] he offends the suffragan bishops: For the rest, lest he should seem to act too severely and by the extremity of right, he consented that the official, as they call him, of Canterbury should not call causes to himself from the suffragans except by appeals made step by step, and when it was established that the bishop had acted negligently and remissly, and in testamentary causes, when the deceased possessed goods in various dioceses. Nor did he wish the sequestrations, as we call them, of churches made by the suffragans to be rescinded; yet all this with this caution, that this indulgence should not be damaging to his church or to his successors. So he. There are extant, as I have already said above, those twenty-one articles of the bishops, and as many answers of the archbishop to them, in tome 2 of the Councils of Great Britain and Ireland, page 75 and following. There is also extant there, at page 77, a letter of the same, or ordinance, concerning the complaints and appeals brought against the official of Canterbury by the subject brethren and suffragans, in which, after the matter had been examined more maturely, he confessed that certain new things concerning the use of power had been introduced by his ministers, which he promises are to be guarded against for the future, and amends. It will help, for the knowledge of the controversy which he had with St. Thomas, to have recounted the same letter, published from the Register of the same archbishop, fol. 145 B.

[162] to satisfy whose complaints, To all who shall inspect the present page, Brother John by divine permission, etc. Whereas the clamorous intimation of very many has lately probably reported to us that in our times certain grievances have been inflicted on our suffragans and their subjects without our knowledge, both by the auditors of our court and by our official of Canterbury, and also by the dean of the Arches at London, commissary of the said official, which were not in the times of our predecessors, in whose footsteps we are bound and wish to tread; we, wishing both to cut away new things and to temper old ones, as far as we can according to God, for the peace of our venerable brethren our fellow bishops and the quiet of their subjects, whom we desire from our inmost heart to console, have commanded discreet men, the venerable brother the lord W., bishop of Norwich, masters R., archdeacon of Canterbury, G. de St. Leofard, treasurer of Chichester, A. de Itales, R. de Brandon, canon of London, learned by long experience in the customs and rights of the church of Canterbury, that they should diligently inquire concerning the aforesaid and faithfully inform us about them. Fortified by whose counsel and by the investigation of other prudent men, we will and have decreed to rescind the said grievances in certain articles, and to commit our ordinance to perpetual memory.

[163] In the first place, therefore, we will and ordain that our official of Canterbury shall not henceforth write back upon the complaints of the subjects of our brethren and suffragans, after mature examination, having consulted skilled men except in special cases, namely in case of negligence, and in hearing accounts from the executors of those dying in the province of Canterbury having revenues, manors, possessions and goods in various dioceses of our mentioned province; and also in other cases which, both by law and by custom, have been permitted and likewise granted to him in our times and those of our predecessors; and if in fact he shall write back in others, and exception is taken to this before him, such exception shall be admitted without any difficulty. We will moreover and ordain that the same official shall not henceforth write back upon appeals interposed by the subjects of our brethren and suffragans directly to the court of Canterbury, the intermediate step being omitted; and if in fact he shall write back, and exception is taken to this before him or any commissary of his, when the said exception and its effect shall have been competently established, they shall in no way intromit themselves further in the same cause of appeal.

[164] This tempering also, in favour of our brethren and fellow bishops and for the quiet of the clergy and people of the province of Canterbury, he issued an ordinance, we annex to the foregoing, that upon the complaints of the subjects of our aforesaid brethren there shall henceforth in no way be a writing back in our name without our special and express knowledge and without reasonable cause. We indeed intend to use this right of ours so moderately, without prejudice to anyone, that in nothing may we differ from the footsteps of our predecessors. Truly, if it happen that any of our brethren sequester the fruits of the church of a cleric his subject for a canonical or customary cause, and after such sequestration an appeal is made on that occasion from the same brother, on the part of such cleric, to the Apostolic See and to our court for protection, although in our court it be pronounced for the same in the business of protection, we will that such sequestration, as preceding the same appeal, shall in no way be finally relaxed by virtue of such protection.

[165] Moreover, if it happen that to anyone litigating in our court in which he amended and granted various things. the benefit of absolution ad cautelam be imparted by our official or by our commissaries or his, if the publication of such absolution be sought by the same, since the publication ought to be conformable to the absolution, lest by a simple publication of absolution he bear himself as simply absolved, and be finally reputed absolved by others, we will and ordain that in letters to be obtained in future concerning the publication of such absolution those words AD CAUTELAM be inserted more expressly. And if it shall be necessary to add anything to the aforesaid or to take away, or to declare any of them, we are ready at the first assembly of the brethren to condescend to them in these and in other things as far as we can, saving the liberty of our church. By this our ordinance, however, we do not intend to derogate in anything from our successors or our church. In testimony of which thing we have caused our seal to be affixed to these presents. Farewell. Given at Mortlake on the VII day before the Kalends of May, in the year of the Lord MCC eighty-two, the fourth of our consecration. From these chronological notes and from what is to be said below it is certain that the ordinance was made by the archbishop at the time at which the last lawsuit between him and St. Thomas had already been brought to the Roman curia; the same ordinance, however, had to be set forth beforehand so that the lawsuit itself could be judged more fairly.

[166] Before this ordinance a discord had arisen Further, although that cause was common to all the suffragan bishops of the province of Canterbury, it concerned Thomas above the rest, whether because he opposed himself more strongly than the others to the endeavours of his metropolitan, or because perhaps it happened that the occasion of the controversy arose chiefly in his diocese of Hereford. The Apostolic commissaries William Durand or Duranti, bishop of Mende in Occitania, Ralph de Baldock, bishop of London in England, and William, archdeacon of Aran in the church of Comminges in Aquitaine, Pontifical chaplain and Apostolic nuncio in England, in the letter which they wrote in the year 1307 to Pope Clement V concerning the process made by them on this matter, speak thus of that grave controversy: Through the depositions of these (witnesses) and some writings which they had long had in custody with them, exhibited by them at our command, and by other means, we have found that the said lord Thomas had great contention and discord with the venerable father Brother John de Pecham, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, his metropolitan, concerning archiepiscopal and episcopal rights, from which the same lord Thomas was said to have been bound, after lawful appeals interposed to the Apostolic See, by the bond of the aforesaid excommunication of the said archbishop. But from these it is not clear what case specially gave cause to that controversy, which therefore must be sought from elsewhere.

[167] between St. Thomas and Peckham, or his court, There are extant on this business, in the aforesaid collection of Councils of Great Britain, tome 2, two instruments taken from the Register of the same archbishop of the year 1282, from which we learn that there was a twin grave controversy between those two prelates, each arising from the ministers of each. The first instrument is published there at page 84 and following under this title: Process held against the court of Hereford before master P. de St. Marius, official of Canterbury. From Reg. Peckh. fol. 149 b. Then follows the process itself, or more truly a compendium of the process, which I subjoin here in so many words, the words, however, which are abbreviated there being rendered in full for the sake of clarity. Whereas lately a matrimonial cause between Petronilla Bebler, the plaintiff party on the one part, and Richard de Bramford of the diocese of Hereford, the defendant party on the other, had been agitated for a long time before the subdean of Hereford, a definitive sentence was given for the said Petronilla; from which sentence the said Richard to the see of Canterbury

lawfully appealed, the intermediate step being omitted (that is, Thomas, the diocesan bishop, being passed over), according to the custom of the court of Canterbury hitherto observed; and after the appeal had been interposed, the judge appealed from (the judge a quo is designated) bound the aforesaid Richard, the appellant, with sentence of excommunication.

[168] At length there was a writing back by the official of Canterbury on the appeal, and an inhibition; by reason of an appeal made to the official of Canterbury, and this notwithstanding, the judge appealed from denounced the said Richard excommunicated. Concerning which the same Richard complained to the official of Canterbury; who admitted the complaint, and wrote back, summoning the aforesaid judge to answer the complainant, and to answer and give satisfaction to the court of Canterbury for the aforesaid contempt: all which things appear by the acts. Which rescript on the complaint having been presented to the said subdean by Richard de Bramford the elder, the father, and Richard the younger, the appellant, he excommunicated the father of the said Richard, the exhibitor of the said rescript, and also the aforesaid Richard the younger, as before, and committed to prison custody Alan of Lichfield, the messenger who obtained the said rescript; concerning which things he was summoned again personally to swear and tell the truth. Who, so summoned, appeared, and sufficiently confessed the aforesaid. Whence the official of Canterbury, following his confession, proceeding by his office, finally condemned the said subdean in ten marks sterling for the aforesaid contempt, and absolved in form of law the often-mentioned Richard de Bramford the elder and Richard the younger, prosecuting their appeal in the court of Canterbury, and commanded the same subdean to denounce them absolved and to free the imprisoned Alan: all which things appear by the acts.

[169] Which letters having been presented to the subdean, he threw them into the mud, the subdean and official of Hereford, under pain of excommunication, and refused to certify the court of Canterbury. Concerning which repeated contempts he was summoned to the aforesaid court; which summons indeed appears by the acts. He not appearing, it was commanded to the penitentiary of Hereford and to master Richard de Gerdebrigge that they should receive the witnesses resident in those parts concerning the said contempts; and this command appears by the acts. Who received the witnesses, whose depositions also appear by the acts. Moreover, it was commanded to the official of Hereford that he should admonish and effectually induce the said subdean to give satisfaction to the court of Canterbury for the said ten marks within a certain time, under pain of sentence of greater excommunication passed from then, if he did not obey the said admonitions; which command indeed appears by the acts. And because the said subdean did not give satisfaction, nor did the said official certify, it was commanded again, under pain of sentence of greater excommunication passed from then, to the said official of Hereford that he should denounce the often-mentioned subdean excommunicated, and announce the said Richard and Richard absolved, and free Alan from prison custody; and these things appear by the acts.

[170] And because he would in no way obey the command, [and he is said to have commanded St. Thomas, under pain of interdict, to execute his sentence.] it was commanded to the Bishop of Hereford that he should announce the aforesaid subdean and official excommunicated, and the said Richard and Richard absolved, and nonetheless cite or cause to be cited the said subdean and official, that on a certain day they should appear in the church of B. Mary of the Arches at London, to answer for the contempts done to the court of Canterbury, and to swear upon certain articles, and further to do, etc. And this was commanded to the mentioned Bishop under pain of suspension of his chapel, and of interdict, which he laid on all places to which it should happen that the said Bishop turned aside; unless it should happen that the lord king, or the queen, or their children, or at least the archbishop of Canterbury, were in the aforesaid places, or were present, whether several or one: and these things appear by the acts. Nor has more yet come to our hands of the process held against the subdean of Hereford, the official, or the Bishop; we believe, however, that we shall obtain more sufficiently in future. There are also some things of the process held between the parties, and those appear by themselves. Likewise there are certain extracts from the Register of the Arches at London, and those appear by themselves. Thus far the praised compendium of the process, at whose beginning, since that cause is said to have been lately agitated, it seems to have been written not long after.

[171] But that compendium of the process, made for the adverse party, But of whatever time it may be, it must be suspect even on the ground that it was made by the party adverse to St. Thomas; nor is it just, the other party being unheard, to hold as ascertained the things which are alleged by adversaries, especially against a holy Prelate. And first indeed the compiler of the compendium boldly asserts that the above-mentioned manner of appealing and writing back, the intermediate step being omitted, is according to the custom of the court of Canterbury hitherto observed; which nevertheless first began to prevail under John Peckham. Indeed, so teach those four men whom the same archbishop, as being learned by long experience in the customs and rights of the church of Canterbury, commanded to declare their opinion concerning these and similar dissensions arisen between himself and the suffragan bishops, as was said at num. 162. The third of their articles, in tome 2 of the Councils of Great Britain, page 78, has thus: They decreed also that the official of the court of Canterbury should not write back upon appeals interposed by the subjects of the suffragans of the church of Canterbury, the ordinary intermediate steps being omitted, to the above-mentioned see of Canterbury; because it ought not to be done according to law, NOR WAS IT CUSTOMARILY DONE OF OLD.

[172] is convicted of falsity. The first of their articles there is this: Although the official of the court of Canterbury in modern times has more frequently written back upon the complaints of the subjects of the suffragans of the church of Canterbury, no appeal having been interposed, than the officials of the predecessors of the said father (John Peckham) presiding in their times in the church of Canterbury were accustomed to write back there, since it is established that some of the ancient officials rarely, some at no time, wrote back upon complaints of this kind, they decreed that henceforth there should in no way be a writing back upon complaints of this kind, etc. Receive also the second article of the same arbiters. Although, they say, the lord of Canterbury by right of legation may, as it seems, all appeals whatever being omitted, write back upon the complaints of the aforesaid, yet the power of so writing back upon complaints does not extend to the official of the court of Canterbury, because the extraordinary jurisdiction of legation is not included in the ordinary jurisdiction of the officialty; even if the lord of Canterbury, in creating an official for himself, wished this to be done. For from this the absurdity would follow that a legate could use the ministry of an official in causes and business as if his power were ordinary. On account of which they decreed that there should be no writing back upon complaints of this kind by the officials of the court of Canterbury by right of the above-written legation; if, however, the lord archbishop wishes to write back as legate, he may certainly do so, as it seems, for a reasonable cause specially pressing; not intending by this to generate any prejudice to the right of his suffragans and of their churches.

[173] Far, then, from the truth is it that such a manner of proceeding was according to the custom of Canterbury hitherto, and in other things it must deservedly be suspect. that is, observed from a long time up to then. Peckham himself also acknowledged this, who followed the opinion of those whom he had appointed as arbiters and censors, as may be seen above. From these things also gather that not all things which are asserted in the above-mentioned compendium of the process are to be held as proved, although the several points cannot now be refuted, for lack of the monuments of the other party. For example, the things which are said there so crudely of the excommunication of both Richards and of the imprisoned Alan would most probably appear fairer if we knew the circumstances of the whole transaction. Further, why shall the aforesaid subdean and official of Hereford, and the holy Bishop himself, be blamed, if they judged that such insolent commands of the official of Canterbury, which the archbishop himself afterwards did not dare to approve, were by no means to be obeyed, lest, to the injury of their church of Hereford, they should add courage to the same official in his new undertakings? I said: commands of the official of Canterbury; for in that whole instrument no mention is made of the archbishop, and from that silence one might suspect that these endeavours of the official are among those which the archbishop afterwards disapproved, as having been done by him without his knowledge, in the words which I recited at num. 162. But even if he perhaps had no part in commanding in this business, it is scarcely credible that it was even hidden from him, or that he did not at least consent tacitly to his official by conniving or otherwise.

[174] Nay, it appears to me most probable that St. Thomas, since he was persuaded On account of these disturbances the Saint seems to have set out into Normandy, that he would obtain nothing with the archbishop against his official, withdrew into Normandy, where we saw above at num. 156, from the testimony of John Butè, who was in his service there, that he stayed for a year and a half, about two years before his death. It is most probable, I say, that the cause of this journey and long stay was that the holy Prelate, withdrawing meanwhile from the ecclesiastical province of Canterbury into Normandy, might from there defend the rights of his church before the Roman Pontiff through his letters and proctors. For I believe that Archbishop Peckham treated of this same stay when, in a letter afterwards given to his proctors, he says of him: Master de Pontisar., archdeacon of Exeter, intimating it to us, we have learned that he, lurking in the parts beyond the sea, is obtaining through his proctors in the curia, against us, concerning certain undue exactions and other injuries; which afterwards appeared in effect.

[175] In this opinion of mine the reason also for so long an absence of the holy Bishop from his flock is not difficult to assign. that from there he might defend his cause before the Pontiff through proctors. For since this journey must be said, from the other calculations, to have taken place in the year 1280, in whose month of August Pope Nicholas III died, and Martin IV was not substituted for him until the month of March of the following year, what wonder if that cause suffered rather long delays, and the Saint was compelled to be absent from his see, both to complete what he had begun before the new Pontiff, and so as not to stir up greater disturbances by returning to his diocese and neglecting the command which the official of Canterbury had given him, as we saw, under pain of suspension of his chapel and of interdict, which the same official had laid on all places to which it should happen that the said Bishop turned aside, etc. Further, it is unknown to me in what manner this lawsuit was at length composed; that it was composed, however, is established from the same Saint's return into England, where we shall show in the following § that he conversed amicably with the archbishop before the XV day of January of the year 1282.

§ X. Another controversy of the Saint with his archbishop, concerning which the published instruments of the adverse party are recited, to be examined afterwards.

The Saint, returned into England, incurs the archbishop's displeasure, St. Thomas's return into England, and his friendly approach to John Peckham, the archbishop himself testified in a letter given to his proctors in the Roman curia, and to be recited below, in these words: The Bishop himself, from beyond the sea

parts (in which he had premised that he had lurked and obtained Apostolic letters against the court of Canterbury, as was just said at num. 174), had returned into England, where, coming to us near Canterbury, and thence, under sheep's fleece, offering the kiss, he so leagued himself with us and bound himself with devout readiness, as it seemed to us, that we trusted him in all things as our most devoted and most constant brother. But that peace lasted a short time, an occasion arising a little afterwards in which Peckham, while he urged his rights, as he contended, more vehemently than seemed fair to the other, and interpreted the Saint's answers and deeds unfavourably, threatened him with sentence of excommunication; but he, appealing to the Apostolic See, at length set out into Italy to plead his cause in person before the Supreme Pontiff Martin IV.

[177] by whom he is said to have been excommunicated, In the often-mentioned collection of Councils of Great Britain, tome 2, page 85, there is extant a Process, as the title has it, held against the Bishop of Hereford and the official, etc. From the Register of Peckham, folio 150 a. Whereas the church of Canterbury enjoys such a privilege, set down in the body of the laws, that the archbishop for the time being may and ought to hear the causes of the subjects of his suffragans even by simple complaint; and moreover enjoys such a custom, which does not differ from law, and was and is in possession, or quasi-possession, from a time of which there is no memory, that when it happens that anyone dies who is beneficed in several dioceses, the execution and defence and probate and all things which touch his testament are known to pertain to him. These things, then, being supposed, the fact is this. Master Henry de Havekly, formerly canon of Lincoln, and beneficed in several dioceses, died, having made a testament; and among others he appointed the vicar of Ros, of the diocese of Hereford, as his executor, whom, at the instance of the vicar of Wrotham, he commanded to be cited through master Robert le Wyse, then official of the lord Bishop of Hereford.

[178] Which official indeed, spurning such a command and contemning the court of Canterbury, deserved to be bound with sentence of greater excommunication: and these things are clear by the acts. At length it was commanded to the Bishop of Hereford because the excommunication passed against his official that he should cite the aforesaid vicar, and publicly denounce the often-mentioned official excommunicated. And because the same Bishop contemptuously refused to execute all the commands directed to him by the court of Canterbury in any manner whatever, he was canonically admonished, under pain of greater excommunication passed from then against his person, that he should execute the same command and the others directed to him by the court of Canterbury: and these things appear. Who afterwards, by himself or by another, took care to execute no command directed to him, as was premised. Wherefore it was publicly and solemnly denounced by the aforesaid court of Canterbury that he had incurred sentence of greater excommunication, and ought to be avoided the more strictly by all as excommunicated: and these things likewise are clear.

[179] Whence it is clear by both processes (of the other of which I gave the compendium in the preceding §) that for various and manifold disobediences first the chapel of the said Bishop of Hereford was placed under interdict, he had refused to denounce publicly. and all places to which it should happen that he turned aside; subsequently that he was involved in sentence of excommunication and publicly and solemnly denounced excommunicated. The archbishop, however, was not present where the Bishop of Hereford was excommunicated, but had committed his functions concerning this to others. Whoever the compiler of this compendium of the process was, he merits no greater faith in this than in the former, of which the same seems to have been the author, especially in the circumstances. Thus, for example, he omits here that the official of Hereford appealed to the Supreme Pontiff, and that on account of this appeal Thomas refused to denounce the sentence of excommunication against him which had been committed to him; as will be established from what is to be said. On the same argument John Peckham himself wrote more at length in two letters to his proctors in the Roman curia, which, although written with a sharp pen and in his own cause, I have judged should likewise be set forth beforehand for a fuller knowledge of the transaction.

[180] Both are published in the often-mentioned tome 2 of the Councils of Great Britain, The same controversy is set out in a letter, and to the first of them, at page 81, this title is prefixed: Another (namely letter of John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury) to the same (Renerius and Philip, his proctors in the Roman curia) concerning the state of the church of England and the assembly of bishops at Lambeth. The letter follows, which I subjoin, but with some abbreviated words, which, lest they render the reading much impeded, I shall make whole. Brother John, etc., to his proctors in the Roman curia, greeting, grace and blessing. Unexpectedly there has lately come upon us a certain storm concerning the Bishop of Hereford, whom we truly believed to be the more obedient and more special among all our suffragans, as one whom we had found recommended above the rest; until, master de Pontisar., archdeacon of Exeter, intimating it to us, we learned that he, lurking in the parts beyond the sea, was obtaining through his proctors in the curia Apostolic letters against us concerning certain undue exactions and other injuries; which afterwards appeared in effect: but yet God quickly overturned his endeavours concerning this.

[181] Whereas, then, Robert of Gloucester, called le Wyse, official of the same Bishop, on account of his disobedience incurred, which, as by Peckham his contempt likewise and offence, had been bound with sentence of excommunication both by our official of Canterbury and by us and our auditors, no order of law being passed over; after the Bishop himself had returned from the parts beyond the sea into England, where, coming to us near Canterbury, and thence, under sheep's fleece, offering the kiss, he so leagued himself with us and bound himself with devout readiness (as it seemed to us), that we trusted him in all things as our most devoted and most constant brother. Moreover, his said official persisting in his contumacy and disobedience, the execution of the mentioned sentence was committed to him both by our official and by us, and also that, as our venerable brother, he should nonetheless fulfil what his official had neglected and contemned.

[182] written to his proctors in the Roman curia, is extant, But he, from whom we hoped to have brought back inmost consolation, casting aside the good of obedience which he professed by his oath to our church and to us, wrote back that he was by no means bound to execute that sentence, as invalid, or our command against his official or any of his subjects whatever, because it was established to him (as he said) that that official had appealed to the Roman curia; asserting also that we can exercise no jurisdiction over his subjects except by appeal only; inserting in his letters many other wiles and tergiversations by which he excused himself in this respect from our obedience, refusing with express contradiction to execute our commands. Which understood, grieving over his damnation, and wishing to bring him back by wholesome exhortations to the good of obedience, we wrote to him often and more often that he should faithfully and effectually execute our aforesaid commands, lest it should behove us, though unwilling, to expiate the stain of such disobedience with canonical severity.

[183] in which the Saint is foully treated, At length, meeting one another at Lambeth, and treating amicably on our part, we asked him by living voice that he would do for us what he and his predecessors the bishops of Hereford had hitherto done for us and our predecessors, and, the vice of disobedience being laid aside, return to the firm charity and obedience which he promised. At last, since our admonitions and friendly inducements profited nothing, but rather, under a dove's appearance, the same Bishop armed himself with his wiles and devised malices against us, we had him again, personally present, solemnly admonished in writing to obedience. And because he still persisted pertinaciously and contemptuously in his rebellion and malice, we had him bound in writing with sentence of excommunication, justice requiring it; who immediately appealed to the Roman curia. And afterwards we commanded that sentence to be published against him by the bishops and our suffragans throughout our province.

[184] and by him he is said to have been excommunicated. But now, feigning frivolous causes, and mixing even blasphemies and lies into his appeals, proceeding in all cunning and falsity, he has those appeals published in the public and more solemn places of England, to our infamy and the subversion of the rights of our church, not without the guilt of perjury. And know that this is the full truth in all respects of the process held against the Bishop. And it is said that the same Bishop has already taken the road towards the Roman curia; which, however, we do not believe, because it is uncertain; since, if it be so, he did not cross the sea publicly, but secretly; and while he is believed to be found in one place, already turning secretly to other places, he hides himself under a fox's pelt. And if it should happen that he comes to the curia, or that impetrations are made in the aforesaid matters, be altogether on guard that no general letters pass the audience under any form whatever without contradiction; nor special letters without agreement as to judges and places. And be watchful and solicitous about these things, inasmuch as our aforesaid adversary is cunning, walking in all falsity. Given at Clyst of the bishop of Exeter, on the II day before the Kalends of April, in the IV year of our consecration, that is, in the year of Christ 1282.

[185] Another letter of the same Peckham, under the title Another letter also, published in the name of the same archbishop, is recited, Letters of the Archbishop containing the fact of the Bishop of Hereford in sum, ibid. fol. 148 a, in the tome cited, page 83 and following, clearly sets out the cause of the controversy. Brother John, by permission, etc., to his beloved son master Renerius of Florence, clerk and his proctor in the Roman curia, greeting, grace and blessing. Lest our affairs, which you have to promote in the curia, should recede from your memory, we inculcate them quite often in your ears. The sum of the business of Hereford is this. Whereas our church of Canterbury is and has been in possession, from a time of which there exists no memory, of taking cognizance everywhere and indifferently of those causes of testaments whose testators had their benefices or any other goods whatever in various dioceses, and of calling and citing the executors of such testaments to render account ; this, because it has been approved by all our suffragans, we, wishing to use this our right and possession, some time ago commanded the official of the Bishop of Hereford that he should cite peremptorily certain executors of the testament of master H. de Havetle of good memory, who resided in the diocese of Hereford, to render before us an account of their administration of the goods of the aforesaid testament, and should certify us of the citation made.

[186] And because that official contemned to do this, at length on account of this and many other

contempts in which the same Bishop which he made both to us and to our official of Canterbury, he deserved to be bound, in canonical form, both by us and by our aforesaid official, with sentence of excommunication, justice requiring it. And when we commanded the Bishop of Hereford to execute that sentence against his official, the same Bishop, showing sufficiently that the disobedience of his official and such contempt done to us had proceeded from the quiver of his own malice, contumaciously refused to execute that sentence; pretending that his said official had appealed from that sentence; asserting also and affirming that we cannot exercise any jurisdiction over his subjects, he being passed over, nor in any way take cognizance of the causes of subjects by complaint. But we, wishing to bring back the said Bishop amicably to the good of obedience and to the observance of his own oath, admonished him often and more often, by letters and messengers, that he should desist from such error and obey our commands, as he was bound by his own oath.

[187] At length, he still persisting with hardened mind in his pertinacity, we met together at Lambeth, if concord might be restored between us; where, various rights, customs and effectual reasons having been alleged on our part, he is traduced no more mildly than in the former. among other signs of peace and charity we offered him that, if it pleased him to do for us this same thing which he and his predecessors did for our predecessors (nor did we ask anything else), we would so moderate this custom and other rights of our church towards him that he should feel himself burdened in nothing. And because he refused to do this, and, admonished canonically on repeated occasions, still continued disobedient, master R. de Lacy promulgated in writing by our authority sentence of excommunication against him as contumacious and disobedient; who immediately, this being done, appealed to the Roman curia. He says, however, that he had appealed before; which is hidden from us. Nor do we believe that the lord Pope wishes to retain this cause in the curia to our injury, just as he did not do with the cause of the bishop of Durham, whom his metropolitan likewise bound with sentence of excommunication. We shall send to you shortly someone to stay in the curia in your place, and then you will return to us with joy and health, the Lord granting it. So this letter ends, the usual chronological notes being omitted; but that it is later than the foregoing is probable both from its very opening and from the fact that the archbishop here holds as certain St. Thomas's journey to the Roman curia, of which in the foregoing he spoke doubtfully.

[188] Finally the same archbishop, Peckham again mentions the same controversy in another letter published there without note of time, page 78 and the two following, in which, commending various businesses to his proctors in the Roman curia, masters Renerius and Philip, among other things he writes thus: But we marvel greatly at the craftiness of the Bishop of Hereford, whom we believed we had found a most faithful friend; of what kind we find him, perhaps the palaces of the Roman Church will soon resound. The Bishop himself asserts that we can exercise no jurisdiction over his subjects, nor are he or his ministers bound to our commands except in his default. Whence for manifold contempt and contumacy we excommunicated his official, and had him publicly announced excommunicated. After this, some things being interposed which do not pertain here, he at last continues: Moreover know that on the XV day of the month of January the said Bishop of Hereford sent to us with his letters a certain clerk of his, who before our commissaries appealed from us in the name of the Bishop himself and also of his official, and also renewed certain appeals.

[189] in other letters, And because we know that he wishes to obtain letters against us in the curia, we send you, in a certain schedule enclosed with the presents, the names of the places and judges on which you ought to agree, and not others. And as much as you can, in odium of the adverse party, impede that impetration, and delay it by oppositions and contrary objections of suspicion, instructing our proctors in every way to this end. And when the letters have been obtained, send them to us with all speed, sparing no money, by a most swift courier, lest we be forestalled by the adversaries themselves in making commissions, who by all means they can are plotting the subversion of the rights of our church. The rest of this letter, mutilated at the end, treats of other businesses. There, at page 80 and following, in a letter given in the year 1282 on the V day before the Kalends of March to the same proctors for various causes, he commended the same business anew; for when a certain man returned from Rome, who had brought letters to the chancellor of the church of Salisbury, had said that he had also brought some to the Bishop of Hereford, he admonished his proctors on that matter, writing thus.

[190] Asked also (Richard, returned from Rome) whether he had brought with him from the curia any other letters whatever, in which he commended his causes to the aforesaid proctors, he answered that besides those (for the chancellor of Salisbury) he had brought with him up to XII pairs of letters for the Bishop of Hereford, which he said he had delivered to a certain burgess at London, to be handed over to the same Bishop; which Bishop, however, being present, denied that he had received any letters from him. Again, after some things not pertaining to our argument, he subjoins: But concerning this, that the said Bishop of Hereford is said to have received the letters touched on before, and concerning the aforesaid vicar who obtained the letters (for the praised chancellor), be solicitously watchful. Moreover, some time ago Robert de Wyse of Gloucester, official of the said Bishop of Hereford, was bound by our commissaries with sentence of excommunication on account of his contumacy and offence, justice requiring it; and when the execution of that sentence was committed to the said Bishop, the same Bishop excused himself to us by letters, that, because it was established to him that his said official had appealed from the said sentence to the Roman curia, he could not execute our command about this, lest we should attempt anything to his prejudice or that of his officials, prorogating it, as is said, through his proctor.

[191] And before also he had been very hostile and disobedient to us, he speaks of the same controversy, and did many things against his profession, committing things which injure the rights of our church; constantly asserting that we, he being passed over, can exercise no jurisdiction over his subjects. Whence we admonished that Bishop often and more often, and had him diligently admonished, that he should desist from disturbing our rights and those of our church, and obey us as a devoted suffragan. At length, having met together at Lambeth in hope of restoring peace between us, his complaint having been set out, and our rights in this respect having been alleged, we admonished him with our own mouth that he should only do for us what he himself and his other predecessors had done for us and our predecessors up to now. Who, ever inflamed with the spirit of pride, persisted in his contumacy, disobedient and rebellious. Whence we again admonished him in writing that he should turn to the good of obedience, and effectually fulfil our commands concerning his said official.

[192] And when the same Bishop in no way acquiesced in our admonitions, and he pronounces that the same was excommunicated by him. but rather prepared himself for frivolous defences and appeals, we, wishing to meet his malices, after admonition premised in writing, had him excommunicated by master R. de Lacy, to whom for this we specially committed our functions before witnesses; who then, after the sentence had been passed against him, appealed in writing through his proctor; and we also excommunicated that proctor, and commanded him to be publicly announced excommunicated; we also caused the sentence against the Bishop to be committed to due execution by each of the bishops. What follows up to the end of the letter pertains again to other causes. And this letter is marked: Given at Exeter on the V day before the Kalends of March, in the IV year of our consecration. And these are the things which I have found concerning that most grave controversy between the two prelates; and since they were written by one adverse party of the litigants, they cannot but be suspect, and the more so because the alleged letters are sprinkled with such black gall, and with words beyond doubt injurious to the holy Prelate, that I marvel that they could have proceeded from an archbishop otherwise conspicuous for piety and learning. For who would not marvel that the holy Bishop should be accused by him of lying, craftiness, cunning, malice, disobedience, rebellion, contumacy, a proud and hardened mind, perjury and blasphemy, and be traduced as a dissembler, now hidden under a fox's pelt, now under sheep's fleece and in a dove's appearance?

* i.e. computum account

* above: Havekly

§ XI. The beginning and progress of the aforesaid controversy set out; the Saint's journey to the Roman curia, and, against the will of the adverse party, his honourable access to the Pontiff.

Some things are set forth beforehand, both from John Peckham's That we may at length come to the discussion of the foregoing, there is no reason for us to doubt that the testamentary cause alleged above was, if not the only, at least the chief origin and head of the feuds: for one of the witnesses in the process also insinuated it not obscurely; but nothing compels us to believe Peckham's assertion that the right which he contended belonged to him, of taking cognizance everywhere and indifferently of those causes of testaments whose testators had their benefices or any other goods whatever in various dioceses, and of calling or citing the executors of such testaments to render account (or to give reckoning), had been approved by all his suffragans already at the time at which the aforesaid discord between him and the official of Hereford began; nothing, I say, compels us to believe this of Peckham, who, it is established from what has been said, also tried to assert other rights as beyond doubt due to him, which the protesting suffragan bishops proved were not so certain, and which Peckham himself acknowledged by remitting them. Secondly, since, the same archbishop being witness, St. Thomas judged the sentence of excommunication passed against his official invalid because the same official had appealed to the Roman curia, it is probable that the official appealed before the sentence was passed, and thus that his cause was transferred from the court of Canterbury to the Pontifical.

[194] which from the letters of the commissaries deputed by Clement V, Concerning the controversy of the holy Bishop it must also be noted, first, what the Apostolic commissaries say in their letter to Pope Clement V concerning the process made on this cause; namely that it was proved that several appeals, competently interposed by the said lord Thomas, or by others in his stead, from the said archbishop and his court to the Apostolic See, preceded the premised (that is, the aforesaid) sentences of excommunication, and also followed after them. Peckham also mentions the appeals interposed by him in the letter to his proctors above at num. 187, where, however, as though he had been ignorant of that which preceded the sentence of excommunication, he says thus: Master R. de Lacy against him … by our authority … promulgated sentence of excommunication; who (Thomas) immediately, this

being done, appealed to the Roman curia. He says, however, that he had appealed before; which is hidden from us. If these words are truly Peckham's, let us allow something to his forgetfulness; for it is less credible that Thomas, a holy man, lied in so grave a matter than that Peckham's memory here slipped.

[195] Indeed Peckham himself, in an earlier letter, written before the sentence of excommunication was passed, had advised the same proctors of his of the appeals made by him, from which and other things the present controversy seems to be set out. saying: Know that on the XV day of the month of January the said Bishop of Hereford sent to us with his letters a certain clerk of his, who before our commissaries appealed from us in the name of the Bishop himself and also of his official, and also renewed certain appeals. That this letter is earlier than the one praised before, as I said, becomes manifest from this, that in this one he says the official was excommunicated, which he does not say of Thomas; but in the one praised before he expressly records the excommunication of both. The other thing to be observed from the above-mentioned letters of the commissaries to Pope Clement V is that Thomas presented to the same archbishop, when he complained of him, letters of certain rights obtained from the Apostolic See concerning the premises, before the admonitions with the sentence of excommunication … had proceeded. Finally the praised commissaries asserted in the same letters that judges had been deputed into England by Apostolic authority concerning the said appeals, by the agreement and assent of the proctors of the parties, before the last sentence, which seemed more doubtful, had been passed.

[196] These things, then, being laid down, the beginning and series of the same controversy seem to be ordered in this or a similar manner. [The Saint refuses to execute the sentence passed against his official, who had previously appealed to the Pope,] Henry de Havekly or de Havetle, canon of Lincoln, who had possessed benefices or other goods in the diocese of Hereford and other dioceses of the province of Canterbury, having died, Archbishop Peckham had the vicar of Ros of the diocese of Hereford, whom the deceased had appointed one of the executors of his testament, cited by the official of Hereford, for his right, as he contended, that he should render account of his administration. But the official, whether of his own accord or by the counsel of his Bishop, if he had already by then returned from Normandy into England, judging that he could not obey such a command without injury to the church of Hereford, refused to obey, and at length, after admonitions and threats of excommunication made against him, appealed to the Apostolic See. On the contrary, the archbishop, reckoning those appeals frivolous, passed sentence of excommunication against the official, and committed its execution to St. Thomas. But he, concerning whose church's rights the question was, excused himself from doing it, because it was established to him, as he said (the words are Peckham's), that that official had appealed to the Roman curia.

[197] This excuse of the holy Prelate was certainly just; but it seemed otherwise to the archbishop; and, asked in vain to do it, he likewise appeals to the Pontiff: and because he was well aware that much would accrue to his authority if he had the Bishop of Hereford, a man eminent in nobility of race and in learning, compliant to him in this respect, he tried by letters to induce him to obey; and when he profited nothing by these, he invited him to Lameth, otherwise Lambeth and Lambith, which was a village of England with the residence of the archbishops of Canterbury, in the county of Surrey, situated not far above London on the river Thames. When, therefore, both prelates had met here, the archbishop tried to persuade him of that very thing with bland speech, promising that, if he would consent, he would so moderate this custom and other rights of the church of Canterbury towards him that he should feel himself burdened in nothing. See what was said above at num. 183 and 187. But the Saint persisted in his opinion, denying that it was lawful for him to execute that sentence against his official, who had appealed to the Apostolic See before it. Perhaps also he then exhibited to him those letters of certain rights obtained from the Apostolic See concerning the premises, which the commissaries mentioned at num. 195; and on the same occasion, lest the archbishop proceed further, he appealed to the same See.

[198] the archbishop threatening excommunication, he repeats his appeals, After this colloquy at Lambeth Peckham blazed up, and, interpreting all St. Thomas's sayings and doings in the worst sense and as contempt of himself, gave him threatening letters that he would be removed from the communion of the faithful unless he complied. The Saint answered these in the month of January by letters which he had carried by his clerk, and through the same appealed anew, both in his own name and in that of his official, and renewed the former appeals. Presently Peckham understood that Thomas was pleading his cause through proctors in the Pontifical curia; wherefore he too wrote to his people staying in the same curia, and advised them what he wished done by them. His words, although already given before, it will help to have repeated here. Know, he says, that on the XV day of the month of January the said Bishop of Hereford sent to us with his letters a certain clerk of his, who before our commissaries appealed from us in the name of the Bishop himself and also of his official, and also renewed certain appeals. And because we know that he wishes to obtain letters against us in the curia, we send you, in a certain schedule enclosed with the presents, the names of the places and judges on which you ought to agree, and not others.

[199] and both write to their proctors in the Pontifical curia. And as much as you can, in odium of the adverse party, impede that impetration, and delay it by oppositions and contrary objections of suspicion, instructing our proctors in every way to this end. And when they have been obtained, send them to us with all speed, sparing no money, by a most swift courier, lest we be forestalled by the adversaries themselves in making commissions, who by all means they can are plotting the subversion of the rights of our church. So he; and since here he instructed his proctors on which judges, and on which places of their meeting, they could agree, it is probable that a little afterwards those judges, whom the commissaries related at num. 195 mentioned, were deputed into England by Apostolic authority concerning the said appeals, by the agreement and assent of the proctors of the parties. These, however, so far as may be gathered from the rest of the course of the controversy, did not arrive in England; whether one or other of the parties, or another reason unknown to me, or some accident, hindered their coming.

[200] Meanwhile the archbishop, through his official, has Thomas excommunicated Meanwhile Archbishop Peckham, advancing from threats to deeds, committed his functions to his official, master R. de Lacy, to excommunicate the Bishop of Hereford. We, wishing (he says in the letter to his Roman proctors) to meet his malices, after admonition premised in writing, had him excommunicated by master R. de Lacy, to whom for this we specially committed our functions before witnesses; who then, after the sentence had been passed against him (as it is also established from what has been said that he had done before), appealed in writing through his proctor; and we also excommunicated that proctor, and commanded him to be publicly announced excommunicated: we also caused the sentence against the Bishop to be committed to due execution by each of the bishops. This letter is marked: Given at Exeter on the V day before the Kalends of March, in the IV year of our consecration, that is, of Christ 1282. Of the excommunication passed and promulgated against the Saint he speaks in the same way in letters given again to the proctors towards the end of March of the same year, writing this: And because he still persisted pertinaciously and contemptuously in his rebellion and malice, we had him bound in writing with sentence of excommunication, justice requiring it; who immediately appealed to the Roman curia. And afterwards we commanded that sentence to be published against him by the bishops and our suffragans throughout our province.

[201] Likewise in another letter of the same, written to the aforesaid proctors without notes of time, and to have him, as such, publicly denounced by the suffragans. it is similarly read: And because he refused to do this, and, admonished canonically on repeated occasions, still continued disobedient, master R. de Lacy promulgated in writing by our authority sentence of excommunication against him as contumacious and disobedient; who immediately, this being done, appealed to the Roman curia. The compiler of the compendium of the process written against the Saint agrees, whose words are the following: It was publicly and solemnly denounced by the aforesaid court of Canterbury that he had incurred sentence of greater excommunication, and ought to be avoided the more strictly by all as excommunicated: and these things likewise are clear. Whoever reads these things will not be able to doubt that the holy Bishop of Hereford was struck with the most grave censure of excommunication. The commissaries, however, deputed by the Supreme Pontiff Clement V twenty-five years afterwards to inquire into this very matter, did doubt it, even after diligently examining the archives of the province of Canterbury and hearing the witnesses, and above all him who was said to have pronounced the aforesaid sentence of excommunication, and fourteen others who had been in those parts clerks and familiars of the aforesaid archbishop; so that the truth concerning the above-mentioned articles of excommunications could be wholly known and had (as they say) by us.

[202] After so diligent an examination they pronounced [It is not established, however, that this sentence was passed against him absolutely.] that the sentences of the aforesaid excommunications are not sufficiently proved; and if anyone perhaps should wish to hold them as proved, they are not found to have been passed as causative explicitly, but conditionally, or under a certain generality, too hastily and less competently and solemnly; but (read nor, or below add not, as is clear from the whole context) it is established by the process that the said lord Thomas acted against the condition or generality, or unduly contemned to fulfil them, nor was this lawfully declared by the said archbishop or another, although the same archbishop wrote to his * suffragans that, since the mentioned said lord Thomas had deserved to be excommunicated, they should have him denounced excommunicated, not declaring (although he is said to have been requested concerning the said declaration to be made first by some of the suffragans refusing to fulfil this command) that the lord Thomas himself was excommunicated; but persisting in the said terms, THAT HE HAD DESERVED TO BE EXCOMMUNICATED. We shall give more below, where we shall recite the praised letter entire.

[203] [and certainly it was not promulgated by all the suffragans, nor approved by the Supreme Pontiff.] Who would easily reconcile these things with Peckham's sayings? Unless perhaps this official de Lacy, to whom he had committed the charge of excommunicating Thomas, mitigated the sentence in that manner in which the aforepraised commissaries said it was passed. Certainly they could be best instructed about the whole matter if, as they affirm, among other witnesses they examined by delegated Apostolic authority also him (perhaps the same official) who was said to have pronounced the aforesaid sentence of excommunication, and fourteen others who … had been clerks and familiars of Archbishop Peckham. From the words of the same commissaries adduced at the preceding number, note that the suffragan bishops, if not all, at least some, refused to promulgate that St. Thomas was excommunicated, which Peckham passed over in silence, speaking as though they had all obeyed this command of his.

But however these things may be, the same archbishop wished Thomas to be held excommunicated, so that he even at first forbade the bones of the deceased to be buried; but Pope Martin IV, with his whole curia, admitted the same Thomas very honourably to his kiss and communion; both of which I shall prove in their places.

[204] The Saint, bearing these endeavours of the archbishop patiently, With what mind the Saint bore these things done against him by his metropolitan, Richard, bishop of Hereford, declared briefly thus in the Compendium of the Life, num. 29: Although he was persecuted by many … and especially by Brother John, then archbishop of Canterbury, vehemently, injuriously and unduly according to the common judgment, he bore the aforesaid patiently and kindly and without any murmuring, not disparaging them, nor permitting them to be disparaged or cursed by his familiars or others in his presence; nay rather he prayed for them. Nevertheless, that he might also take thought for his reputation, and not seem, to public offence, to have been justly excommunicated as a rebel and contumacious, he had his appeals published in public places, Peckham being witness, who, since this went ill for him, wrote of it to his proctors in plainly injurious words and unworthy of himself: But now, feigning frivolous causes, and mixing even blasphemies and lies into his appeals, proceeding in all cunning and falsity, he has those appeals published in the public and more solemn places of England, to our infamy and the subversion of the rights of our church, not without the guilt of perjury.

[205] he sets out to the Supreme Pontiff, Meanwhile the holy Prelate, since he had yet another lawsuit in the Roman curia, thought it would be best if he himself set out to the Roman Pontiff, to plead both causes in person. And because, says Richard in the Compendium, num. 19, the bishop of St Asaph had usurped episcopal rights in those parts, the said lord Thomas moved a lawsuit against him in the Roman curia; and for the prosecution of the said lawsuit, and also of the contention which he had with Brother John de Pecham, then archbishop of Canterbury, for the liberties of the church of Hereford and its subjects, having been assured by skilled men that he was maintaining a just cause, and that it was meritorious for him to prosecute it, not sparing his body, worn out with old age and weakness, etc., he set out to the Roman curia, being then more than sixty years old, never to return alive into England. He can be seen to have had some foreboding of this; for it is read in the process both that he made his testament before his departure, and that to Adam de Kyngeshuam, the jurist, wishing him a prosperous return to his homeland, he answered in a very pious manner, I do not believe so.

[206] He indicated it even more clearly to William Jaudre, one of his domestics, foreseeing that he would not return alive into England: which journey who, recounted in the fifty-third place among the witnesses, narrated that when the said lord Thomas set out, in the year of his death, to the Roman curia on account of the lawsuit which he had with Brother John, then archbishop of Canterbury, the same lord Thomas then, as it were with prophetic mouth, said to the same witness that thenceforth he would not see him: and so it came about, as he foretold. Nay, he even gave to the same William at his departure certain garments of his which he had been accustomed to wear, which the latter, after his death, happily applied to driving away various ills. Now, as regards the time of the same journey, Adrien Baillet in the French Life of St. Thomas connected it with the year of Christ 1285, deceived by the Life published by Laurence Surius, in which he is indeed rightly said to have been received kindly and honourably by the Supreme Pontiff Martin IV, but the death of the same Saint is deferred by a manifest error to the year 1287. For since Martin IV died on the XXVIII of March in the year 1285, Baillet believed that the mentioned access of St. Thomas to him must be connected with the last year of the same Pontiff, lest the Saint be compelled to make too long a stay at the Roman curia, at which he died.

[207] From the same error Baillet held that St. Thomas, after the death of the praised Martin, stayed at Rome is to be connected not with the year 1285 but with 1282. for that whole two years in which his successor Honorius IV held the Pontificate, that is, up to the III day of April of the year 1287, and returned thence at the time of the conclave in which Nicholas IV was elected. But I shall prove in the following § from more certain monuments that the death of St. Thomas took place neither later nor earlier than the month of August of the year 1282. Moreover, since William Jaudre, just praised, expressly asserts that the same set out on the road thither from England in the year of his death, and other things to be adduced below also agree excellently with this testimony, there is no doubt that that journey is to be referred to the year 1282. Nor do his deeds with the Pontiff require a longer stay; for so far is it from being necessary to say that that stay was of two years that not even one of a month can certainly be established. Moreover, it is certain from the process that Thomas not only did not survive Pope Martin IV, to whom he had come, but ceased to live a whole two years before him: nor, therefore, could he have reached the Pontificate of Honorius IV, much less the conclave in which Nicholas IV was created Pontiff.

[208] Now let us return to where we digressed a little. The archbishop advises and instructs his proctors on this matter. The archbishop of Canterbury, having heard of St. Thomas's departure from England, but not yet having learned it from sufficiently certain authors, without any delay, towards the end of the month of March of the aforesaid year 1282, advised his proctors acting at the Pontifical curia on this matter, and, having set out the controversy and its progress according to his own view, at length says: It is said, however, that the same Bishop has already taken the road towards the Roman curia, which, however, we do not believe, because it is uncertain: since, if it be so, he did not cross the sea publicly, but secretly; and while he is believed to be found in one place, already turning secretly to other places, he hides himself under a fox's pelt. And if it should happen that he comes to the curia, or that impetrations are made in the aforesaid matters, be altogether on guard that no general letters pass the audience under any form whatever without contradiction, nor special letters without agreement as to judges and places. And be watchful and solicitous about this, inasmuch as our aforesaid adversary is cunning, walking in all falsity. Given at Clyst of the bishop of Exeter, on the II day before the Kalends of April, in the IV year of our consecration. You have this letter entire above from num. 180.

[209] [they struggling against it in vain, Thomas is received by the Pontiff with honour into communion.] The praised proctors, instructed by these and perhaps other admonitions which have not come down to us, laboured above all that the Bishop of Hereford, as one removed from the communion of the faithful, should not have access to the Supreme Pontiff and his curia; but their endeavours were in vain. I have here again as authorities the often-praised commissaries of Pope Clement V, saying in their letter to him: It is sufficiently deposed by witnesses in the process that it was declared by two Cardinal auditors deputed to the proctors of the parties, the cause having been summarily examined, before the same lord Thomas, going in person to the Apostolic See for the prosecution of the aforesaid appeals, entered the curia, that the same lord Thomas, having been reported concerning the said excommunications to the lord Pope Martin of happy memory and to the Cardinals by the proctors of the mentioned archbishop, lest they should not * admit him to their communion, was of whole status, and was to be admitted as a man of whole status when he came to the said curia. Coming after which declaration, he was received by the said lords the Pope and Cardinals to the kiss, and very honourably, on account of the excellence of his life, nobility and learning, and was communicated with by them in divine and other things. Here also pertains what I adduced above on another occasion from the testimony of John de Kemeseya, canon of the church of Hereford, namely that when the Saint was celebrating his last Mass at Montefiascone with tears poured out according to his custom, very many of the familiars and squires of the lord Pope and of others … stood round about the altar. There likewise agree the things which we shall relate in the following § concerning his honourable obsequies.

* i.e. suis to his

* non is redundant

§ XII. The last illness of St. Thomas; his pious death, and its year, month, day and place; the burial of the flesh separated from the bones, honourably carried out by Cardinals of the H. R. C. in the church of St. Severus near Orvieto.

A little after his access to the Pontiff How far from the truth Baillet was when he says that St. Thomas stayed two years at the Pontifical curia, and when he believed from the Life published by Surius, with which John Capgrave also agrees in the Legend of the Saints of England, that the same died when, after all the things for the sake of which he had come had been happily accomplished, he was returning to his homeland, becomes manifest from the letter of the Apostolic commissaries, which I have frequently praised. For these expressly affirm that the holy Prelate fell into the illness of which he died a little after his arrival at the curia, the aforesaid lawsuit not yet, so far as we have found, judicially begun (exordita, that is, exorsa), nor from then on prosecuted. So he had not only not won his causes (if you except the appeal from the sentence of excommunication), but had not even begun to plead them judicially when he died; and of the lawsuits, the one which he had with his metropolitan fell of itself through his death; while the other, which he had undertaken against the bishop of St Asaph, was afterwards, under Richard, the Saint's successor, adjudged to the church of Hereford by Richard, bishop of London, chosen arbiter by compromise, as was said above at num. 148.

[211] The kind of his last illness was indicated by the sixtieth witness, Robert Deyntè, he fell into an illness from which he had often suffered, who was then filling the place of chamberlain with him, and in whose arms he breathed out his happy soul. From him we learn that Thomas had for many years before been tormented from time to time by pain of the intestines, or colic, and at length succumbed to it. He had, he says, gripings in the belly and the colic passion, and had had them before he was bishop, and in the year (that is, yearly) the said colic passion afflicted him much, three or four times, and the said affliction lasted for him half a day and half a night. Then, after a few things, he testifies that the same died of fever and the said colic passion. Richard also in the Compendium, num. 34, among the troubles which his holy Predecessor had suffered in life, recorded that he was troubled by the adversity, or grave infirmity, of pain of the bowels, or iliac passion, and pain of the stomach for many years before he was made bishop, and afterwards as long as he lived. His severe manner of living, and the laborious Italian journey, which

he had undertaken for his church, perhaps gave cause or fuel to the inveterate ill, not sparing his body, worn out with old age and weakness, from the said fervour and zeal which he had for defending the rights of his said church, and in the prosecution of which, martyred by labours, anxieties and expenses, he closed his last day there, as Richard speaks in the Compendium, num. 19.

[212] Foreseeing, therefore, that death was at hand for him, whether from the gravity of the illness or from more certain knowledge, and having made his testament, and fortified with the Sacraments of the Church, he turned all his cares to this, that he might die Christianly and holily, as he had lived; and that the endeavours of the archbishop of Canterbury might not render doubtful his communion with the Roman Pontiff, which he had always deservedly made the most of. Although, therefore, he had already made his testament before his departure from England, and had with him his chaplain, to whom he was accustomed to confess his sins, he wished nevertheless, having asked and obtained the faculty from Martin IV, to make his testament anew, and to obtain sacramental absolution from the Pontifical penitentiary. So the often-mentioned commissaries expressly assert in the letter to Clement V, whose words I append. A little after his arrival at the curia, the aforesaid lawsuit not yet, so far as we have found, judicially begun, nor from then on prosecuted, when the infirmity had seized him (of which, as a faithful Catholic and devoted to God, he is said to have died in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two, on Tuesday, the morrow of B. Bartholomew the apostle, in the castle of Florentinum), having obtained licence to make his testament, he confessed to Brother Geoffrey de Chepeya, of the Order of Minors, then penitentiary of the lord Pope, and was absolved by him of all his sins, as truly penitent and contrite; and his absolution was approved by the aforesaid lord Pope, as the same penitentiary attests in his letters patent then made there.

[213] The other circumstances of his illness and death we learn from the testimony of Robert Deyntè, an eye-witness, as we have said. He had died in the castle of Florentinum near Montefiascone of fever and the said colic passion, in possession of his mind, and commending his soul to God, he dies holily having received the ecclesiastical Sacraments, and he had good memory up to his death, and confessed to a certain priest of his who was called the lord Nicholas; and he spoke frequently and for several days with Brother Geoffrey de Schepeye of the Order of Minors, penitentiary of the lord Pope, he does not know about what, in the aforesaid infirmity. Likewise he added (Robert Deyntè) that when the hour of death of the said lord Thomas was at hand, and the same witness was assisting him on the bed, and he (the dying Bishop) held his head inclined upon the arms or elbows of the said witness, and also leaned * his whole body upon the witness himself, because he was lying clothed upon the bed on account of a clyster which the physicians had given him the preceding night, the same lord Thomas began to say the hymn Veni Creator Spiritus, reading it. And the whole hymn being finished, he said: By the sign of the holy Cross deliver us from our enemies, O our God; and By this sign of the Cross let every malign thing flee far away; and by the same sign let every benign thing be saved. And, adding, Into Thy hands, O Lord, repeating thrice, O Lord God of truth, I commend my spirit, with hands raised and joined towards heaven, repeating the said words I commend my spirit, he gave up the spirit.

[214] in a small chamber, in the year of his age Asked (the same Robert) about those present at the hour of the said passing, he answered that the said lord Nicholas, his chaplain, to whom he had confessed, and Robert de Starklaund, a layman, master of the wardrobe (that is, keeper of the clothing) of the lord Thomas himself, were present with the witness himself; for the chamber in which the said lord Thomas lay sick in a certain tower was so small that there could scarcely be received in it the bed of the said lord Thomas and the bed of the witness himself, then his chamberlain, and a certain little altar erected in it: nor did the physicians or companions think that he would die so soon. Before we proceed to the burial, inquiry must be made here into his final age, and the year, month, day and place of his death. As regards the first, in one of the two apographs of the Compendium of the Life, or testimony of Richard, bishop of Hereford, St. Thomas is said to have then been sixty-three years old, or more beyond; but in the other sixty-three years old, or a little beyond; but from the phrase itself it is clear that the latter reading is genuine and the former vitiated, for the adverb ultra is redundant in the former, not in the latter.

[215] the sixty-third or fourth, and of Christ, not 1287, Nearest approaches John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford and companion of the Saint on his last journey, who, asked by the commissaries how old he was when he died, answered sixty-two, or thereabouts. Robert of Gloucester made him a little older, who, questioned in a similar manner, replied that he believed the said lord Thomas was sixty-six years old or thereabouts when he passed to the Lord. With me the testimony of the praised Bishop Richard prevails, who, after long companionship with him, also succeeded him in the bishopric, and the age assigned by whom, of sixty-three years or a little beyond, agrees excellently with the calculations already related from the same at num. 52. More has been erred by others in the death year, which the author of the Life in Surius, Matthew of Westminster in the Flowers of histories, John Capgrave in the Legend of the Saints of England, and after them Cardinal Baronius in the Notes to the Roman Martyrology on this day, Odoric Raynaldus in the continuation of the Ecclesiastical Annals, Baillet and others said was the 1287th of the Christian era; from which, arranging the rest accordingly, they necessarily disturbed the whole chronological order of the things which pertain to St. Thomas. For this cause it has seemed good to me to establish the Saint's true death year by certain testimonies and arguments.

[216] That this is the year of Christ 1282 the Apostolic commissaries deputed in the year 1307 to institute the process of his canonization most clearly asserted, but in the year 1282, whose words I gave at num. 212. Bishop Richard agrees, the Saint's next successor, from whom therefore the year of his Predecessor's death could not have been hidden, and who testified in the Compendium, num. 35, that he died in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two. I do not see what can be replied to these things, unless a groundlessly feigned suspicion of our apographs being vitiated, to remove which, if necessary, the subjoined observations will abundantly suffice. The same Richard, at num. 36 of the Compendium, in the year 1307 counted about 25 years then elapsed from the burial of the same Saint; take these, then, from the aforecited year 1307, and there will come out the year 1282, assigned as the death year. In the miracles written at the time of the process of canonization, instituted in the year 1307, it is read thus: On the Thursday, therefore, of the Lord's Supper, namely the IIII (I shall prove in the same place that III is to be read) day before the Nones of April, in the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven, and in the fifth year from the passing of the said Bishop from this life, etc. Count again the years which elapsed from the XXV day of August of the year 1282 up to the III day before the Nones of April of the year 1287, and you will find four years, with the eighth month of the fifth year begun.

[217] Add Nicholas Trivet or Trevet, a writer of the same time, as is manifestly proved. who, as was said above, in his Chronicle first writes at the year of Christ 1275: There died in this year John Brutoun, bishop of Hereford… To whom succeeded master Thomas de Cantilupo, doctor in sacred Theology, etc.; and at the year 1282 says again: In this year blessed Thomas, bishop of Hereford, on the way towards the curia, snatched from the present wicked world, passed to the heavenly kingdoms, when for seven years he had ruled with solicitous care the flock committed to him. Enter on the calculation, and you will find it accurate. Likewise the author of our manuscript Florarium of the Saints, written as the fifteenth century was verging to its end, rightly observed that Thomas was enrolled among the Saints in the year of Salvation MCCCXX, the XXXVIII from the passing of the most holy Man; 38 years being subtracted from 1320 years, there will remain 1282 years, the last of which must by all means be said to have been the Saint's death year. Hence observe at the same time that the author of the Surian Life and the others agree that his episcopal ordination is to be referred to the year 1275, but consequently, which Baillet expressly did, must attribute to him twelve years of see, so as to be able to prolong his life up to the year 1287; but I think I have already sufficiently demonstrated that neither is probable.

[218] Equally unfortunate were the same Surian biographer and Capgrave He died not on the 2nd of October, when they wrote that our Thomas departed from the living on the sixth day before the Nones of October, whom Baillet and others followed, straying as to month and day. The occasion of the error was given by the bull of canonization published by Pope John XXII in the year 1320, in which, since he affixed his feast to the sixth day before the Nones of October, they believed that the same day was the Saint's day of death: but for whatever cause the Pontiff assigned it to his annual cult, it is certain that Thomas did not die on that day. Indeed the Apostolic commissaries leave no doubt on this matter in the often-mentioned letter, where they say that he died in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two, on Tuesday, the morrow of blessed Bartholomew the Apostle, that is, on the XXV day of August, which in the aforecited year 1282 was really a Tuesday, or third feria, as is clear from the Dominical letter D. In the Compendium of the Life also, num. 35, he is said to have died on the morrow of saint Bartholomew the apostle in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two.

[219] but on the 25th of August, More ambiguous is the testimony of Robert Deyntè, as it stands in our apograph of the process; namely he, asked about the hour of the said passing and death, said that on the day or vigil of blessed Bartholomew, as it seems to him, before sunset, between day and night, and it was twenty-five or twenty-six years at the feast of blessed Bartholomew last past. According to his testimony, therefore, St. Thomas would have to be said to have died on the XXIII or XXIV day of August; unless so doubtful an answer were to be emended from the foregoing assertions of others. That this hesitation, however, may seem less wonderful in a man who had stood by him as he died, it must be observed that the feast of St. Bartholomew is not celebrated at Rome, as elsewhere, on the XXIV day of August, but on the day after; which custom it is credible was kept by the Pontifical curia, which was then staying in Etruria, and that thence it came about that Robert Deyntè, a layman, twenty-five years afterwards, spoke thus hesitatingly from a confused memory: for the XXIV day of August, which with us is sacred to St. Bartholomew, is with the Romans his vigil; and the XXV day, which with them is his feast, is with us the day after. Wherefore, if that witness answered according to the custom of the Romans, he will have said rightly that St. Thomas ceased to live on the feast of St. Bartholomew.

[220] counting the years of his episcopate not 12 but seven, Finally, since Robert testified these things on the X day of September of the year 1307, he rightly counted from the Saint's death up to the feast of St. Bartholomew then lately past twenty-five years, completed on that very feast according to the custom of the Romans, or on the day after according to ours. The holy Prelate, therefore, died in the sixty-third or fourth year of his age, of the Christian era 1282, on the XXV day of August towards evening; and since he was ordained bishop in the year 1275, he held the see of Hereford for seven years less thirteen days, if that ordination, as Francis Godwin has it in the Commentary on the Prelates of England, was made on the VIII day of September. Seven years of see, completed or incomplete, Trevet, praised at num. 217, also assigns to him; and certainly twelve years cannot be granted him, which Baillet does, and which all are compelled to do who, retaining the year of his ordination which we have assigned, deferred his death up to the year 1287 from the Life in Surius or from John Capgrave's Legend of the Saints of England.

[221] in suburbicarian Tuscany, in a castle near Montefiascone, It remains that we treat of the place of his death. In the letter of the Apostolic commissaries he is said to have departed from the living in the castle of Florentum; and it is read in the same way in the testimony of John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford. Robert of Gloucester speaks more clearly: At the castle of Florentum near Montefiascone: Robert Deyntè: In the castle of Florentinum near Montefiascone; and finally Richard in the Compendium, num. 35, with whom Capgrave agrees: At Florentinum near Montefiascone. Mons Flasconis is commonly known, called by the Italians Monte Fiascone, and celebrated for its wine, then a castle of the diocese of Bagnoregio, now an episcopal city suffragan to none, of the Pontifical dominion, situated in suburbicarian Tuscany on the lake of Bolsena. Near this city, then, there must have existed the castle which is called by the aforepraised witnesses and commissaries the castle of Florentum, Florentinum and Florentinum. In the bull also by which Pope Urban V in the year 1369 erected Montefiascone into a bishopric on account of its merits towards the Roman Pontiffs, the castle of Florentinum is recounted among the castles which were to belong to that new diocese. Nevertheless I have not found it there either in Maps or in geographical Lexicons; which I do not know whether to ascribe to a change of name, or to the destruction or obscurity of the place.

[222] Not rightly did the anonymous writer in the Life in Surius assign the Saint's place of death among the Florentines near Montefiascone, and perhaps not much distant from Orvieto. and after him Baillet, in French words, at Montefiascone in the Florentine territory. About ten Italian miles from Montefiascone is Urbs Vetus, commonly called Orvieto, where Martin IV, Supreme Pontiff, then generally held his curia, and from time to time turned aside also to Montefiascone, as may be seen in the Ecclesiastical Annals of Odoric Raynaldus at the year 1282. Since some did not notice this, and believed that Thomas, whom they had read had set out to the Roman curia, had accordingly gone to the City of Rome, some of them said that he, while he was making for it, others, while he was returning from the City after his business was happily accomplished, was seized by illness at Montefiascone and passed to heaven. That neither is true, the testimonies so far adduced prove sufficiently and more than sufficiently, from which it must be concluded that he departed this life in that place, whether because he had followed the Pontiff to Montefiascone, or because, on account of the nearness of Orvieto, where the Pontiff was staying with his curia, he was perhaps lodging with some friend in the aforesaid castle, or finally because for whatever other cause he had turned aside thither, when he fell into his last illness from the colic torment not unusual to him.

[223] What followed after his death the most frequently praised Apostolic commissaries continued to set out thus to their lord Clement V. His flesh, separated from the bones, was honourably buried On the Sunday next following after his happy passing his body was honourably and solemnly committed to ecclesiastical burial by the lord Jerome of good memory, then Cardinal, other Cardinals standing by, within the church of the monastery of saint Severus near Orvieto. Understand these things of his flesh: for that his bones, separated from it, were translated a little afterwards to his see of Hereford in England, we shall presently say, both from the sworn testimonies of the same commissaries and from those of others. Robert Deyntè, who had stood by him as he died, similarly testified of the burial: The body of the said lord Thomas was buried, the lord Hugh of Evesham and other Cardinals being present, of whose names he does not remember, within the church of the monastery of saint Severus near Orvieto, on the right side as one enters the said church from the cloister.

[224] The Cardinals who honoured the sacred funeral with their presence [in the church of the abbey of St. Severus, the Cardinal of Palestrina performing the office,] Bishop Richard named in the Compendium, num. 35, saying: His body (again interpret it of the flesh) in the church of the abbey of saint Severus below Orvieto on the Sunday next following was honourably committed with solemnity to ecclesiastical burial by the lord Jerome, Cardinal, there being present the lords Hancherus, Latinus, Comes and Hugh, Cardinals; and the deceased was much commended there by the said lord Jerome, preaching. Behold also the testimony of John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, who was also present at the funeral. The witness himself being present (the words are the process's), Brother Jerome, Cardinal, who was afterwards Pope Nicholas IV, with due solemnity, the lords Hugh of Evesham, Ancherus and Comes, Cardinals, standing by, buried in the church of the monastery of saint Severus, towards the Southern side, next to the wall and the door by which the monks enter the church from the cloister, the body of the said lord Thomas, and excellently commended the deceased in his preaching.

[225] afterwards Supreme Pontiff, other Cardinals being present: Of the Cardinals named, the first, who then performed the funeral office and delivered the panegyric oration on the deceased Prelate, was Jerome, called of Ascoli from the diocese in Picenum in which he was born, who, from the Order of Friars Minor, was made first Cardinal priest of the H. R. C. of the title of St. Pudentiana of the Pastor, then in the year 1281 Cardinal bishop of Palestrina, and at length in the year 1288 was created Supreme Pontiff, called Nicholas IV. Hancherus or Ancherus Pantaleon, by homeland of Troyes in French Champagne, was chosen into the sacred college of Cardinals by Urban IV in the year 1261, and died in the year 1287. Latinus Frangipani, or Malabranca, from the Order of Preachers, having obtained the same dignity from Nicholas III in the year 1278, ceased to live in the year 1294. Comes Glusianus de Casate of Milan, and Hugh Atratus, an Englishman, called of Evesham from his birthplace, received the Cardinal's purple from Martin IV in the year 1281, and both departed from the living in the year 1287. Thus the flesh of St. Thomas, whom the proctors of the archbishop of Canterbury had hoped to keep away from the Roman curia of the Pontiff as one removed from the communion of the faithful, was honourably committed to ecclesiastical burial, and he himself was publicly praised for his merits in a funeral oration by a Cardinal bishop, afterwards Supreme Pontiff, other Cardinals who were then staying at the Pontifical curia standing by. Truly virtue shows itself everywhere, and acquires new splendour from its persecutors.

[226] concerning which monastery, founded near Orvieto, Of the abbey of St. Severus, and its site and varying state, the most reverend lord Charles Louis Hugo, abbot of Étival, treats in tome 2 of the Annals of the Premonstratensian Order, col. 741 and following, from which I shall note a few things for a knowledge of the place. The Abbey, named after St. Severus, distinguished even in these times by a magnificent and notable structure, situated on a plain to the Southern side about five hundred paces from Orvieto, was transferred from the monks to the Premonstratensians by order of Pope Honorius III in the year MCCXXVI; not, as it pleased Ughelli, MCCXXI. Then he recounts some abbots of that place of the Premonstratensian Order, of whom he observes that the first, anonymous, presided in the year 1228, and the last whom he knew, Nicholas, son of Bindus or Bivolus, of the noble family of the Marsciani, in the year 1373. Premonstratensian canons Regular, therefore, inhabited this abbey of St. Severus when the flesh of St. Thomas, separated from the bones, was interred in the church there. Who, however, was abbot at that time I have not ascertained; for the praised Hugo named from the monuments no one intermediate between Bartholomew, who he says acted as abbot in the year 1277, and the just-mentioned Nicholas; and after them he knew no other prelates of the same abbey than the abbots, as they call them, commendatory, and these Cardinals of the H. R. C.

[227] Nor did the Premonstratensians thereafter remain and of it, then untended by the Premonstratensians, some notice is given. its perpetual inhabitants, nor are they today, nor is it established at what time they withdrew from it; which the most reverend Andrew Pennatius, vicar general of Orvieto, praised by Hugo, thought was done by them of their own accord in the XIV or XV century on account of the internal wars of the people of Orvieto and others. The same abbot of Étival also does not mention whether and who succeeded the Premonstratensians in the abbey; but that at the present time it is inhabited by no Religious or clerics is gathered from what he says of the Most Eminent Cardinal John Baptist Altieri, then its commendatory abbot: Who takes care there that the house of God be guarded by a certain hermit. From such obscure notices of that place, the veneration of St. Thomas in its church is obscure to me also, so that I do not know in what honour his sepulchre is there, or what memory of it exists. The aforepraised abbot-annalist made no mention of it, and therefore the most reverend Andrew Pennatius, to whom he acknowledged himself indebted for the few things which he wrote of the same abbey, seems also to have made none.

[228] Before the end of this § the narration of the Surian anonymous is here briefly to be refuted, That the sacred body is said to have been sweetly fragrant who, after he had wrongly fixed St. Thomas's death on the VI day before the Nones of October in the year of the Lord MCCLXXXVII, subjoined the following: Meanwhile his lifeless body was kept for six days, breathing a most sweet odour. Then the flesh, separated from the bones, was honourably buried in the church of St. Severus. So Surius there, the words of the anonymous somewhat changed, who in our apograph and in Capgrave has thus: And when his body was kept for six days, a most sweet odour nonetheless proceeded from it. But afterwards the flesh, separated from the bones, was honourably buried in the church of St. Severus. I proved above that the Saint's death took place in the year 1282 towards evening on the XXV day of August, which was a third feria; and his burial on the Sunday next following after his happy passing; so that scarcely five whole days could have intervened between his death and burial.

[229] As regards the odour, if the lifeless body really was most sweetly fragrant with it for some days, lacks a suitable authority. I marvel that none of the witnesses, of whom certainly two, namely John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, and Robert Deyntè, then performing the office of chamberlain with the Saint, were present at all those things,

I marvel, I say, that none of the witnesses in the process spoke of so notable a miracle, and that the curators of the sacred funeral were not deterred by it from stripping the body of its bones. But I find no word made of these things in the testimonies which I have. Baillet seems to have held this prodigy suspect, who, although he followed the Surian biographer in the rest, substituted incorruption for the most sweet odour, saying in French: His body, after it had been kept for six days, being found free of corruption, was stripped of its bones. Therefore, although such prodigious fragrance in the bodies of the Saints does not lack examples, authority is nevertheless lacking for asserting it here, and on account of the silence of the witnesses it does not appear to me probable.

* i.e. inclinatum teneret held it leaning

§ XIII. The translation of the sacred bones into England and their first burial in the cathedral church of Hereford; their second translation within the same church to a new tomb, and the veneration that soon followed.

The Saint's bones, separated from the flesh, are carried into England. After the funeral solemnities of St. Thomas had been discharged, and his flesh interred, as we have seen, in the church of the abbey of St. Severus near Orvieto, the rest of the body, namely the bones, and perhaps also the heart, were carried back into England to be entombed in his cathedral church at Hereford. Go to the Compendium of the Life, num. 35, where this is said to have been done by the familiars of the deceased himself, among whom were John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, and Robert Deyntè, filling the place of his chamberlain. The former of these asserted this translation in these few words: But after the said burial the bones, separated from the flesh, were brought to the church of Hereford: the other similarly says: The bones, separated from the flesh, were brought to the church of Hereford, and rest therein. I pass over others who affirmed the same translation in the process; the words of the Apostolic commissaries I shall give more fittingly below. I said that perhaps the heart also was then translated into England, because Adam Kyngeshuam, the eleventh witness in the process, deposed that it rested in that year 1307 at Asshrugg in the diocese of Lincoln.

[231] Whether in this translation, as some assert, Singular is what is read to have happened in this translation in the testimony of the fifth witness, Aicardus de Warevik or Warwik, jurist and justiciary and counsellor of the king of England, who said that he had heard it publicly related that when the bones of the said lord Thomas were brought from the parts in which he had died, and the said bones were being carried through the diocese of Canterbury, blood flowed from the said bones when they were in the above-mentioned diocese. Archbishop John Peckham was then still presiding over the church of Canterbury, and, as will be clear from what is to be said, had not yet laid aside his feuds, nay, wished Thomas to be held excommunicated; to which thing, I think, the praised witness ascribed the cause of that prodigious outpouring of blood. Something quite similar, but with varied circumstances, is to be read in the Life written by the anonymous writer, both in our apograph and in the one published by Capgrave, namely in this manner: The bones were carried into England to his see through so many spaces of lands and sea. For when the holy bones met in the way Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, who had wearied him with labours and many expenses over the rights of the church, they immediately poured forth blood in great abundance, so that the vessels in which they were placed and carried appeared reddened with blood. Which seen, the earl, struck with fear and horror, restored all the rights of the church, doing penance for what he had committed.

[232] flowed with blood, is not sufficiently established. Surius rendered the same things, somewhat changed in his own style, thus: But the bones were brought into England to his see through such long spaces of lands and sea. And when Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, who had wearied the blessed Man over the rights of the church, had come to meet them, presently a most copious blood flowed from them, so that the vessels in which they were being carried were seen tinged with blood. That earl, seeing it, shaken with fear and horror, restored all the rights of the church, and did penance for the things he had rashly committed. Thus far he. That St. Thomas suffered much from Gilbert, earl of Gloucester, is established from the foregoing. We shall also see below that the same earl often came as a suppliant with gifts to the tomb of the same Saint; but whether this piety of the man was born from the asserted miracle of the blood, and whether his enmities and unjust violation of ecclesiastical rights then first ceased, I would not dare to affirm. And to disclose my mind in few words, the authority of the anonymous writer, of uncertain place and time, who wrote after Thomas's canonization, that is, not earlier, and perhaps much later, than thirty-eight years after the translation, must yield much to the testimony of Aicardus de Warwik, a contemporary of the translation; nor yet do I dare to put certain faith in him concerning so great a prodigy, because, the other witnesses being silent, he alone said that he had heard it publicly related, and because we know from elsewhere that rumours of this kind, often born without a suitable witness, are easily spread among the common people; which the silence of the other witnesses makes one at least suspect was done here too.

[233] Further, Archbishop Peckham, persisting in his opinion of Thomas as excommunicated, [The archbishop of Canterbury at first forbade, then permitted, them to be buried,] forbade his bones to be committed to ecclesiastical burial, until it was established to him from the letter produced of Brother Geoffrey de Schepeya, Pontifical penitentiary, that he had been sacramentally absolved by him in his last illness; concerning which see what was said in the preceding §. So the Pontifical commissaries teach in the letter to Clement V. The bones, they say, separated from the flesh, carried into England, were, by the said archbishop (who had previously forbidden them to be buried until the lawful absolution of the said lord Thomas should be established), the letter of the said penitentiary having been exhibited to him, as some witnesses say, absolved, and subsequently, with his permission, entombed in the church of Hereford … and both the archbishop himself and his suffragans gave an indulgence to those praying for the soul of the said lord Thomas; and the same archbishop approved his testament, and it was executed by his authority. In this way Peckham manifestly acknowledged that the holy Bishop, if he was ever truly and lawfully excommunicated, had been restored to ecclesiastical communion before his death; but I have also proved in the two preceding §§ that he had no need of any absolution of that kind.

[234] He afterwards also acknowledged his holiness, and him whom while living he had greatly vexed, and he venerated the tomb, sending gifts he implored as patron in heaven when dead. For at his tomb (I use again the words of the commissaries) a certain familiar of the said archbishop deposed that, by the will of the same, together with other oblations, he had brought candles made on a thread with which the same archbishop had been measured to the lord Thomas himself in the infirmity of which he died some months afterwards. On this occasion a word is to be inserted here concerning a custom of the English of that time, of which most frequent mention will occur in the miracles. They were accustomed to measure the persons, or even the cattle, for whom they invoked the help of the Saints, with a thread or other similar thing according to the custom of the country, as will often be said, and to carry to the tomb or church of the Saints whom they had implored a candle of the same size made from that thread and wax; or, if perhaps the custom of giving the candle was not universal, at least by this rite of measuring they protested their trust in the Saints, and commended the thing measured to their patronage. We shall read very many examples in the miracles.

[235] in the last illness, of which he died. Since this supplication of John Peckham, through his familiar, at the tomb of St. Thomas is said to have been made in the infirmity of which he died some months afterwards, hear what Nicholas or Aicardus de Warwik, the fifth witness in the process, testified from common report concerning the last illness of the same archbishop, as though divinely inflicted. After he had said that the Saint, while he lived, suffered much from Brother John de Pecham, then archbishop of Canterbury, on account of the jurisdiction which the said archbishop wished to usurp over the subjects of the said lord Thomas, he subjoined: It was commonly said through all England, and it was and is public report, that the said archbishop, for half a year and more before the death of the archbishop himself, was infatuated, and did and said many follies, as if he had been a boy, singing at table and similar things; because he had unduly persecuted the said lord Thomas; and that for this God had inflicted on him * the said plague, and had taken the said vengeance on him. Although I cannot confirm these things from elsewhere, yet from the letter of the commissaries which I have just set down it appears that Peckham, or his friends, at least suspected something similar.

[236] They, buried in the chapel of St. Mary of the cathedral church of Hereford, That the holy Bishop's bones, brought to Hereford as I have said, were first entombed, the faculty having been given by the archbishop, in the chapel of B. Mary of the church of Hereford, namely the cathedral, Richard teaches in the Compendium of the Life, num. 36, which others also testified; in which place they rested only a few years. For the same Richard, surnamed de Swinfeild, formerly familiar of St. Thomas and then his successor in the bishopric, erected a nobler sepulchre for him in the same church, and transferred his bones from that former humble one into that new one. He did this not for the sake of paying cult, but, as is read in Part IV of the miracles, num. 2, for various and lawful causes according to the ordinance of those who had formerly been the executors of his testament, and with the will of the chapter of the aforesaid church. And that you may doubt the less about the absence of cult, it is added that Richard then ordered the Mass which is commonly celebrated for the dead to be celebrated in his presence near his new sepulchre, which he himself also testified in the Compendium.

[237] [they were translated to a more elegant tomb within the same church in the year 1287,] He set out the same translation at more length in the same place, num. 36 and the three following, to which, referring the reader, I shall note here only the circumstances of time. In the year 1307, on the XIV day of September, when Richard testified these things, he counted twenty years or thereabouts elapsed from this translation, which reckoning leads to the year 1287. He had likewise premised in the same place that about five years had intervened between the same translation and the first burial in the church of Hereford, which, if you add it to the year 1282, in which Thomas died, you will fall on the same year 1287, which others also affirmed, so that there can be no doubt of it. The day I have read marked by no one, yet the things said here and there in the process do not allow one to stray much from it. Gilbert, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, testified that a certain raving woman named Edith, on the Friday next before the feast of Palm Sunday in the year of the Lord MCCLXXXVII (MCCCLXXXVI was read here by a manifest error of the copyist, which I have corrected), in the morning time in the church of Hereford, restored to sound mind, went to the place in which the bones of the said St. Thomas were then laid up

in the chapel of St. Mary in the church of Hereford, from which chapel they were afterwards translated into the tomb in which they now are.

[238] In agreement with these, Robert, husband of the same Edith, after the 28th day of March said on the IV day of the month of November in the year 1307 that about the beginning of the following Lent it would be twenty-one years since she had fallen into frenzy; and that in the same Lent she, thus raving, had been led to the church of Hereford, and in it, after some days, on the Thursday before Palm Sunday, had been brought to the chapel of B. Mary in the same church, in which chapel the bones of the said St. Thomas were then lying; and finally that on the morrow, namely on Friday morning, she had been restored to the use of her former reason. Consult Part I of the Miracles from num. 73. In the aforecited year 1287, therefore, on the Friday before Palm Sunday, or the XXVIII day of the month of March (for Easter in that year fell on the VI day of April), the mentioned translation had not yet been made. That it could not, however, have been deferred long after, other assertions in the process prove, although these too, in order to be reconciled with one another, suffer difficulty in assigning a certain day of the translation.

[239] In the collection of miracles made at the time of the same process, but before the 3rd day of April next following. which I shall publish under the title of Part IV, the beginning of the miracles is taken from blind persons given light on the Thursday of the Lord's Supper, namely the IIII (III is to be read) day before the Nones of April, in the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven, and in the fifth year from the passing of the said Bishop (St. Thomas) from this life, when the lord Richard, by the grace of God bishop of the same church and his next successor, had buried the bones of the aforesaid Servant of God from the place where they had first been buried … in another more fitting place in the same church, and had caused the Mass which is commonly celebrated for the dead to be celebrated in his presence near his new sepulchre, etc. In this year 1287 Easter, as has been said, fell on the VI day of April, and so the Lord's Supper on the III, before which the sacred bones must have been translated: for the words adduced by no means require that they be said to have been translated on the same day; nor is it by any reason probable that this day, least suited to a funeral pomp and to the celebration of a Mass for the dead, was chosen for that matter by Bishop Richard. In one place, indeed, John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, speaks thus, as though the translation had taken place on the very day of the Lord's Supper; but he there records various things in few words, some of which could have happened on that day, and he must be said to have spoken less accurately there.

[240] Very intricate are the things which are related, from the testimony of the noble man Milo, Some sayings of others are discussed, crippled in the feet for six years and then restored to his former soundness on the feast of the Lord's Resurrection at the new tomb of St. Thomas, among the miracles with me in Part 2, num. 6 and 7, whence I have copied almost in their very words the things which pertain here. That Milo, then, so crippled, is said, when he had been persuaded by the lord Richard … bishop of Hereford, to come to a certain very great solemnity to be made by the bishop himself on the feast of the Lord's Resurrection, when the bones of the lord Thomas himself were translated by the bishop himself into the tomb in which they now are, to have had himself carried in a cart to Hereford; and when he had heard there that in the said translation God had worked many miracles for St. Thomas himself on holy Thursday and on Good Friday… to have had himself carried to the said tomb at the hour of Vespers on the Saturday before the said feast of the Resurrection; and finally on the day after to have been so fully and perfectly cured at the said tomb … that on the same day, exulting in the Lord, he served before the above-mentioned bishop at a solemn banquet celebrated by him.

[241] from which it may be seen From these things Milo might seem to have indicated here two feasts of the Lord's Resurrection, one of which preceded the Lord's Supper, and the other followed it. To this end I observe that, besides the Sunday of the Lord's Resurrection, which is otherwise called Easter and is a movable feast, in ancient Martyrologies the memory of the Lord's Resurrection also had a fixed day, and in some indeed was inscribed at the XXVII, in others at the XXVIII day of the month of March. Consult our Henschen at the former day, in tome III of March, page 687, under the title: The sacred memory of Jesus Christ Rising. To the English Martyrologies may be added the Kalendar prefixed to the Enchiridion of the church of Salisbury printed in the year 1533, which exists in our Museum, and in which at the XXVII day of the same month of March the Resurrection of the Lord is similarly marked. Yet a twofold reason stands in the way of my believing that this immovable feast is indicated by the praised Milo. The first is that it is established from the foregoing that St. Thomas's bones still rested on the XXVIII day of March in their first sepulchre in the chapel of St. Mary, nor is it probable from the whole narration of Gilbert the proctor that they were carried thence to the new sepulchre on the same day. The other is that Milo himself sufficiently insinuates that he is treating of a single feast of the Resurrection, or of the feast of Easter, when he says that he had himself carried to the Saint's tomb on the Saturday before the said feast of the Resurrection.

[242] the same translation For which reason I indeed think that Milo's narration is confused, and to be explained thus: that by the feast of the Lord's Resurrection Easter is to be understood in both places, and that this is said to have been appointed by Bishop Richard, not for making the translation (for to what end a funeral pomp on so joyful a festivity?), but for celebrating the Paschal joys also with a solemn banquet: while these words of Milo, When the bones of the lord Thomas himself were translated by the bishop himself into the tomb in which they now are, are not to be restricted to the very day of Easter, but, in a manner not wholly unusual, to be referred to the time next preceding. Namely, the praised Milo could have spoken thus both because that solemn banquet was most probably instituted by reason of the aforesaid translation, and, because the Lenten season was least suited to it, deferred to the feast of Easter; and also because he himself was then invited by the bishop to the same banquet, and, having heard the things which had happened on occasion of the translation then made two or three days before, was raised to hope of recovering his health and came out having obtained his vow. So certainly Milo must be explained, unless he is to be said to disagree both with others and with himself.

[243] are to be referred to other days. A more difficult passage is in the testimony of Robert of Gloucester, who, to use the words of the process, asked from what time onward the said report had begun that the said lord Thomas was a saint and that God worked miracles for him, answered that the bones of the said lord Thomas had first been entombed in the church of Hereford in the chapel of the blessed Virgin; and when they had stood there for many years (certainly not beyond five years), and the lord Richard, now bishop of Hereford, had prepared an honourable tomb for the said lord Thomas and had translated the bones of the said lord on the feast of the Lord's Resurrection, many from the country having been called together, God then in the aforesaid translation worked many miracles for the said lord Thomas; and so the report of the holiness of life of the lord Thomas himself, and of the working of miracles, was divulged, and from then on continued and increased. To confess the truth, I do not see by what reasoning these things can be reconciled with the sayings of the foregoing, who unanimously affirm that the same translation was carried out before the Lord's Supper. I do not see, I say, in what manner these things can be reconciled with those, unless perhaps the involved phrase of Robert of Gloucester signifies only that the fame of Thomas's holiness, from the miracles which had happened in the translation, immediately after, on the feast of the Lord's Resurrection, became known to many from the country invited to a solemn banquet by the bishop of Hereford, and was thus easily divulged. However that may be, I prefer to believe the rest rather than Robert alone, the more so because according to his opinion it would have to be said, without any likelihood of truth, that that funeral office was carried out on the very solemn day of Easter. Therefore, not to hold the reader with more, it seems certain to me that the often-mentioned translation took place between the XXVIII day of March and the III day of April.

[244] I have already observed that the translation of which we are speaking After this the Saint soon began to grow famous for miracles, was made by Richard, his successor, without any intention of paying sacred cult, but only that the bones of so great a Man, conspicuous in his diocese for illustrious race and merits, might be laid up in a more honourable tomb. For although there was even then a great esteem of his holiness, he was nevertheless not yet honoured with any public veneration. But from that time the fame of his holiness, and men's trust in him, was vehemently increased, and was continually propagated by so many benefits divinely granted at his invocation, that twenty years afterwards the praised Bishop Richard, with me in the Compendium, num. 36, did not hesitate to affirm before the Apostolic commissaries that the public fame of his holiness was even then diffused through all England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland, and through many parts of the kingdom of France. The testimony of Robert of Gloucester on this matter I have partly given already, but there must be added what he had premised concerning various illustrious persons who he says came as suppliants to his sepulchre, recounting the more notable of them by name.

[245] For, bidden to prove the fame of Thomas's holiness, and his tomb to be honoured even by royal and illustrious persons he answered that all (I use the words of the process) commonly said so, and had recourse to him, and had flocked on pilgrimage to his tomb, both the lord King Edward of illustrious memory, and Margaret, queen of England, and the lord Edmund, brother of the said lord king, and the queen of Navarre, formerly wife of the said lord Edmund, and prelates, earls, nobles, barons, and others, greater and lesser, of the said kingdom; and out of the devotion which they had towards the said lord Thomas, the said lords the king and queen, the prelates and others, came on foot, getting down from their horses when they were near the city of Hereford, and some of them came barefoot (among whom was the lord Gilbert, earl of Gloucester above-mentioned, with whom the said lord Thomas had litigated, and who many times visited the tomb of the lord Thomas), and out of the above-mentioned devotion and from the opinion which they had of the said lord Thomas, offering large gifts at his tomb. Here also belong the things which Brother Nicholas de Wichio, monk and priest of the cathedral church of Worcester, the sixty-second sworn witness, deposed in the process.

[246] and by pilgrims flocking from everywhere. The whole people (he said) of the kingdom of England reputes the said lord Thomas a saint, and they have devotion towards him as towards a Saint, and go on pilgrimage and have recourse to him as to a Saint. And these things he said he knew,

because so many of the said pilgrims make their passage, coming to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, through the city of Worcester, that the church of Worcester has on this account from the oblations of pilgrims more than ten pounds sterling annually. Asked what the said pilgrims offered in the church of Worcester, that the oblation could mount to so great a quantity, he said that some a fourth part of one penny sterling, and others a halfpenny sterling, and others one penny sterling. All the aforesaid will be confirmed even much more from the very great abundance of votive offerings of every kind which the Apostolic commissaries themselves beheld in the year 1307 at the tomb of the same Saint in the church of Hereford, and enumerated in their letter to Clement V, Supreme Pontiff, to be recited in its place.

* i.e. eidem to the same

§ XIV. Letters for his canonization given to Pope Clement V, who appoints commissaries, whom he commands first to inquire concerning the excommunications, as was said, passed against the Saint; the process here happily completed.

For his canonization, among others, Edward, king of England, writes The veneration of St. Thomas among the clergy and people having begun in the manner which has been said, he soon also began to grow famous with so many and such great miracles that at the beginning of the XIV century action was earnestly taken to obtain his canonization from the Apostolic See. To this end the dean and college of canons of the cathedral church of Hereford sent their proctors to Clement V, who had ascended to the supreme Pontificate in the year 1305. Likewise there wrote Edward I, otherwise IV, king of England, and of the English clergy William de Greenfield, archbishop of York, fifteen bishops, seven abbots; and of the people eleven earls, with many barons and other noble men of England, as may be read in the letter of the same Clement to be given below, from which, however, it is not sufficiently established whether some of them had not written to the Apostolic See already before the Pontificate of Clement. Of the letters of all these I have found only one, that of the praised King Edward, published in the collection of Councils of Great Britain and Ireland, tome 2, page 283, such as I have copied here.

[248] to Pope Clement V in the year 1305, To the most holy Father in Christ the lord C., by divine providence Supreme Pontiff of the most holy Roman and universal Church, Edward, by the same grace king of England, etc., devout kisses of the blessed feet. It is judged pious and just that, as God, glorious in His Saints and wonderful in majesty, magnifies His faithful ministers, adorns them with lofty honours, and makes them possessors of heavenly blessedness in the heavens, so also the most holy Roman Church, following His footsteps, should cause those at whose memorials God Himself manifests the power of His might, doing signs and prodigies for them, to be praised, glorified and honoured with solicitous zeal on earth by the office of worthy veneration; that by this the Catholic faith may be strengthened, and the same Most High, who is to be praised for ever, may be the more glorified and praised, and may deign from this to work the cause of our salvation the more mercifully and compassionately.

[249] Whereas, then, Thomas de Cantelupo, prelate of the church of Hereford, whose letter who, sprung from a noble lineage, while he was held shut in the prison of the flesh, poor in spirit, meek in mind, thirsting for justice, given to mercy, clean of heart, truly peaceful, as we firmly remember having experienced, as one whose long and praiseworthy conversation with us and the marks of whose glorious life were made more evidently known to us from the great familiarity which he had with us; for we beheld the holiness of his life and his praiseworthy conversation; as, living in the world, he was powerful in great merits, so now, coming * to heaven, he is known to shine with great miracles, insomuch that through his merits and glorious intercessions light is conferred by the heavenly right hand on the blind, hearing on the deaf, speech on the dumb, and walking on the lame, and very many other benefits on those imploring his patronage; of the manifold shining of which miracles it is known with certainty to not a few of our kingdom.

[250] We, considering that by God's grace the faithful in Christ, is here recounted. and we especially and the people of our kingdom, can be helped by his suffrages, so that we may merit to have as patron in heaven him whom we had as familiar on earth, most devoutly beseech Your Holiness that, not suffering so great a lamp to remain longer hidden under a bushel, but commanding it to be placed upon a candlestick, to afford solace to those who are in the house of the Lord, you would deign to inscribe him in the venerable catalogue of the Saints, that the Lord, entreated by his prayers, may grant us grace in the present and glory in the future. May the Most High preserve you for the governance of His holy Church for happily longer times. Given at Westm. * on the second day of November, in the XXXIII year of our reign. This year concurs with the year of Christ 1305 up to the XVI day of November, on which day in the year 1272 Edward's father Henry III had died: nonetheless the editor in the same place, marking the same year of Christ, noted, I know not for what cause, that for the XXXIII year of Edward's reign XXXIV should more rightly be read; nor can it be deferred up to the 2nd of November of the year 1306, as will be clear from the letters of Clement given in that year in the months of August and September.

[251] Moved, therefore, by so many letters and the fair prayers of illustrious men, Pope Clement V in the following year appointed three commissaries Clement, assenting to their prayers, commands the bishops of Mende and London who should diligently inquire by Apostolic authority concerning the life and miracles of Thomas, and make the process for his canonization. These were William Durand or Duranti, bishop of Mende in Occitania; Ralph de Baldock, bishop of London in England; and William de Festa, archdeacon of Aran in the church of Comminges in Gaul, Pontifical chaplain and Apostolic nuncio in England. Clement's letter, which we received from the Vatican codex containing the process of canonization, has thus in our apograph: Clement, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, to the venerable brethren the bishops of Mende and London, and to the beloved son William, archdeacon of Aran in the church of Comminges, our chaplain, greeting and Apostolic benediction. We have lately joyfully received the pleasant tidings which the beloved sons the dean and chapter of the church of Hereford have intimated through their proctors and messengers, whom they directed to our presence on this account.

[252] and the archdeacon of Aran, From which, if, as we hope, they rest on truth, holy mother Church ought to exult in jubilation, and all who serve under the religion of the Christian faith, since a Man from their company, advancing to the heights, made a companion of the heavenly ones, is held a pious and sedulous intercessor for the earth-born sons of men. And we, not without jubilation of praise, joyfully report that, as the same proctors and messengers related on the part of the aforesaid dean and chapter in our presence and that of our brethren, Thomas de Cantalupo of memory to be revered, bishop of Hereford, walking from the first auspices of his youth in the way of truth, having cut down with the sickle of the virtues the blandishments of the deceitful world, by which the condition of human frailty is frequently deceived, so knew how to subjugate the pleasures of the flesh to the spirit, and, while the present life quickened the members of his body, to profit himself by works of holiness and to instruct others by praiseworthy examples; and so at length immolated himself as a pleasing victim to God, that through his great and most exalted merits the Lord works many and evident miracles in the same church in which his body rests. For the blind, as we have learned, recover their sight there, the lame walk, the dead rise again, and the other sick and weak, oppressed by various ailments, are freed beyond the strength and power of nature.

[253] to institute, according to custom, a process on this matter And the premises were set out diligently in our presence and that of the aforesaid brethren not only by the proctors and messengers aforesaid, but also by our venerable brother the bishop of Worcester, staying at the Apostolic See. And afterwards, from the report of our venerable brother John, bishop of Porto, and of our beloved sons Thomas, priest of the title of St. Sabina, and William, deacon of St. Nicholas in the Tullian prison, Cardinals, whom we deputed to inspect and examine the documents which could be found concerning these things at the Apostolic See, we have found that both our most dear son in Christ Edward, illustrious king of England, and our venerable brother the archbishop of York with fifteen bishops and seven abbots, and also eleven earls with many barons and nobles of those parts, bear witness by their letters patent to the holiness of life of the same Bishop of Hereford and to the aforesaid miracles.

[254] by letters given at Bordeaux in the year 1306. In order, therefore, that so great a lamp may not lie hidden further under a bushel, but that he whom the sublimity of divine providence has willed to be honoured on high may be reverently cultivated with human praises on earth, we command your discretion by Apostolic writings that concerning the faith, life and morals of the said Bishop of Hereford, and also the fame and miracles, and the other circumstances touching business of this kind, both through the witnesses whom the dean and chapter themselves shall think fit to produce concerning these things, and through others, you inquire more diligently into the truth within the space of four months after the receipt of the presents; and what you shall find concerning the premises, faithfully reduced to writing and enclosed under your seals, you take care to send to us as quickly as possible by faithful and suitable messengers. And the witnesses who shall have been named, if they withdraw themselves through favour, hatred or fear, you shall compel by ecclesiastical censure, appeal being removed, to bear witness to the truth. And if you cannot all be present at executing these things, two of you shall nonetheless execute them. Given at Budegale * on the X day before the Kalends of September, in the first year of our Pontificate.

[255] Clement had been born in the diocese of Burdigala, commonly Bordeaux, But when, a little afterwards, it had been suggested to him in Aquitanian Gaul, and was archbishop of Bordeaux when, through the efforts of Philip IV, king of the French, he was elected Pontiff in his absence at Perugia; and he, preferring Gaul to Italy, wished to be crowned at Lyons, nor did he ever as Pontiff go into Italy, but remained in Gaul, and afterwards was the first to hold his see at Avignon, whose example some other Roman Pontiffs followed, to the great damage of the Church. The tenth day before the Kalends of September of the first year of his Pontificate indicates the year of Christ 1305, if it were to be counted from his election; but the year 1306, if the beginning is drawn from his coronation; for in the year 1305, in the month of June, he was elected at Perugia, and in the month of November of the same year crowned at Lyons. That it is to be begun from the coronation is drawn from the fact that he mentioned the letter of Edward, king of England, which we have seen was written in the month of November of the year 1305. And from Lyons in the year 1306, after Easter, he returned to Bordeaux, and there resided with his curia all the rest of that year, Bernard Gui being witness in the Life of the same Pontiff.

[256] A few days after he had given these letters, that the Saint had died bound with the bond of greater excommunication, it was suggested to him that Thomas at the time of his death was bound with the bond of greater excommunication

namely by John Peckham, formerly bishop of Canterbury, his metropolitan, concerning which controversy we have treated at sufficient length above. For which reason Clement in the same year, on the Kalends of September, directed other letters to the same commissaries of his, which I shall here recount from the same Roman apograph of ours. Clement (the word Bishop has dropped out here), servant of the servants of God. To the venerable brethren the bishops of Mende and London, and to the beloved son William, archdeacon of Aran in the church of Comminges, our chaplain, greeting and Apostolic benediction. The beloved sons the dean and chapter of the church of Hereford having lately intimated to us that the sublimity of the divine power was working many miracles in the aforesaid church on account of the excellentiae * merits of Thomas of memory to be revered, bishop of Hereford, whose body rests therein, we remember that we directed to you our letters of a certain tenor concerning an inquisition to be made concerning the morals and life of the said Bishop, and also the fame, miracles and other circumstances touching this business.

[257] But because it has been suggested to us that the same Bishop at the time of his death was bound with the bond of greater excommunication, [he soon gave other letters to the same, that they should first inquire into this.] we, not wishing that this article of excommunication should remain undiscussed (although in so great a Man it seems by no means probable), command your discretion by Apostolic writings that concerning this article also of excommunication, and the things touching it, as also concerning the others contained in the same letters, you inquire more diligently into the truth within the space of two months after the receipt of the presents. And if perhaps you find that any sentence of excommunication was promulgated against the said Bishop, or that he incurred it on any occasion; unless it be established to you of his absolution, or of the nullity of the same sentence, you shall take care to supersede the business of the inquisition committed to you by the aforesaid other letters; otherwise from then on you shall proceed in it according to the form delivered to you. And what you shall find both concerning these and the other things which are contained in the said letters, faithfully reduced to writing according to their content and enclosed under your seals, you shall direct to our presence by suitable messengers. And if you cannot all be present at executing these things, two of you shall nonetheless execute them. Given at Bordeaux on the Kalends of September, in the first year of our Pontificate.

[258] Both letters were exhibited to the commissaries in the year 1307, Both letters of Clement, although given in the same year 1306, were exhibited to those three Apostolic commissaries only in the year 1307, on the XV day of April, by the proctor of the cause appointed by the venerable chapter of the church of Hereford, near London in the suburban residence of the bishop of the same city, since this could not have been done before on account of many and various impediments, as the same commissaries speak in the letter to Clement. This proctor was Henry de Schorne, archdeacon of Hereford, to whom, by letters sealed by the praised chapter on the IV day of November of the year 1306, full power was given to treat this business, and also to substitute another proctor, and to revoke him and resume the office of proctor, when he should see it expedient, etc. To the same Henry in the following year, on the V day of April, by the same chapter of Hereford, the dean being abroad, another proctor was added, Thomas de Orletone, so that both jointly and severally, and each of them in solidum, could discharge the office and use the power of proctor. Afterwards also another proctor, Gilbert, will occur, whether he was joined to the aforesaid two, or substituted in the place of one or the other. I have both letters patent, but because they contain nothing peculiar, I pass them over.

[259] copies of which they commanded to be promulgated in all England, After this the praised commissaries sent transcripts of both aforementioned Pontifical letters under our seals (they say) to all the archbishops and bishops of the kingdom of England, and to those acting in their stead, reverently, humbly and strictly enjoining them by Apostolic authority that all and each of them should, within eight days after the receipt of our letters, cause it to be publicly, sufficiently and solemnly announced through all their cathedral churches and the collegiate and parish churches of their cities, and the other more solemn and more populous churches of their dioceses, as should seem expedient to them, and the bishops of London and Hereford, in whose cities and dioceses the same lord Thomas had lived longer, through all the parish churches also of their dioceses, that if they knew anything of the contents of the second letters above-mentioned, they should appear sufficiently and lawfully before us by the XXIIII day of the month of May then following, inclusive, in the chapter of the cathedral church of London, in which we began to proceed, as in the more solemn and more frequented of the kingdom of England, and more convenient for the discussion of the business and for us, and less costly to the chapter of Hereford; to instruct and inform us, and also to propose, if they wished to propose anything, and to bear witness to the truth concerning the contents of the second letters mentioned, adding that we would provide for those coming in their due expenses.

[260] For the rest (so the praised commissaries continue again after some things), lest the time of two months prefixed to us should lapse uselessly, and they began the process concerning the excommunications; we received and named twenty-nine witnesses, several of whom had been in the service of the aforesaid lord Thomas, supplied by the proctor of the aforesaid chapter; and because through their depositions, and some writings which they had long had in custody with them, exhibited by them at our command, and by other means, we found that the said lord Thomas had great contention and discord with the venerable father Brother John de Pecham, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, his metropolitan, concerning archiepiscopal and episcopal rights, from which the same lord Thomas was said to have been bound, after lawful appeals interposed to the Apostolic See, by the bond of the aforesaid excommunication of the said archbishop; we notified these things to the proctor above-mentioned, lest he could pretend himself ignorant, and the chapter of Hereford to have had a probable cause of ignorance of the premises from the fact that the attestations had not been published; prefixing to the same proctor on the thirteenth day of the aforesaid month of May a peremptory term, that within the space of time contained in the commission made to us he should propose and prove whatever he wished concerning absolution from the said sentence of excommunication, or its nullity.

[261] We signified the above-mentioned moreover to those governing the spirituality of the archbishopric of Canterbury (for Archbishop Robert Winchelsey, proscribed by the king, was in exile) and to the conventual proctor of Canterbury, but after a most diligent inquisition they judged commanding that they send us all the documents, if they had any with them, touching the above-mentioned, and indicate those who had them. And when both they themselves and a certain messenger sent by them had answered that they neither had nor knew of any, we caused all the registers, books and cartularies of the said archbishop and of the church, general and provincial, and all the protocols and rogations of the notaries who were said to have been personally present at the aforesaid on one side or the other, together with other sworn and faithful persons aforesaid, to be searched with diligence for everything which could serve for the instruction of the premises; taking the things found in them and causing them to be reduced into the process. We sent moreover to the parts of Tuscany, where the processes held, as was said, between the same lords the archbishop and Thomas in the Roman curia were believed to have remained with the proctors of the parties; which we were finally unable to receive.

[262] We also received by our office as witnesses him [that the Saint was immune from them, and that they must proceed to the other process.] who was said to have pronounced the aforesaid sentence of excommunication, and XIIII others who had been in those parts clerks and familiars of the aforesaid archbishop, so that the truth concerning the above-mentioned articles of excommunications could be wholly known and had through them. After we had rubricated and examined the long and diffuse process necessarily made thereupon, and had laboriously made from it the extract sent back to Your Holiness with the process itself, showing such process and extract to the venerable father the lord, by the grace of God bishop of Sabina, and to the skilled and experienced men, the lords Simon de Marvilla, treasurer of Metz, Onufrius de Trebis, dean of Meaux, and Bosolus, canon of Tournai, auditors of your sacred palace, then being at London in the company of the same lord Cardinal; these having been seen by them, and conference and deliberation having been held with them for several days upon various points of law arising from the things found through the process itself, it finally appeared to them and to us that we should proceed to make the inquisition concerning the faith, life, morals, fame and miracles of the aforementioned lord Thomas according to the form delivered to us, notwithstanding anything found through the process concerning the said and other excommunications which the same archbishop was said to have passed against the aforementioned lord Thomas. The rest of this letter I have partly given already above, and shall partly give below, where I shall print it entire, so that the studious reader may better perceive the whole series of the process from a continuous narration.

* or vivens? living

* i.e. Westmonasterium Westminster

* Burdegale Bordeaux

* or excellentia?

§ XV. The second process, concerning his life, morals, etc., begun; the form of the oath to be taken by the witnesses prescribed; the interrogatories prepared; the witnesses heard, and their names.

In the same year 1307, on the 13th of July The first process, concerning the articles of excommunications, having been happily and according to wish finished, the second was begun, concerning Thomas's faith, life, morals and miracles, to which a beginning was given at London in the same cathedral church in the same year 1307, on the XIII day of the month of July. What was done first on this day is contained in the instrument from the process, such as I subjoin here from our Ms. In the name of the Lord. Amen. To the honour, praise and glory of the holy and undivided Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, of blessed Mary, of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, of blessed Agilbert, patron of the church of Hereford, of the kingdom of England, of the province of Canterbury, and of all the Saints of God, men and women, and to the honour of the most holy Roman and universal Church, and of our lord, the lord Clement, by the providence of the divine clemency Pope the fifth; and for exciting the devotion and edification of the whole orthodox clergy and people, and for the memory and caution of those to come. Here begins the inquisition concerning the life and morals, fame and miracles of the lord Thomas de Cantalupo of memory to be revered, formerly bishop of the said church of Hereford, and the things touching them.

[264] the proctor of the chapter of Hereford demanded Be it known therefore to all present and to come who shall inspect the present writing, that in the year of the Lord's Incarnation one thousand three hundred and seven, in the fifth Indiction, on the thirteenth day of the month of July, in the second year of the Pontificate of the said lord Pope Clement the fifth, the venerable man master Henry de Schorne, archdeacon of Hereford, doctor of laws, proctor specially appointed by the venerable chapter of Hereford to prosecute and procure and promote the business of the aforesaid inquisition, as is more fully contained in the letters patent of his proctorship, sealed with the seal of the said chapter, whose tenor is subjoined below (I have already advised that I shall not recount them), appearing before the reverend fathers in Christ the lords, by the grace of God bishops of Mende and London, and the venerable man master William, archdeacon

of Aran in the church of Comminges, chaplain of the lord Pope and nuncio in England, deputed by the said lord Pope to inquire concerning the aforesaid, urgently requested them that they should proceed to making the aforesaid inquisition according to the form of the Apostolic letters directed to them concerning this, whose tenor is subjoined below. I have already given both above.

[265] Which letters the said proctor presented to them (asking this chiefly, [of the commissaries that, since the process concerning the pretended excommunication was finished,] since the said proctor did not believe, as he said, that anything had been found through the process made by the two bishops and archdeacon above-mentioned concerning the articles of excommunications by which it had been suggested to the said lord Pope that the aforesaid lord Thomas had been bound at the time of his death, on account of which the present inquisition could or ought to be delayed), the aforesaid proctor urgently asking that the said lords commissaries should declare their intention concerning this; since the said lords commissaries, as the said proctor said he believed, had already examined the said process made by them, and had had counsel, deliberation and conference upon it on several occasions and days with the venerable father the lord Peter, by the grace of God bishop of Sabina, Cardinal of the most holy Roman Church, being at London, and with all the auditors of the sacred palace of the said lord Pope, namely with the lords Simon de Marvilla, treasurer of Metz, Onuphrius, dean of Meaux, Bozolus, canon of Tournai, being in the company of the aforesaid lord Cardinal.

[266] The said proctor protesting and proposing that he had not presented these Apostolic letters concerning the present inquisition, they should proceed to institute the other, concerning his faith, life, etc.: to be made by the said lords commissaries, directed to them, in the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and seven, in the fifth Indiction, on the fifteenth day of the month of April, in the manor of the said lord bishop of London at Stebbenheth, when he exhibited the said letters to them with other Apostolic letters in which it was commanded to the said lords commissaries that they should inquire concerning the articles of excommunications above-mentioned, to this effect, that they should then proceed to the contents of the said letters; nor that the term of four months should run from then; but because in the letters then presented to the same lords commissaries, by which the inquisition concerning the aforesaid articles of excommunications was commanded to be made, mention was had of these Apostolic letters, which had been earlier in impetration; the said proctor wishing and intending (as he said) to begin the term of four months, within which the contents of the aforementioned Apostolic letters ought to be dispatched by the aforesaid lords commissaries, from the presentation of those letters made this day.

[267] To which proctor indeed answer was made by the lords commissaries aforesaid to which they assenting, that they were ready to proceed to the said inquisition, to be made concerning the faith, life, conversation, fame and miracles of the said lord Thomas, according to the content of the Apostolic letters directed to them: since, the aforesaid process made by them having been seen and examined with diligence, this had been agreed among them, and counsel given them by the aforesaid lord Cardinal and the three auditors of the sacred palace, fully informed (as they said) by the lords commissaries themselves of the things which were found through the aforesaid process; the said lords commissaries offering themselves ready to cite, receive and examine witnesses, and all other things serving for the instruction of the present inquisition, whenever they should be requested by the aforesaid proctor; forewarning and commanding him that he should not withdraw from the city of London without their licence, since the lords commissaries themselves intended by their office to receive some witnesses concerning the present inquisition, at the receiving of whose oaths, when they swore, they wished the aforesaid proctor to be present. Indeed the form of the proctorship of the said master Henry is this.

[268] they prescribed the form of the oath There follows the instrument of the same proctorship, given on the IV day of November of the year 1306, which I mentioned above; there follows also another, by which, as I advised there, the same master Henry de Schorne and Thomas de Orletone were appointed jointly and severally proctors of the same cause on the V day of April of the year 1307 by the same chapter of the church of Hereford, which I also noted above. After this is subjoined the first letter of Pope Clement V, already given before, and not to be repeated here. Then the form of the oath of the witnesses is read in this manner: In the same year, day and place the aforesaid commissaries agreed among themselves that the witnesses to be received concerning the present inquisition should swear according to the form written below, namely, the witnesses shall swear, the most holy Gospels being touched with the hand, and in the presence of the witnesses to be received standing by, that concerning all and each of the contents of the aforesaid Apostolic letters (which letters shall first be read and expounded to the witnesses themselves), and concerning all things touching the letters, and the whole business at issue, they will tell the lords commissaries themselves and each of them (one or two, however, of the said lords commissaries being present with the commissary questioning), and another or others, if the same commissaries or two of them shall commit it, the whole, full, pure, sheer and simple truth, which they know, or believe, or have heard, as they know, believe, or have heard, as often as they shall be questioned by them, or by one with the will of the others, the others being present, or another or two of them, or by another or others in place of the lords commissaries themselves, until the said business shall have been terminated; even if they should not be questioned by them or two of them, or by another or others in their place:

[269] to be taken by the witnesses, and they received the oath of the proctor Likewise that they will not testify on account of grace, or favour, or friendship, or on account of private advantage which by themselves or by others they have had, or shall have, or hope to have from this, or for fear or hatred; and that by no device will they mix in any falsity, nor suppress any truth, nor add anything of their own to their testimony, and that they will disclose their testimony to no one until the attestations concerning this business shall have been published. And as it is here written, and shall have been read and expounded to the witnesses themselves, the said witnesses shall swear to observe this, the most holy Gospels being touched: So help them God and these holy Gospels of God. Presently there follows concerning the proctor of the cause: Likewise after the aforesaid the said lords commissaries received a bodily oath, the most holy Gospels being touched, taken by the said master Henry, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, on his own soul and on the souls of those by whom he was appointed proctor, that in this business and in the whole process he will not act, nor do anything, nor bring in any proofs through calumny or malice, and that in this whole business and present process he will use the truth, and will tell and answer the said truth whenever and as often as he shall be questioned or requested by the said lords commissaries, or either of them, or by another or others in their place.

[270] On the same day also the notaries who were to be employed in the process and that of the three notaries to be employed in the process; were bidden to say their oath. For so it follows there in the process: Likewise, the said proctor being present, I, William le Dorturer of the diocese of Winchester, and Adam de Landeseya of the diocese of Lincoln, by Apostolic, and Reymund de Prada, by imperial authority, notaries public, which notaries we all three had been present in the first process made by the said lords commissaries concerning the articles of excommunications by which the said lord Thomas de Cantalupo was said to have been bound, as we notaries of the said process swore, so we swore, the most holy Gospels being touched, to write faithfully all things which shall be to be written in the present business and process, and to keep secret the depositions of the witnesses and the other things which are to be kept secret, and to conduct ourselves faithfully in all things which pertain to our office in this whole business and process.

[271] These things being thus settled, the proctor Henry de Schorne was asked by the commissaries whether he they appointed the beginning of the examination of the witnesses for the morrow, wished to deliver articles, or heads of matters pertaining to Thomas's faith, life, etc., concerning which the witnesses were to be examined; and he refusing, and demanding that they themselves should prescribe them, they took up this charge. For after this (I use again the words of the process) the said lords commissaries asked the aforesaid proctor whether he wished to render articles or chapters concerning this business; and he answered that he did not; but that the said lords commissaries should proceed in this business according to the form of the Apostolic letters, and should themselves form articles or chapters, if it seemed expedient to them. And he said that he had made the aforesaid answer by the counsel of the wise men who had been deputed to him by the chapter of Hereford for having counsel. And because the said proctor said that he intended to produce in this business some witnesses, justiciaries and officials of the lord illustrious king of the English, and certain others, who had to absent themselves from the city of London, the said lords commissaries commanded the same proctor that on the morrow he should cause to be presented before them, in the chapter of the cathedral church of St. Paul of London, before terce, the above-mentioned whom the said proctor intended to produce at present as witnesses; and that the same proctor should appear in the said place and term before them to see the said witnesses swear, and others whom the said lords commissaries intended to receive by their office.

[272] After this the said lords commissaries agreed that the witnesses in this business should be examined upon the articles and interrogatories written below. and they prescribed the articles to be examined, In the name of God. Amen. This is the form of the articles and interrogatories of this process, agreed upon, upon which the witnesses to be received in the inquisition to be made concerning the faith, life, morals, conversation and miracles of the lord Thomas de Cantalupo of memory to be revered, formerly bishop of Hereford, are to be examined. Before their examination, however, after they have sworn, as at the end of the examination, let the condition of the said witnesses be described, namely whether they are lettered or unlettered, noble or plebeian, rich or needy, and whether they were of the kindred or of the household of the said lord Thomas; of what age the witnesses themselves are: and let not all be questioned indiscriminately upon all the articles written below, but only those of whom it will be probable that they should know the truth concerning the things about which they will be questioned; lest, if it were done otherwise, since many are to be brought in only to prove miracles, it should happen that time be spent in vain on their examination, and parchments be uselessly occupied.

[273] of which the first was concerning the faith, morals, etc., of St. Thomas The first article is concerning the faith, life, morals and conversation of the said lord Thomas, and the circumstances pertaining to the aforesaid, upon which the said witnesses shall be questioned first: Whence, and from whom, and from what kind of parents the said lord Thomas drew his origin; and where he was baptized, and where in boyhood, adolescence, youth and old age

he lived, and with whom and how he conversed, and how he was tempered in his morals. Likewise, secondly, let them be questioned: To what studies and exercises the same lord Thomas gave himself before he was taken up to the episcopate; and what and what kind of offices he had before the said episcopate, and what state, and how he conducted himself in them. Likewise, thirdly, let them be questioned concerning the faith of the lord Thomas himself working through love, and concerning the excellence of his life; namely whether he had any virtues or operations of virtues pre-eminent in excellence, and for how long a time he persevered in them; and whether he had the said excellences and operations of virtues singularly or notably beyond the measure, condition or conversation of others who were in a similar state or grade with him.

[274] from his first age up to death; Likewise, fourthly, let them be questioned: How in the episcopate he governed himself and the church and people committed to him; and whether he pressed diligently on the governance, visitation and correction of his subjects, on the office of preaching, and the celebrations of Masses, and the other things incumbent spiritually and temporally on the episcopal office; and what kind of entry he had into it. Likewise, fifthly, let them be questioned whether he was naturally discreet and prudent, humble, mild and meek, patient and kind, sober, modest and chaste; sedulous in prayer, devotion and contemplation or meditation; whether just, God-fearing, and merciful and peaceable; and what persecutions or adversities he suffered in his life, and for what cause. Likewise, sixthly, let them be questioned: How old he was when he passed to the Lord, and where and how he ended this life; and whether having received the Ecclesiastical Sacraments: and where his body rests.

[275] the second concerning the fame and common voice of his holiness, The second article is concerning fame and common voice and opinion; upon which let the witnesses be questioned, first, whether it is public fame and common voice and opinion, or the belief of the people, that the said lord Thomas is a saint. Likewise, secondly, if they depose concerning the aforesaid, let them be questioned how they know this, and where the said public fame and common voice and opinion concerning the premises is; and from what time onward they have known or heard it said that the said fame, voice and common opinion exists. Likewise, thirdly, if they say that they have heard the aforesaid said, let them be questioned from whom and from how many, how often and where they heard the aforesaid said, and whether those from whom they heard it were men of good or bad fame, and whether special friends, or of the kindred of the said lord Thomas, or beneficed in the church of Hereford. Likewise, fourthly, let them be questioned: What they call, or believe to be, public fame in their aforesaid deposition, and what they call common voice and common opinion, or the common belief of the people.

[276] The third article is concerning the miracles of the said lord Thomas, the third concerning the miracles upon which let the witnesses deposing concerning the said miracles be questioned, first, whether, and which, and of what kind God worked through him or for him in his life and after his death. Likewise, secondly, if they depose concerning the said miracles, let them be questioned concerning the causes of their knowledge. Likewise, thirdly, whether the said miracles were above or against nature. Likewise, fourthly, what words those used who asked that the said miracles be done, and how they invoked God and the said lord Thomas. Likewise, fifthly, whether in the working of the said miracles herbs or stones, or any other natural and medicinal things, were applied, and whether incantations or superstitions, or any frauds, intervened in the working of the said miracles. Likewise, sixthly, whether, the said miracles having been done, faith or devotion was increased on account of those miracles, of those in whose persons, or at whose invocation or petition, the said miracles happened, or of others to whose knowledge they came, and whether they glorified God.

[277] Likewise, seventhly, in the persons of whom, and of what age and condition, the said miracles were done, obtained before and after his death; and from what place, and from what parents they were sprung. Likewise, eighthly, whether the witnesses, before the said miracles were done, knew those in whose persons the said miracles are said to have happened, and whether they saw them sound before, and for how long a time. Likewise, ninthly, for how long a time and of what sickness those miraculously cured had been sick before the miracle happened, and for how many days they had seen them sick before; and how they know that they laboured under such a sickness. Likewise, tenthly, whether after the miracle was done they were fully and perfectly cured and sound, and whether immediately or after an interval, and for how long a time they have been so, and whether the said witnesses saw them sound and freed from the sickness after the said miracle. Likewise, eleventhly, in what year, month, day, place, and with whom present, the said miracles were done. Likewise, twelfthly, whether the said miracles were published immediately or afterwards, and if afterwards, for how long a time after, in the places in which they are said to have happened. Likewise, thirteenthly, whether there is and was public fame concerning the said miracles, and for how long a time, and from what time onward, in the places in which the miracles themselves are said to have been done, and in other places.

[278] The fourth article is concerning the devotion of the people, namely whether the people and nations have devotion towards the lord Thomas himself the fourth, finally, concerning the devotion of the people towards him. as towards a Saint, and have recourse to him as to a Saint, and from how long a time onward; and let them be questioned how they know this, if the said witnesses depose concerning the aforesaid. Lastly let it be asked of the said witnesses whether they have deposed by reason of prayer, command, fear, hatred, love, price, and of gain given or promised, had or to be had, and whether they were taught or instructed to testify , and whether they agreed with other witnesses so to depose. These things were done in the year from the Incarnation of Christ MCCCVII, in the V Indiction, on the XIII day of the month of July, in the chapter of the cathedral church of St. Paul at London, there being present the venerable men the lord Raymund Harroti , precentor of Mende, master William de Meleford, canon of London, and I, William called Le Dorturer, and masters Adam de Lyndeseya *, by Apostolic, and Raymund de la Prada, by imperial authority, notaries public of this process.

[279] On the next day the witnesses began to be examined, of whom sixty-two, On the next day, therefore, or the XIV day of the month of July, the praised commissaries began to examine the witnesses at London in the church of St. Paul, and continued the examination partly there, partly at Hereford, for the space of four months which had been assigned to them for this business by the Supreme Pontiff. In all, three hundred and twenty-three witnesses were examined altogether, of whom I have the first sixty-two, who deposed for the most part about the life and morals of St. Thomas, copied, and I subjoin them here.

The first witness, the lord Rudolph de Heughum, justiciary of the king of England on his bench, canon in the churches of London and Hereford, a famous jurist of LXX years or thereabouts.

The second witness, the lady Mary de Breuse, widow of the Lord William de Breuse, baron and knight.

The third witness, William de Breuse, baron and knight.

The fourth witness, William de Codineston, priest, rector of the church of Findon, of the diocese of Chichester.

The fifth witness, the Lord Aicardus de Warevik, justiciary and counsellor of the lord king of England, jurist.

The sixth witness, Hugh le Barber, sprung from the city of Ely, of LXX years and more, who was of the household of the Lord Thomas, and had seen him studying at Paris, and came with him into England to visit friends; and at Oxford for four years, while he was engaged in studies, he was his table-companion and familiar, keeping his chamber and making his bed, and afterwards lived with him before and after he received the episcopate.

The seventh witness, the Lord John of Winchester, priest and rector of the church of St. Benedict.

The eighth witness, Juliana.

The ninth witness, Adam Aspelon.

The tenth witness, William de Eston.

The eleventh witness, … the lord Adam de Kyngeshm *, of the diocese of Hereford, a jurist of LV years and more, of the household of the said Thomas after his entry upon the episcopate.

The twelfth witness, the lord Richard de Kimberle, of LX years, who was of the household of the lord Thomas for X years in various offices.

The thirteenth witness, Brother Roger de Hunneden, subprior of the Friars Hermits of the Order of St. Augustine of the convent of London, of L years and more, who was ordained priest by the lord Thomas in the church of Leominster, of the diocese of Hereford.

The fourteenth witness, Brother Hermer de Tytyngton, of the same Order, lector in natural philosophy in the convent of London, of XL years or thereabouts.

The fifteenth witness, Brother Robert de Machinge, of the said Order, of about XL years.

The sixteenth witness, Brother John of St. Albans, of XXVI years.

[280] who for the most part The seventeenth witness, Brother Thomas Ylley, master in Theology, of the Order of the Friars of B. M. of Mount Carmel, of LIII years.

The eighteenth witness, Brother Richard de Weluwe, of the same Order, in which he was conventual Prior for XXXI years, of LXVIII years.

The nineteenth witness, Brother William de Thorp, of the said Order, in which he had long been Prior, of LXVII or LXVIII years.

The twentieth witness, Brother Robert Wyk, of the said Order, Prior in various convents, of LX years.

The twenty-first witness, Brother Hugh Mamcestr, master in Theology, of the Order of Friars Preachers, of LXXI years.

The twenty-second witness, Brother John of St. Giles, of the Order of St. Dominic, of about LX years.

The twenty-third witness, Brother Edmund de Aumari, of the said Order, of about LIX years.

The twenty-fourth witness, Brother Peter de Wyrebrugg, of the said Order, of XLIX years, who had seen him more than once at Oxford holding a certain principium in the church of B. M. of Oxford, in which master William de Montfort then incepted in Decrees under him, and Brother John de Trinitate incepted on the same day in Theology under him, and it was XXVII years on the morrow of Trinity.

The twenty-fifth witness, Brother Hugh of London, of the Order of Friars Minor, of LXII years.

The twenty-sixth witness, Brother Henry de Sintone, guardian of the Friars Minor of the convent of London, of XLV years or thereabouts.

The twenty-seventh witness, Brother John de Wesewode, of the said Order, of about XL years.

The twenty-eighth witness, Brother Walter of Canterbury, of the said Order, of about XLIV years.

The twenty-ninth witness, Brother John Keusington, conventual Prior of St. Bartholomew's in London, of LX years and more.

The thirtieth witness, Brother Robert of St. Martin, sacristan of St. Bartholomew's in London, of L years and more.

The thirty-first witness, Brother Radolph of Canterbury, conventual Prior of Holy Trinity in London, of XXX years and more.

The thirty-second witness, Brother Robert of St. Martin, sacristan of Holy Trinity, of

L years, or thereabouts.

The thirty-third witness, Joan, daughter of Radolph, of XIX years and more.

The thirty-fourth witness, Alice, of XXX years.

The thirty-fifth witness, Beatrice le Mareschal, of XV years (this number is faulty here) and more, nurse of the aforesaid Chilbert, drowned in a vessel of water; and she was present in the house of the aforesaid Radolph.

The thirty-sixth witness, Catherine, wife of John the Tailor, of about XXX years.

[281] The thirty-seventh witness, William de Cantalupo, testified about the Saint's life and morals, of XLV years and more, son of the lord John de Cantalupo, and patruelis of the lord Thomas himself, whose companion he almost always was.

The thirty-eighth witness, Brother Richard de Insula, of the Order of Friars Minor, professor of civil law, of about XXXVII years.

The thirty-ninth witness, William de Lonesdale.

The fortieth witness, Alice, daughter of the aforesaid William, of about XIX years.

The forty-first witness, Anicia Rysshwyk, of XLV years, sprung from Bernastorica of the diocese of Norwich, and long living at London.

The forty-second witness, William of Oxford, of the diocese of Lincaster, of about XL years.

The forty-third witness, Nicholas Chiket of Gloucester, of the diocese of London, of about XL years.

The forty-fourth witness, the lord William of London, perpetual chaplain of the church of All Saints at the market in London, of about L years, who saw the said Alice crippled for five years.

The forty-fifth witness, Hugh le Chaundeler of Shorhm, of the diocese of Canterbury.

The forty-sixth witness, Agnes, wife of the aforesaid Hugh.

The forty-seventh witness, Brother Walter Kinille, master in Theology, of LX years or more, familiarly known to the lord Thomas in several places.

The forty-eighth witness, Brother Walter de Risebury, of the Order of Friars Minor, of LXVI years, likewise familiarly known to the lord Thomas.

The forty-ninth witness, Brother Robert de Herton, of the Order of Friars Minor, of LXIII years.

The fiftieth witness, Brother Adam de Chabbenore, of the Order of Friars Minor, of about XXXIII years, who lived for XV years with the confessor of the lord Thomas in the city of Hereford, called Brother Henry de Hellington, of the same Order as himself.

The fifty-first witness, Brother Robert de Ribbesfordia, Prior, of the Order of St. Benedict, of the priory of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and of St. Guthlac, of about XLII years.

The fifty-second witness, Brother John de Tourey, subprior of the said Order and place.

[282] are here recounted. The fifty-third witness, William Jaudre, citizen of Hereford, eighty years old, known to and serving the lord Thomas in the episcopate.

The fifty-fourth witness, John of Leominster, citizen of Hereford, eighty years old and more, known to the Lord Thomas in the episcopate.

The fifty-fifth witness, Arnald le Glovere, citizen of Hereford.

The fifty-sixth witness, master Robert of Gloucester, doctor of Decrees, Chancellor of Hereford, of about LV years, who had been of the household of the Lord Thomas.

The fifty-seventh witness, the Lord John de Kemeseya, canon of Hereford, of the household of the Lord Thomas, especially in the episcopate.

The fifty-eighth witness, William le Wayte de Bosco arso, who was watchman of the Lord Thomas for seven years in the episcopate, as also of his predecessor.

The fifty-ninth witness, John Bute, citizen of Hereford, of LXXX years, who had formerly been baker of the Lord Thomas, and of his household and of his robes after he was bishop: which witness was commended to the lords the bishop and commissaries for fidelity and truthfulness by other witnesses under oath, and was heard on the IX of September in the chapel of St. Catherine.

The sixtieth witness, Robert Deyntè, layman, formerly familiar and chamberlain of the said Lord Thomas for several years under Nicholas de Hodinet, the principal chamberlain, of the kindred of the said Lord Thomas, who closed his last day at the Roman curia in the company of the said lord Thomas. The same Robert was XL years old (this age seems faulty) and more, and had been with the Lord Thomas at the council of Lyons.

The sixty-first witness, the R. F. the Lord Richard, by the grace of God bishop of Hereford, and master in Theology, sixty years old and more, who was of the robes and household of the Lord Thomas for about XIV years.

The sixty-second witness, Brother Nicholas de Wichio, priest-monk of the cathedral church of Worcester, of about LV years, who was clerk of the chapel of the lord Thomas for five years before he was bishop.

* or testificari? to testify

* elsewhere Garroti

* above: Landeseya

* others: Kyngeshuam

§ XVI. The letters in which the Apostolic commissaries rendered account to Pope Clement V of all things done by them in both processes.

The examination of the witnesses finished, the Apostolic commissaries The examination of the witnesses was at length finished in the same year 1307, on the XIII day of November, on which day expired the space of four months appointed to the commissaries by Clement V. And that the reader may understand what was accomplished by them in this cause meanwhile in that time, I subjoin here their very letter, in which they rendered account to the praised Pontiff of the charge committed to them. It is copied from the same Vatican codex from which we received the other monuments of the process, but mutilated in a few places, whether because the characters there were somewhat worn away, or because they could not be read. Receive it, then, as we have it in our Ms.

[284] To the most holy Father and his Lord, the Lord Clement, in a letter to Pope Clement V they render account by the providence of the divine clemency Supreme Pontiff of the most holy Roman and universal Church, his faithful and humble servants, the bishops of Mende and London, and William, archdeacon of Aran in the church of Comminges, your chaplain and nuncio in England, kisses of the blessed feet. It was set forth some time ago, most blessed Father, to the Holiness of your clemency, by the proctors and messengers of the dean and chapter of Hereford, and by the venerable Lord the bishop of Worcester, formerly, then staying at the Apostolic See, that through the most exalted and very great merits of the lord Thomas de Cantalupo of memory to be revered, formerly bishop of Hereford, the Lord was working many and evident miracles in the church of Hereford, in which his bones rest; and by the letters patent of the most serene prince, the lord Edward, of illustrious memory, then illustrious king of the English, of the venerable fathers the lord archbishop of York, fifteen bishops, seven abbots, eleven earls also, and many barons of those parts, in which certain * letters bear witness to the holiness of life of the said lord Thomas and to the aforesaid miracles, set forth to your Beatitude.

[285] Lest so great a lamp, if, as was hoped, truth supported the premises, [concerning the charge enjoined on them by him; and they signify that at his twofold command] should lie hidden further under a bushel, but that he whom the sublimity of divine providence had willed to be honoured on high might be reverently extolled with human praises on earth, you commanded us by your Apostolic writings that concerning the faith, morals and life of the said lord Thomas, and also the fame, miracles and other circumstances touching business of this kind, both through the witnesses whom the same dean and chapter of Hereford should think fit to produce concerning these things and otherwise, we should inquire more diligently into the truth within the space of four months after the receipt of the Apostolic letters. But, because after the aforesaid commission it was suggested to your Holiness that the same lord Thomas at the time of his death was bound with the bond of greater excommunication, not wishing, most holy Father, that such an article of excommunication should remain undiscussed (although in so great a Man, as was contained in your Holiness's letters, it seemed by no means probable), you commanded us by other Apostolic letters that concerning this article also, and the things touching it, as also concerning the others contained in the first letters, we should inquire more diligently into the truth within the space of two months after the receipt of these second letters.

[286] they applied diligent effort to searching out the truth: And if perhaps we should find that any sentence of excommunication had been promulgated against the said lord Thomas, or that he had incurred it on any occasion; unless it should be established to us of his absolution, or of the nullity of the same sentence, we should supersede the business of the inquisition granted to us by the first letters, otherwise from then on we should take care to proceed in it according to the form delivered to us, that clause, But if not all, two of you, etc., being inserted in both letters; and that we should send the things found concerning all the premises, faithfully reduced to writing and enclosed under our seals, to the presence of your Holiness by faithful and suitable messengers. All which things, with due reverence for what was enjoined, as we are bound, with zeal of solicitude and in the form of the mandate, observed with exact diligence, we have executed faithfully, solemnly and skilfully, as will be able to appear fully from the processes made thereupon, which we have thought fit to transmit under our seals according to the form of the commission by faithful, provident and discreet men, master Adam de Orletone, rector of the church of Woctone of the diocese of Worcester, and Thomas de Guines, clerks, proctors of the chapter of Hereford, who swore to present them faithfully; whom may it please you to hold commended in your grace; a copy of them nevertheless being retained with me, the bishop of Mende, and left for caution, entire and under the said seals, in the treasury of the church of London. Written at London on the … day (here the day has dropped out) of the month of December in the year of the Lord M.CCCVII.

[287] [and first that they ordered his two letters to be promulgated throughout all England;] This is the brief summary of the form and substance of the first inquisition concerning the articles of excommunications. Moreover, most blessed Father, the manner which we kept in proceeding, if perhaps you have leisure and pleasure to hear it and some of the things found in both processes more explicitly, we summarily intimate. The second letters, namely, having been first presented to us near London * on the fifteenth day of the month of April last past (since this could not have been done before on account of many and various impediments) by the proctor lawfully appointed by the aforesaid chapter of Hereford, their dean being in remote parts, and answer having been had from the aforementioned proctor that he did not intend to render us any chapters concerning the contents of those second letters, we transmitted transcripts of them and of the first under our seals to all the archbishops and bishops of the kingdom of England, and to those acting in their stead, reverently, humbly and strictly enjoining them by Apostolic authority that all and each of them should, within eight days after the receipt of our letters, cause it to be publicly, sufficiently and solemnly announced through all their cathedral churches and the collegiate and parish churches of their cities and the other more solemn and more populous churches of their dioceses, as should seem expedient to them, and the bishops of London and Hereford, in whose cities and dioceses the same lord Thomas had lived longer, through all the parish churches also of their dioceses, that if they knew anything of the contents of the second letters above-mentioned, they should appear sufficiently and lawfully before us by the XXIIII day of the month of May then following, inclusive, in the chapter of the cathedral church of the city of London, in which we began to proceed, as in the more solemn and more frequented of the kingdom of England, and more convenient for the discussion of the business and for us, and less costly to the chapter of Hereford; to instruct and inform us, and also to propose, if they wished to propose anything, and to bear witness to the truth concerning the contents of the second letters mentioned.

[288] Adding that for those coming we would

provide in due expenses, [that they had commanded that, if any knew anything of excommunications passed against Thomas, they should come to London;] and that after the said term, peremptorily assigned for reasonable causes, we would not grant audience, unless the necessity of law required it, to those wishing to propose anything concerning the articles of excommunications aforesaid. And although all the above-mentioned were promptly and entirely fulfilled by the aforementioned archbishops and bishops, or those acting in their stead, yet nothing was proposed before us by anyone, before the said term or after, concerning the above-mentioned excommunications. For the rest, lest the time of two months prefixed to us should meanwhile lapse uselessly, we received and named twenty-nine witnesses, several of whom had been in the service of the aforementioned lord Thomas, supplied by the proctor of the aforesaid chapter; and because through their depositions, and some writings which they had long had in custody with them, exhibited by them at our command, and by other means, we found that the said lord Thomas had great contention and discord with the venerable father Brother John de Pecham, formerly archbishop of Canterbury, his metropolitan, concerning archiepiscopal and episcopal rights, from which the same lord Thomas was said to have been bound, after lawful appeals interposed to the Apostolic See, by the bond of the aforesaid excommunication of the said archbishop, we notified these things to the proctor above-mentioned, lest he could pretend himself ignorant, and the chapter of Hereford to have had a probable cause of ignorance of the premises from the fact that the attestations had not been published; prefixing to the same proctor on the thirteenth day of the aforesaid month of May a peremptory term, that within the space of time contained in the commission made to us he should propose and prove whatever he wished concerning absolution from the said sentence of excommunication, or its nullity.

[289] We signified the above-mentioned moreover to those governing the spirituality of the archbishopric of Canterbury (Archbishop Robert Winchelesey being then in exile) and conventually to the proctor of Canterbury, commanding that they send us all the documents, if they had any with them, touching the above-mentioned, and indicate those who had them. And when both they themselves [that they had had the archives of Canterbury searched, and had examined suitable witnesses;] and a certain messenger sent by them had answered that they neither had nor knew of any, we caused all the registers, books and cartularies of the said archbishop and of the church, general and provincial, and all the protocols and rogations of the notaries who were said to have been personally present at the aforesaid for one side or the other, together with other sworn and faithful persons aforesaid, to be searched with diligence for everything which could serve for the instruction of the premises; taking the things found in them, and causing them to be reduced into the process. We sent moreover to the parts of Tuscany, where the processes held, as was said, between the same lords the archbishop and Thomas in the Roman curia were believed to have remained with the proctors of the parties; which we were finally unable to receive. We also received by our office as witnesses him who was said to have pronounced the aforesaid sentence of excommunication, and XIIII others who had been in those parts clerks and familiars of the aforesaid archbishop, so that the truth concerning the above-mentioned articles of excommunications could be wholly known and had by us.

[290] and at length that they had decided they must pass to the other process, After we had rubricated and examined the long and diffuse process necessarily made thereupon, and had laboriously made from it the extract sent back to your Holiness with the process itself, showing such process and extract to the venerable father the lord, by the grace of God bishop of Sabina, and to the skilled and experienced men, the lords Simon de Marvilla, treasurer of Metz, Onufrius de Trebis, dean of Meaux, and Bosolus, canon of Tournai, auditors of your sacred palace, then being at London in the company of the same lord Cardinal; these having been seen by them, and conference and deliberation having been held with them for several days upon various points of law arising from the things found through the process itself, it finally appeared to them and to us that we should proceed to make the inquisition concerning the faith, life, morals, fame and miracles of the aforementioned lord Thomas according to the form delivered to us, notwithstanding anything found through the process concerning the said and other excommunications which the same archbishop was said to have passed against the aforementioned lord Thomas.

[291] [both because it was not established of an excommunication passed decisively against him,] Both because the sentences of the aforesaid excommunications are not sufficiently proved; and, if anyone perhaps should wish to hold them as proved, they are not found to have been passed as causative explicitly, but conditionally, or under a certain generality, too hastily and less competently and solemnly: but * it is established by the process that the said lord Thomas acted against the condition or generality, or unduly contemned to fulfil them: nor was this lawfully declared by the said archbishop or another; although the same archbishop wrote to his suffragans that, since the mentioned said lord Thomas had deserved to be excommunicated, they should have him denounced excommunicated, not declaring (although he is said to have been requested concerning the said declaration to be made first by some of the suffragans refusing to fulfil this command) that the lord Thomas himself was excommunicated, but persisting in the said terms, that he had deserved to be excommunicated.

[292] And because it is proved that several appeals, competently interposed by the said lord Thomas, or by others in his stead, from the said archbishop and his court to the Apostolic See, preceded the premised sentences of excommunications, and because the Saint had appealed to the Apostolic See; and also followed after them, before any conditions, admonitions , contained in those sentences could be fulfilled: and that judges had been deputed into England by Apostolic authority concerning the said appeals, by the agreement and assent of the proctors of the parties, before the last sentence of excommunication, which seemed more doubtful, had been passed. And in the transcript of a certain letter, drawn up in the name of the bishop himself, found in a certain book of his, not authenticated, it is contained among other things that the said lord Thomas presented to the same archbishop, when he complained of him, letters of certain rights obtained from the Apostolic See by the same lord Thomas concerning the premises, before the admonitions with the sentence of excommunication contained in the said transcript (namely, that the said lord Thomas should not disturb the rights of the church of Canterbury, and that he should desist from disturbance) had proceeded. And that is the first excommunication, concerning which, through the said transcript (of which neither the original nor whether the letters according to the form of the transcript preceded, and whether they were presented to the same lord Thomas), anything appears to have been found through the process.

[293] And because it is sufficiently deposed by witnesses in the process [and because he was held in communion by Pope Martin IV, and the flesh of the dead man] that it was declared by two Cardinals, auditors deputed to the proctors of the parties, the cause having been summarily examined, before the same lord Thomas, going in person to the Apostolic See for the prosecution of the aforesaid appeals, entered the curia, that the same lord Thomas, having been reported concerning the said excommunications to the lords Pope Martin of happy memory and the Cardinals by the proctors of the mentioned archbishop, lest they should not * admit him to their communion, was of whole status, and was to be admitted as a man of whole status when he came to the said curia. Coming after which declaration, he was received by the said lords the Pope and Cardinals to the kiss, and very honourably, on account of the excellence of his life, nobility and learning, and was communicated with by them in divine and other things. And also because, a little after his arrival at the curia, the aforesaid lawsuit not yet, so far as we have found, judicially begun, nor from then on prosecuted, when the infirmity had seized him of which, as a faithful Catholic and devoted to God, he is said to have died in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two, on Tuesday, the morrow of B. Bartholomew the apostle, in the castle of Florentum, having obtained licence to make his testament, he confessed to Brother Geoffrey de Chepeya, of the Order of Minors, then penitentiary of the lord Pope, and was absolved by him of all his sins, as truly penitent and contrite, and his absolution was approved by the aforesaid lord Pope; as the same penitentiary attests in his letters patent then made there.

[294] [was honourably buried in Italy by Cardinals, and the bones, with Peckham's consent, at Hereford, etc.] And on the Sunday next following after his happy passing his body was honourably and solemnly committed to ecclesiastical burial by the lord Jerome of good memory, then Cardinal, other Cardinals standing by, within the church of the monastery of St. Severus near Orvieto; and afterwards his bones, separated from the flesh, carried into England, were, by the said archbishop, who had previously forbidden them to be buried until the lawful absolution of the said lord Thomas should be established, the letter of the said penitentiary having been exhibited to him, as indeed witnesses say, absolved, and subsequently, with his permission, entombed in the church of Hereford; at which tomb a certain familiar of the said archbishop deposed that, by the will of the same, together with other oblations, he had brought candles made on a thread with which the same archbishop had been measured to the lord Thomas himself in the infirmity of which he died some months afterwards. And both the archbishop himself and his suffragans gave an indulgence to those praying for the soul of the said lord Thomas: and the same archbishop approved his testament, and it was executed by his authority.

[295] [After this they say that, having begun the process concerning his life, etc., they heard witnesses first at London, then at Hereford.] This is the brief summary of the form and substance of the second inquisition, concerning faith, life, morals, fame and miracles. The first Apostolic letters, then, in which the inquisition concerning the faith, life, morals, fame and miracles of the same lord Thomas was commanded to be made, having been presented to us at London on the XIII day of the month of July, we received there as witnesses concerning his fame and other things, by our office, four Religious of the Orders of Preachers, as many of the Minors, Augustinians and Carmelites, and as many of the conventual priories of canons Regular of St. Bartholomew, and two others of Holy Trinity, at London, who were said to have had knowledge of the same lord Thomas in his different states, and several others supplied by the proctor of the chapter. These having been examined, we the bishops of Mende and London, master William the archdeacon, our commissary *, being in remote parts on other businesses committed to him by your Holiness, going in person to Hereford, where, having seen that many signs of miracles which God was said to have worked through the merits of the same lord Thomas were hanging about his tomb, we made with the canons and several others, who had hitherto been custodians of the same tomb, a summary inquisition whether concerning these signs or miracles anything had been feigned or even contrived by them or by any others whatever by any device whatever.

[296] where they beheld the votive offerings at the sepulchre, And we did not find, with them or with several other witnesses , received before and afterwards concerning the whole business, diligently questioned concerning this, anything which could induce a sinister suspicion in the premises: they constantly attesting that the aforesaid signs, and many others consumed by age, by reason of the miracles which had happened, and many others found there from the faithful's

devotion, had been offered. Among which we found one hundred and seventy little silver ships and forty-one of wax, offered by mariners (that is, sailors and others carried by sea) for various perils of the sea, from which they said they had been miraculously freed through the merits of the same lord Thomas (as they said). And while we were there two other silver ones and one of wax were brought, and twelve Irish sailors swore before us that they had lately, in a certain ship so shattered by a sea storm that much water entered through the bilge and other parts, been miraculously freed from shipwreck through the merits of the same lord Thomas, and that the said ship, thus shattered, after the invocation of the said lord Thomas, a vow having been made to him when it was near the shore of rocks against which it was being driven by the storm to be dashed, the wind immediately changing, after one day reached another port, all the persons and goods in it being safe, and remained there broken.

[297] We found also, among persons and great images of men and figures of various members, one hundred and twenty-nine (in the margin 140 is noted, and a word is lacking, for example silver, or another similar), and one thousand four hundred and twenty-four of wax, and those various and in great number, excepting eyes, breasts and ears of wax, which it would not have been at all easy to count on account of their multitude: and before our departure there were brought there one of silver and eighty-five of wax, and a great number of the said eyes, breasts and ears. There hung also near the said tomb seventy-seven figures of animals and birds of various species, which were said to have been raised to life, or cured of various sicknesses: and one hundred and eight crutches, or staves, left there, as was said, by the crippled and lame who were cured; three wooden carts and one of wax, in which crippled persons were said to have been carried to the said tomb, and to have returned thence sound to their own homes on their own feet: shirts of very many miraculously (as was said) begotten by those who at first had been unable to have children, or of those raised to life, or cured of grave languors, ninety-seven.

[298] There hung also some lances and arrows and some swords, which they partly recounted: they likewise set out with which men were said to have been wounded, and miraculously cured, and some chains and anchors of ships. We found also many gold rings and gold and silver necklaces offered, as was said, from the devotion of the faithful for the adornment of the aforementioned tomb, one hundred and sixteen; cloths of gold and silk thirty-eight; some great tapers; and of candles, which during the seventy-eight days in which we were at Hereford, watching the church every day on purpose, we saw brought by pilgrims flocking from everywhere, there was no number. And from the oblations which had formerly come in money, the cathedral church was enlarged by two naves, and the greatest bell-tower in part built. And the said apisia having been made … (perhaps aprisia, i.e. inventory; then a lacuna leaves the following period mutilated) whether in the said miracles, or in each of them, anything had been simulated, we received by our office as witnesses concerning the whole business four from the convents of Friars Minor and two from those of monks existing at Hereford, by whom, since there were no convents of any other Religious there, we had some of the citizens of Hereford named to us, more worthy of trust in their judgment.

[299] And after the examination of these, and of others supplied by the aforementioned proctor [in what manner and what witnesses they examined, and what miracles were chiefly proved.] for the proof of the faith, life, morals and fame, lest an onerous multitude should induce confusion, leaving the said chapters concerning faith, life, morals and fame, concerning which about fifty-five witnesses had been principally examined, both by our office and at the aforesaid naming of the proctors, we were occupied continuously for fifty-nine days at Hereford in proving the truth of the miracles, concerning which many of the aforesaid witnesses had also deposed, and we associated with ourselves for caution two Friars Minor, sworn and known in that parish, in the examination of the truth of those miracles, on account of their knowledge of the witnesses and for a fuller interpretation of their depositions, and we examined concerning the said miracles about one hundred and thirty witnesses, by whom the said proctor seemed to prove the raising * of nine dead, namely of seven little children exhibited before us, of whom five are said to have been drowned, the sixth to have expired from a fall from a height onto a deep rock, and the seventh, his head having been crushed as he slept on the ground by the wheel of a cart laden with earth passing over him; and of one man twice, and of a certain woman once, hanged: the enlightening of five blind, the raising up of three crippled, the cure of Gilbert from warts and madness: that a tongue, through the merits and at the tomb of the same lord Thomas, was conferred on one who, lacking it from birth for many years, had been dumb, together with speech in two languages; and some other things.

[300] which miracles likewise on the last day of the commission But on the thirteenth day of the month of November, on which the term of four months prefixed to us for making the said inquisition was lapsing, the same proctor exhibited to us in writing two hundred and four other miracles, published in the church of Hereford, inquisition (as he asserted) having been made first, and reduced to writing. Which miracles indeed we caused to be registered for caution in the process with the quaternions from which the said miracles had been extracted, abbreviating too much in some points, and omitting the year and day. And the said miracles are concerning the raising of forty-three other dead, the enlightening of twenty-nine blind, the raising up of thirty-eight crippled, the cure of twenty-four lame, ten paralytics, and ten frenetic and raving persons, and concerning the restoration of hearing to three deaf, and of speech to seven dumb. One hundred and forty-one miracles were concerning various other languors and infirmities, from which persons of various states and conditions were said to have been cured. The same proctor offered and protested that he would prove, if need were, the aforesaid two hundred and four miracles, and many others which had not been reduced to writing, although he believed, as he said, that the others were sufficient upon which witnesses had been principally produced by him; naming to us as witnesses for the proof of the said two hundred and four the clergy and people of the city of Hereford gathered in the cathedral church, and many from the diocese, in whose persons some of the aforesaid miracles were said to have happened.

[301] produced by the proctor Which things heard, and in some manner wondering at so many and such great miracles, the venerable father the lord Bishop Richard, and all the canons who were priests and several clerics of the church of Hereford then present in the city, who were in number … (the number has dropped out here), having been summoned before us, by virtue of an oath solemnly taken by them and by the three proctors of the aforesaid chapter, after each miracle of the said two hundred and four had been distinctly read in their presence, being asked whether they believed that the said miracles were true, and could be proved, and whether they had been and were publicly and commonly ascribed to the merits of the said lord Thomas; all and each answered unanimously that they were, and also many others which had been read before us and them; adding, being asked under the said oath, that they knew or had heard of no fraud or simulation in the said miracles.

[302] and partly seemed to be proved. After * on the same day we had examined forty-four witnesses supplied by the aforesaid proctor, summarily abbreviating and reducing to writing the substance and effect of their deposition, by whom the said proctor seemed to prove six of the two hundred and four miracles rendered in writing by him that day; namely, that to one whose tongue was said to have been cut out by his stepmother it was restored whole together with speech; and that four crippled were raised up, and one drowned girl raised to life; and six others, which had not been rendered in writing by him with the said two hundred and four miracles, nor otherwise in the process; namely concerning the raising up of two crippled, and concerning the raising of four dead little children, one who had died of natural infirmity, another from a fall and hanging from the cradle, the third from being overlain by the mother; and that the fourth had been born dead, and, having been measured to the said lord Thomas, was brought to life. And the said proctor had many other witnesses in readiness to prove many other miracles, whom we did not examine, because no more of the time of four months remained to us.

[303] Again, most blessed Father, let the clemency of your Holiness not be ignorant [Finally they reverently commend the manner and good faith kept in both processes,] that I, the bishop of Mende, was present in all and each of the acts both of the first and of the second processes together with the said lords the bishop of London and the archdeacon of Aran, or one of them, when it happened that the other was hindered by the businesses of your Holiness or the king's, and that I had with me continually, for writing everything, master Raymund de la Prada, sprung from my diocese, notary public by imperial authority and mine, or the lord Raymund Berengarii, monk of Figeac, my chaplain, in place of the said notary, when at times he was absent on the said businesses, and in every act, except the deposition of Walter twice hanged, in which we had no one who understood him except two Friars Minor, interpreters with us. And besides us commissaries, at least four faithful and sworn persons were present, understanding the languages of the deposing witnesses, for which there were deputed by us the discreet men masters Raymund Garroti, precentor of Mende, and William de Melford, chancellor of the lord bishop of London, jurists; and masters Gilbert de Bruena, beneficed priest, Adam de Lyndeseye and William le Dorturer, by Apostolic, and Ranulph de Waleham, beneficed deacon of Holy Cross, by imperial authority, notaries public, sprung from England.

[304] Of which English notaries public at least two, with the said Raymund de la Prada, and conclude the letter. or the monk, were present at all things and reduced everything to writing, and besides two Friars Preachers or Minors almost continually, when any deposed in English. In the first process, however, no one deposed except speaking in Latin * or in French; nor in the second, except … (here again there is a lacuna.) And although, chiefly because certain things were not sent to us under the bull, we made very many special interrogatories by our office concerning the life, morals and conversation of the same lord Thomas to the witnesses deposing about them, palliating nothing, yet we could find nothing sinister about him, but rather by the common testimony of all, as the discussion of the process will more fully indicate, many great and wonderful things, which to us, unless we had so diligently and acutely discussed them,

and felt them out, would not have been easily credible; concerning which we are very greatly consoled in the Lord, and hope that the clemency of your Holiness — whom may the Most High preserve happy, as we desire, and safe for the holy Church of God — will exult, when there have been disclosed to it such great and so many benefits of God, shown in modern times for the corroboration of our orthodox faith and for exciting the devotion of the faithful. Written as above, namely on the … day of the month of December in the year of the Lord M.CCCVII.

* or quidem?

* Londoniam London

* read nec

* or monitionesque?

* add invenitur is found

* non is redundant

* or concommissario?

* pluribus is redundant

* attestantibus attesting

* add ea

* or resuscitationem? the raising

* Post quae After which

* i.e. Latine in Latin

§ XVII. The Saint's canonization made by Pope John XXII, whose bull is recited; his notable relics at Saint-Omer in Artois.

John XXII, enrolling Thomas among the Saints, published a bull, Clement V, Supreme Pontiff, by whose command and authority we have seen that the process of St. Thomas's canonization was made in the year 1307, ceased to live in the year 1314, no decree having meanwhile been published for enrolling him among the holy confessors. After a vacancy of the holy See of two years and almost four months, John XXII succeeded him in the year 1316, and he, in the fourth year of his Pontificate, which was the 1320th of the common Christian era, residing at Avignon, happily completed what his predecessor had begun. His bull is extant in the Roman Bullarium, published at Rome in the year 1617 by the labour of Laertius Cherubini, page 160 and the two following. Justus Fontaninus, archbishop of Ancyra, also gave the same in the Codex of canonizations, likewise published at Rome in print in the year 1729: and these two so agree that one is sometimes more accurate than the other; and on that account I shall recount it from Fontaninus's edition, except where the other is more correct. Of another edition I shall speak below.

[306] in which, inviting heaven and earth to applause, John, Bishop, servant of the servants of God, to all the faithful of Christ who shall inspect the present letters, greeting and Apostolic benediction. The only-begotten Son, the brightness and figure of the substance of the Father, who for the healing of fallen man, emptying Himself, became in the womb of the Virgin the Word made flesh, does not cease to gather from the garden of the Church militant now roses of fiery colour, now lilies of snowy whiteness, now violets of gentle odour, and to offer them to His sight; in present times, the day drawing towards evening, the end of this transitory world approaching, He has made a flower to spring up from the root of mother Church, He has commanded a splendid morning star to rise out of our Jacob. For behold, He who, sitting on the throne, makes all things new, brings forth to the world new great works of a new confessor, namely blessed Thomas, formerly bishop of Hereford, offers his fame magnificently, offers his life to be imitated by all, as a shining rule and exemplar. Let the heavens above, therefore, rejoice, which receive this glorious Saint into themselves; and let the earth below exult, which sends up so wonderful a Prelate. Let the angelic companies applaud for this, and praise God with melodious jubilation. Let the heavenly hosts go out to meet him: let the citizens of heaven festively praise him together. Let mother Church, the bride of Christ, rejoice immensely together, fruitful with the brightness of so great an offspring, who, leaving earth and earthly things, rejoices in the admirable ineffable throne itself of the heavenly empire.

[307] And that the lamp of his splendid life, placed upon the candlestick of the house of God, may not lie hidden, the chief virtues of the same Saint, but may be open to all the faithful as a norm of heavenly and everlasting life, let us relate a few things out of many concerning his happy morals and acts for the profit of the hearers. For he, whom faith made firm, hope upright, abundant charity towards God and neighbour broad, prudence circumspect, temperance ordered in all things, justice harmless to all, fortitude bold and vigorous, was fragrant with the spices of all the virtues, like a storehouse full of divine charisms. Indeed this blessed Thomas, English by nation, himself an angelic man, drawing his origin from noble and Catholic parents, from his earliest age illustrious for honourableness of morals, so dedicated himself wholly to the studies of letters, so solicitously studied and advanced in them, that both in the human sciences and also in the divine he obtained the honour of the mastership, and afterwards, diffusing far and wide the rays of his doctrine, he instructed very many unto justice, like a most shining luminary in the world holding forth the word of life.

[308] And lest the indwelling of earthly flesh should weigh down with itself the sense that thought on heavenly things, with which, both before and after obtaining the episcopate, he macerated it, that it might serve the spirit, with vigils and abstinences, and also with a pricking hair shirt, and also with continual sparingness of food and drink, abstaining quite often from wine, knowing that in it lies the slipperiness of the flesh. Knowing also that God promises Himself as object and reward to the clean of heart, from his youth he loved the beauty of chastity, and on that account most prudently avoided the company of women, which snatches the precious soul of a man, and their bland conversations. For he knew that on account of the beauty of woman, from whom the beginning of sin was made, many have perished. This Saint also, like another Job, simple, upright and God-fearing, learned from Christ to be meek, mild of heart, humble and kind; and mercy, which had grown with him from infancy, nonetheless so affected the bowels of his loving-kindness towards the poor and afflicted, that he, truly poor in spirit, rich in goods, sustained the former with large alms, and cherished the latter with frequent consolations: for with the Apostle Paul he was weak with the weak, and burned with those who suffered scandal.

[309] This Saint, finally, from an innocent lamb made a good shepherd in the church of Hereford, he flourished up to his death, it briefly recounted, became greater than himself in mind, striving always to advance from virtue to virtue, in which time, placed in the temple of God on the summit of the virtues, he so shone forth that he could deservedly be called the gem of prelates. He persevered assiduously in prayer, and tears flowing abundantly from his eyes in prayers and in the celebration of Mass demonstrated the fervour of his spirit. The sheep committed to him he led to pasture, and, protected from rapacious wolves and fed alike by word and example, he sedulously brought them back to the folds of Christ. The rights of his church he defended, clothed with justice as with a breastplate. For, ready to lay down his life for the flock committed to him, he feared in this neither prince nor magnate. And because it was fitting that eternal rest after labour be given to one of so excellent merit, when he had come to the Roman curia for the causes of his church, he closed his last day, having first devoutly received the Sacraments of the Church; and so this happy Man, sending his spirit to God, from a pilgrim and stranger was made an eminent citizen of heaven; and, as greatly befitted the power of the divine Majesty, that it might declare to the faithful by the evidence of signs that this Saint reigns with Him in heaven, it made him shine on earth with many miracles; certain of which, proved by faithful testimonies, we have thought fit to insert to the praise of God and the glory of this Saint.

[310] as also some out of many miracles, For a certain girl of the age of five years, who had lain for a long time dead and drowned in a certain deep pond, drawn out thence all cold and stiff, having no sign of life, a vow having been made to this Saint for her raising, was restored to her former life. A certain infant also of two years, drowned and dead in a certain water, drawn out thence, after a vow made for him, was miraculously raised. A certain boy of nine years, drowned in a certain river, after some had vowed him *, drawn out of the water, to this Saint, was restored to life and health alike. Another little one, of the age of one year and a half, over whose head, as he slept on a threshing floor, the wheel of a laden cart drawn by four oxen had passed, dead from this, recovered life and soul through the merits of this Saint. Another infant, not yet of the age of two years, found dead at the bottom of a certain ditch, into which place he is asserted to have fallen by night from a bridge of great height, wholly cold and stiff without any sign of life, having been measured to this Saint, was wonderfully restored to life.

[311] obtained at his invocation; A certain woman, who for seven years had been so crippled that she could neither stand nor walk by herself, carried to the tomb of St. Thomas, prayer having been made there by her, was restored to the former freedom of health. Moreover a certain girl of five years , who for several years had one foot almost wholly putrefied from fistulas, so that she could neither stand nor walk except by dragging herself on her thigh along the ground, carried by her father to the tomb of the said Saint, was cured there of the said infirmity. Another woman, who for several years had lacked sight, nor could go anywhere unless, as blind, she was led by another, led to the church of Hereford, and prayer having been made at the tomb of St. Thomas, was straightway freed from the said blindness. Moreover a boy of five years, who from a certain infirmity had wholly lost his sight, and had remained so blind for two years, led to the tomb of this Saint, prayer having been made, perfectly recovered his sight. A certain man also, who had carried for many years a gilbus of the size of a goose's egg grown on his neck, praying at the tomb of this Saint and offering a penny, with which he had touched the said gilbus in the manner of a cross, was immediately wholly cured, and entirely freed from the said gilbus.

[312] with which, since God manifests him honoured in heaven, With the aforesaid and many other miracles God glorified His Saint, who alone does great wonders. These certainly are miracles, Thy works, O God, who so govern and dispose all earthly things through heavenly spirits that Thou wonderfully repairest from earthly men their sacred number, which the ruin of the fallen diminished. These are Thy Saints, almighty God, who by the gift of Thy grace are ever green, are red as the rose, white as the lily, please as honey, run as the spirit, are fragrant * as balsam, shine as the sun. So the clement God, glorifying His saint Thomas, strengthens faith, scatters and confounds cloudy errors, snatches our affections to things above, kindles our cold hearts with flames of love. On this joyful day, therefore, which the Lord has made, on which this Confessor sits bright in the crown of glory on the throne of God, let every spirit praise God, let the heavens of heavens sing to God with ineffable clamour: let the Church of the Saints chant psalms to God in mind and spirit on strings and organ. But applaud the more, Hereford, which containest so immense a treasure of his body; for him whom thou hadst as pastor on earth thou now hast in heaven as sedulous protector.

[313] But because it is very fitting that him whom

God glorifies in heaven, he commanded him to be venerated with an annual feast on the 2nd of October, the world should venerate on earth for its own fruit and joy, we have caused inquiry to be diligently made concerning his life and miracles: thereafter, attentive examination and skilful discussion having been had by us and our brethren upon the things found, being fully assured of the holiness of his life and the truth of his miracles, at the urgent request and the humble and devout supplication of many prelates staying at the Apostolic See, by the counsel and assent of our said brethren, trusting in the mercy of almighty God, and by the authority also of the blessed Peter and Paul, His Apostles, and our own, we have thought fit to inscribe * in the catalogue of the holy confessors. And therefore we admonish and attentively exhort all of you, commanding you by Apostolic writings, that on the sixth day before the Nones of October you devoutly and solemnly celebrate the feast of the same Confessor, that by his pious intercession you may be able both to be protected here from harmful things, and in the future to attain everlasting joys.

[314] And that the multitude of the Christian people may flock more ardently and more abundantly to his venerable sepulchre, and he granted indulgences to those praying at his sepulchre: this bull and the festivity of the same Confessor be extolled more solemnly, to all truly penitent and confessed who shall go thither with reverence annually on the same feast, to seek his suffrages, trusting in the mercy of almighty God and the authority of the blessed Peter and Paul, His Apostles, we mercifully relax two years and two quarantines; and to those going each year to the aforesaid sepulchre within the Octave of the same feast, one hundred days of the penance enjoined on them. Given at Avignon on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of May, in the fourth year of our Pontificate. These notes indicate the year of Christ 1320, whether you begin the years of John's Pontificate from the VII day of August of the year 1316, on which he was created Pontiff, or from the month of September of the same year, in which he was crowned. The same bull, but mutilated in a great part of itself, all the miracles being cut off, though with the same chronological notes, David Wilkins published in tome 2 of the Councils of Great Britain, page 651 and following, where he recounted it in an altogether foreign place.

[315] For he placed it under the Pontificate of Benedict XII, in the 5th year, pertains to the year 1320. in the 6th year of John Stratford, archbishop of Canterbury, in the year of Christ 1339, in the 13th year of Edward III, king of England. And he prefixed this title: Canonization of St. Thomas, bishop of Hereford in England, and his relation into the number of the holy confessors, with the institution of his festivity for the 2nd day of the month of October. From Bullar. Roman. vol. 1, p. 223, edit. M.DC.LXXIII . Then at this asterisk he notes thus below: This Bull, to be referred to the year of the Lord M.CCC.XIX, was published in this or the following year, as the Bullarium witnesses. That edition of the Roman Bullarium I have not indeed seen; and hence I do not know what the praised Wilkins wished to be indicated by this annotation of his; for either he meant that the same bull was promulgated in the year 1319, or more rightly 1320; but to what purpose, then, did he print it under the year of Christ 1339? or he indicated that it was given by John XXII in the year 1319 or 1320, but not promulgated before the year 1339 or 1340; but by what argument is so long a delay of the promulgation of the same Bull proved? I certainly have found nothing anywhere that makes me doubt whether the often-mentioned bull was promulgated later than the year 1320, in which it is marked as given.

[316] Of the Saint's relics, by the care of Catholics Further, although there can be no doubt that the cult of St. Thomas took a great increase after the sacred honours were decreed to him by the Pontifical oracle, I have nevertheless read nothing further on this argument. It is probable that, if not his whole body, at least a part of it was raised from his marble tomb at that time, and was accustomed to be publicly exposed to the veneration of the faithful while the Catholic faith stood in England, or up to the times of King Henry VIII. But that thereafter at least not all his sacred bones, once so dear to the English, were scattered by the heterodox, I learn from notices sent to us in the year 1755 from the college of our Society at Saint-Omer, to which an entire bone of his arm came in the XVII century. The first notice is the testimony of John Stephen Poynez or Poinz, priest of our Society, given in the year 1668, such as I have transcribed here: I, the undersigned priest of the Society of Jesus, attest that the arm of St. Thomas, bishop of Hereford, of which mention is made in the adjoined writing, was delivered to me by F. Francis Bay (truly, or by his proper name, Custaud), priest of the same Society, from several sacred bones of the same Saint entrusted to his custody at Hereford in England, where they are venerated with great piety by the Catholics, and that it was deposited by me, by the prescription of our R. F. Provincial, in the Marian sodality of our English seminary on the I of September MDCLXVIII at Saint-Omer. John Steph. Poynez of the Society of Jesus, Apostolic notary.

[317] withdrawn from the hands of heretics, one bone of the arm There follows presently in the same place another testimony also, of the same man, as it appears, although there is some difference in the name. That sacred pledge, which, wrapped in a green band, I left deposited at Paris in the year of Christ MDCLI, on the XII of November, with my sister the lady Mary Poinz, I, John Poinz, priest of the Society of Jesus, testify is one of the bones of that great prelate, most celebrated for miracles, St. Thomas of Hereford, whose feast is celebrated on the 2nd of October in the Roman Martyrology. This precious treasure, together with the head and other relics of the most holy Prelate, kept by Catholics up to these times with pious veneration, although secretly, was at length in the year MDCXLII, when the parliamentary soldiers under the leadership of the earl of Stamford had occupied Hereford, plundered by them; but recovered by the pious endeavours of the lady Ravenhill, a Catholic matron then dwelling in that city. Whence I, the aforesaid John Poinz, received this notable part of so great a treasure from F. Alexander Custaud (otherwise, as we have just seen, called Francis Bay), also priest of the Society of Jesus, and delivered it, deposited, to my sister the lady Mary Poinz at Paris, that, if anything should happen to me, it should be returned to the R. F. Provincial of England of the Society of Jesus then in office. John Poinz, priest of the Society of Jesus. So he; which things, if I rightly understand, mean that that sacred bone of the arm was brought first to Paris and thence to Saint-Omer.

[318] The other notice is the testimony of R. F. Richard Barton, at the foot of which is added the faculty of the most illustrious bishop of Saint-Omer brought into Belgium, at Saint-Omer in the English college for exposing the same sacred bone to public veneration, which I likewise exhibit here. Richard Barton of the Society of Jesus, rector of the college of the English at Saint-Omer. To all who shall see these, everlasting greeting in the Lord. We attest and testify to all, for the memory of posterity, that on the I of September of the year MDCLXVIII there was placed by order of our R. F. Provincial, in the chapel of the Marian sodality of this college, the greater and entire bone of the right arm of St. Thomas, bishop of Hereford and confessor, enclosed in an ebony case and visible on all sides through inserted glass, belonging to the English province of the said Society, to be kept here meanwhile as a deposit; which was long since taken from the chest in which his venerable head and very many bones, long ago withdrawn by Catholics from the fury of the heretics, are religiously kept with a Catholic priest at Hereford in England, and are exposed to the public veneration of the faithful (as far as can be done there among heretics), by continued succession already from the time when the Catholic faith flourished in England; as is established to us from the testimony and holy asseveration of R. F. John Stephen Poinez, priest of our Society and formerly rector of several of our colleges, who brought this sacred pledge to us by order of the R. F. Provincial. In faith of which we have given these, secured by our hand and the seal of our office, at Watten on the I of October MDCLXVIII. Rich. Barton m.p. L.S.

[319] Presently is subjoined the approbation of the bishop of Saint-Omer in these words: of the Society of Jesus is honoured, The most illustrious and most reverend lord bishop of Saint-Omer permits the relics mentioned below to be exposed publicly to the veneration of the faithful. Given at Saint-Omer on the first of October MDCLXVIII.

By command J. De la Ramonery. L.S.

That bishop, according to the writers of the Gallia Christiana, must have been Ladislaus Jonnart, afterwards translated to the archbishopric of Cambrai. William Wappeler, priest of our Society of the English province, who sent us the aforesaid notices in the year 1755, on the XXIV day of June, from the English college at Saint-Omer, noted certain things on them in an attached letter. And first indeed he observed that the approbation of the most illustrious bishop is read in the autograph prefixed to the testimony of F. Richard Barton, and on that account it is said in it: The relics mentioned below. Secondly, that Francis Bay and Alexander Custaud, of whom mention has been made above, are the same. Thirdly, of the reliquary he says thus: The ebony case with glass (concerning which see the preceding number) was afterwards changed into a round crystal, and this by me three years ago into a case made of tin and covered with a silver plate; but the relics, placed on silver semicircles, are seen through crystal glass. These relics are kept in the forward part or front of the altar table in the oratory of the Marian sodality, and, the antependium being removed, they appear on the more solemn feasts, and on the second of October they are exposed to public veneration in our church.

[320] Finally he had premised that the feast of the same St. Thomas is celebrated yearly in the same college with double rite on account of the aforesaid relics. and there the Saint is on that account venerated with a feast of double rite. For the rest, Audomaropolis, otherwise also Fanum S. Audomari and commonly called Saint-Omer, is a city of Belgium in the province of Artois on the river Aa and situated on the border of the county of Flanders, episcopal under the archbishop of Cambrai. And these things indeed concerning the bone of the arm of the holy Prelate; but what was at length done with his other members is unexplored by me; nor do I know more of his heart, which Adam Kyngeshm, the eleventh witness in the process, asserted rested in his time at Asshrugg in the diocese of Lincoln in England. Now I subjoin the Acts.

* or famam effert? brings forth his fame

* others: ipse

* others: devoverint

* nay, nineteen

* i.e. gibbum, or tuber a hump, or swelling

* or fragrant?

* others add: in

COMPENDIUM OF THE LIFE

From the Process of Canonization,

From the Vatican codex 4015.

Thomas de Cantilupe, bishop of Hereford, at Montefiascone in Papal Tuscany. (S.)

From the Vatican cod.

CHAPTER I.

The Saint's illustrious family, birth, education, literary studies, offices and benefices, virginal chastity, and wonderful temperance in food and drink.

Preface. Master Henry de Schorno, archdeacon of Hereford, and deputed proctor by the chapter of Hereford for promoting the business of the canonization of the lord Thomas, bishop of Hereford, on the X of September produced as the LXI witness concerning this whole business the reverend father the lord Riccard, by the grace of God bishop of Hereford ^a, who, the most holy

Gospels having been placed in his sight, swore to tell the truth concerning this whole business according to the form of oath proposed to all the other witnesses ^b.

[2] [The Saint had as father the baron de Cantilupo, as mother one formerly countess of Évreux;] And first, asked whether he had been of the kindred or household of the said lord Thomas, he answered that he had not been of his kindred, but of his robes and household ^c for XIIII years or thereabouts, as he believes; but he did not live with him continuously that whole time, but by turns, because he was meanwhile occupied with scholastic studies. Likewise asked about his age, he answered that he was sixty years old and more. Likewise asked whence and from what parents the said lord Thomas drew his origin, he answered that he had it from the relation of many, and reputed it to be notorious in the whole kingdom of England, that the said lord Thomas had been sprung from the noble stock of the barons of the kingdom of England, and the father of the lord Thomas himself was called the Lord William de Cantilupo, and he was a great baron, having in annual revenues fully two or three thousand pounds sterling. And the mother of the said lord Thomas was called the lady Milesenta, who had been countess of Évreux in Normandy, and the said lady had been sprung from very noble persons of Normandy or of France ^d.

[3] And after the death of the count of Évreux she married the said lord William, and from lawful marriage bore the said lord Thomas, and the lord Hugh, his brother, a man of great authority and learning, and three most vigorous knights, and three or four ladies, placed in marriage with the more noble barons of the kingdom of England ^e. he had brothers and sisters; he was born and baptized in the diocese of Lincoln. And the grandfather of the said lord Thomas was said to have drawn his origin from Normandy. Likewise asked where the said lord Thomas was born and baptized, he answered that he had heard from him that he had been born in the diocese of Lincoln, in a certain manor, then his father's, in the township of Hameldene ^f; and he said that he believed that he was baptized there, where the earl of Cornwall, namely the lord Edmund, son of the lord Richard, formerly king of Germany ^g, built an oratory out of reverence for God and for the said lord Thomas, whom in his lifetime he reputed a saint, as the same lord bishop said he had heard from the said earl; and in the said oratory the Lord is said to work miracles frequently for the said lord Thomas.

[4] Likewise asked where, with whom, and how the said lord Thomas lived in his boyhood, [Piously educated, he studies at Paris, at the council of Lyons he becomes chaplain of Innocent IV:] adolescence and youth, he answered that he had heard it related by persons worthy of trust, and also by the same lord Thomas, that in his infancy he had been nursed by a certain very devout, noble and holy matron named ^h… But after seven years or thereabouts, when he was being handed over to be formed in letters, he was handed over to good masters with his said brother Hugh ⁱ; and they heard Mass every day and the canonical Hours; and when they had advanced in age and letters, they said the aforesaid canonical Hours. And in his adolescence the same lord Thomas and his aforesaid brother studied and taught as regents at Paris in arts, and stayed there very honourably, and with a good and honourable company ^k; and afterwards both went to the council of Lyons, celebrated by the lord Pope Innocent the fourth, and there both were made chaplains of the lord Pope himself ^l. Afterwards, by his own and his friends' will, each of the said brothers kept a hospice and a great household for himself. They studied at Paris, the said lord Thomas in Decrees, in which faculty he was licensed there; and the other brother in Theology.

[5] Earlier also the said lord Thomas had studied laws at Orléans ^m, and made such progress [he studies laws at Orléans, Decrees and Theology at Paris, teaches at Oxford, where he becomes chancellor of the university.] that he sometimes lectured for the lord Guy, then a most famous doctor, whom the said lord Thomas heard. And having obtained the licence in Decrees at Paris, he incepted in the said Decrees and taught as regent at Oxford for some years ⁿ, and was chancellor of the said university ^o, and in the office of the chancellorship and in every state of his which he had before and after he conducted himself justly and holily, and did not leave the way of truth which he had first begun; namely he ever advanced from good to better. Afterwards he returned to Paris to hear theology, and the lord Thomas was then forty-four years old [p] or thereabouts, and then the lord Richard, now bishop of Hereford, was with him, and had been for two years. And when he had studied in Theology for several years, and had read there cursorily the Epistles which they call Canonical, returning to Oxford, he incepted and taught as regent there in Theology for one year and four months, before the council of Lyons was celebrated by the lord Pope Gregory the tenth, on the occasion of which council, the lecturing being given up, he went to the council above-mentioned [q].

[6] And the said lord Thomas conducted himself so praiseworthily in every state of his He becomes chancellor of Henry and counsellor of Edward, kings of England: that neither foulness, nor foolish talking, nor scurrility, so far as the witness himself knows or has heard, by himself or from others, proceeded from the mouth of the lord Thomas himself. Likewise, questioned upon the second interrogatory of the first article, With what studies, the same lord bishop of Hereford, being asked, said that he had in part answered the above-mentioned question by the foregoing, adding that the said lord Thomas was counsellor and chancellor of the lord Henry [r], then king of England, and afterwards he was also of the council of the lord Edward, son of the said lord Henry, now deceased [s]. He also said that the aforesaid lord Thomas had had a very great and honourable state before the episcopate, and about a thousand marks of silver of annual revenue in ecclesiastical benefices and dignities, which he obtained by dispensation of the Apostolic See, which the same witness asserted that he had seen.

[7] he administers and defends his ecclesiastical benefices excellently. For he had been precentor and canon in the church of York, archdeacon and canon in that of Lichfield, and canon in the churches of London and Hereford, and he obtained several ecclesiastical benefices [t]; adding that he governed the said benefices wholesomely, and defended and increased their rights, and made many buildings in them. And he specified that he litigated and won against his parishioners, by reason of his parish church of Doderhull *, the tithe of the salt-works, which amounted to much, they refusing to pay it to all his predecessors in the said church; and wherever he saw the rights of his other benefices injured or lost, he took pains to repair them and restore them in full with great expenses and labours. He specified moreover that the said lord Thomas built many buildings at Bradewelle of the diocese of London, at Schireburn of the diocese of Winchester, and at Kemeseya of that of Worcester [u], and at York [x], in his benefices [y]… Done in the chapel of St. Catherine on the XI day of the month of September before the said lords, the bishops and commissaries, the notaries of this process being present.

[8] He excels in the theological and moral virtues: After this, on the morrow, namely the XII day of the month of September, the aforementioned lord Richard, bishop of Hereford, returning before the said lords commissaries to continue the series of his deposition, asked upon the third interrogatory of the first article, namely concerning the faith of the said lord Thomas working through love, answered that the lord Thomas himself had right faith, certain hope, and perfect charity; as the witness himself could weigh from many reasonable causes while he was his familiar. Likewise asked about the life of the lord Thomas himself, he answered that he never saw a man, in his judgment, of greater holiness, devotion and abstinence. Likewise asked about the excellences of the life of the lord Thomas himself, he answered that he had noted in him the excellences written below beyond the measure, condition or conversation of others of whom the witness had knowledge. First indeed he said that he believed that he was chaste and clean in mind and body, and had remained a virgin at the time of his death.

[9] above all his virginal chastity, which Robert, archbishop of Canterbury, Asked why he believed the above-mentioned, he answered that he believed it through the signs and works of holiness which he saw him do while for many years he was of his household; nor did he ever see nor hear anything said on account of which the contrary could be noted, or reasonably suspected by anyone. And he narrated that he had been present at the oration in the great church of the friars Preachers with the university of the doctors and scholars of Oxford, when the lord Robert, archbishop of Canterbury, a Man of great holiness and eminent knowledge, who was afterwards Cardinal bishop of Porto [z], and had for many years been confessor of the said lord Thomas, and had come specially to Oxford because the said lord Thomas was about to incept under him in Theology [aa], that he might honour with his presence him whom he had loved in God; when the said archbishop had held the disputation which scholars commonly call Vespers, and it had come to this, that he was then to commend, as is customary to be done, the lord Thomas himself, then a bachelor, about to incept under him, he commended him among other things, and asserted, saying thus.

[10] So help me God, as this Man is as clean today as regards chastity of mind and body [afterwards Cardinal of Porto, asserted in a public address while the Saint was living.] as on the very day on which he was born from his mother into the world; saying that he was a virgin in flesh and mind, although he was fifty-four years old or thereabouts. The said archbishop, making the said commendation before the said university, adding: If you ask me how I know this, I answer before God that I have read in his conscience and life, by hearing his confession for many years up to now, as purely and openly as you could read in a well-written book open before your eyes, all things concurring which are necessary for sight. And truly I hope that God, who has hitherto kept this Man in such cleanness, will preserve him for ever. These things the aforesaid lord bishop of Hereford said he had heard when they were then uttered by the above-mentioned archbishop [bb]; and because the said archbishop was of such perfection as regards life, knowledge and doctrine, and of such maturity, that in England he had no equal in common reputation, the aforesaid lord said that he did not believe that the said archbishop had spoken against his conscience in the things which he said of the cleanness and of the other things which will be subjoined below in commendation of the said lord Thomas.

[11] Likewise the said lord bishop narrated, in commendation of the cleanness and chastity of the said

lord Thomas, [He avoids the company of women, even of his sisters: he rebukes those speaking foul things.] that even before he was bishop he avoided the company of women; and when his own sisters, who were great ladies, came to see him, or he himself turned aside to the manors or places of his sisters' husbands (which rarely happened), he declined, as far as he could in a good manner, saving his honourableness [cc], their conversations and company, and as soon as he could he gave them leave, and at most they did not stay in the place in which he was except for one day; nor in his absence did he permit them to stay for some days in the manors of his church; nor did the said bishop of Hereford ever see (as he said) the lord Thomas himself suffer himself to be kissed by his sisters, or by any other women whatever. Likewise the said lord bishop added that when some coloured or figurative words were sometimes told by the familiars of the said lord Thomas, or by others before him, which designated some unseemliness or foulness of lust, and on this account the familiars themselves or others joked or laughed, as though ignorant of what the said words implied, he asked what they were laughing at; and either he did not understand the things signified by the said words on account of his innocence [dd], or if he understood, he sharply reproved those speaking such things.

[12] He excels in sparingness and abstinence of food and drink, Likewise the aforesaid bishop of Hereford said that the aforesaid lord Thomas had, secondly, in excellence a sobriety, frugality and abstinence in food and in drink such as he had never seen any healthy man have. Asked in what and from what he had specially noted the above-mentioned, and how he knew, he answered that he had been his table-companion for many years, and had frequently sat at table next to him, and had noted the aforesaid; adding that he ate very little of bread and of other foods: that the witness himself, seeing the said lord Thomas well complexioned, as it seemed to the witness himself, marvelled how he could live with so little nourishment: and when on a certain occasion the witness himself sat by him at table, and at the end of dinner asked him why he had eaten so little, and whether he could not eat more for lack of appetite for eating, the same lord Thomas answered, touching with his hand a good quantity of bread, such as the same lord Thomas was not accustomed to eat in one day: I do not lack, he said, an appetite for eating; nay, I could still eat so much of bread with good appetite. Asked about the place and time at which the aforesaid were said, and about those present, he answered that it did not come to his memory at present; in so many places and so often he ate with him at table.

[13] which is confirmed by one or two examples Likewise he said that of delicate foods he took most temperately and very little, and the rest of the foods set before him he had distributed to the sick poor and languishing. Likewise he said that his drink was commonly weak ale, when he could have it, or wine very much watered, and of both he drank in a moderate quantity: but after dinner he was not commonly accustomed to drink. And when there came such persons and so solemn that it would become him to drink together with them after dinner, he took the cup with wine and ale, and put it to his mouth, and tasted nothing of it, but pretended to taste. And when the witness himself on a certain occasion had said to the lord Thomas himself in jest [ee] that in this he practised fraud on his guests, because he pretended to drink and did not drink, he answered that in such fraud there was no danger, and therefore it was not to be cared about. Likewise the aforesaid witness said that the whole life of the aforesaid lord Thomas, as it seemed to him, was passed in fasting on account of the above-mentioned sobriety and abstinence, and that he supped very rarely: but on the vigils of blessed Mary and on Good Friday his physicians did not allow him to fast simply on bread and water; but he ate bread with pottage [ff] in a moderate quantity, and drank wine very much watered or weak ale.

[14] is confirmed. Likewise he said, in confirmation of the aforesaid which he deposed concerning the sobriety, frugality and abstinence of the said lord Thomas, that on a certain occasion, when the lord William de Albaniaco, who had been the companion of the said lord Thomas for twenty years and more, was sitting with him at table, and, dinner being already finished and the others having ceased from eating, the same William alone was eating bread, and the aforesaid lord Thomas saw this and wondered somewhat at it, he asked him, saying thus: Old man, what art thou doing? And he immediately answered: I am eating: and the lord Thomas himself said: Why dost thou eat now? And he answered: Because I still have an appetite for eating. And the lord Thomas said: Hast thou the custom of eating as long as thy appetite lasts? And he answered with asseveration: Yes; adding that so did all the others whom he knew, namely eating as long as their appetite for eating lasted. Wondering at which saying and deed, and as it were reproving and instructing him, the same lord Thomas said: May it not please God that all do so: for I too tell you in truth that from thirty years up to this day I have not risen from table with less appetite for eating than I came to it with. And the aforesaid were said by the said lord Thomas and by the said lord William, the witness himself being present and hearing; but of the place, time, and who were present, he said he did not remember; adding that for this he was also publicly commended by the aforesaid archbishop in the said vespers [gg]. Done in the said chapel of saint Catherine before the said lords the bishops commissaries, we the notaries of this process being present.

ANNOTATIONS.

p. In the same Commentary, num. 47, I warned that an error lies here in the years, and that for these forty-seven years or thereabouts is to be read, and that the Saint's return itself to the studies of Paris is to be placed about the year 1266.

q. This II council of Lyons was celebrated by Gregory X, present in person, in the year 1274, from the VII day of May up to the XVII of July. Go to the Commentary, num. 49 and the three following, where I treated of the year and circumstances of the mastership in Theology taken up, and of his coming to the council of Lyons.

r. Namely of Henry III, king of England, under whom I showed in the Commentary, num. 39 and following, that St. Thomas held the chancellorship in the year 1265.

s. Edward I, otherwise IV, succeeded in the kingdom of England his praised father Henry, who departed this life in the year 1272, and died on the VII day of July in the year 1307; and Richard testified these things in the same year on the X or XI day of September.

t. Read, if you please, the Commentary §4, where I have set out at more length these things, and those which pertain to the most upright administration of the same benefices.

u. Concerning the dioceses here mentioned receive these few things: Londinum, commonly London, a city, the head of England, in the county of Middlesex, is too well known to need explanation. Wintonia, formerly Venta Belgarum, now to its inhabitants Winchester, is another city of England in the county of Hampshire, commonly Hant-Shire, episcopal under the metropolis of Canterbury. Wigornia, finally, to the natives Worcester, is an episcopal city under the same metropolis, and the head of the county of the same name.

x. Eboracum, now in the vernacular Yorck, is the city and head of the county of York in England, distinguished by an archbishopric.

y. In one of our apographs (for the other is contracted and mutilated in this and in many places) there followed these words: Likewise, questioned upon the third concerning the faith of the lord Thomas himself and love working, and being asked concerning his life and the excellence of his life, he answered that… Then is subjoined: Done in the chapel of St. Catherine on the XI day of the month of September, etc. Hence I hang in doubt whether all the things which the praised bishop had testified on the XI day of September have been omitted here, or whether rather above at num. 1, where the same is said to have been produced before the commissaries on the X day of September, this error was committed, so that for the X day the XI is to be read. That I rather believe the latter, I am induced because the same witness, in the foregoing

was examined upon the first and second interrogatory of the first article, but on the 12th day of the same month, as we shall presently see, he began presently to be examined upon the third interrogatory of the same first article; so that nothing seems to have been omitted there, at least of any moment. Further, the chapel of St. Catherine was at Hereford near the cathedral church, as is said elsewhere. The names of the notaries who wrote the Acts of the process you have in the Commentary, num. 303.

z. This was Robert de Kilwardby of the Order of Preachers, about whom more can be read in Jacques Échard in the Library of the same Order.

aa. That is, about to obtain the mastership or doctorate, on which matter see what was said in the Commentary, num. 49 and the two following.

bb. You have these things confirmed also from Trivet in the same place, num. 49 and 50.

cc. That is, as far as courtesy permitted.

dd. Interpret innocence as the virginal chastity of mind, to which unchaste jests were wholly foreign. What has already been said of chastity I have also illustrated with other deeds from the testimonies of others in the Preliminary Commentary from num. 71.

ee. That is, in a friendly way, for the sake of jesting.

ff. Potagium is a dish of vegetables or pulse.

gg. Namely by Robert de Kilwardby, as has been said above. Further, in the Preliminary Commentary § V, from num. 79, I have given more things by which the wonderful abstinence of St. Thomas is confirmed and illustrated.

* Doderhult

* others: dictus

* adjiciens is lacking in others.

CHAPTER II.

The Saint's piety in celebrating Masses; assiduity in prayers and sacred studies; fortitude in vindicating the rights of his church; entry upon the episcopate, and sedulous care in administering it.

[He celebrates divine things piously: he spends much of the night in prayers and sacred study:] After this, on the morrow, namely the XIII day of the month of September, the aforesaid lord bishop returned to the same place before the said lords the bishops commissaries to continue and complete his deposition, commending the said lord Thomas, thirdly, for excellence of devotion in celebrating the divine offices, asserting that he handled the divine Sacraments so most reverently that the very handling formed the faith and morals of those beholding. For, standing at the altar, he always had a heart so contrite and humbled when he celebrated Mass, and such abundance of tears, as though he were holding the Lord's passion present in the flesh. And this the aforesaid lord bishop of Hereford said he had seen several times, and that it was known to all who were accustomed to assist the same lord Thomas when celebrating ^a; subjoining that he was very slow and long at Mass by reason of the aforesaid devotion. He passed each night with the briefest tasting of sleep, so much so that his companions and others assisting him were often greatly burdened by this: and the rest of the time of the night in which he was awake he spent in prayers and in the study of sacred Scripture, and the collations which he composed he wrote with his own hand ^b.

[16] Likewise the aforesaid lord of Hereford said that the said lord Thomas had, fourthly, excellence of speech and zeal for keeping unharmed the rights of the church of Hereford, the right of hunting, unjustly taken from his church, and, if they had been injured in anything, for restoring them, in this sparing neither labours nor expenses, nor fearing to incur personal danger. Asked to specify in what he had known, and how he knew the aforesaid, he said that he knew because he had been of his household; and he specified that he had been present when, after great labours and expenses, the same said * Thomas recovered by judgment of the royal court the chase of Malbunia ^c, pertaining to the church of Hereford, occupied by the most powerful man, the lord Gualbert ^d, earl of Gloucester, and his father, in the times of the lords Peter and John ^e, the next predecessors of the said lord Thomas, who on account of the power of the said earls had not been able to recover the aforesaid rights.

[17] he vindicates even with danger of life: to one wickedly resisting And since the said lord Thomas could not ride well, he sometimes had himself carried in a litter ^f between two horses, that he might be present in particular before the royal court at the terms assigned to him by the above-mentioned earl. And when, judgment having been rendered for the said lord Thomas and the church * of Hereford, for the sake of recovering and taking possession the said lord Thomas had hunting done in the above-mentioned chase, and was perambulating unarmed the bounds and limits existing between his chase and the chase of the said earl; and certain archers and foresters ^g of the said earl shot near him, and he could probably fear danger of death from the said arrows, he did not on this account omit to go before and perambulate all the bounds and limits above-mentioned.

[18] he foretells divine vengeance: he answers meekly those calumniating him. And when he had threatened one of the said archers, more hostile than the others, with the judgment of divine vengeance by reason of the aforesaid injurious hostility, the said archer within a short time perished drowned; and there was a report in those parts that he had so perished by reason of the offence so perpetrated against the said lord Thomas. And these things concerning the shooting of the said archer the aforesaid witness said he knew by the relation of the familiars of the said lord Thomas who had been present at the aforesaid. Likewise he said that he had been present on the day and in the place in which the second judgment was rendered; when to the earl and the lord Riccard de Haidone ^h, seneschal of the same earl, who falsely imputed some opprobrious things to the same lord Thomas, as was known to the witness himself and to others present there, the said lord Thomas answered with meekness, kindness and patience that they might say whatever they wished; but they could not say so much as to provoke him to say anything unseemly of them; because he had not come for this, but to recover the rights of his church.

[19] [He recovers possessions taken from the church: he excommunicates an unjust possessor,] Likewise he specified that the same lord Thomas obtained by judgment of the said court great pastures of five or seven miles in the place called the Long Mynd from the lord Peter Corbet, baron, who had usurped them in the times of the predecessors of the said lord Thomas ⁱ. Likewise he specified that the same lord Thomas excommunicated the lord Llywelyn, prince of Wales ^k, because he refused to give up and restore three townships of the church of Hereford near Montgomery ^l, hostilely occupied; and because the bishop of St Asaph ^m had usurped episcopal rights in those parts, the said lord Thomas moved a lawsuit against him in the Roman curia; and for the prosecution of the said lawsuit, and also of the contention which he had with Brother John de Pecham, then archbishop of Canterbury ⁿ, for the liberties of the church of Hereford and its subjects, having been assured by skilled men that he was maintaining a just cause, and that it was meritorious for him to prosecute it, not sparing his body, worn out with old age and weakness, from the said fervour and zeal which he had for defending the rights of his said church, he went to the said Roman curia, martyred by labours, anxieties and expenses in their prosecution, and closed his last day there ^o.

[20] Likewise the same witness subjoined that when, at the request of the lord Edward, and, he being present, he refuses to celebrate Mass: he uses a rough hair shirt. king of England of illustrious memory or remembrance, lately deceased [p], he was about to celebrate on a certain great solemnity before the aforesaid lord king and the great men of his kingdom, at the beginning of the said Mass he saw the said Llywelyn standing by with other nobles, previously excommunicated by him, as the said witness deposed above; he would not celebrate, however urgently he was asked by the said king and others, until the said Llywelyn, excluded from the church, satisfaction having been competently offered, and letters * concerning the said satisfaction having been given to his parents, was absolved. And the said witness said that he was present at these things; but, asked about the year and day on which these things took place, and the other things concerning the above-mentioned lawsuits, he answered that he had no fresh memory. Likewise the same witness said that he believed that the aforesaid lord Thomas used a knotted, hard hair shirt and hair girdles at the time of his death, and had used them for many years before death; and he bequeathed some of the above-mentioned hair shirts to some powerful persons; and the same witness said that he had seen some of them [q].

[21] Likewise, questioned upon the fourth, being asked how in the episcopate he had governed himself and the church and people committed to him, He governs the bishopric of Hereford well, and whether he pressed diligently on the governance, visitation and correction of his subjects, and on the office of preaching, the celebrations of Masses and the other things incumbent spiritually and temporally on the episcopal office, he answered that he did, and that he performed all the above-mentioned well and sedulously according to his strength. Asked how he knew the aforesaid, he answered that he had often been with him in visitations, and had seen the above-mentioned, and had heard it related by others who accompanied him. Asked in what he had known that he governed himself well, he said in good government, and in the excellences and virtues of his life, and because he presided well over his house. Asked in what specially he had promoted the good government of the church committed to the lord Thomas himself, he answered in the prosecution and recovery of the aforesaid rights, concerning which deposition has been made by him: but special cases of correction, he said, being asked, did not occur to his memory [r].

[22] Likewise asked what kind of entry the same lord Thomas had had to the bishopric of Hereford, canonically elected, which, two years before, to him he answered that by canonical and concordant election [s]; and that, resisting, and out of humility pretending his weakness, he was taken up to the aforesaid bishopric [t]; and he narrated that it had been foretold to the aforesaid lord Thomas by the lord John, the immediate predecessor [u] of the said lord Thomas, two years before the death of the lord John himself, that he was to be his immediate successor in the church; the said lord John, when he said the aforesaid words, leading the same lord Thomas to see a certain house then newly built by the lord John himself, but not yet roofed, in the manor of the bishop himself of Bosbur. [x], the said lord John adding that he was showing the aforesaid building to the aforesaid lord Thomas for this reason *; because, if the site and arrangement of the said building pleased the lord Thomas himself, the said lord John would complete it: but if the site and arrangement of the above-mentioned building did not please the said lord Thomas, he should tell him, because it was easier and less costly for the aforesaid to be reformed then than if the said lord Thomas, having been made his successor, should have them changed. Which words did not seem to please the aforesaid lord Thomas; but he prayed that God would give a good and long life to the said lord John [y]. At all which things the said witness said he had been present, not, however, remembering the month or the day:

but the things which he deposed concerning the said entry upon the episcopate he said he had learned from the relation of persons worthy of trust.

[23] then in boyhood or adolescence, had been foretold. Likewise he narrated that he had learned from the relation of persons worthy of trust that when on a certain occasion the lord Walter of good memory, then bishop of Worcester, a man of great learning and holiness, for whom God is said to have worked many miracles after his death, the paternal uncle [z] of the said lord Thomas, asked the lord Thomas himself, as a little boy, and his brothers, brought before the lord Walter himself, of what condition or state they wished to be when they had come to a more advanced age, and the said lord Thomas answered that he wished to be a knight, the mentioned lord Walter immediately answered the lord Thomas himself: Son, thou hast answered excellently; for thou shalt serve as a knight perpetually to the most high King and to saint Thomas, His glorious martyr [aa]. Which saying the father of the said lord Thomas, receiving it as the saying of a prophet, handed him over to be formed in letters, and assigned the three other brothers to the temporal knighthood chosen by them.

[24] He wins a lawsuit against certain monks: Likewise the said lord bishop of Hereford narrated that it came to his memory that when the monks of the priory of Lewmunstre [bb], of the diocese of Hereford, powerful in ecclesiastical and worldly revenues, contended that they were not bound to receive the said lord Thomas when he wished to visit them; and that they would not take down for the same lord Thomas certain great and strong gates made by them before the forecourt of the parish church of the said place, on account of the will of the parishioners of that place, the said lord Thomas with labours and expenses obtained the said visitation, unduly denied to himself and his predecessors, and had the aforesaid gates taken down, because by reason of them free entry was not open to the parish priests by night and at other suitable hours for the necessities of the sick and other things pertaining to their office; nor could those seeking ecclesiastical immunity and fleeing to the church take refuge freely in the said parish church. And these things the aforesaid lord bishop said he had heard, and that they were notorious in those parts [cc].

[25] he restrains by excommunication a wicked aggressor of the church. Likewise he narrated that he had heard it related that when on a certain occasion the said lord Thomas, exercising the office of visitation, had lodged in the hospice of the church of Pantesbur [dd], of the diocese of Hereford, and the lord Reginald, son of Peter, a powerful, wilful and harsh baron, pretending that he was patron of the said church, coming upon him, wished violently to eject the said lord Thomas from the aforesaid hospice of the church and to lodge in it, bringing terrible threats against the lord Thomas himself and his familiars unless they gave up the above-mentioned hospice to him; the said lord Thomas, because, canonically admonished, he would not desist, the lord Thomas himself not withdrawing from the said hospice on this account, excommunicated him, and kept him excommunicated until, acknowledging his guilt, he returned to his mercy and the bosom of the Church and merited to obtain the benefit of absolution. From all which things deposed above by the witness himself he asserted that the said lord Thomas had been strong and constant and of great zeal in prosecuting and recovering and defending ecclesiastical rights.

[26] Likewise, questioned upon the fifth, whether the said lord Thomas was naturally discreet and prudent, being asked, he answered Bidden by the king to come without delay, he first celebrates Mass; that he was; and, being asked, he gave the cause, because in all his affairs he conducted himself prudently and vigorously, and was of great counsel. And he narrated that he had heard from persons worthy of trust that when the aforesaid lord King Edward, of whose council the aforesaid lord Thomas was, on a certain occasion, for having counsel upon certain very arduous things touching himself and his kingdom, had sent special * messengers to the said lord Thomas that immediately, without other delay, his own other businesses being passed over, the said lord Thomas should come to him at his palace at Westminster [ee]; and the said lord Thomas was then preparing himself, when the said messengers came upon him, to celebrate Mass, he would not omit, on account of the haste of the said messengers requiring on the royal part that, all things being passed over, he should come to the said lord king, to complete the divine office which he had disposed to fulfil that day before the above-mentioned messengers had come; answering the above-mentioned messengers that he wished first to serve the most High King in the office aforesaid rather than the earthly king, their lord; subjoining that the aforesaid messengers might say this, if they wished, to their said lord the king.

[27] And when, the divine office having been consummated, coming to the aforementioned lord king, he had been then he answers the king freely, and refreshes him with his counsel. somewhat reproved for the delay by the said lord king and his people, and had answered them effectually, as he had the aforementioned messengers, he, the things having been set out to him for which he and others had been called together to the royal council, gave so notable and praiseworthy a counsel in the premises that it was followed by the lord king himself and by all the others who had assembled in the said council, and very greatly approved; insomuch that the aforesaid lord king, who had been somewhat disturbed by the said delay incurred in coming * by the mentioned lord Thomas, gladdened and consoled by the said counsel given by the same lord Thomas, said to him that God should do well by the lord Thomas himself, and that blessed was that most High King whom the lord Thomas himself had served, and would that he himself could fittingly serve that God for a long time. Done in the said chapel of saint Catherine, the notaries of this process being present.

ANNOTATIONS.

p. Go to the Annotations to Chapter 1, letter l.

q. Other witnesses, whom I adduced in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 88 and the five following, related more concerning his most rough hair shirts and girdles.

r. I have recounted some examples of that kind in the Commentary, num. 121 and following.

s. How this concordant election is to be understood I said in the same Commentary, num. 64 and 65, from the testimony of William Cantilupe, who was present at the election. There I showed that the same election took place in the year 1275.

t. In the testimony of the same William Cantilupe the Saint is said, resisting and weeping, and alleging that he was not sufficient, to have been carried, the witness himself being present, to the altar, and Te Deum laudamus was sung.

u. Of him Godwin gave this brief eulogy: John Breton, doctor of laws (also so skilled in our municipal law that he wrote a little book on that matter, which is still held in great esteem today, whose title is: On the laws of England), bishop of Hereford, dies on the XII of May, MCCLXXV.

x. So there; but that place is unknown to me.

y. In the Preliminary Commentary, num. 62 and 63, I related another presage of the same John Breton concerning St. Thomas's succession from the testimony of William le Wayte de Bosco Arso.

z. Concerning him consult the same Commentary, num. 25 and the two following.

aa. Namely to St. Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, whose Acts will come to be illustrated in our Work at the 29th day of December, on which he is venerated. And our St. Thomas is said to be about to serve as knight to him because the see of Hereford is suffragan to that of Canterbury.

bb. Lewmunster, or, as it is otherwise called, Leonminster and Lemster, in Latin Leonis monasterium, is a little town of England on the river Lugg in the county of Hereford. Of the etymology of that place Camden says this in the description of the same county: Some have dreamed that it was called the Monastery of the Lion from a lion seen in sleep; but the Britons call it Lhan-lieni, and since this denotes the shrine of Nuns, and it is established that Merewalh, king of the Mercians, set up a church here for nuns (which afterwards was a cell of the monastery of Reading), to seek another origin, what else is it but to hunt the winds? More concerning the same is to be read in tome 1 of the Monasticon Anglicanum, page 420 and following, where it is called the priory of Leominster in Herefordshire, a cell of the cenobium of Reading, and is reckoned among the Benedictine monasteries.

cc. Richard de Kymberle, the twelfth witness in the process, testified the following concerning the visitation of the same priory.

Likewise he said that when the aforesaid lord Thomas was visiting the priory of black monks at Leominster, he found Brother William of Winchester, a monk of the said place, gravely defamed of dishonest conversation with a certain nun of Lingebrok; and since he would not clear himself before the said lord Thomas, he had him removed from the said place, in which he was subdean, and transferred to Rading., of the diocese of Salisbury. Then he set out the controversy about the gate of the church thus. Likewise he said that within the aforesaid priory of Leominster there was a parish church, and the monks closed the said church, so that access was not open to the parishioners and others for Matins and the other Hours when they wished, since the monks had closed the gates; nor could those in extreme necessity take refuge in the church from then on. The Eucharist also was kept in the private house of the priest, and not in the church, so that the said priest, the said church being closed, could carry the said Eucharist to the sick when he should be required. And because it seemed to the said lord Thomas that the aforesaid were not fitting, and needed correction, he ordained and commanded that there should be made outside the gate of the said priory a chapel, in which one priest should celebrate daily, and in which the Eucharist should be kept, and to which those seeking protection, liberty and ecclesiastical immunity could take refuge. He also said that the said lord Thomas ordained that one gate should be removed from the said parish church until the aforesaid chapel should be completed: and this he deposed from the relation of another, and that he had seen the above-mentioned chapel.

dd. So in our apograph, but I have found nothing more concerning the same place.

ee. Westmonasterium, commonly Westminster, formerly a celebrated abbey on the river Thames, once separated from the city of London, is now a city adhering to its suburbs on the West, distinguished by the ancient palace of the kings of England.

* contrectatio handling

* or videret? should see

* or dominus?

* ecclesia

* or literis? letters

* i.e. propterea for this reason

* others: spirituales

* others: conctanter veniendo in coming tardily

CHAPTER III.

Other virtues of the Saint; his blessed death in Italy; his flesh honourably buried there; his bones carried back into England, and five years afterwards, not without prodigies, translated into a more honourable tomb; the fame of his holiness and miracles.

By humility, meekness and kindness he was dear to all, After this, on the morrow, namely the XIV day of the month of September, the aforementioned lord Riccard, bishop of Hereford, returned before the said lords the bishops commissaries in the said chapel of saint Catherine to continue and complete the series of his deposition. And being asked whether the said lord Thomas had been humble, he answered that he had. Asked in what he had chiefly noted his humility, he answered in the obedience which he rendered to God and his superiors; and because towards his equals and inferiors he conducted himself humbly in words and deeds; and from this he was dear to the king and to the greater, middling and lesser of the kingdom, and commonly loved by them. Likewise being asked whether he had been mild, meek, patient, and kind and peaceable, he answered that he had. Being asked in what and from what he had perceived the above-mentioned, and to specify, if he knew any notable deeds of the said lord Thomas in which the aforesaid could be noted, he answered that he had perceived the aforesaid from the long conversation which he had with the said lord Thomas; and he never saw in him any excess in words or deeds, in prosperity or adversity, in joy or sadness, from which the contrary could be known.

[29] likewise peaceable, patient, prudent, Nay rather, although he was persecuted by many (with whom the said witness deposed above that the same had litigated), and especially by Brother John, then archbishop of Canterbury, vehemently, injuriously and unduly according to the common judgment, he bore the aforesaid patiently and kindly and without any murmuring; not disparaging them, nor permitting them to be disparaged or cursed by his familiars or others in his presence; nay rather he prayed for them. At the death of his parents and nearest kin he did not show himself disturbed. The discordant and those at variance he brought back to concord according to his ability, having peace, as far as in him lay, with all men ^a; lawsuits, however, being informed that his church had right, he did not refuse to undergo for the said right, when he could not otherwise obtain the said rights amicably: retaining in his society and friendship * jurists and approved men, without whose mature counsel he did nothing judicable, and every day after the divine office he held counsel with them concerning the things to be done.

[30] Likewise asked whether he was just and God-fearing, just, and spurning gifts offered to him. he answered that he was; and concerning this he said he had been commended by the lord Robert, then archbishop of Canterbury ^b, before the university of Oxford, which the same archbishop brought forward as witness, because he had been chancellor of the said university, and by reason of the said chancellorship had to carry out justice and juridical acts upon scholars and others ^c; and in the said office he had not been seen to deviate from justice for favour or other cause. And the aforesaid witness said that he believed, and that it was notorious in the aforesaid university, that the commendation of the above-mentioned archbishop rested on truth. Likewise he narrated that when the said lord Thomas was chancellor of King Henry ^d, certain monks having business at the royal court offered a certain precious jewel ^e to the same lord Thomas, who, spurning it, courteously rebuked them, because they wished to induce him, with peril to his soul, to receive what did not become him to receive, as if they thought him corruptible and pliable. At which things the said witness said he had been present at London * in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and sixty-five ^f; of the month, however, and day and names of the monks he said he did not remember.

[31] Likewise being asked whether he had been merciful, he answered that he had. His mercy towards the poor, the dead and penitents; Asked in what he had specially noted mercy in him, he said that he had been very compassionate towards the poor, scholars and others, and before he was bishop and after he had many poor eat before him every day, and nonetheless ministered alms to other poor according to his ability ^g. He also said that when any funeral whatever and anywhere met him as he rode, after he was bishop, he got down from his horse and prayed for the soul of the deceased, saying De Profundis with the customary prayers devoutly; and to those asking pardon for their offences, if signs of penitence appeared in them, he did not refuse it ^h: and the aforesaid witness said he had seen this when the familiars of the lord Thomas himself asked pardon from him; the incorrigible, however, he rejected from his household.

[32] Likewise the same witness narrated that he had heard from the mouth of the said lord Thomas he washed away a slight fault of his by long penance: that when he and his brother, as youths studying in arts at Paris, lived in a certain house in which there was a vine, and the same lord Thomas had taken a little rod which supported the shoots of the vine, of almost no value, with which he had made a window-frame for his study ⁱ, thereafter he did penance for seven years, and in each of the said seven years confessed it. From which the said witness inferred that the aforesaid lord Thomas, who had had a conscience about so little, and had repented for so long a time, had a very clean and sincere and pure conscience, as it seemed to him.

[33] Likewise he narrated, exemplifying the patience of the said lord Thomas, that he had seen, while he was with the said lord Thomas at Paris, that a certain scribe, struck imprudently by his domestic, he bears it patiently, whom the aforementioned lord Thomas kept in his household for the writing of his books, once lightly roused by the said lord Thomas from his daytime sleep after dinner, from an evil habit which he had of striking with his fist all who roused him from sleep, even before he opened his eyes, struck the said lord Thomas hard with his fist on his side; since, ignorant of the evil habit of the said scribe, he had bent himself a little to rouse him; which the said lord Thomas bore patiently without any offence, saying nothing else thereupon, as he withdrew from the said scribe, * but: Beware, son, for thou hast struck a priest. And these things the aforesaid witness said were three or four years before the said lord Thomas had been advanced to the episcopate ^k.

[34] as also the infirmities of the body: he perseveres in virtue, Likewise being asked whether, and what kind of, blows or adversities the said lord Thomas had suffered in his life, he answered concerning his persecutors, as he deposed above concerning the lawsuits which he had had for the right of his church, subjoining that he was troubled by the adversity, or grave infirmity, of pain of the bowels, or iliac passion, and pain of the stomach for many years before he was made bishop, and afterwards as long as he lived ^l. Likewise asked whether the aforesaid lord Thomas had persevered to the end of his life in the virtues and excellences of life which the said witness deposed above that he had, he answered that he had, adding that before he was bishop he lived most holily and with great gravity and honourableness of morals, and in the odour of good fame, and without any infamy.

[35] he dies over sixty and is buried in Etruria; his bones are carried into England: Likewise, questioned upon the sixth, namely how old the same lord Thomas was when he passed from this world, being asked, he answered that sixty-three years, or a little beyond ^m, as he believes; and that at Florentinum near Montefiascone ⁿ, on the morrow of saint Bartholomew the apostle, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-two ^o, praying and saying, Into Thy hands I commend my spirit, he passed to the Lord, having received confession, the Eucharist and extreme Unction [p]. And his body in the church of the abbey of saint Severus below Orvieto [q], on the Sunday next following, was honourably committed with solemnity to ecclesiastical burial by the lord Hieronimus, Cardinal, the lords Hancherus, Latinus, Comes and Hugh, Cardinals, being present, and the Deceased was much commended there by the said lord Hieronimus, preaching [r]. After which * the bones of the same lord Thomas deceased, separated from the flesh, were brought into England by his familiars, and honourably placed and buried in the church of Hereford, as the same witness said he had heard the aforesaid from the truthful relation of the said Thomas's familiars [s].

[36] then, entombed in a more honourable place, they are famous for miracles. Likewise, being asked upon the second article, concerning fame, whether in the city and diocese of Hereford

and in the neighbouring dioceses there is public fame and common opinion that the said lord Thomas is a saint, and that God works miracles for him as for a saint, he answered that there is, and that it was notorious that the said fame was through all England, Scotland, Wales * and Ireland, and through many parts of the kingdom of France. Being asked how he knows the aforesaid, he answered that from the common relation of persons worthy of trust, and because from the said lands and provinces many pilgrims flock to the tomb of the said lord Thomas with devotion and reverence, bringing with them many images and signs of miracles, which they say happened through the merits of the said lord Thomas in the said lands and provinces, both on land and on sea [t]. Likewise asked when the said fame and the concourse of the people to the tomb of the said lord Thomas began, he answered that when the bones of the lord Thomas himself had stood entombed for five years or thereabouts in the chapel of B. Mary of the church of Hereford, and the said witness, an honourable tomb having been prepared in another place of the said church, had placed or translated the said bones in the aforesaid tomb [u] (it is now twenty years, or thereabouts), then God worked four or five miracles for the said lord Thomas, as was then said; and from these the said fame had its beginning.

[37] And he narrated that when the witness himself had disposed to place the said bones in the above-mentioned tomb, The bishop, about to make this translation, is wonderfully roused from sleep: and had come to lie [x] about two miles from the city of Hereford, and on account of a night vigil had fallen asleep at the hour at which he ought to have risen, on a certain window of a certain upper room in which * he had slept, placed where there was no access for a man wishing to reach it on account of its height, three blows were given, as if a man with the joint of one finger, his hand closed, had struck strongly on the said window, making a sound to rouse him to rise. At which the same witness, waking, rose and roused the household, thinking in his heart that this had been done divinely in favour of the said placing or translation of the bones; since humanly, without the setting of a ladder, which the said witness, turning over the aforesaid within himself, did not find there, the said sound and the aforesaid striking could not have been made; the said witness ascribing the aforesaid to a miracle done through the merits and to the honour of the said lord Thomas.

[38] Likewise he narrated that when a certain very great stone, heavy and long and broad, a sepulchral stone of great mass is easily moved such as is accustomed to be placed over the tombs of prelates or of noble deceased persons, had been placed over that place where the bones of the said lord Thomas had first been placed in the chapel of blessed Mary, and the said witness and others, the cement with which the said stone was glued to the others having been removed, were thinking how they could turn over the above-mentioned stone and draw out the said bones from beneath, two of the squires [y] of the witness himself set their hand * to drawing the above-mentioned stone, so that, it being separated a little from the other hollow stone in which the said bones were laid up, they might draw the bones themselves out thence; the said two squires, who were not very robust in bodily strength, drew the said stone as far as was sufficient with such facility as if it had been of wood. And because according to the common judgment the said stone could not have been drawn so far by four well robust men, the witness himself and others standing round ascribed the facility of moving and drawing the said stone to a miracle, done to show the holiness of the said lord Thomas, since the said moving and translation of the bones pleased him.

[39] But when, the office of burial having been done or completed, it is put back with difficulty. and the said bones having been placed in the new tomb prepared for them, they wished to draw back the said stone, thus first easily moved and drawn by two, to its former place, and place it as before, scarcely ten men, straining with all their strength, could suffice on account of the heaviness of the said stone; although, according to the arrangement of the tomb and of the place in which the aforesaid stone lay, the greater difficulty ought to have been in the first removal and drawing of that stone than in its second drawing back and replacing. Asked whether from the said two deeds, just narrated by him and ascribed by him to a miracle, the faith and devotion of the witness himself and of others who, attending to or knowing the aforesaid, ascribed them to a miracle, were increased, and whether from these they glorified and praised God and the said lord Thomas, he answered that they were, as he believes as regards the others, and simply as regards himself.

[40] The witness thus far examined answers Asked what in his aforesaid deposition he calls public fame, and what common opinion, he answered that he called public fame that which clergy and people commonly cry out; common opinion, that which is commonly believed by clergy and people. Asked what moves him to believe for him, or to say, that people commonly believe that the said lord Thomas is a saint, and that God works miracles for him as for a Saint, he answered that from this, because people commonly so speak, and the witness himself believes that they so believe as they say, because they run to him as to a Saint and show signs of miracles. Likewise, being asked under the third article, concerning the truth of the miracles, whether he knows that God worked other miracles for the said lord Thomas than he deposed above, he answered that he had not seen others; but he had heard it related by persons worthy of trust concerning the raising of very many dead, and concerning many other various miracles done through the merits of the said lord Thomas.

[41] certain general interrogations Which miracles the same witness believes were true; he heard them from so many and such great persons worthy of trust, and saw so many signs and indications of them; especially since the goodness and holiness of life of the lord Thomas himself, known to the witness himself, do not disagree with the above-mentioned miracles, but agree with them; adding that Brother Geoffrey Schepeye, of the Order of Friars Minor, who, as penitentiary of the then lord Pope, had heard the confession of the lord Thomas himself in the infirmity of which he died, had asserted this same thing to him, when the witness himself with great devotion and urgency asked to be certified by him whether the life of the lord Thomas himself agreed with the miracles. And this the aforesaid witness said was (ten years have elapsed and more) in the manor of the bishop himself of Witeborne *, to which manor the said Brother Geoffrey had turned aside, on his way to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, or returning from it. And the said Brother Geoffrey subjoined that he had never seen a man of greater zeal as regards prosecuting and defending the rights of his church.

[42] concerning the faith of what he had testified. Likewise asked whether he knows, believes or has heard it said that any fraud, fiction and contrivance was committed by any persons whatever, for gain or from any other cause whatever, concerning the miracles or the signs of miracles which God is said to have worked for the said lord Thomas, he answered that he did not. Lastly asked whether he had deposed by reason of command, fear, hatred, love, price, of gain given or promised, had or to be had, and whether he had been taught or instructed to testify, and whether he had agreed with other witnesses so to depose, he answered that he had not. Nay, he asked some of his familiars, produced and examined as witnesses in this business, that they should by no means deviate from the truth, nor add any falsity to their sayings on account of the commendations of the said lord Thomas or favour towards him. Done in the said chapel of saint Catherine, we the notaries of this process being present.

ANNOTATIONS.

e. That is, a necklace.

p. The Apostolic commissaries just praised say in the same letter to Clement that he then confessed to Brother Geoffrey de Chepeya, of the Order of Minors, then penitentiary of the lord Pope. Robert Deyntè also mentions another confessor of his then employed, who was called the lord Nicholas. Read what was said in the Preliminary Commentary, 212 and the two following, where from the testimony of the praised Robert Deyntè, who stood by him as he died, you will find other circumstances of that blessed death.

q. By the body understand the flesh separated from the bones, as will presently be clear, and as I said in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 223. There and in the four following numbers I gave some notice of the monastery of St. Severus near Urbs Vetus, commonly called Orvieto.

r. There also, at num. 224 and following, I noted some things concerning the Cardinals who honoured the Saint's funeral with their presence, the first of whom, Jerome, was afterwards created Supreme Pontiff and called Nicholas IV. Thus Thomas, whom his metropolitan John Peckham had wished to be held as excommunicated, was honourably received for his merits by Martin IV, then Supreme Pontiff, as I have said elsewhere, and after his death honoured with ecclesiastical burial and solemn obsequies by a future Supreme Pontiff and other Cardinals of the H. R. C.

s. What one or another asserted concerning a prodigious flow of blood from his bones, as having happened in this translation, can be read in the Commentary, num. 231 and 232.

t. Among the very many who already before the year 1307 had come in veneration to his tomb, Robert of Gloucester, related in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 245, named the king of England Edward himself and other princely persons: and the votive offerings and gifts hung at the same tomb, in truly great number, the Apostolic commissaries, eye-witnesses, recounted in their praised letter to Clement V. Go to the Commentary, num. 296 and the two following.

u. This translation, which was made without any intention of paying cult, I showed in the Preliminary Commentary, num. 237 and following, took place in the year 1287, between the 28th day of March and the 3rd of April.

x. That is, to pass the night.

y. Sons of noble men were then called domicelli; wherefore these two seem to have been in the service of Bishop Richard for the sake of honour.

* others: comitiva

* others: Londoniis

* add: quam

* others: Postquam

* others: Italiam

* in quo in which

* others: manus

* others: de Witenborne

MIRACLES

From the Process of Canonization.

Thomas de Cantilupe, bishop of Hereford, at Montefiascone in Papal Tuscany. (S.)

From the Proc. of can.

PART I.

MIRACLE I.

A girl of five years, drowned in a fish-pond, restored to life.

A girl of five years, following her parents to a tavern, The noble man Adam le Schirreve, father of Joan ^a, produced by the proctors of the chapter of Hereford, and requested to narrate truthfully the miracle which is said to have happened in the person of Joan, his daughter, examined immediately before him, and the circumstances of the fact, said that it is now fifteen years and more, about that time in which the miracles which God was said to work for the said lord Thomas first began to be published, in the month of April, on a certain Sunday before the feast of B. George the martyr ^b, it happened that there was a certain ale-tavern in the parish from which the witness himself is sprung, namely of Maurdin , in the house of Walter de la Wile , to which tavern there came on the said day the said witness and Cecily his wife after none ^c, and fully a hundred persons or thereabouts of the said parish; and when they went to the said tavern, they left the aforesaid Joan, their daughter, in their house with her other brothers and sisters. And when they were near the said tavern, they saw the said Joan, their daughter, who was then five years old ^d, following them, and they did not care; because there were many other little children of the neighbours there.

[2] And when she had stood a little in the said tavern with other little children before the said witness and before several others, playing with other children in a garden, she went out with the said little children from the said tavern, and entered the garden ^e of the aforesaid Walter, in whose house the tavern was. And in the said garden there was a certain pond, or fishpond, or fish-stew, and there was water there of a depth of six feet or thereabouts, and the ditch was twenty-four feet wide, and sixty feet long or thereabouts, and from the top of the bank down to the water there were six feet or thereabouts ^f, and round about the bank there were some brittle plants, because the said bank was partly earthen, partly muddy and partly sandy. And the said girl, having entered the said garden, going with the other little children and approaching the said pond, fishpond or ditch, was throwing little stones into it together with John, son of Thomas Schout, of the same township, who was almost of the same age as the said girl, and the son of the godmother of the said girl, and with them were two other boys of the same township, of whose names, and whose sons they were, it did not come to the memory of the said witness, as he said.

[3] And while they were thus throwing little stones into the water, the aforesaid John, of the same age as the said Joan, pushed Joan, pushed by a boy into the fish-pond, she is drowned to frighten her, into the said ditch; and the said Joan fell into the water and was drowned there ^g: as all the aforesaid concerning the going of the said girl to the garden and the said game, the pushing and the fall into the water itself, the said witness said had been related to him afterwards by the aforesaid Joan and John of the same age as herself. And since the said witness and the others who were in the said tavern were ignorant of this, and, according to their manner and custom, the younger ones, after drink once taken, had set themselves in a round dance, and had led the said dance through the garden and near the ditch in which the said Joan was drowned, some who were in the said dance saw the garments of the said girl in the said water, and her lying without motion at the bottom of the water, and they thought that she was the daughter of Christina de Grenewei, of the same parish, who went begging with her said daughter, and that from the bitterness of poverty and misery the said Christina had thrown her said daughter into the aforesaid ditch.

[4] and, found in it by some, she is left there And because it is the custom in that country, and through the whole kingdom of England, excepting the cities, that whoever first finds one slain or drowned must raise the cry and publish it, and all hearing the said cry and the finder must follow him from township to township until he is at the place in which are those who preside over the jurisdiction of that country, before whom the aforesaid homicide or drowning is denounced by the said finder, and the said denouncer is personally detained unless he gives suitable security by sureties to present himself to the royal justiciaries as soon as they shall come to the parts, to undergo judgment before them. Nor must one slain or drowned so found be removed from the place in which he is found unless there be first called he who presides for the king to inquire concerning such cases, pertaining in the kingdom of England to the crown of the lord king, however far he who presides may be distant from the place, even if he should not come for three months to the aforesaid place; and, if the contrary be done, a great and most grievous penalty is incurred, and the pond in which anyone is found drowned would be filled up with earth.

[5] from fear of the laws; and the drowning is concealed, The aforesaid dancers, on account of the aforesaid custom, and because no one wished to make himself the finder of the said drowning (although John de Pirebrok of the same township, servant of Walter della Wylle, in whose house the said tavern was kept, wished to denounce the said drowning to the said Walter, and on this account, the other dancers not permitting it, strove to withdraw from the above-mentioned dance), thinking that at nightfall they would throw the said girl into a certain river water running near that township, which is called the Lugg ^h, dissembled to publish the case of the said drowning and to draw the said girl out of the aforesaid ditch, as the said dancers afterwards narrated to the witness himself, because the witness himself was not in the said dance, but remained with the other elderly and old people in the said tavern. And while Cecily, wife of the witness himself and mother of the said Joan, was still in the said tavern, and the said John of the same age as the said Joan, who had pushed her into the ditch, was beginning to narrate these things to the mother of the said Joan, who was talking with others, Thomas Schout, father of the same John, coming up, the said Thomas, who had led the aforesaid dance, and had seen, in leading the dance, the aforesaid girl drowned in the water, not wishing that the said drowning should be published, taking the said John his son, led or carried him to the house of the wife of the same Thomas, which was distant from the said tavern by a furlong or nearly; and shut him up, lest he should reveal the aforesaid.

[6] At last the said John, having gone out of the aforesaid house after sunset, until, the same boy having given information, she is drawn out of the water and returning to the said tavern, and finding in the tavern itself the said Cecily, mother of the drowned girl, narrated to her concerning the said drowning. And then the aforesaid natural mother of the said girl, who was pregnant, and from then on gave birth within a month, with Joan Wase, wife of the said Thomas Schout, her gossip, godmother of the said drowned girl, running to the said ditch with Radulph the Tailor, saw the said girl her daughter drowned in the said ditch; and the aforesaid Joan, her gossip and godmother of the said girl, threw herself with a rush into the said water, and drew the said drowned girl to the bank. And all these things the aforesaid witness said had been narrated to him by others; but he did not see the girl within the said ditch nor in the water; he was, however, in the said tavern, treating of other things with his neighbours ⁱ. And when the said girl had been drawn out of the water, and had been placed near the bank on the ground, the witness himself was called, and seeing that his said daughter was dead by reason of the said drowning, and had no sign of life in her, and the mother of the girl herself and many standing by lamenting and weeping around her, his paternal bowels being moved, grieving exceedingly, he lamented and wept.

[7] And because the said witness had heard that God was working many miracles for the said lord

Thomas, she is found dead, and by her father and others kneeling there, with many tears and with great compunction and devotion, he asked the said saint Thomas that, if it was true that God worked miracles for him, he would raise his said daughter: and all the others standing by, who might be about forty between men and women ^k, on bended knees asked the said saint Thomas with tears for the raising of the said girl; and the same witness with his girdle measured his said daughter there to the said St. Thomas ^l. And immediately after the said measuring the said witness cut the belt with which the said drowned girl was girded, because the aforementioned girl had her belly so swollen and distended that the witness himself could scarcely put his fingers between the body of the said girl and the belt. And the said belt being cut, he opened the mouth of the aforementioned girl, a little knife being applied, since he could not open it with his finger, and together with Cecily his wife and others standing by he tried to put back into the mouth of the said girl her tongue, which for the most part stretched out beyond the girl's mouth, and was black and swollen.

[8] And the said tongue, having been put back by force within the mouth and teeth, immediately, she is commended to St. Thomas. when the finger with which it was held within the said mouth and teeth was removed from it, went back outside the mouth and teeth, as before; and the mouth of the girl herself, after it had been opened with the said force, remained so open through the whole night, except when it was closed by force, and then, the force ceasing, the said mouth soon opened. And the said belt being cut, and the mouth of the mentioned girl thus first opened, a certain rumbling was heard by the witness himself and by others standing by in the body of the said girl, and one of those standing by, namely Walter de Pirebrok, said: If there was any breath of life in the girl, now it has wholly breathed out ; but others said that through the merits of the said saint Thomas God had breathed life into her, and, hoping from this for the raising of the said girl, they persisted more fervently in prayer. It is to be known, however, that this witness did not persevere in this, that others said that the spirit of life had been sent into the girl through the merits of St. Thomas; nay, he varied, persisting in this, that neither motion, nor breath , nor warmth, nor any other signs of life appeared in the girl herself until the following dawn.

[9] At night the girl, carried first into the tavern, then to her father's house, And when they had stood beside the aforesaid bank from sunset until dark night, persevering in the said prayer, and for devotion all the men had removed their hose from their knees, that both they and the women might pray on bare knees upon the ground, and still no signs of life appeared in the said girl, and there had come out of her body, both through the mouth and through the other natural parts, about the quantity of two flagons and more of water ^m, they brought the mother of the said girl, who was holding her in her arms and lamenting her as dead, into the house in which the said tavern was; and there they stayed, persevering in the said prayer that the said St. Thomas would raise the said girl, almost until midnight: and when still no signs of life appeared in the said girl, the said girl was carried to the house of the witness himself ⁿ; and the neighbours who had prayed for the raising of the said girl followed, and stayed the whole night in the house * of the witness himself, hoping and praying that the said St. Thomas would raise the said girl; and since the mother would not let go her said daughter, and the witness himself and others standing by feared that from grief and anguish she would lose her unborn child, they made her get into bed, and because she wished to have her said dead daughter with her in bed, the bed was set near the fire, lest the pregnant mother should be harmed by the coldness of the dead daughter ^o.

[10] others invoking St. Thomas for her, in the morning she revives; And when the said dead daughter had lain [p] in the bed with her mother until dawn before any signs of life appeared in her, at the said dawn the aforesaid mother felt * some motion in her said daughter, and said this to those standing by; and then the said bystanders praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas with the greatest tears; and immediately the girl put her right hand to her left shoulder, as it seems to him, and began to vomit the humours and superfluities which had remained in her body by reason of the aforesaid drowning. And after the said vomiting she spoke; and asked how she had been drowned, she narrated that the said John had pushed her into the said ditch [q]. And when the said girl had somewhat recovered her strength, about sunrise they carried her to the parish church of the said place, and placed her upon the altar of St. Ethelbert, king and martyr, patron of the church of Hereford [r], and the bells were rung there, and the whole people assembled, and Te Deum laudamus was sung.

[11] afterwards she is carried by her father to the tomb of St. Thomas, And the same witness, almost against the will of the neighbours, who did not wish him to carry her yet, because the said girl was weak, took her in his arms, mounting a horse, a cushion being placed beneath, and carried her to the church of Hereford, and many of his neighbours, both of those who had prayed for the raising of the said girl and of others, about thirty in number, came with him, and some of them barefoot, and many from the townships round about, namely Maurdyn, Wistanton, Froremanton and de Walde, meeting him on the way by reason of the said miracle, and also many from the city of Hereford, from whom the said girl could scarcely be protected; because out of devotion for the miracle they wished to see and kiss her. And the nearer the said girl drew to the church of Hereford, while she was being carried to it by the witness himself, the more she was strengthened and fortified, and recovered colour in her face. And when the said witness had brought his said daughter into the church of Hereford, and had led her to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, the canons, having first inquired, and summary proof having been made to them of the said miracle, had the bells rung through the whole city of Hereford, and, the people having been called together and a great procession made, the miracle was published there, and with tears and the greatest devotion of clergy and people Te Deum laudamus was sung, and praises and thanks were rendered to God and to the said St. Thomas [s].

[12] Afterwards the said witness brought his said daughter back, and there the miracle is solemnly published; and had a wax image of the said girl made, which for many years stood hung near the tomb of the aforesaid lord Thomas, and afterwards fell, consumed by age. And from then on the same witness with his household came every year at least once, and sometimes more often, barefoot, with oblations, as a pilgrim to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, and especially on the feast of the aforesaid St. Ethelbert, patron of the church of Hereford. Asked about the names of those who were in the said dance when they saw the said girl drowned in the water, he said that Thomas Schonk * above-mentioned and Stephen de Pirebrok, sworn witnesses and produced for the proof of this miracle, John de Pirebrok and many other neighbours of his; to which neighbours indeed it is so notorious and public, what has been deposed by the witness himself concerning the drowning, death and raising of the said girl, and that she was raised at the invocation of the name of the said St. Thomas, and that in the said raising and miracle there intervened no fraud, guile, fiction or contrivance, or natural things, but only the virtue and power of God, which worked the said miracle at the invocation of the name and through the merits of the said St. Thomas, that it can in no way be concealed, nor can there be doubt about the aforesaid: and the said girl is still called, in the said township from which she is sprung, Joan, daughter of Adam le Schirreve, whom St. Thomas raised.

[13] And many nobles from remote parts still come, in attestation of the said miracle, to see the said girl. for the sake of which many visited the girl. Likewise asked whether, before the drowning and raising of the said girl, the witness himself and his wife had devotion towards the said St. Thomas, he answered that they had been pilgrims to his tomb with others their neighbours, and immediately when the said witness, having seen that the said girl was dead, had begun to invoke the name of the said St. Thomas, all who were present began in the same manner to invoke him unanimously with tears, having great trust that God, through the merits of the said St. Thomas, would raise her. But after the said raising the witness himself, or his wife, or the aforesaid daughter, had no vision or any other special things concerning the aforesaid lord Thomas, so far as he knows or has heard [t].

ANNOTATIONS.

in width 24, and the water of the said fishpond then had, and still has, a depth of 13 feet and a half or thereabouts; and the said fishpond was made from the beginning in such a manner that it had as much depth at the sides as in the middle.

p Stetisset, that is, she had lain here: for the verb stare ("to stand") in this whole process, as well above as below, is used for the verb "to be" in any position of the body; which let it suffice to have noted once.

q In the testimony of the praised mother some circumstances are read somewhat differently; namely: Item, she said (Cecilia the mother) that from then on she held her aforesaid dead daughter with her in bed, not perceiving in her any breath of life until the following dawn. But at dawn the said girl began first to move one foot (and it seems to her that it was the right foot); afterwards the said girl shuddered with her whole body; and the said Cecilia, putting her mouth to the mouth of the said girl, felt Note: sensit the breath of the said girl, and heard a certain low groan, which the said girl made in the manner of one suffering, uttering no word, but only a sound expressive of lamentation; and when she had continued the said sound for so long a time as the Pater noster could commonly have been said twice without chant, then the said Cecilia, putting her mouth to the ear of the said girl, asked of her: What did you want in the water? And the girl answered that John had pushed her. This done, the said Cecilia at once revealed and made known the aforesaid to her husband and the other bystanders, who had prayed perseveringly for the restoration of the said girl; and she showed them the said girl alive: and they, seeing that the said girl lived, praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas, and signified this to the lady of that township, who is called the lady Margery Note: perhaps Margaret? Gafre; and she came with her company to see the said girl; and when she had been seen, about sunrise, the said lady and a multitude of the parishioners of the said township accompanying, she was carried to the parish church of the same township, etc.

r Concerning this holy king of the East Angles, treatment has been given in our Work at the 20th day of May.

s Cecilia the mother agrees, who herself too was then in the church of Hereford, and among other things testified thus: And when they were in the church of Hereford, and the said girl had lain a little while upon the tomb of the said St. Thomas in quiet, the said girl lifted her head, and the canons inquired on oath concerning the truth of the said miracle (as it seems to the said Cecilia); and she (Cecilia) sitting in the middle of the church with her said daughter, a procession having been made around her, and the bells rung, they sang with tears, she knows not what. And there was a great people there; and all praised God and St. Thomas on account of the miracle aforesaid.

t The oft-mentioned Cecilia, appearing for the third time before the praised commissaries on the 19th day of September, and asked whether she or her husband, before the said miracle happened, had any special devotion in their life beyond others their neighbours, answered that they had come as pilgrims with many of their said neighbours to the tomb of the aforesaid lord Thomas; and that they were faithful and Catholic and devoted to the Church, living of their own, bestowing alms happily according to their means, loving their neighbours round about, and loved by them, etc. And at the end of the testimony this is added: And be it known that she deposed in English. For the rest, this miracle, besides the three said witnesses, namely the parents and Joan herself who had been submerged, seven other sworn witnesses moreover asserted, according as each had been present at the event, whose names are these: Ralph de la Broche, about 60 years of age. Thomas Schout, about 39 years of age. Joan Wase. Walter de la Wyle, about 40 years of age. Joan, wife of the aforesaid Walter de la Wyle, about 50 years of age. Stephen de Pirebrok, aged 38. William le Pipere, aged 100 and more. This miracle has been related in the bull of canonization, in which it is read thus: A girl of the age of five years, who for a long time had stood dead and submerged in a certain deep pond, drawn out thence wholly cold and stiff, having no sign of life, a vow having been made to this Saint for her resuscitation, was restored to her former life.

al. Waurdin*

al. del la Wylle*

impegit*

impactione*

exhalavit*

halitus*

in domo*

sensit*

an Schout?* perhaps Schout?

MIRACLES II AND III.

Two other drowned children raised to life.

A child not yet two years old, having fallen into a pond, Edith, wife of William Draek ^a, a native of the place called Little Markele, of the parish of Ledebury ^b, asked to relate what she knew about the resuscitation of John her son, said that on Tuesday in the feast of Rogations before the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, three years had elapsed, that being in the said place of Little Markele after the hour of None ^c, for so long a space, as she indicated when questioned, as a man could have gone one mile at a common pace, she saw that the said John her son, who was then of the age of one year and a half, went away from the house proper of the husband of the said witness; and the said woman then thought, as she said, that her aforesaid son, who had risen from sleep, had at once gone to play with other little ones in the quarry or public way; and the said witness remained in her house, cleaning the said house and throwing out of it dung, straw, and other things needing cleaning out. And in doing the aforesaid, she stayed in the said house for so long a space (as she judges) from the hour at which her said son had gone away from the aforesaid house, as she could have gone one mile at a walking pace.

[15] But going out of her house, and believing that she would find her said son in the road with other little ones and bring him back into her house, drowned in it, is found by his mother she searched, and did not find him, nor any other little ones near her house; and going further on, she asked her neighbours, namely Gilbert ^d le Neve and Geoffrey de Smalmedelke ^e,

witnesses sworn above and brought forward for the proof of this miracle, whether they had seen her said son passing then before them, or being with other children. And having received the answer from them that they had not seen her aforesaid son, she went together with the said two witnesses named by her to search for her said son through one part of the said place; and from the time she was seen to have gone out of her house to search for her said son, before she found him, so much time passed (as she answered when questioned) that she could have gone, as she said she believes, one mile. And when, searching for the child with the said two witnesses, she had returned near her house, she suspected that her said son had fallen into a certain water standing near her house, in which at that time the animals of that place were watered.

[16] And when the witness herself and the aforesaid Gilbert and Geoffrey had looked around for a little while, [while he is being mourned by his parents, two unknown horsemen arrive, one of whom] to see whether they could see the aforesaid John submerged in the said water, the witness herself saw him submerged, as she said, in the said water, with his face turned to the bottom of the water; and at once, clothed and shod, entering the said water, which was so deep that it reached up to the shoulders of the said witness, she drew her said son out of it, the said Gilbert and Geoffrey being present; and the said John was placed in the road near the said water in which he had been submerged; and the aforesaid Gilbert lifted the said child from the ground, with the feet raised up and the head hanging downward, so that the water might come out of the body of the said John ^f. Then, because the said John held his mouth closed, two horsemen coming up (she knows not who, nor whence they were), clad one in bluet, the other in pounacium* ^g, of whom one was of a black colour and the other reddish (as she indicated when questioned), getting down from their horses and seeing the said child dead, and feeling compassion, approached the said dead child. And the elder of them, drawing a thread out of his own purse, measured the said John, then naked and stripped of his own clothes, to St. Thomas de Cantilupe of Hereford, and called upon God and the said St. Thomas that he would restore life to the said John.

[17] he bids St. Thomas be invoked; And the witness herself and the above-mentioned Gilbert and Geoffrey, and of the neighbours up to twenty, as she judges (but as to their names she answered that she does not remember), on bended knees, with devotion, likewise asked God and the aforesaid St. Thomas that life might be restored to the said John; and many of them wept and said on bended knees the Pater noster and the Ave Maria and the Credo in Deum: and they stayed so long a time in the road with the said John after the aforesaid measuring, before any signs of life appeared in him as to motion, breath, warmth and the rest, that she could have gone one mile, as she believes. And although the horses of the said two horsemen who had come up had run away, yet the horsemen themselves would not go away from the said John, dead and measured, until he was raised to life ^h. Done in the said chapel of St. Catherine, there being present the said brothers Walter and John of the Order of Minors, and we the notaries of this process.

[18] and a little afterwards the child revives, After these things, on the morrow, the aforesaid Edith returned before the said lords commissaries to complete her deposition; and asked what signs of life appeared first in her aforesaid submerged son after the said measuring, she answered that first he opened one eye, and afterwards the other; she knows not, however, which of the said eyes he opened first. And after the opening of the first eye there passed, as she reckons, so much space as a man would have said the Pater noster twice, before he opened the other eye. And after the opening of both eyes he opened his mouth, as much time having passed from the opening of the eyes to the opening of the mouth as a man commonly sits at table to eat. And his mouth being opened, he did not speak nor cry; and the witness herself pressed milk from her breast into the mouth of the said John several times, and little by little, along with the said milk, water came out through the mouth of the said child. At length, with the feet straight up and the head of the said John hanging downward, the witness herself holding him up, water came out in great quantity through both passages from the body of the said John, which was filled with the said water as much as could be contained in the skin.

[19] and he sucks at his mother's breasts: then the miracle is solemnly announced. And the water having come out of the body of the said John, before sunset, by so much space as a man could have gone one mile, he nodding with his hand, the breast was given to him by the witness herself, and he sucked milk from the breast; yet the said John did not speak on the said Tuesday on which he had been submerged, nor on the following Wednesday; but on the Thursday immediately following, about the ninth hour, he began to speak, babbling, as he had been wont to try to speak before; yet he could not walk until the following Saturday ⁱ: the witness herself adding that on the said Saturday, for the showing of the said miracle, he was carried to the church of Hereford and placed upon the tomb of the aforementioned lord Thomas; and both in the said church of Hereford and in the parish church of the parish from which the said John springs, and in other churches and chapels near that parish church, when the said miracle was being made public, the bells were rung, and at the ringing of the bells the people of the places in which the aforesaid bells were rung came together, praising and glorifying God and the said St. Thomas, and giving thanks to them with devotion by reason of the aforesaid miracle.

[20] The witness herself also added that on the Sunday immediately following the day [Yet he was not suddenly restored to his former vigour, and he retained marks in his face.] on which he had been submerged, the same John was confirmed in the churchyard of the aforesaid parish church of Ledebury by the lord Richard ^k, bishop of Hereford. Item, asked after how much time, reckoned from the day of the aforesaid submersion and resuscitation, the same John had been in such vigour and strength of his person as he was before the aforesaid submersion, she answered that three weeks passed; and that from that time the same John had not, nor has he still, so good and lively a colour as he had before; and there still remain (as she said) some tokens in the eyes and nose of the said John by reason of the aforesaid submersion, not from the fall, but rather (as she believes) from the water, because he has in the said eyes and nose flesh in some part of it as it were greenish, mixed with a crosseus ^l colour, as she said. And the said John having been shown before the aforesaid lords commissaries and us the notaries of this process, and the brothers Walter and John undermentioned, and the said tokens, which were said to appear in the eyes and nose of the said John, having been diligently looked over, the testimony of the said Edith seemed in this to be consonant with the truth ^m.

[21] Thomas ⁿ, son of William of Doninghton ^o, a youth of sixteen years, Likewise another child drowned in a river asked to relate what he knew concerning the submersion and resuscitation of William, son of John de Lorimer, said that on a certain Sunday, eight or fifteen days before the instant feast of Blessed Michael, two years had elapsed [p]; the witness himself, by command of William of Doninghton his grandfather, going about high tierce [q] to gather wild apples for making sauce [r], passed by a certain running water which is called the Somergeld, and the said water runs near the place of Doninghton. And crossing the ford of the said water, distant from the house of the witness's grandfather as far as he would shoot an arrow with a bow, he saw certain red clothes beneath the water on the right side, and thought that some washerwoman had left the said clothes there. But looking more diligently, he saw with the said clothes the head of a little child, recently shaven; and approaching the said head and clothes, he drew out of the said water the above-mentioned William, son of the aforesaid John de Lorimer, submerged and dead. He was then about two years and a half old, as it seems to him. And laying him upon the dry land near the shore of the said water, he raised the cry, such as according to the custom of the country is wont to be raised when persons are found drowned or dead by accident or slain; and at the said cry all the witnesses brought forward for the proof of this miracle came together there [s].

[22] And seeing the said William dead, and the limbs of the said William stiff and the body cold as a stone, and that he did not move, nor draw breath, and held his mouth closed and his eyes open, and drawn out with his whole body already stiff and lifeless, they were very sorrowful: and Hugh De Atforton, a witness sworn above, measured him with a certain thread (he knows not from whom obtained), the witness himself seeing it, the said dead William, to St. Thomas of Hereford; and the said Hugh and the others standing by, on bended knees, asked God and the said St. Thomas that he would give life to the said William, saying the Pater noster and the Ave Maria in the best manner they knew. And the same Hugh, with a piece of wood fitted for this, opened the mouth of the aforesaid William, whose lips were drawn back and shortened: and he lifted him up by the feet, the head hanging downward, and water came out in a quantity, which quantity he could not describe, through the mouth of the said William. And when they had stayed with the said dead William in the aforesaid place for so long a time as a man could have gone one mile at a walking pace (as he judges), and no signs of life appeared in the said William, he was carried to the aforesaid house of William of Donington, grandfather of the witness himself; and because they hoped that he would be raised by the merits of the said St. Thomas, they made a fire around the little body of the said dead William [t].

[23] after prayers poured out by others to St. Thomas And when he had stayed in the said house until the hour midway between None and sunset, as it seems to him, then signs of life began first to appear in the said William, and he began to have a palpitation about the heart; and about the hour of Vespers he began to move his eyes and draw breath and move his limbs, and he seemed indeed to look askance at the bystanders with a twisted gaze, as though he were mad; and he had the said grim look with signs of fear, especially of water, for about eight days [u]; but on the morrow the witness himself saw, as he said, the aforesaid

William walking feebly; and two days passed from that time before he spoke and walked as before; and on the following Wednesday, as it seems to him, he [was] carried by reason of the said miracle to the tomb of the said lord Thomas in the church of Hereford. Item, asked at what hour and how the said William had been submerged, and where, and how great was the depth of the water, he answered that he knows nothing about the hour, nor how he was submerged; but he judges that he fell into the said water from a certain wooden and narrow bridge, which is made for crossing over the said water when they cannot cross by the ford because of the flooding of the waters; and at the sides of the bridge there were no rails [x] by which the said William, crossing by the bridge and looking at the water, being afraid or stumbling, could hold himself so as not to fall into the aforesaid water.

[24] he is called back to life. Now the water beneath the said bridge had then a depth of about four feet, and the bridge was raised above the surface of the water by five feet or thereabouts, as it seems to him; nevertheless the witness himself did not find the said William submerged in the said water beneath the bridge, but in a place distant from the bridge by seventy feet or thereabouts. Asked how great a depth the water had in the place in which he found the said William submerged, he answered that it had no more than one foot of depth; and he reckons that the course of the water running down through the aforesaid place in which he lay submerged had carried the aforesaid William from the bridge to the aforesaid place, and that it could not carry him beyond that place because of the shallowness of the aforesaid water. Item, asked how the aforesaid William lay in the water when he found him submerged, he said that he lay with his face turned to the sky, and that the water covered the whole face, and the water made a little ripple and was raised a little because of the obstacle of the body and clothes of the said William; for the said water, because of its own weakness, could not push the body of the said William further. Item, asked whether he had found the said William submerged in the middle or at the bank of the said water, he answered that it was in the middle [y].

ANNOTATIONS.

p Alice, mother of the drowned child, indicated the time and occasion of the submersion. She said that on the first day of the month of October two years and fourteen days had elapsed, that on that Sunday, being invited to dinner by William de Borwore in the township of Borwore, distant by one mile and a half from the township of Donington, in which is her husband's dwelling, soon after sunrise, before mid-Prime, because she was somewhat weak, she took her way to go to the place to which she had been invited. And when she was near a certain wooden bridge for crossing the water called the Somergeld (Camden calls it the Somergil), running down near the said place of Donington, having seen that the said William her son, then about two years and a half of age, was following her, taking a switch from a certain tree, she drove him back to her husband's house, and left him within the close of the aforesaid house; and having called Matilda de Harpton, then her maidservant, then eleven years of age or thereabouts, she charged the said maidservant to keep watch over the said William. And going on to the place to which she had been invited, she stayed there until near the hour of Vespers; and in the said place it was told her that the said William her son had fallen from the aforesaid bridge into the said water, and had been submerged there, etc. Under such a keeper, therefore, that child, ill watched and following his mother, fell into the river.

q The third hour corresponds to our nine in the morning.

r That is, seasonings, I think.

s See above, number 4, and what is said here at letter p.

t It will help to have confirmed all these things from the sworn testimony of Hugh de Atforton himself, who had a great part in them. After it had been said that Hugh had run up at Thomas's cry, and had found the child already drawn out of the water by him, it is added in the same place: And the witness himself (Hugh), lifting

the said William, dead and then having no sign of life in him, from the aforesaid sand, carried him to a certain open place or yard situated in the said place of Donington, and laid him upon the green grass in the said open place. And at the cry of the witness himself and of the aforesaid Thomas there came up all the witnesses produced above … and many others, men and women of the same parish. And when all the aforesaid and others who saw the said submerged William reckoned that he was truly dead, because no sign of life appeared in him, and he had his body cold, his limbs so stiff that they could not be bent, and his teeth violently clenched together, his lips drawn back, his eyes open, and the pupil of the eyes covered with a certain film, so that the pupil itself could not be seen, and there was no hope for them that the said William could rise again naturally, the witness himself said to the bystanders that God was working many miracles for St. Thomas of Hereford, and that they should measure the said William to the said Saint, and that they should ask him to ask God that he would send life to the aforesaid dead William. And the witness himself with a thread (he knows not from whom obtained) measured the said William to the aforesaid St. Thomas; and he and all the bystanders, on knees bent and bare upon the ground, many of the bystanders with tears, asked the said St. Thomas with devotion that life might be sent to the said William. And after the said measuring the witness himself, having violently opened the mouth of the said William with his hands, and having placed a piece of wood between his teeth, namely, so that the mouth should not be closed again, lifted the said William up by the feet, the head hanging somewhat downward; and through his mouth, namely, there at once came out water to the quantity of half a flagon, as it seems to him. Afterwards, stripping the said William, they brought him into the house of William of Donington, grandfather of Thomas, the witness last examined; and a fire having been made, they warmed the whole body of the said William: and when it was warmed on one side by the power of the fire, and they were warming it on the other, the part of the body first warmed became cold again, as before. And thus they stayed about the said child from the hour of Tierce, at which the witness himself had lifted the said William from the sand near the bank of the water, until the hour of None, before any signs of life appeared in him.

u The same Hugh testified thus concerning these things: And after the hour of None, by so much space as a man could have gone at a walking pace three miles or thereabouts, the witness himself put his mouth and his cheeks to the mouth of the said William, and put his finger within the mouth of the said William several times, and finally he pressed the said finger with his teeth, and he felt breath; and putting his hand to the belly about the heart of the said William, he felt the heart itself palpitate, as the heart of a man drawing breath palpitates; and from then all the bystanders, seeing the aforesaid signs of life in the said William, praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas, giving thanks to them. These things he testified on the 28th day of the month of September: but the day after, bidden to set forth his assertions more at large, he said that after the said palpitation of the heart the said William moved his eyes, and the film which covered the pupil of the eyes disappeared; and he looked at the bystanders with a grim eye, and a little before the said moving of the eyes he let out small wailings; but after the said moving and looking round the same William let out a great roar, and with the said roar he closed his eyes; and then the bystanders said that he was dead. But the witness himself, still feeling the palpitation of the heart and the breath of the said William, whom he held in his lap, said that he was not dead: and so the said William rested and stood Note: i.e. lay in the witness's lap, as he said, as though drowsy, for so much space as the witness himself would have gone one mile at a walking pace; and from the first palpitation of the heart and drawing of breath, first felt by the witness himself, until the movement of the said eyes, so much time passed (as he answered when questioned) that he could have gone two miles. Item, he said that when the said William had stood as though drowsy after the closing of his eyes in his lap for the above-mentioned space of one mile, he opened his eyes and looked at the bystanders; and he had a placid look, and was so well coloured that the witness himself had not seen him (as he said) so well coloured before the said submersion, nor has he seen it since. And the witness himself, seeing the said William living, asked him whether he wanted to have anything; and he answered that he did, bread and cheese. And they gave it to him, and he ate: and meanwhile they made him a toast, that is, bread roasted (or toasted) at the fire, and put it in ale to warm it, and gave him the said bread with the said ale. And when he had eaten and drunk, he recognized the bystanders and answered them; and thereupon he was put to rest. And the witness himself returned to his house, and did not see him thereafter for several days… But the said William is still alive.

x Appodiamenta, from the Italian appoggio, in Latin fulcrum a support. On the testimony of Hugh just praised, the aforesaid bridge was of wood and had been broken, and between the breaks of the bridge there had been placed a single beam, one foot and a half in breadth; and under the said beam ran the water, having a depth of about four feet, and from the surface of the water up to the said beam there were about four more feet. And he answered that he knows this because he has often fished (as he said) in the aforesaid place, judging that the aforesaid William fell from the said beam into the water, etc.

y Further, William's mother Alice, asked by the commissaries: Within what time after the resuscitation was the said William restored to his former soundness? answered that within a month after he had not been restored to his former soundness; nor does he yet have his former colour, and that he is still fearful when he sees bridges and water. Either to this or to the preceding miracle are to be referred these words of the bull of canonization: Likewise a certain infant of two years, submerged in a certain water and dead, drawn out thence, after a vow made for him was miraculously raised.

conversa*

MIRACLE IV.

Likewise another boy, drowned in a river, called back to life.

A boy of nine years, Nicholas, son of John the Fisherman ^a, seventeen years old, produced by master Henry, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, asked to relate what he knew of the miracle which is said to have happened in his person, said that on a certain Saturday, eight years or thereabouts having elapsed, but he knows not in what month, as it seems to him, at the time at which people commonly go on pilgrimage to St. Milburga in the priory of Wenlok ^b (he knows not of what diocese), and at the time at which men are wont to parch ears of corn in the fields and eat the grain rubbed out in their hands, the witness himself led a certain cow of his father's, red, white on the head, assigned to the witness's keeping, to a certain pasture near his father's house, about the field of the lord of the same township, which field is called the Lord's Croft ^c; and since the said cow was not fully tamed, and ran about more than the witness wished, and got into the corn ^d of the said lord, the same witness, wishing to hobble ^e the said cow with rings to be made from green withies, went to a certain place which is called Skedemeres Croft *, near the said field of the lord on one side, and on the other near the bank of the river called the Weye, running in the aforesaid place.

[26] wishing to get into a small boat alone, And because certain withies, from which he wished to make the said rings for hobbling the said cow, had been put by the witness's father in the boat or small craft with which his father fished, which small craft was in the river above-mentioned near the bank, tied with an iron chain, wishing to get into the said small craft from the bank, since the said bank was slippery, he slipped, and his feet giving way, he fell into the water between the small craft and the bank, and he felt himself to be a long while in the water under the said small craft, and that afterwards the water carried him; but he knows not what was done with him from then on; but at the hour at which the hens go up to the perch to rest for the night, he found himself in the house and in the bed of his father, and was awakened. Item, asked at what hour he had fallen into the said water, he answered that he had breakfasted, that is, had eaten in the morning, and that he fell into the said water about mid-Prime.

[27] having fallen into the river, he is afterwards raised; Item, asked whether he remembers that he drank in the said water after the aforesaid fall, he said that he did, beyond measure and his will; and it was reported to him that he had drunk more than a flagon of water. Item, asked whether he remembers having seen anything in the aforesaid water, he answered that he had then no leisure to see anything. Item, asked whether he thought of God and of the said St. Thomas or of other Saints while he was in the said water, and whether he asked that they would deliver him from the danger, he answered that he thought of God, and wished to ask him that he would give him grace to reach the land; and when he opened his mouth, the water came in; yet he does not remember, because he was then young, that he then had, or had before had, in memory the said St. Thomas or any other Saint. Item, asked whether he remembers having seen any men or any things from the time at which he felt himself to be under the small craft and that the water was carrying him, until that time at which he felt himself awakened in the bed and house of his father, he answered that he does not.

[28] which he himself testified. Item, asked whether he was devoted to the said St. Thomas, he answered that he was; because it is told him that he was measured to the said St. Thomas and raised by his merits: and therefore he says ten times the Pater noster and ten times the Ave Maria,

when he rises from bed, and afterwards many times, when he has leisure. Item, since the said Nicholas seemed in some degree languid, he was asked whether after the said submersion he had been well and sound as before; he answered that he had not, because before he had not felt heaviness in his body, but from that time he was frequently heavy and weighed down in his body about the heart; so that sometimes he could scarcely walk for one or two days. And because the said Nicholas was very simple, he was not questioned on further matters by the said lords commissaries: and he deposed in English, because he did not know how to speak in Latin, nor French, as he said. Done, etc.

[29] Namely, bidden by his father to fetch a withy from the boat, After these things John the Fisherman, father ^f of the aforesaid Nicholas, produced by the same proctor and asked to relate whether he knew anything of the miracle which is said to have happened in the person of the aforesaid Nicholas, his son, said that on the Vigil of Pentecost seven years had elapsed ^g, the witness himself, about sunrise, as he judges, had a certain red cow of his, having a white star on its head, led by the said Nicholas, his son, to a certain pasture near the Croft ^h or field of the lord of the township of Huecapel, which field, with a small space between, is adjacent to the river called the Weye; and the said son returned with the said cow to the witness's house after the hour of Tierce ⁱ, and ate bread and milk; and about the hour midway between Tierce and midday the said witness charged his said son to go and fetch a certain withy in the witness's small boat, which was in the above-mentioned river; and he went, and the witness himself remained in his house, reckoning that the said Nicholas was playing with his companions of the same age.

[30] Afterwards, about the middle hour, as he judges, between None ^k and Vespers, he fell into the river: the father, warned by another child, a certain little child of four years or thereabouts, son of a certain poor little woman begging in the said township of Huecapel, coming to the witness's house (as to the names of which little child and poor little woman he answered that he does not remember, nor knows where they now are), said to the witness himself that the aforesaid Nicholas his son had been submerged in the said river of the Weye; and at once the witness himself, running to the said river, in which river, beside the bank, was his small boat with which he fished, tied near the field of John Skydemore ^l, and in which small boat indeed the same witness had left the said green withy, from which withy the witness himself wished to make rings for hobbling the said cow, so that it should not run about through the corn; therefore * he had charged his aforesaid son, when he went away from his house, to bring him the aforesaid withy; he saw near the said boat, on the bank, the footprints of a person who, because of the slipperiness of the said bank, seemed to have fallen into the water of the river between the bank and the boat: and at once he thought that his said son had fallen from the aforesaid place and had slipped into the aforesaid water.

[31] And going along the bank, he looked around to see whether he could see his aforesaid son within the water; running thither, he draws him out, when found, with a pole hooked with iron, and while he went round, he saw near the place in which his small boat had first been tied, at forty feet or thereabouts, in a certain bay of water eighteen feet deep or thereabouts, a certain whiteness. And because his said son was, as a poor boy, clothed and wrapped in a certain white linen cloth, judging that it was he, having applied an iron hook ^m and a pole, he lifted and drew his said son up from the bottom of the water with the said hook and pole (which pole was eighteen feet in length, and could scarcely reach the submerged boy) to the bank, and found that he was dead. And when Lucy, wife of the witness himself, mother of the said Nicholas, coming up with Christina, daughter of Henry, a witness produced above and not yet examined, having seen her said son thus submerged and dead, and the witness himself afterwards, unable to bear the grief, their bowels being moved, had fallen to the ground as though lifeless, and at length, water having been poured on their faces, had come back to themselves, the said Christina, who had drawn the said Nicholas somewhat further from the aforesaid water, pouring and sprinkling the said water on their faces, the mother of the said child measured him, dead, with a certain thread to St. Thomas of Hereford.

[32] And the said mother asked God and the said St. Thomas, and, commending him to St. Thomas, he carries him home; with a great outpouring of tears, that she might have her said son alive; and the witness himself and the said Christina and Felicia Morker, witnesses produced above, asked the same also, on bended knees and with tears. And when he had been measured, the said Nicholas at once opened his mouth, which mouth indeed the witness himself had not been able to open before, even with a little knife applied, unless he had broken the teeth of the said Nicholas. The said Nicholas also, immediately after the said opening of the mouth, drew his arms to himself, which before he had held stretched out and so stiff that the said witness could in no way have bent the said arms before the measuring, unless he had broken those arms. Afterwards, the witness himself lifting up his said son by the feet, and the aforesaid Lucy the mother and Christina moving and rubbing the belly of the said Nicholas, water came out through the mouth of the said Nicholas to the quantity of two flagons, and after the water came out milk, which the aforesaid Nicholas had drunk before the said submersion ⁿ. And after the aforesaid the said Nicholas was carried by the witness himself and the said Christina in their arms to the same witness's house, and laid in the witness's bed.

[33] where, when he was believed dead, he himself called upon the Saint, And when he had stayed in the said bed for so much time as a man could have gone five miles at a walking pace, and no other signs of life had appeared in the said Nicholas except the aforesaid opening of the mouth and drawing in of the arms; and the witness himself still reckoned his said son dead, who had his whole body cold and stiff and palish, or livid after the manner of lead, and held his eyes open and veiled with a certain film, the witness himself, thinking of the burial of his aforesaid son, and that the body should be prepared for burial, having put two fingers to the eyelids of the said Nicholas's eyes, wished and tried to close the said eyes; and while he was holding the eyelids of his said son's eyes closed with his fingers, the son himself cried out, saying: Lady *, help; St. Thomas, help ^o, repeating the aforesaid words twice or thrice. And then the witness took his fingers away from the eyes of the said Nicholas: and the said Nicholas moved his eyes and looked round at the bystanders. And the aforesaid witness, having put and raised his own hand near the face of his said son, asked whether he saw; and he answered that he did, holding his hand. Then the witness himself moved his fingers, asking of his said son whether he saw what he, the father, was doing; and the answer having been given by the son himself that the said father was moving his fingers, the witness himself and his wife, who were then alone with their aforesaid son, praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas, giving thanks and immediately making the miracle known to their neighbours.

[34] [and he eats, and three days afterwards set out on foot to the tomb of the same Saint.] Which neighbours, seeing that the said Nicholas lived, likewise praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas, and gave thanks to them. Item, he said that after the aforesaid the said Nicholas, when he had thrice thrown up warm milk poured into his mouth by his mother with a wooden spoon, the said milk being poured into his mouth a fourth time, kept the milk down, and rested and slept until the second cockcrow, and from then, being awakened, said that he was hungry. And the witness himself, having prepared milk-food with fine flour, gave it to him, and he ate and fell asleep again until day; and then, being awakened, the said Nicholas dressed himself, sitting in the bed, and said to the witness himself, his father: Father, we are putting off too long going to St. Thomas. And on the Tuesday next following the said Nicholas on his own feet, with his father and mother and other neighbours, came to the tomb of the said lord Thomas in the church of Hereford; and they left their township, distant from Hereford by six miles, before sunrise, and arrived before the hour of Tierce. And inquiry having been made concerning the said miracle by the canons of Hereford, the bells were rung, the people gathered, a procession made, the miracle made known to the people, and the aforesaid Nicholas shown and displayed to the people, and there was singing, he knows not what. And all who came together at the making known of the said miracle praised and glorified God and the said St. Thomas.

[35] Item, asked at what hour of the day the said Nicholas moved his eyes and spoke after being drawn out of the water, The drowned boy's father, bidden by the commissaries, sets forth as he deposed above, he answered that it was about the hour midway between None and sunset. Item, asked of how many years his said son was at the time of the aforesaid submersion, he answered that he was nine years old or thereabouts. Item, asked for how long a time his said son had stayed submerged in the said river, and how he had been submerged, he answered that he does not know with certainty; but from probable conjectures he reckons that he fell into the water before midday, at about the hour midway between Tierce and midday. Asked what the aforesaid conjectures are, he said that about the said hour midway between Tierce and midday his said son went out of his house by his command to fetch the aforesaid withy, which was in the above-mentioned small boat; and Margaret Fraunceps of the township of Eneston, who was on the other side of the river, saw the said Nicholas coming to the said small boat, after he had gone away from the witness's house, and saw him then slip and fall into the aforesaid river; as she related to the aforesaid witness.

[36] Item, asked why the said Margaret Fraunceps did not come to the help of the said Nicholas, certain circumstances of the matter. or did not reveal this to others, he answered that the said water was so deep and so broad that in no way could the said Margaret have come from the other side of the water without a boat to the other side of the water, on which the said Nicholas had fallen; nor for two miles nearby was there any boat with which the said water could be crossed, except the boat of the witness himself,

which was tied with a chain on the side of the bank on which the said Nicholas was submerged: nor was there any bridge near there, except at six miles. And the aforesaid Margaret said to the witness himself that she had cried out many times and had not been heard. Asked on what day the said Margaret related the aforesaid to him, he said that it was on the morrow, when the witness himself was fishing in the aforesaid water; and that the said Margaret was betrothed to someone and taken away, he knows not where. Item, asked whether his said son was fully restored to his former soundness after the said resuscitation, he said that he remained for one year before he was restored to his former health, and even then he was frequently weighed down with pain about the heart [p].

ANNOTATIONS.

p The mother, questioned about the same thing (so again Papebroch here), answered that for a month he was not so strong as before; and that three years ago now he had suffered from an acute fever for seven days. Perhaps either here "month" has been put in error for "year," or in the testimony of the father "year" for "month." The other illness, or that acute fever, does not pertain to the matter. The memory of this miracle exists in the Bull of canonization in this manner: A certain boy of nine years, submerged in a certain river, after some had vowed him, drawn out of the water, to this Saint, was restored to life and to health alike.

al. Skecemstrot*

al. &*

al. Dulcis domina*

MIRACLES V, VI AND VII.

An infant, dead with his head crushed by a wheel, is granted life: two contracted women, at the Saint's tomb, obtain the use of their limbs.

The wheel of a laden cart crushes the head of a sleeping infant, Robert Russel, produced by the proctor and asked to relate whether he knew anything of the above-mentioned miracle ^a, said that on the fourth weekday in Easter week last past three years had elapsed ^b, that the witness himself, whose houses had before been burned for the greater part, was drawing earth out of the site of the said houses, which he has in the township of Elleffeld ^c, with a certain cart, which cart indeed, laden with the aforesaid earth, was drawn by four oxen of his, and he himself was driving the cart with Letitia his wife. Now it happened, shortly before the hour of Prime, while the said cart thus laden was passing through the site on which the witness's hall had formerly been, which had then been burned, that the aforesaid Geoffrey, his son, was sleeping on the above-mentioned site upon the hard and level and solid ground; and while the said cart was near the said Geoffrey, so that it was already in the act of mounting over the head of the said Geoffrey, the said Letitia, being on the other side of the cart, having seen her aforesaid son, and that the wheel of the cart had thus come near to the head of the said Geoffrey, and was thus directly to pass over the head itself, so that according to the course of nature it was necessary that the said Geoffrey should die from the crushing of the said cart, cried out, saying to the aforesaid witness: Our son is dead!

[38] And the witness himself, bending down and looking at the wheel of the cart, his parents looking on, who, when for his life which was on the right side and further from him, saw the said wheel pass straight over and come down upon the head of the said Geoffrey, then sleeping and having one ear and temple on the ground; and the said wheel passed over the other ear and temple, and came down across the eyes. And when the said cart had passed over, because the said witness had neither time nor a check with which to hold back the oxen or the cart, nor could he draw the child away before the passing of the wheel, the witness himself and the said Letitia, lifting their above-mentioned son from the said place, found him dead, and having in himself neither motion nor breath. But fearing that danger and loss might come to them from the royal court, because the said Robert and Letitia would have been imprisoned, and the oxen and cart and their other goods confiscated, if the accident had then been made public, they wished to conceal the aforesaid accident, and did conceal it as far as they could, and told no one, putting and hiding their said dead son in their bed, which was in the right-hand corner of a certain house of theirs which had remained unburned.

[39] had prayed to St. Thomas the rest of the day and night, And he remained in the said bed until the hour midway between None and Vespers; and the witness himself and the said Letitia, from the time they had laid him in the aforesaid bed, often feeling him and putting their hands about the heart and about the mouth and nostrils, felt no motion nor breath in him; and the body became cold and stiff, and had no sign of life in it. But at the said hour midway between None and Vespers, the witness himself, calling to mind that God was working many miracles for the said St. Thomas, measured, with the said Letitia his wife, their aforesaid son to the said St. Thomas; and both, on bended knees, with tears and devotion, asked God that for the love of the said St. Thomas he would send life into their aforesaid dead son, saying the Pater noster and the Ave Maria many times. And after the aforesaid measuring they stayed about their said son until twilight ^d, seeing or perceiving no signs of life in him even then.

[40] the same infant fully revived at dawn. And when they were still staying about the said child, persevering in prayer and devotion and hoping for the help of God and of the said St. Thomas, at the following dawn they heard a certain childish voice, which their said son uttered harshly and loudly, which voice indeed had no definite meaning except of pain or of horror, because the said son did not know how to speak, since he was then only of the age of one year and a half or thereabouts. And looking at him with a light, they saw that he opened and moved his eyes: and when the said Letitia had taken him into her lap and put her breast into his mouth, he sucked milk; and thereafter his mother cherished him until the third day. And on the third day he laughed, and walked, as before. His eyes, however, seemed livid and swollen, and the lividness appeared through all that part of the head over which the said wheel had passed; and the said lividness lasted for a week or thereabouts, and from then the said lividness went away for the greater part; yet something of the lividness and swelling remained in the upper part of the eyebrows of the said Geoffrey

until the feast of the nativity * of Blessed John the Baptist, then next following ^e.

[41] It is set forth how grievously his head was crushed. Asked whether from the said blow of the cart-wheel blood flowed out through the mouth, ears, nostrils, eyes, or through any part of the head of the said Geoffrey, and whether the skin and bones of the said head were broken, he answered that no blood came out except from the ear of the said Geoffrey which he held toward the ground when he was crushed by the aforesaid wheel; and the said blood did not flow from the brain, nor from the inner part of the head, but from the extremity of the ear; for beneath the ear of the said Geoffrey they found a little stone as big as a big nut, which had hurt the ear of the said Geoffrey, and the said little stone was found broken beneath the aforesaid ear; he knows not, however, whether the said breaking of the little stone happened with the crushing of the said Geoffrey, or before. But the skin of the head of the aforesaid Geoffrey was not broken; the bones, however, seemed to have been crushed by the pressure of the said wheel: for when they had put their hands to the said head, shattered and crushed by the pressure of the said wheel, they did not feel the hardness of bones, but as it were the softness of flesh; and after the aforesaid shattering and crushing the head of the said Geoffrey became thin and oblong, like some soft thing which had been pressed: but the witness himself, handling the head with his hands, brought it back, as best he could, to its former shape. And be it known that the said Geoffrey, as appeared on inspection to the said lords commissaries and to the undermentioned Brothers, and to us the notaries of this process, still has an oblong head, and the temples and above the ears somewhat pinched in, and a pointed head; yet no scar appears on his head.

[42] Sir Gilbert de Chevenigh, priest, perpetual vicar of the church of Great Markele ^f, A contracted woman, carried in a basket to the Saint's tomb, asked to relate whether he knew anything of the miracle which is said to have happened in the person of Juliana Kock ^g, said that, while he was keeper of the tomb of the said lord Thomas and vicar in the church of Hereford, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven it happened that on the day of the Parasceve Good Friday, at the hour of Prime, while the aforesaid Juliana was in the said church of Hereford in a certain basket of withies, in which basket she had been carried to the church of Hereford by Philip le Longe, a witness sworn above, and by a certain woman (whose name he said he does not know), that she might be miraculously cured there by the merits of the said St. Thomas, for whom God had worked four miracles in the said church in the earlier time.

[43] The said Juliana, seeing that a certain other man contracted in his feet, is suddenly healed; who was called Philip the Harper, and dwelt in the city of Hereford, and was in a certain other basket in the said church of Hereford, waiting there to receive miraculously the benefit of health by the merits of the said St. Thomas, had at the said hour of Prime, the witness himself seeing it, been miraculously cured and set upright, and had walked around the above-mentioned tomb without any support ^h; the said Juliana, being fired, and led by she knows not what fervour, by herself, without human help, came out of the said basket, in which she held her legs folded and sat bent; and having left the said basket in the place in which she was thus lying in it, but having pushed it a little away from herself with her foot, upright, without support and without any human help, not limping, at the aforesaid hour she came to the above-mentioned tomb ⁱ, and prayed there and offered there one penny, and related to the witness himself and to others, and especially * to Sir Henry of St. Albans, then keeper of the said tomb with the witness himself, and to master Roger of Sevenok, then canon of Hereford, both now deceased, that the said St. Thomas had told the said Juliana to rise and walk.

[44] Item, he said that when the said Juliana had related the aforesaid, but after the basket left in the church was asked back, having left the basket in which she had been carried into the said church of Hereford, she returned on her own feet to her house, which she had in the said township of Eton, distant by three leagues, as he believes, from the church of Hereford. The same witness, however, did not see her going on except as far as the gate of the house of the Friars Minor of Hereford; but it was commonly reported by Juliana herself and by others that she then went on her own feet to her said house, and made the aforesaid miracle public in her parish church of Eton on Easter day. Item, he said that he had it from common report that, the aforesaid Juliana having thus returned to her house, a certain neighbour of the said Juliana, who had lent her the aforesaid basket in which she had been carried to the church of Hereford, asked back the said basket from the aforesaid Juliana; and Juliana herself on the morrow of Easter sent to the witness himself a woman ^k, whose name he does not know, that he might send the said basket back to her by her; and the witness himself sent it back.

[45] [she is contracted again, and, carried back thither in the same basket, is healed anew,] Item, he said that he learned from Juliana herself and from common report that immediately when the said basket was carried back by the aforesaid woman to the house of the said Juliana, forthwith the said Juliana became contracted as before; and on the Tuesday following the same witness saw the said Juliana, contracted, carried back, he knows not by whom, in the same basket to the said church of Hereford about the hour of Prime, and saw her weeping. And in the said church of Hereford she remained thus contracted in the aforesaid basket all that Tuesday and the following night, and on the Wednesday and the following night. And afterwards, on the Thursday about sunrise, the witness himself seeing it, she raised herself and came out of the said basket, crying: St. Thomas, St. Thomas, I give thee thanks; have thy basket, and do with it whatever thou wilt. And she walked, coming to the tomb, and all that day she remained in the church, walking and praising and glorifying God and the said St. Thomas; and she was perfectly cured; and from that time the witness himself saw her for two years every week on the Tuesday come as a pilgrim to the tomb of the said Thomas; and she said that she came from her aforesaid house.

[46] and she returns home on foot. And the witness himself went with the said Juliana for one mile on the Friday after the aforesaid cure had been made , when she was returning rejoicing to her house; and then she did not carry a staff, nor when she came as a pilgrim, as he said before, to the church of Hereford. And she survived for twelve years, as he heard reported by many of the aforesaid parish of Eton, after the aforesaid miracle. Item, asked whether before the said miracle he had known that the aforesaid Juliana was contracted, and how, and from what infirmity, and for how long a time she had remained contracted, he answered that, while the witness himself, for two years before the said miracle, was a member of the household and almoner of the lord Richard, now bishop of Hereford, the aforesaid woman was carried in a certain basket four times at different times to the manor of the said bishop called Sugwas, near the said parish of Eton; and the witness himself gave alms four times * to the aforesaid Juliana, throwing the said alms into the basket, outside of which basket indeed he did not see her before the said miracle; nor did the witness himself test whether the said Juliana could walk or not; nor did he then see her feet or legs; but it was commonly reported that for nine ^l years before the said miracle she had remained contracted and had not been able to walk ^m. Item, asked of how many years the said Juliana might have been at the time at which the above-mentioned miracle is said to have happened, he answered that she was forty, as he reckoned, and more.

[47] John de Honymer, asked to relate whether he knew anything of the miracle Another woman likewise, contracted for ten years, which is said to have happened in the person of Margaret his mother, said that he had seen his said mother for many years sound and robust in body; but after the death of Adam, husband of the said Margaret and father of the witness himself, from whom the said Margaret had borne five children, the said Margaret on a certain night (he knows not in what year, nor from what cause) fell into a certain sickness, from which sickness indeed she was so affected and contracted that she could in no way walk, nor move herself from one place by herself without help. And thus she remained contracted almost ten years, and she felt such pain (as she said) as though she had been pricked with needles. Whence, when Joan her daughter, or other women, wished to handle her, because of the said pain she would not allow herself to be touched by hands, unless linen cloths or cushions were put between. She moved, however, her feet and legs, but could not support herself on them, nor had she outwardly in the skin or in the flesh any apparent injury; but with her hands and arms as far as the elbow she helped herself a little, and could sew, and she was so wasted that, when she was carried in arms, she was light like a child. And he said that he had often proved these things by carrying her.

[48] Item, he said that about the end of the ten years in which she had remained thus contracted, after various apparitions of St. Thomas, carried to his tomb the said Margaret related to the aforesaid witness and to the said Joan his sister many times that St. Thomas of Hereford, whom she had often seen when he was bishop of Hereford at his episcopal manor of Sugwasse, appearing, * on many nights seemed to stretch out his hand to her, and to signify that he wished to help her. Fired by these visions, she asked that they should carry her to the tomb of the said St. Thomas: which they put off fulfilling for two months and more, so that they might provide themselves with money, and that it might be a more convenient and better time. Item, he said that after the aforesaid (he knows not in what year ⁿ), on the day of the Ascension of the Lord, in the morning, the witness himself and the said Joan his sister, and Alice de Honymer, a witness sworn above, putting the said Margaret upon a certain horse, with cushions put between, brought her to the said church of Hereford on the same day about the hour of Prime, and, having taken her down from the horse, laid her near the aforesaid tomb on the right side; offering at his tomb a candle made on the thread with which the said Joan had before, in her house, measured her aforesaid mother to the said St. Thomas.

[49] This done, the witness himself, having left his aforesaid mother and sister in the said church of Hereford, she is restored to soundness.

returned to his house, and on the morrow in the morning returned to the said church; and then the said mother and sister related to him that on the aforesaid day of the Ascension of the Lord, and soon after the said witness had gone away from there, his aforesaid mother had begun to move her feet and some other members of the body, and that she had been led on foot to the tomb, and, supported, had gone round it, and was little by little and successively getting better. Item, he said that when he had returned to the said church on the said morrow of the Ascension, he saw his said mother standing on her feet near the tomb, to which she had been brought; and she walked by herself on the said day without support ^o, and she fasted until evening every day, and made her confession to master John de Brunsope, since deceased, then penitentiary of the bishop of Hereford; and on the following Saturday, after the hour of None, she returned to her house, distant from Hereford by three miles, with the witness himself and the said Joan and Alice, and along the level road she went on foot, and along the rest she rode. And after she was in the house, little by little she began to gain strength, and walked with a staff for eight days and more within the house, to the church, and afterwards walked without a staff to her fields and the plough and to the reapers, and worked, fully and perfectly cured, as before; without relapse [p] for ten years and more, during which, as he reckons, she survived after the said cure [q].

ANNOTATIONS.

p That is, without a return of the disease.

q Take now what Sir Gilbert de Chevenigh briefly testified concerning this miracle. He, asked to relate whether he knew anything of the miracle which is said to have happened in the person of the said Margaret, said that in the said year one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven (he does not remember in what month, on what day, nor at what hour), the witness himself, being in the church of Hereford, saw the aforesaid Margaret (he does not remember by whom) taken down from a certain animal, on which she had been brought, before the door of the church of Hereford which looks to the West; and, taken in the arms of those who took her down, she was carried through the church to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, and she prayed there for a long time; and afterwards, the witness himself seeing it, she rose and walked without the help and aid of any person, and gave thanks to the lord St. Thomas for her cure; but from that time he did not see her, nor had he seen her before, nor does he know from what sickness and for how long a time she had been contracted.

al. natalis*

al. magistro*

al. secundam*

al. quater* is lacking

al. quamdam*

&* is superfluous

perhaps ipse*

quem*

MIRACLES VIII, IX AND X.

A hump or swelling of the neck at once taken away at the Saint's tomb: a tongue given there to one without a tongue: a boy, dead from a fall, restored to life.

A long-standing swelling of the neck John Alkyn, a sworn witness ^a, asked to relate whether he knew anything of the miracle above-mentioned, said that he had seen the said John of Holaurton, and had known him for ten years before the above-mentioned miracle happened; and he dwelt in the aforesaid parish of Hammelacyn; he knows not, however, whether he was of the said parish, nor whence he sprang ^b, nor from what parents he was born: he was reputed, however, a good man, and at the time at which the said miracle happened he was (as he reckons) of the age of fifty years and more. Now the said John had behind his neck a certain red hump, as big as a large goose egg, and bigger ^c. And he saw the said hump hanging on the neck of the said John behind for ten years and more before the aforesaid miracle happened. After the aforesaid the said John, having heard that God, at the tomb of the said lord Thomas, had miraculously cured of madness Edith Oldecriste ^d of Hereford, came to the city of Hereford; and the said witness heard it publicly and commonly reported that, when the said John had been lodged in the house of Agnes de Porta, a citizen of Hereford, with one penny sterling which he already purposed to offer at the tomb of the said St. Thomas, to which, in the hope of a cure, by reason of the aforesaid miracle of the mad woman cured, he had arranged to come, he uncovered * and measured round the aforesaid hump.

[51] suddenly taken away at the Saint's tomb; And the witness himself, being in the church of Hereford (on the Monday immediately following after Easter, twenty years have elapsed ^e, as he believes), about the hour of Tierce, saw the aforesaid John with his hump in the aforesaid church weeping and approaching the tomb of the said St. Thomas, and offering one penny; and he saw him putting his head within a certain stone opening near the said tomb and adjoining it: and when he had held the said head within the said opening for so long a time as he could have said the Lord's Prayer three times with the salutation of Blessed Mary, he drew his head out from there, this witness seeing it, and drawing off his hood, feeling himself cured of the said hump, he searched for the said hump in his hood; and when he did not find it, drawing off the tabard ^f which he wore as clothing, he searched for the said hump in his bosom, and did not find it ^g. And giving thanks for this to God and the said St. Thomas, when he had stayed a little while in the said church, and there were, when the said miracle happened, more than a hundred persons, the people running after him and looking him over and praising God and the said St. Thomas, rejoicing for the aforesaid miracle, the witness himself seeing it, he went out of the church; and inquiry having been made by the canons concerning the said miracle, the bells rung, the people gathered and a procession made, the said John returning to the said church and being shown in the sight of the people, the above-mentioned miracle was solemnly made public, and there was sung first in the choir the Te Deum laudamus.

[52] which miracle was solemnly made public. And singing they went on to the tomb, and there they sang the Benedictus Dominus Deus Israel, etc. Item, asked whether after the miraculous cure scars or any other traces of the said hump had remained on the neck of the said John, he answered that he saw him on the said day immediately after the said cure, and on the same day presented the said John to the clergy and people when the said miracle was made public; and then, in the eight years in which the said John survived, he saw him almost once every week coming to the market of Hereford in the city, and on the neck of the said John the witness himself did not see after the said cure any trace of the said hump ^h.

[53] A youth born without a tongue, at the Saint's tomb Cysolda, wife of Richard de Thorgrymie, a rich citizen of Hereford, asked to relate whether she knew anything of the miracle for the proof of which she was produced, said that while she was in the township of Lodelawe (twenty years have elapsed, as it seems to her), there was begging in the said township a certain little boy, who was then (she knows not, however, of what age) and was said to have sprung from Wales ⁱ, she knows not of what diocese, nor of what parish, nor from what parents, nor by what name he was called. And the said little boy, in begging and asking for his necessities, uttered certain lowings, which were not significant of any English word; nor does she believe that they signified any language ^k. And in the said township he begged for many years (she knows not, however, for how many), nor did the witness herself see his mouth open, nor whether he had a tongue or not, before the said miracle which is said to have happened concerning him. Item, she said that she had heard it publicly and commonly reported in the said township of Lodelawe that the said little boy had no tongue at all ^l, and that he had come to the tomb of the said lord Thomas in the church of Hereford, and that miraculously, by the merits of the said St. Thomas, there had been given to him at the said tomb a certain little tongue, with which tongue he spoke, but not clearly, English and Welsh.

[54] Item, she said that after the aforesaid miracle she saw the aforesaid little boy, he obtains an imperfect tongue, who at the time of the said miracle had become, as she judges, thirteen or fourteen years old, begging in the said township of Lodelawe, and heard him speaking English not well, because he repeated his words twice or thrice before he was understood. And she heard him also speaking another language, which seemed to her to be Welsh ^m. She said also that she had seen the said tongue, which was said to have been miraculously given and fitted to him; and she reckons that it was as long and as thick and as broad as is an inch of the thumb. And he had a very great hollow in his palate, or in his throat, in such a place as are the roots or lower part of the human tongue, in which hollow a common hen's egg could be received. And the said tongue was not of so good a colour as is the human tongue; but it seemed to be as it were a morsel of other flesh. And she said that she had seen the aforesaid tongue in the church of St. Laurence of Lodelawe on a certain Sunday, many being present, whose names she does not remember; nor does she know in what year; nor does she remember whether she herself heard from him that he was called John; but she heard it reported by others that, having got his tongue, he said that he was called John.

[55] Item, she said that in the said church of St. Laurence it was then urged by her and by others upon the said John then, returning thither, he obtains one wholly perfect. that he should return to the said tomb, to ask the said St. Thomas anew for the receiving of a better tongue. And she heard it reported that he returned to the above-mentioned tomb, and that there he had miraculously received a better tongue. Item, she said that after all the aforesaid she saw the said John again in the same township in the same year, in the month of August, as it seems to her; and then she saw him having as fair a tongue, and as great, long and broad, as other men have. And she saw that that hollow which she had before seen in his palate or throat was filled up from the roots on the lower side of the said tongue; nor did there appear in the said tongue any middle join or division between the little tongue which he had first received and the aforesaid great tongue ⁿ. And she then heard the aforesaid John speaking English better than he spoke before; but he mixed the said English somewhat with the language of the Welsh ^o: and from that time she saw him many times with the said good and fair tongue, which * she knows not for how many years. And it was said that he afterwards went to the Holy Land.

[56] The aforesaid proctor delivered before the said lords commissaries a certain schedule of the content written below. The proctor of the cause produces various witnesses The aforesaid proctor intends to produce as witnesses the lords Simon de Watford, perpetual vicar of Conewye [p], Richard de Novo Castro Newcastle, chaplain of Blessed Mary of the same, John de Boys, steward of the castle of Conewye, Simon Fliut, John Seward, John de Gistyn, burgesses [q], and Liberius of Conewye, of the aforesaid diocese of Bangor, and Gervase the cook * and Dionysia Peyttenyn his wife, father and mother of the aforesaid Roger, of the same township and of the same diocese, in which the miracle written below happened, as witnesses. Namely, that the said Roger fell in the night-time into the depth of a certain ditch, in which he lay dead for some time, and by the merits of the aforesaid St. Thomas was miraculously raised to life; and he showed the said Roger in person before the aforesaid lords commissaries, and with the aforesaid witnesses.

[57] to prove the miracle of a boy raised to life, And immediately all the witnesses above-named and present swore, having touched the most holy Gospels, in the presence of the said proctor, to tell the aforementioned commissaries the truth concerning the aforesaid miracle and the things touching it, according to the form of the oath of the other witnesses registered above. And after the aforesaid oath the said proctor protested that he wished still to produce more witnesses of rank, placed in remote parts, for the proof of the miracle, if after the examination of the witnesses last sworn upon it it should seem expedient to the same commissaries. Item, the said proctor exhibited to the aforesaid lords commissaries certain letters patent for the proof of the aforesaid miracle, sealed, as appeared at first sight, with seals hanging, impressed in red wax, of the lords Anian, formerly bishop of Bangor [r], David, abbot of Abbertonewye [s], John de Havering, knight, William de Suthon, Cicon, Esthale *, Hugh of Leomunstre, and certain others whose names could not well be read on the aforesaid seals. Now the tenor of the said letters was this.

[58] which he also proves by the authentic letters patent of the bishop of Bangor Be it manifest to all the sons of holy mother Church that on the sixth day of the month of September, in the year from the Incarnation of the Lord one thousand three hundred and three, it happened at the castle of Conewye in Wales that a certain infant of the age of two years and three months, whose name was Roger, the son of a certain serving-man of the castle whose name was Gervase, and the name of his mother Dionysia, the same boy fell in the night-time, in the first hour of the night, from the bridge of the same castle down to the bottom of the ditch, cut in strong and very hard rock; naked he fell, and naked he lay in the ditch upon the rock until the morrow about the middle of the hour of Prime: and the height from the bottom of the ditch up to the bridge is twenty-eight feet. And when the coroners [t] of the same township had come on the following day to inquire concerning that misfortune, they find the boy dead. Afterwards a certain John de Seward *, burgess of Conewye, came to the dead body, and took a penny from his purse, and with the same penny made the sign of the Cross on the forehead and upon the breast of the boy, vowing to God and to Blessed Thomas de Cantilupe, of good memory, formerly bishop of Hereford, that, if God by the merits of the same Blessed Thomas would raise the boy, the same infant would visit the threshold of the same Blessed Bishop Thomas.

[59] and of others, he proves by letters patent. This done, as it were in the twinkling of an eye, the boy revived, blessing the Most High . At once the boy was restored to his mother, and the mother showed him her breasts, and at once he sucked his mother's breasts, and after a little the boy was cheerful and rejoicing, without any hurt to his body. And the people and the clerics of the church, running, hearing and seeing this marvel, took the body and brought it to the church, singing the Te Deum laudamus, there being present the venerable fathers, the lord Anian, bishop of Bangor, and brother David, abbot of Maynam [u] of the Cistercian Order, who were then in the same church, celebrating the divine offices for the soul of the lord John de St. John [x], of good memory, on the day of his anniversary. Of this miracle the witnesses are the lord John de Haveryng, William de Suthon , William de Cicons , knights, who are of the council and household of the illustrious lord Edward, son of the king of England and prince of Wales; the lords Thomas of Cambridge , Hugh of Leoministre, and Thomas Esthale , clerics, who are of the household and council of the same lord prince; the lords Simon, vicar of Conewye, Richard de Novo Castro, Roger of Bruges and Thomas Dynbey, priests, serving the aforementioned church, dwelling in the same township; and besides these more than two hundred men and women, who saw the aforesaid boy dead, and afterwards raised to life. And for the perpetual memory of this miracle the seal of the venerable father, the lord bishop aforesaid, and the seal of the same abbot, together with the seals of the knights, priests and clerics aforesaid, have been appended to this writing. Given at Conewye on the seventh day of September in the year of Grace above-mentioned [y].

[60] Sir Simon de Watteford, perpetual vicar of the church of Conewye, This boy, having gone out of the house at night after his parents, a witness sworn above, reported on his oath to the aforesaid lords commissaries that he had cited all the witnesses produced, together with the vicar himself, for the proof of this miracle, according to the form of the mandate made in writing by the same lords commissaries to them. Item, asked whether he himself was vicar in the said township of Conewye at the time at which the said miracle is said to have happened in the person of the aforesaid Roger, he answered that he was, and that he was present in the aforesaid township, and the vicar himself was then thirty-one years old. Item, asked to relate the truth of the above-mentioned miracle and its circumstances, he said that he had baptized the said Roger, sprung from his parish, of the father Gervase, cook * of the lord William de Cycons, constable of the said castle of Conewye, and of the mother Dionisia de Paytefin, witnesses sworn above.

[61] Now when the said Roger was two years and three months old, and searched for in vain among the neighbours and was staying in the house which his mother inhabited in the township; and often from the said house, not distant from the castle more than a stone's throw or thereabouts, went into the aforesaid castle, in which his aforesaid father was staying with the aforesaid constable, it happened in the year of the Lord's Incarnation one thousand three hundred and three, on the sixth day of the month of September, that the said Roger (as his mother reported) remained in his mother's house in bed asleep, while she went, the said night not yet come, at twilight, to the church of Blessed Mary of the said township on account of the obsequies of Gerard de Spinee, a serving-man of the said constable *; and he believes that the mother of the said Roger passed the whole of that night in the above-mentioned church. And when morning had come, returning to the house and not finding the said Roger in the bed, his aforesaid mother searched for him (as was said) through the above-mentioned township, and could not find him [z].

[62] Item, he said that on the morrow, namely on the seventh day of September, as the witness himself was going out of the said castle, in which he was staying with the aforesaid lord constable and with John de Boys, a witness sworn above, on the next day, in the morning, he was found dead in the ditch of the castle, John de Gistyn, also a sworn witness, told the aforesaid constable, John de Boys and the witness himself that the aforesaid Roger was lying dead in the ditch of the said castle beneath the bridge. And all four likewise going on to the said bridge, they saw the said Roger lying beneath the bridge naked upon the rocks, and upon the hoarfrost that lay frozen upon the rocks; and the said hoarfrost appeared somewhat frozen upon the body of the aforesaid Roger. Which seen, the said John de Gistyn, by command of the aforesaid constable, went down into the ditch to see whether the above-mentioned Roger was dead; and, they seeing it, he felt the body of the aforesaid Roger, and lifted him from the rock in his hands, and told them that he was dead; and to the witness himself and the other aforesaid it seemed from his appearance that he was dead, because he neither cried nor uttered any sound, and he appeared stiff, holding one leg straight and the other bent.

[63] and by the royal officers, after diligent examination, And when the said John de Gistyn wished to draw him out of the ditch, the aforementioned John de Boys told him that he should not do so until the royal coroners came, to whose office it pertains, when anyone is found dead by accident or slain, to inquire concerning the said death; and without them a person dead or slain ought not to be lifted from the place in which he is first found dead or slain; and then the said John de Gistyn left the said Roger in the place in which he had found him [aa]. Item, he said that after the aforesaid Stephen de Ganvy and William of Nothingham, royal coroners, and William, clerk and scribe of the said coroners, the aforesaid accident having been signified to them by the aforesaid constable, who were then in the aforesaid township or near, came, the witness himself being present, to see the said Roger lying in the ditch. And they went down to him in the ditch, and touched and felt him, inquiring, as pertains to their office, whether he had any wound, of which wound indeed they are bound, according to their office, to reduce distinctly into writing the length, breadth and depth, for reporting to their superiors; and they did not find any wound in him, nor breaking of any limb, nor of any bone, nor shedding or issue of blood, nor breaking of the skin. He had, however, on the left jaw, on which he lay and which clung to the rock, when the witness himself had seen him before the coming of the coroners, a great bruise; but in no other part of his body did there appear in him any other sign of hurt violently inflicted on him or received by him. And this the same witness said he had seen, being on the aforesaid bridge, while the coroners were looking round and doing the above-mentioned: and after the aforesaid the aforesaid witness went away from there.

[64] held for dead; but after a vow to St. Thomas made by a bystander Item, he said that he had heard it publicly and commonly reported that when, after the aforesaid, the said coroners, being in the same ditch, had withdrawn themselves a little from the body of the said Roger, so that, sitting, they might frame the inquisition and have written what pertained to their office concerning the aforesaid, there came up John Seward, a burgess of the same township, unaware of the prohibition made by the coroners themselves that no one should go down into the ditch, going down and approaching the said Roger, and feeling him and finding him dead, with a penny drawn

from his purse he made the sign of the Cross on the forehead of the said Roger, asking St. Thomas de Cantelupe, for whom God was working miracles, for the resuscitation of the said Roger, and vowing that the said Roger would visit on foot the tomb of the same St. Thomas, if by his grace it should come about that the same was miraculously raised. And after the sign of the Cross and the vow uttered, the mouth of the said Roger having been opened by him, the aforesaid John Seward saw, as was said, his tongue palpitating a little, and said this to the aforesaid coroners and to the other bystanders, giving thanks for this, together with the said bystanders, to God and St. Thomas.

[65] And when after a little while the said Roger had moved his right arm a little, he revived and recovered. the coroners ceasing from their inquisition, he was given back to his mother: and when she had put him to her bare flesh and had held him beside the fire, and several other signs of life had appeared in the said Roger, he was carried about the hour of Prime to the church of the said township, in which the lord Anian, bishop of Bangor, was then celebrating the obsequies for the noble man, the lord John de St. John; and there were with him in the said church all those named in the above-mentioned letter, exhibited by the proctor of the chapter of Hereford for the proof of this miracle and registered above. And on the same day the witness himself spoke with the same Roger about the hour of None, and he did not seem to feel any pain, and appeared as cheerful as on former days, and he walked about his mother's house, but not so well as he had been accustomed; and he still had the bruise on his jaw, which bruise little by little in the following days went away altogether, and the said Roger after three days walked as before [bb].

[66] Asked how the said Roger had died, Certain circumstances of the matter and from what cause, in the said ditch, he said that he did not know with certainty, but the people of the said township then publicly and commonly were of opinion, and said that they believed, and so they are still of opinion and believe, and the witness himself is of the same opinion and believes, that the said Roger, having gone out of the house of his mother, who was then in the church, leaping naked from the bed after the manner of an infant, wished to go into the castle and go to his father, as he had often been accustomed to do, in the aforesaid castle; and because between the township and the castle there is a bridge over the said ditch, which was then raised at night, the said Roger, not noticing that the bridge was then raised, nor perhaps being able to see well, since it is believed that it was then night, fell into the aforesaid ditch, and that he perished by the fall. And to strengthen the aforesaid he said that there supported it the saying of Nicholas, son of the lord John de Havering, knight, who that night had lain in the said castle near the bridge, and on the morrow reported publicly that in the said night he had heard the cry of a child, as it were falling into the said ditch, about the first part of the night; and that he had not heeded it, because he had heard no further wailing or crying.

[67] Item, asked whether from the disposition of the place through which there is access from the township to the aforesaid bridge, and the circumstances of the place are set forth. and of the place in which, before the coming of the coroners, he saw the said Roger lying in the aforesaid ditch, it might be conjectured visibly and probably that he had fallen into the said ditch in wishing to cross the aforesaid bridge, he answered that it might, most of all because he was near the wall standing on the side of the township and beneath the aforesaid bridge. Item, asked whether the distance and height of the bridge to the bottom of the ditch, in which he saw the said Roger lying dead, is so great and of such a kind that, falling from the place from which he reckons him to have fallen, he could and must naturally have perished by the fall, he answered that it is: for he measured the said height to the bottom in which the aforesaid Roger lay, and found that it had twenty-eight of his feet, with a little cord hung from the top of the bridge to the bottom of the ditch: adding that a certain serving-man of the said castle, by name John, in former times, as is publicly reported, had perished in the said place by a fall from the bridge into the aforesaid ditch, in which there is no water, nor mud, nor earth, but rocks hollowed out for the buildings of the said castle [cc]. Item, asked whether the said Roger, before the aforesaid happened, had ever gone down into the said ditch by himself by that way by which the aforesaid coroners went down, or another, he answered that he had not; nor could any child of the age of which the aforesaid Roger then was go down [dd].

ANNOTATIONS.

other men have; and he showed the said tongue publicly, and put it out of his mouth a good two fingers in breadth. And for this those who saw and heard the above-mentioned miracle praised and glorified God and the said Saint, and the witness himself together with them; and from this their faith and devotion was increased. That the relations of these witnesses may be reconciled, it must be said that the first obtaining of an imperfect tongue was unknown to John Bute, and that between this and the obtaining of the complete tongue that youth returned within a few days to the parish of Lodelawe, and thence again to Hereford, and thence once more to Lodelawe; so that that half year, during which he is said by John to have stayed at Hereford to obtain a tongue, was interrupted only by a few days, and at the times assigned by the lady Cysolda he could be seen and examined in the same parish.

p It is, or certainly was, a township and castle in Wales, of the diocese of Bangor, as we shall see below.

q That is, as I think, inhabitants of the same castle.

r Bangora or Bangoria, in the vernacular Bangor, is an episcopal see in North Wales, suffragan to the archbishop of Canterbury.

s It must be read Abercon-Wey, which in the Monasticon Anglicanum, tom. 1, page 918 and following, is said to have been an abbey of the Cistercian Order founded in the territory of Carmarthen, which is a county of England in Wales, and which is recorded as having already from the year 1198 been transferred thence to the place Maynan; whence the praised David is called below at number 59 abbot of Maynan of the Cistercian Order.

t Hear Henry Spelman in the Glossary at the word Coronator. With us (he says) the officer of the Crown is very ancient, appointed in each county by the votes of the people to guard the peace and the royal dignity. Formerly not less than a gilded knight; but, his power being diminished today, four are commonly elected, who chiefly give their labour to inquiring into homicides. Over them all presides the chief justice of the king's bench; who therefore also is held the Supreme Coroner of England.

u Consult the Annotations here at letter s.

x In the preliminary Commentary, §1, I said that Agnes, the sister of St. Thomas himself, was married to Robert de St. John, and that from these was born John de St. John, whose anniversary day may be indicated here.

y Here I find it noted that after these things there are recorded in the process fairly lengthy depositions of the aforesaid witnesses, which I do not have except that of Simon de Watford or Watteford, which I subjoin here for a clearer knowledge of the miracle.

z What Simon relates here about the mother properly pertains to the father, from whose testimony Papebroch excerpted certain things, which, although they are rather long, yet have seemed to me worth communicating to the reader. Gervase the father, questioned concerning the same miracle, said that on a day about the next Vigil of the feast of Blessed Mary, which feast is before the feast of St. Michael, four years had elapsed, that he went by night (namely in the evening twilight, as his wife testified) to keep vigil there (in the church) on account of the funeral rites of Gerard de Pyneye, a serving-man, and of Cecilia Domitale, wife of Sir William de Cygnon, constable of the said castle; and when he went to the said church, he left in the house which his wife inhabited near the castle, at a stone's throw, his aforesaid wife and Wenthliana, a maidservant of the said castle, and the said Roger bound in the cradle, as infants are bound, and Agnes, seven years old, and Ysolda, nine years old, his daughters; and he went away from the said house, all the aforesaid being left in it, between night and day. And when the night had gone further on, so that a man (as he reckons) could have gone one English league, his aforesaid wife with the aforesaid Wenthliana came into the said church to keep vigil about the funeral rites of the said Cecilia, because she had served her in the infirmity of which she had died; and she left in her house her said daughters sleeping in one bed, and Roger in the cradle. And in going away from the house they drew the door after them; but they did not fasten it with a lock or other fastening, because there was no fastening on the outside of the said door, and because the church was near the house, at a stone's throw; but on the inner side of the door there was a closing of the door with a bolt or bar; but the said daughters did not put it to, as they reported to him. Item, he said that he, having left them in the church, when he had stayed there for so long a space of time as a man could have gone at a walking pace four English leagues, went out with a lighted candle in his hand, returning to his house, and found the door of the house open, and the two daughters sleeping, and did not find Roger: yet all the cloths with and in which he had been bound in the cradle had remained in it, with his clothes. And thinking that he had gone out of the cradle and gone out of the house, he searched for him in the neighbourhood, and especially in the houses which master Thomas, the physician, and William Godefreay then inhabited; and all had gone to sleep, because a great while had already elapsed; and they answered that they knew nothing of Roger. And judging that one of the neighbours had taken him into his house, he returned to the church, and told his wife that he had not found Roger in the house. And she answered that she would not go out of the church for the whole night. And when after the aforesaid Gervase had stayed there until midnight, and was troubled, he returned again to search for him with a light, as before; and he did not find him, neither in the house, nor in the road, nor elsewhere: and because it was so late an hour, he would not wake the neighbours, and returning to the church, he stayed there until sunrise. And after sunrise, as he was returning to the aforesaid castle, Sir William the constable, meeting him, asked where he had stayed that night; and it being answered by him that it was in the church, on account of the vigils of the aforesaid funeral rites, the aforesaid William told him that he had kept ill watch over the guarding of his son, who was lying dead in the ditch of the castle. Now let us return to the testimony of Simon.

aa Thereupon the boy's father Gervase came thither, as has been said, who, as is read again in his testimony, when he also asked … of the aforesaid constable that he might draw him out, he did not permit it until the coroners of the lord prince of Wales had come; and approaching the ditch on the side of the township, but not entering, he saw Roger lying in it beneath the bridge, on one side; and he lay quietly crosswise, and he did not see that he had anything beneath him but rock; and he was naked, and held one leg straight and the other bent. And because his wife, having learned of her son's death, was as it were put out of her senses, leaving the body of Roger he went to direct and console her, who was being held by the neighbours, lest

she should throw herself into the ditch with her son. For the wife Dionysia herself testified that, when, returning home from the church, she did not find her son in it, and because of the aforesaid was weighed down by excessive grief and, because of the vigils, by sleep, she slept until broad day, for so much space as one could have gone (as she reckons) one mile; and then John de Giffon, coming to her house and asking where Roger was, she answering that she did not know, said that he was lying dead in the ditch of the castle: and when for grief she had fallen to the ground, and was as it were out of her mind, she was seized, bound and held back by the neighbours, so that she should not go out of her house.

bb Let us hear the mother again testifying of these things. When she (the mother) had stayed in her house almost until the hour of Tierce (that is, until our nine in the morning), Roger was brought to her; and it seemed to her that he was still dead, because she felt no breath, although she had put her tongue within the mouth of the said Roger, which mouth was so cold that because of its coldness she could not keep her tongue in it for long without harm. And the clothes of the said Dionysia having been torn from the upper part down to the girdle, the said Roger was placed in her bosom to be warmed: and when she had held him thus for some while in her house, she carried him in the same bosom to the parish church, and sat with him before the Cross, many standing by; and she believed that there were more than two hundred there. And when the said lord Anian, sometime bishop of Bangor, had celebrated Mass in the said church, coming to Roger he made on him Note: i.e. illi the sign of the Cross with his thumb on the forehead: the said Roger looked at him terribly; and the said Dionysia felt the same Roger in her bosom then for the first time move one elbow, and his heart palpitate very quickly. And then she cried out, fearing that because of the said palpitation he must die again; but seeing that he lived, she praised God for it and the sweet St. Thomas of Hereford, giving thanks to them: and those standing by did the same. And on the same day he could stand on his feet, and about Vespers he sucked the breasts, and from then within the third day he walked. Item, she said that because of the aforesaid fall there came upon the same Roger, in the first week after the resuscitation, pain and swelling in the right eye, so that he could not see with the said eye, and humours tending to scab on the right jaw, on which he was said to have lain when he was found dead in the ditch; and he still had the said swelling and the said scab when, for the sake of devotion and for the making public of the said miracle, within three weeks, he was carried by the witness and her husband to the tomb of St. Thomas, there coming together then the same lord William de Cyconis Note: above Cicons, constable, John de Havernige Note: above Havering, Hugh de Lemunstre Note: above Leomunstre, clerics then of the prince of Wales. And when he had stayed in Hereford for one week, and was being brought back to the township of Coneweye, he was perfectly cured of the said swelling and scab before he had gone forty miles, namely English ones, away from Hereford.

cc That is, I think, that the rocks had been cut out from there for building the castle.

dd This miracle is read inserted in the bull of canonization in this manner: Another infant, not yet of the age of two years, found dead at the bottom of a certain ditch, into which place he is asserted to have fallen by night from a bridge of great height, wholly cold and stiff, without any sign of life, measured to this Saint, was marvellously restored to life. For "not yet of the age of two years" must be read "not yet of the age of three years"; for from the testimonies stated above that child was then of the age of two years and three months.

detexit*

sed*

i.e. coquum*

al. Thomæ Esthale*

al. Ssiward*

al. Benedictus Altissimus*

al. de Button*

al. de Cinton*

al. de Cantebregge*

al. Castalle*

al. de Kugges*

coquo*

add ivit*

MIRACLES XI, XII AND XIII.

Sailors snatched from the peril of imminent shipwreck: a frenzied woman restored to a sound mind: a man twice hanged, restored to life from the gallows.

Twelve Irish sailors, coming to the Saint's tomb, After these things, on the second day of the month of November, the aforesaid lords commissaries being in the above-mentioned chapel of St. Catherine for the carrying out and examination of this business, there came to them John Bateswayne, of the parish of Donotly, Alexander son of Walter, of the parish of [Milton, William son of Adam de Virly, of the same parish; Adam de Lenesdale, of the parish of] Neweton, of the diocese of Down ^a, Matthew Carpentary, John de Lydel, Alexander son of Gamaël, John son of Nicholas, James son of William, John son of William, John son of Thomas, and John son of Margaret, of the parish of Knocfergose, of the diocese of Gorguen., of the province of Armaten., of Ireland ^b. And when they related that they had lately been miraculously delivered from the perils of the sea by the merits of the said St. Thomas, and had for this reason come to the tomb of the said lord Thomas as pilgrims *, the aforesaid lords commissaries, by virtue of their office, the lord Gilbert, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, being present, received from them an oath, the most holy Gospels having been touched by them according to the form of the oath of the other witnesses registered above in the process, to speak and relate the truth to the same lords commissaries concerning the fact which they ascribe to a miracle, and concerning all things touching that fact, and other things which should be asked of them.

[69] testify that, tossed on the sea in a most violent storm, After which oath the said lords commissaries charged them, in virtue of the oath taken by them, that one or two of them who knew best should relate the fact, the others being present, and with their consent should set forth those things which they wished to explain concerning the fact which they ascribed to a miracle. For the relating of which Alexander son of Walter, sworn above, was deputed by all the others. Which Alexander indeed related that he and all the others sworn above, and moreover Martin le Nottoverne, master of the ship, the noble Colt of Knocfergose, Hugh le Napesiller, Thomas son of James, owner of the ship, Isaac le Wyth, Richard de Ives, of the parish of Knocfergose of the aforesaid diocese of Coiguen. ^c, on the second day of the month of October last past, set out, and, having boarded the ship of the aforesaid Thomas son of James, with sail raised, from the sea-port called Senit Guwes ^d in Cornwall near the borders of England ^e, wishing to go with the said ship laden with hides and wool into Gascony ^f, to bring back wine from there. And when they had been on the sea until the hour of Vespers, having quite good weather ^g, there came upon them then a contrary wind with a storm of the sea, which all that night drove them over the sea at hazard against their will: and this was on the Monday ^h.

[70] And on the following Tuesday the wind and storm began to grow so strong with the ship already giving way, that all despaired of their life; and each of them, since they had no priest in the ship, confessed his sins to his companion ⁱ, believing with probability that about the hour of Vespers the peril of death and of the breaking of the ship hung over them; since the said ship was being driven by the wind and storm directly toward land, and according to the lie of the said wind and of the place in which they were, and toward which they were being driven, the aforesaid ship was bound to strike with the said storm upon certain rocks, and, according to the aforesaid disposition of place and time, necessarily to run upon them and be broken, and they consequently to be drowned there. And they did not know in what region ^k they then were; and the mast on which the sail was hung *, because of the violence of the storm, was partly split, and the ship so shaken that water came in through the bilge and through its other parts in such quantity that two of them could not suffice to draw the said water out of the aforesaid ship; because, notwithstanding this, there was in the said ship so great a quantity of water that it reached almost up to their knees.

[71] And when they were set in the said peril, all with one accord asked God and St. Thomas de Cantilupe the same Saint having been invoked by a vow, they escaped safe. to deliver them from the said peril, and the owner of the aforesaid ship vowed, if they were delivered from the peril, that he would carry to the tomb of the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford a silver ship, with which he is to come, as he said, shortly, with the others named above and not sworn, to the tomb of the said St. Thomas; and all who were in the said ship likewise vowed that they would come to the said tomb as pilgrims; and they said the Pater noster and the Ave Maria many times: and at once, the vow having been uttered, about the hour of Vespers, the wind was changed and the storm calmed. And they raised the sail; and with the said wind they were on the morrow, namely on Wednesday, about the hour of None, prosperously brought to a certain muddy harbour in the place which is called Sancto Despol ^l, of the diocese of Bath, where no other ships had landed, so far as was known: and the said ship remained there so shattered that it could not be sailed with thereafter. And all the persons and things that were in it were saved miraculously by the merits of St. Thomas, as they firmly believe, to whose merits they ascribe and have ascribed their said deliverance; and for this they came barefoot as pilgrims to his tomb, praising and glorifying God and him for it, giving thanks to them; and from this they were (as he said) made more devout in faith and firmer.

[72] A vision which one of them had had at that time. Item, he said that Alexander son of Gamaël, sworn above, reported to them, after they had gone out of the ship * sea, that, the vow having been uttered, he had seen in the ship two in white, who seemed to him to be in the form of men, but he did not see their faces, because they held their backs toward him; and one stood on one side of the mast or tree carrying the sail, and the other on the other, and immediately they disappeared. And the same Alexander, under the oath taken by him, asserted to the aforesaid lords commissaries that he had seen the aforesaid vision

had had, but because of the excessive terror which he had he did not then report it to his companions until they had gone out from the sea; nor does he know who the aforesaid two were whom he saw in white. The aforesaid two were asked, and also all the others sworn above, who approved the deposition of these two, read and set forth to them, and asserted under their oaths that the things related by the above-mentioned were true, except concerning the vision, of which they knew only through the report of the said Alexander son of Gamaël. Asked whether the said lord Thomas is commonly reputed a Saint in Ireland by all people, and whether God works miracles for him, as for a Saint, in those parts, all answered that it is so, both on sea and on land, in all kinds of infirmities and perils; and that therefore many come from those parts as pilgrims every year to the tomb of the said St. Thomas ^m.

[73] A frenzied woman, bound with fetters, Robert, ironmonger, asked concerning his wife Edith ⁿ, answered that she became mad, in the coming Lent, about the beginning, it will be twenty-one years ^o, and never before had she been mad, so far as he knows; and she had then been his wife about two years. And the said madness befell her (as he reckons) because she ate little and drank much; and on a certain night in the first week of the said Lent (he knows not, however, on what night of the said week) his aforesaid wife, lying with him in bed, began to tear him with her hands; and seeing her ill disposition and the delirium of her speech, for she was cursing her neighbours without cause, and was very drunk, he left the bed to her *. And on the morrow, when she appeared out of her senses, and cried out like a madwoman, he had her bound with linen cloths, and hired Alice le Longe and Emma de Ravense Wath [p], his neighbours, since deceased, to keep watch over her: and so he kept her under guard in his said house, bound, until the week before the week of Palm Sunday. And in the said time she was continually mad, nor did she have lucid intervals, and she did not sleep except by snatches, and ate little, and drank water or weak ale.

[74] carried to the church of Hereford, And she cried out, uttering foolish and delirious words; but he does not remember that * she blasphemed God or the Saints: and he believes that she was possessed, but yet he did not see that she was carried or moved from place to place, nor that she did any act by the power of evil spirits. Item, he said that in the said Lent, his aforesaid wife being set in the said madness, he, by the counsel of his neighbours, measured his said wife with a thread to the holy Cross of Hereford and to the holy Cross of Wistanton [q], of the diocese of Hereford, and had two candles made of the fourth part of a pound of wax on the said thread; and with one of the said candles he had his aforesaid mad wife carried to the altar of the Cross in the church of Hereford in a basket by the said two women, hired by him for the keeping of his said wife, for five or six days (as he reckons) before she was cured. On which days she remained continually bound in the said church, except when she was eating; for then the bonds of her hands were loosed, and she was held by the said two women deputed for her keeping.

[75] Item, he said that on the Thursday before Palm Sunday his aforesaid mad wife after she had stayed in it some days was (he knows not by the counsel of what cleric) moved from the pulpitum rood-loft of the church of Hereford, in which is the altar of the Cross, and in which she had lain for the four or five preceding days, to the chapel of Blessed Mary in the same church, in which chapel the bones of the said St. Thomas were then resting; because the said cleric had said that she would be cured there by the merits of the said St. Thomas [r]; but on the same day (he knows not for what cause) she was carried back about the hour of Vespers to the said pulpitum, and lay there that night [s]. Item, he said that on the morrow, namely on Friday morning, he carried one of the candles made on the thread with which he had measured his said wife to the said holy Cross of Wistanton, and offered the said candle at the said holy Cross well after sunrise and before the hour of Prime; and as he was returning to Hereford, he heard the great bells of the church of Hereford being rung: and then he asked God that the said ringing might be for the cure of his aforesaid consort.

[76] And John Slaybrond, of the parish of Maudin, meeting him, told him by the help of St. Thomas she is restored to a sound mind. that his said wife had been cured by Bishop Thomas; for then he was not called Saint. And coming to the church of Hereford about the hour of Prime, he found his said wife cured, and saw her raising her hands at the elevation of the Body of Christ in the Mass which was then being celebrated at the altar of the holy Cross, and the candle, which had been brought to the church of Hereford for the cure of his said wife, and had then been put away in the treasury of the church of Hereford, as was said [t]… Item, he said that, the aforesaid Mass which was then being celebrated at the altar of the holy Cross being finished, the aforesaid women, keepers of his wife, related to him that she had said that God and a certain bishop, namely St. Thomas, had saved her; and that the candle had been lit from heaven [u]. And in the same basket in which she had been carried to the church she was carried back by the said women to his house; because she was weak and could not walk. First, however, the miracle was made public in the church of Hereford, as was said. Item, he said that in the said weakness, being unable to walk unless she were helped and supported by others, his said wife lived in a sound mind and without madness, yet in weakness and infirm, until the feast of St. Peter's Chains [x] or thereabouts, and then died, and was buried in the churchyard of the church of Hereford. Done in the said chapel of St. Catherine on the fourth day of the month of November, the said Brothers and we the notaries of this process being present.

[77] William Aprees [y], otherwise called Crah, that is, Hanged from the gallows, and then taken down, Tinginosus, of Swayneseye, of the diocese of St. Davids, asked to relate whether and for what cause he had been hanged, answered that, it being laid to his charge by the aforesaid lord [z], under whom he was then dwelling, that he had killed thirteen men, he was taken by the said lord and imprisoned in the castle of the said baron called Swayneseye; and when he had remained thus taken and imprisoned for fifteen days, and inquiry had been made with him by the lord of the said castle, and he had not confessed the said homicides, because he had not committed them (as he said), nor had he been convicted by others, no sentence of death having been given against him, he was (on the Monday after the instant feast of Blessed Martin it will be fifteen years) about the hour of Tierce, by the witness's own kinsmen, namely by Griffin Weil and by Ad. Ap. Gryfin and Ythel Fachan [aa], since deceased, and many others, led, by command of the father of the said William de Brewes, to the gallows set upon a certain lofty hill near the said castle at the fourth part of a mile or thereabouts.

[78] he revived through the patronage of St. Thomas, And about the said hour of Tierce the above-mentioned Ythel, his kinsman, with a certain cord thicker than is the knotted cord which the Friars Minor commonly carry in their girdles, brought from the castle by the witness himself to the said gallows, hanged him; he knows not, however, what kind of knot he made in the said cord with which he hanged him; and after his hanging Trahern Ap Howel [bb], of the parish of Lanredensis of the said diocese of St. Davids, who had been led with him to the aforesaid gallows, was forthwith (as he heard reported) hanged after him on the same gallows and on the same beam; and at once the aforesaid Trahern Ap. Howel, as was said, was dead after his hanging. And he being dead, the beam on which they were hanging was broken (he knows not how, nor into how many parts), and both the hanged men fell to the ground: and then the witness himself did not feel the said fall, because he believes that he was dead: he did feel, however, the noise when the other was hanged; and he heard it publicly and commonly reported in the said parish after the aforesaid that on the same day he was hanged again on one leg of the said gallows; but he himself felt nothing of the aforesaid hanging, nor does he know for how long a time he remained, nor at what hour he was hanged the second time [cc]. Done in the said chapel of St. Catherine on the sixth day of the month of November, Walter and John being present in all things which were done this day, and the aforementioned Brothers John and Maurice at the oath of the witnesses received concerning this miracle and at the deposition of the aforesaid William, and we the notaries of this process.

[79] who had appeared to him before in prison After these things, on the morrow, the said William, returning before the aforesaid lords commissaries to continue the course of his deposition, was, by command of the aforesaid lords commissaries, asked through the aforesaid Brothers John and Maurice as interpreters whether the same William had been dead, as he deposed above that he believed, when, where, how, and by whose merits he was raised to life. And he answered that he had heard it reported publicly and commonly in the said township that about cockcrow [dd] after the hanging signs of life appeared in him; he himself, however, after he felt the noise when the other was hanged on the same beam, did not feel that he had life until the morrow about the hour of None. Asked whether before the said hanging, or from the time of the hanging until he recognized the bystanders, or from then on, waking or sleeping, he had had any vision or revelation concerning or from any Saint, or the dead, or those things which are in the other world, he answered that on that day on which he was hanged, as he slept in prison after cockcrow, it seemed to him that Blessed Mary was in the said prison with a certain lord, and it seemed to him that she was covered with precious stones, with a white stole on her head; yet she did not carry her Son in her arms, as her material images represent: but of that lord who was with Blessed Mary he answered that he does not remember what clothes he wore.

[80] And when the aforesaid Blessed Mary had thus appeared with the said lord, with the Blessed Virgin Mary, the said Blessed Mary asked

in whose sight all those imprisoned with the said William seemed to be, who were thirteen in number, whether William Aprees was among them; and the witness himself, who is called by that name, answered that he was; for he himself was the said William. And then Blessed Mary said that they should all go up by a certain ladder which seemed to be placed there opposite the above-mentioned Trahern Ap Howel, who namely on that day, all the others having been freed from the prisons, was hanged with the witness himself and died on the gallows. And then the said witness again asked of the aforesaid Blessed Mary what should be done with the above-mentioned Trahern Ap Howel; and Blessed Mary answered: Leave him. And after these things the said witness again asked of the aforesaid Mary who that Saint was who had come with her; and she answered that it was St. Thomas, who would free him. And then the said witness had it in his mind (as he said) that St. Thomas of Hereford had freed him.

[81] And asked why he had understood it rather of St. Thomas of Hereford and whom he had therefore constantly invoked, than of St. Thomas the apostle or the archbishop of Canterbury, he answered that it was because before * that time he had been a pilgrim to the tomb of the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford, and on that day on which he was thrust into prison he bent, according to the custom of England, a penny sterling in honour of the said St. Thomas, that he might free him, and he hid the said penny thus bent in his breeches [ee]; and as long as he remained in prison, and when he was led to the gallows, and while he hung on the gallows, he had with him the said penny thus bent; and while remaining in prison and when he was led to the gallows, he always, in his heart and with a loud voice, so that he could be heard by those who were present, invoked the help of the said St. Thomas, and had hope that he would free him. Asked whether any of the thirteen imprisoned had had the said vision, as he had, he answered that he does not know. Item, asked whether he related the said vision to the other prisoners on that day, he answered that he did not; but after his resuscitation he related it to all who were willing to hear, many times and often.

[82] Item, asked what followed concerning him after he was raised to life and to whom he had been commended. and recognized the bystanders, he answered that he had heard it publicly and commonly reported that, he having been hanged, the lady of the said castle asked of the aforesaid lord William de Brewes, her husband, who had had him hanged, that he would give her the body of the said William, so that it might be buried in the churchyard; and the lord granted it to her; and therefore, when he had been taken down from the gallows on which he had been hanged the second time, he was carried by his kinsmen to the church, and since they could not go into the church, he was carried to a house near the church, which was Thomas Thuathei's ; and then the aforesaid lady had him measured to the said St. Thomas. And because he was raised to life, and had been given to the lady, he was not hanged further: he was, however, sick for one week and more; and afterwards the lord and lady of the said castle came with him as pilgrims, by reason of the said miracle, to the tomb of the aforesaid St. Thomas, and offered there certain funras of wax, and the rope with which he was hanged, which he brought sewn * to his neck.

[83] From the testimony of another, that William John de Bageham, asked to relate whether he had knowledge of the said William Crak, and whether he knew anything of the miracle which is said to have happened in his person, said that for many years he had known the said William and had seen him before he was hanged; and from then on he has seen him, and he is the one who swore above with the said witness concerning this miracle, who is called William Crak; and that he was born in the parish of Laridiry, of the diocese of St. Davids, of a father called Res; the name of his mother he said he does not know. Item, he said that, while the witness himself was in the service and household of the said lord William de Brewes (sixteen years have now elapsed), the aforesaid William Crak was taken, because he was said to have taken part with many others in the attack upon and burning of a certain castle of the said lord called Ostremue [ff]; and for this he was imprisoned in the castle of the said lord called Sweyneseye. Afterwards in the same year, on the Monday after the feast of Blessed Martin, when the said William was to be hanged on the same day, and one other, called Traheit ab Howel [gg], was to be hanged with him, the aforesaid lord William de Brewes, so that those to be hanged might not be carried off by their friends and kinsmen, had ten horses and ten horsemen armed, of which horsemen the witness himself was one.

[84] having fallen with the beam of the gallows from which he hung, And about the hour of None [hh] they were led by them to the gallows of the said lord, standing in a certain lofty place, distant about the fourth part of a mile from the said castle. And at the said hour Griffin Woyl *, the uncle, David Assa, the first cousin, and Ythel, a kinsman of the said William Crak, compelled by the lord, the witness himself seeing it and being near the foot of the gallows, hanged the said William on the crossbeam of the said gallows with a certain cord; he did not notice, however, where the knot of the said running cord, with which he was hanged, was applied to the neck of the said William: and immediately when he had been hanged, the ladder by which he had gone up to the gallows was taken away from him, that he might die at once. And when the said William had hung on the said gallows for so much space (as he judges) as a man could have gone the fourth part of a mile, and had emitted through both the lower passages the superfluities of nature which are emitted by the hanged when they die after hanging; and the said William was reckoned dead by the witness himself and by the others there present, and none of the friends of the said Traharn, who was a noble, had arranged anything with the lord concerning the ransom of the said Traharn, on account of which ransom they had somewhat put off hanging the said Traharn after the hanging of the said William, the executioners of the said township, deputed to such offices, hanged him on the same crossbeam on which the aforesaid William had been hanged.

[85] and he was hanged again. Then his body And forthwith, when the ladder had been taken away from the said Traharn, and he had stretched himself out, the said beam was broken of itself in the middle, and both the hanged men fell to the ground. And he reckons that the said beam was broken because of its weakness; and the witness himself saw both, when they had fallen from the said gallows to the ground, dead, as it seemed to him; but because of the disgrace to the kindred of the aforesaid hanged men, and because, according to the custom of the country, they ought not to be removed from the gallows without the lord's leave, before the witness himself and the other armed men had gone away from the aforesaid place, they had the said William and Traharn hanged again, one on one leg of the said gallows, and the other on the other. And after the second hanging the witness himself, who was steward of the household [ii] of the aforesaid lord, returned immediately to the castle, and signified to his said lord that the aforesaid had been hanged and were dead. And because the lady Mary, wife of the aforesaid William, had asked for the body of the said William (he knows not for what cause), having heard that they were dead, the said lord granted to his aforesaid wife the body of the said William.

[86] And the lady asked the witness himself that, returning in haste to the aforesaid gallows, given to the lady baroness de Brewes, he would have the said William taken down from the gallows and carried to the township. And returning, he had the cord with which the said William was hanged cut off; and his body fell to the ground. And he ordered that he should be carried to the township, and saw that he was carried on the ladder by which he had gone up to the gallows: and his body being left there, he returned to serve his said lord, who was then at dinner in the aforesaid castle. Asked whether, when he returned to have the said William taken down from the gallows, he saw in him any signs of life, he said that he did not; nay, he believes that there was as much * life in him as in a stone. Item, asked who were present at the said hanging at the gallows, he answered that Henry Pellissarius the Skinner, a witness sworn above but not yet examined; Henry de Scorlage, Roger de Heve, who were of the said armed men, and many others, since deceased.

[87] Item, he said that on the same day, when the said lord had eaten, which lady, when she had had it measured to St. Thomas the aforesaid lady, before she would allow the witness himself to eat or drink in the said castle, handed him a thread taken from the purse of Margaret her daughter, and charged him to go forthwith to measure the aforesaid William with the said thread to St. Thomas de Cantelupe. And the witness himself, going, found the body of the said William in a certain house of Thomas Mathi, near the church, on the ground, face upward; and his eyes hung out of the eyelids and their hollows, just as he had sometimes seen the like in some other hanged men. And he had his tongue thick, livid, in part outside the teeth, violently pressed and hurt by the teeth themselves: and he felt no breath in him, nor any sign of life, although he felt his body along with others, who all, feeling and seeing him, said and reckoned that he was dead; of whose names he said he does not remember, because the whole house was full of men and women.

[88] In whose presence, stretching out the arms of the said William, and had heard that some sign of life had appeared in him, with her daughter he measured his breadth with the said thread to the aforesaid St. Thomas; and he and the greater part of those who were in the aforesaid house, on bended knees, asked God and the said St. Thomas that they would put life into the said William, so that he might do penance for his misdeeds; and they said the Pater noster and the Ave Maria. And soon after, so that a man could have gone, as he reckons, one furlong, or the eighth part of a mile, the said William moved one of his feet a little (he does not remember which), and drew breath, as it were snoring. Which seen, the witness himself then ran to announce it to the aforesaid lady who had had him measured; and he reckons that it was then about the hour midway between None and sunset. And when the aforesaid lady rejoiced at the said signs

of life, and the said witness had said to her that she was rejoicing over an evil; for it was an evil that so evil a man should be raised to life, the aforesaid lady, going with the knights and squires and other members of her husband's household and her own to see the said William, measured him again to the said St. Thomas, the witness himself seeing it, with another thread, and Margaret her daughter after her measured him with another thread to the said St. Thomas, praying for his life.

[89] measured him again, and afterwards brought him to the Saint's tomb. And before the mother and daughter measured him, they perceived that he was drawing breath; and after the measuring by the mother and daughter the eyes of the said William, which were hanging out, the mother and daughter themselves, the witness and the others who were in the house seeing it, were drawn back of themselves into their hollows about sunset, and he closed the said eyes and kept them closed for so much space as a man could have gone one mile, as he reckons; and afterwards he moved and opened his eyelids; but he did not recognize people, nor did he speak. After which the said lady, and the witness himself with her, returned to the aforesaid castle, and on the morrow in the morning they went back to see him, and found him in a better state, and he seemed to recognize the bystanders; but he did not speak. And the worthy lady had care taken of him, and had broths of almonds prepared for him. And on the following day the witness himself heard him speaking; and when he had lain some days (he knows not for how many) and had been cured, after a month, as he reckons, from the time of the hanging, the said lord and lady de Brewes brought the same William on foot, by reason of the said miracle, to the tomb of the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford, from which the said castle is distant three days' journey [kk]. And after the resuscitation he has not heard that the said William committed any wrongdoing. Item, asked whether he knew or had heard it reported that the aforesaid William Crak, before his hanging or while he hung on the gallows, had had any vision or revelation from or concerning any Saint, he answered that he had not [ll].

ANNOTATIONS.

p I do not know what this abbreviated word signifies.

q This place is otherwise unknown to me; but probably both in it and in the church of Hereford there was then some Cross renowned for miracles.

r Perhaps to this refer the things which Papebroch noted from the assertion of some witness whom he did not name. Because some had said that the said bones (of St. Thomas) had dripped blood when they were brought from the place in which he had died, passing through the lands of the archbishop of Canterbury, to the church of Hereford; and hoping from this that she would receive health there by the merits of St. Thomas, the father and mother of the same Edith had her carried to the said chapel; and they encircled the said place in which the said bones were resting with a certain thread, on which one candle was made by Alice le Longe.

s The cause (on the testimony of Papebroch) Robert Coke, one of the witnesses, alleged: because the ministers of the church, who then, for the guarding of the church, lay in the sub-sacristy of the church near the choir, were excessively disturbed by her shouting and crying, reckoning that they would be less disturbed by her because of the height of the said pulpitum.

t There is a lacuna here in our manuscript, which I cannot fill from elsewhere.

u Consult the testimony of the lord Gilbert, at the place cited at letter n.

x This feast is celebrated on the Kalends of August; and Edith will have been cured on the 24th day of March, and so she survived in possession of her mind only four months with a few days.

y In the Rubrics concerning the miracles he is called William son of Apnees, and concerning that subject one reads thus: Rubric of the proof of the twelfth miracle which in the book is called the thirteenth, made at Hereford, concerning this, that William son of Apnees, of the parish of Swaynesey, of the diocese of St. Davids, who is surnamed by some William Crach, that is, Tingnosus (I do not understand this word), was hanged on the gallows and died (as is reported), and by the merits of the said St. Thomas was miraculously raised; for the proof of which miracle indeed Thomas de Guynes, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, produced as witnesses the lord William, the lord Thomas, priest, John de Berham, Henry Pellipar, Adam de Rowame, John Apenon, all of whom he said were of the aforesaid parish and diocese. The same proctor, asked in virtue of the oath taken by him whether he believed the said miracle to be true, answered that he did; and because the above-mentioned William Apnees did not know how to speak in the lettered tongue (that is, Latin), nor the English idiom, nor French, but only Welsh, as was said, the same lords commissaries, for setting forth to the same William the articles of the oath to be taken by him, and for receiving the deposition to be made by him, employed Brothers John the Younger and Maurice de Pencoyt, conventuals in the house of the Friars Minor of Hereford, who were said to have sprung from Wales, and to understand and know how to speak the Welsh idiom. Which Brothers, having touched the most holy Gospels, the said proctor being present, swore faithfully to set forth to the said William those things which should be said to them by the said lords commissaries, and faithfully to report to them the answer and deposition received from him, and to keep it secret until it should have been lawfully published Note: add processus. After which, the articles of the oath of the other witnesses registered above having been set forth in Welsh to the said William by the said Brothers, and in English to the other witnesses above-named by the lord bishop of London, all the aforesaid witnesses swore, etc.

z This was the lord William de Brewes, a baron.

aa Thomas Marescalli, priest, a sworn witness, says that they did this compelled by the aforesaid lord baron. And by parentes understand not progenitors, but blood-relations or kinsmen by marriage, or, as the same Thomas puts it, of the kindred of the said William.

bb The praised Thomas, priest, calls him in the same way, adding that he was a nobleman.

cc These things, which William, being hanged, could not know, Thomas the priest, an eyewitness, set forth, speaking thus: And when the said William had been hanged, and those who were hanging him were drawing one part of the little cord with which he was hanged, so as to tie him to one of the legs (that is, to one of the side posts) of the said gallows, the aforesaid crossbeam was broken, and he

William, who was hanged on the said crossbeam, fell to the ground… And when he had fallen, almost forthwith, so that (he reckons) a man would not have gone more than a hundred feet, the said William was hanged again on one of the legs of the said gallows. And afterwards, when he had seen him hanged again, the said witness (namely Thomas the priest himself) went away. And he heard it publicly reported in the said township that he had been taken down from the said gallows about the hour midway between None and sunset, and was then dead. He had, however, stated before that the same man was hanged about the hour of midday.

dd Understand the evening cockcrow; but just below, the morning one.

ee That is, in his breeches.

ff Neither the castle of Ostremue, nor the parish of Laridiry above, nor many other places, both those named above and those to be named hereafter, have I been able to find; I believe that they have in part long since been destroyed, in part now go by other names, and in part also have been faultily written in our copies.

gg Above he is constantly called Trahern Ap Howel; but below, Traharn.

hh There seems to be an error here in the hour: for None corresponds to our three in the afternoon, and yet Thomas the priest, cited at letter cc, says that he was already hanging about the hour of midday.

ii The steward of the household is the officer over the food and drink, or the table, of his lord. The French say le Maître d'hôtel.

kk A dieta is a journey of one day.

ll Concerning the same miracle the Apostolic commissaries wrote to Clement V that the proctor of the cause seemed to them to have proved the resuscitation … of one man hanged twice, and of a certain woman (concerning whom see what is to be said below) hanged once.

rather peregrinos*

i.e. pendebat*

&*

i.e. illi*

perhaps quod*?

perhaps circa*?

below Mathi*

perhaps furcas*?

perhaps insertam*

al. Weil*

tanta*

MIRACLES XIV, XV, XVI AND XVII.

Sight restored to a blind woman: a hanged woman kept among the living: boys, one blind in both eyes, the other in one eye, suddenly cured: a woman contracted in her limbs, set upright.

A woman blind for more than ten years, John Alkin, several times sworn and produced in this process, asked to relate whether he had had knowledge of the aforesaid Agnes ^a before she was blind, answered that he had known her for forty years and more elapsed, because they were born and lived in the same parish; the names of her parents, however, he does not know. And he saw her for fifteen years and more having sound eyes and seeing well. Afterwards he saw the said Agnes for ten years and more led to the aforesaid church of St. Martin on Sundays and feast days to hear the divine office by a certain girl, the daughter ^b of her daughter (whose names he does not know; the said girl, however, is now the wife of a certain seller of fish in Hereford, whose name also he does not know), as persons who do not see are led. And he himself was in the house of the same Agnes for three continuous years every Sunday to minister holy water to her and to others in the said house. And he saw many times that she did not know how to walk unless she were led; but she did not have in her eyes wounds, abscess, swelling, spot or sickness apparent which the witness himself knew how to discern *. And she was reputed a good woman, and abounded in temporal goods; so that she would not have feigned anything in the aforesaid for the sake of begging or gain: and it was then said publicly and commonly in the said parish, in which she was known, that she was blind.

[91] persevering at St. Thomas's tomb, she receives her sight. Item, he said that when God had begun to work miracles for the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford, the aforesaid Agnes came to the tomb of the aforesaid lord Thomas in the said church, and he saw her there on three days, and heard it also reported that she had lain in the said church three nights, and that she had been measured to the said St. Thomas. And on the morrow, namely on the quindene of Easter, twenty years have elapsed, before the hour of Tierce, having heard that she had been miraculously given light at the tomb of the said St. Thomas, the witness himself, who in that interval had been busy arranging the procession to be made in the church itself on account of the solemnity of the day, running up to the tomb, found her having sound eyes and seeing. And she recognized him, calling him by his own name; and she was brought to the said procession, and, the bells being rung, the clergy and people gathered, she related that she had been given light by the merits of the said St. Thomas; giving thanks for it to God and to him *, together with these, and praising and glorifying them: and the Te Deum laudamus was sung. From which things the same witness was made more devout and firmer in faith, believing the same of the others: nor does he judge that any fraud or contrivance, superstition or invocation of demons was present in the aforesaid, but only the grace of God and of the said Saint, working beyond the strength and power of the nature of the said Agnes ^c.

[92] John Alkyn, often sworn and examined concerning other miracles, A woman, measured to the Saint while she was being led to the gallows, asked to relate whether he knew anything of the aforesaid ^d, said that he had not known the said Christina before the hanging; but he heard it publicly and commonly reported that the aforesaid Christina dwelt in the said parish of Welinton; and that a certain strange pig had mixed itself with her own; and that she had sold the said pig, long kept and not asked back by others, with her own. On which charge, having been denounced to the royal court, she had been imprisoned in the royal castle of Hereford, and for this adjudged to hanging. And it was said publicly and commonly in the said city that she had been measured by her children at the entrance of the prison to the said St. Thomas. Item, he said that (on the Saturday after Pentecost it was thirteen years) the same witness saw the aforesaid Christina being led to the gallows: and when she was near the church of St. Martin in the suburbs of the city of Hereford, she made her confession, he seeing it, to a Friar Minor, whose name he does not know; and she was measured again by her son and daughter with a thread to the said St. Thomas: and this was before the hour of None by so much time (as he judges) as a man could have gone one English league.

[93] And thence she was brought to the gallows, near the said church, at the fourth part of a mile, to be buried after the hanging, she is discovered alive. as he reckons: the witness himself, however, did not follow her to the gallows, but heard it publicly and commonly reported that without delay she was from then led to the said gallows, and hanged on them before the hour of None with a cord by the neck, and that she had died on the said gallows before those departed who had led her to the hanging with ten others hanged after her. And that she had remained hanging on the said gallows until the hour of Vespers; and when at the said hour, according to the custom of the city of Hereford (according to which it is lawful to bury in the churchyard the hanged, removed from the gallows after they are dead, if they have been of the confraternity of the hospital of St. John, of which the aforesaid Christina was), her friends and son and daughter had gone to take her down from the said gallows, and had carried her on a certain bier ^e, bound with the cord with which she had been hanged, as far as the church of St. Martin, to the place in which she had made her confession and been measured, a certain woman of the parish of St. Martin, whose name he does not know, the witness himself being present and hearing, cried out that she had seen that the said Christina had moved one foot, and that * she should be brought into the said church of St. Martin.

[94] And when she had been brought, he seeing it, into the church itself, helped, as she herself said, by the same Saint. and, removed from the bier, placed in another place, she spoke ^f and gave thanks to God and the said St. Thomas, asserting to the royal justices and others who had come together to the said church that the said St. Thomas de Cantilupe had held her up by the feet, while she hung on the said gallows, so that she should not die ^g. And it was said publicly that after the aforesaid she remained in the same church of St. Martin for three weeks, not daring to go out, lest she be taken again by the royal justices: and afterwards, according to the custom of the kingdom, having taken a cross in her hand, and in the presence of the said justices, she went, having abjured the kingdom of England ^h, as she said, into Ireland; and from that time he did not see her.

[95] A boy, from a certain infirmity wholly blind for two years, Margaret, sometime wife of Robert de Kylpek, asked to relate in order what she knew of the blindness and enlightening of her two sons Adam and Roger ⁱ, said that it is now twenty-five years that the witness herself bore the aforesaid Adam on the feast of the Nativity of Blessed Mary; and he had fair eyes, and saw for almost three years; and after that pain of the head and infirmity of the eyes came upon the same Adam (she knows not how; for he received no blow, nor wound), and he had so much pain that he could not rest; and evil humours flowed out of his eyes, and sometimes the eyelids of the said eyes were closed: then the eyes themselves swelled, and, pus being gathered in them, the eyelids opened again. And the said infirmity so prevailed that for two years the said Adam did not see light, nor any material visible thing, as she said she had often proved.

[96] and his brother, deprived of one eye, Item, she said that she bore the aforesaid Roger (some days after Easter last past it was twenty years), and when he was born he saw with both eyes; and one or two days having passed from his birth, Petronilla, sometime wife of Daniel, a witness sworn above, who had been midwife at the beginning of the same Roger, one night bound the head of the same Roger with a certain cap ^k or band so tightly and improvidently that in the morning, when the same Roger had been brought to the witness herself, she saw the left eye of the same Roger, by reason of the said binding, standing out and hanging out of its hollow. When, affected with excessive grief at this, she had rebuked the said Petronilla, the said Petronilla, in the presence of the same witness, put the eye back in its hollow; and after the said putting back certain white knots, as big as an inch of the thumb, rising up, covered the whole pupil and the white of the eye to such an extent that with that eye he saw nothing at all for three weeks.

[97] after they had been measured to the Saint, the first of them at his tomb, Afterwards Amabilia, the witness's own sister,

returning from Hereford, where she had been a pilgrim to the tomb of the said St. Thomas, relating that God was working there many miraculous things for him, urged that the aforesaid Adam and Roger should be measured to him; and she, with one thread, the witness herself being present and seeing, measured both (she does not remember on what day), and, five candles having been made of wax *, she sent by Eve, daughter of Alitia, her maidservant, the said Adam with the aforesaid five candles, large and long, to the church of Hereford, charging her that she should stay with the said Adam for three days and three nights in the said church of Hereford, holding one of the said candles lit in the middle, and the other four at the four corners of the tomb of the said St. Thomas. And she reported that she had done so; and that in the third night it seemed to the said Adam that a certain lord, wearing white priestly vestments, with a cross in front and behind, appearing to him, had wiped his eyes with the vestment which he wore; and that afterwards he had gone out through a great glass window on the East near the tomb.

[98] the other, in his mother's house, are healed the same night. And the said Adam, with open eyes, was looking at him, and was asking where he had gone. And Sir Gilbert, who produced the witnesses concerning this miracle, then keeper of the said tomb, asked of the same Adam whether he saw: he answered that he did. And the said miracle having been solemnly made public in the church of Hereford, the said Adam was brought back to the witness's house, having sound eyes and seeing well; and from that time he has had nothing wrong in them ^l. Item, she said that on the same night and at the same hour at which the said Adam was miraculously given light, she, affected with excessive grief at the aforesaid blindness of her said sons, heard her two daughters, namely Joan, the survivor, and Amabilia, since deceased, holding the said Roger near the fire, saying to each other: If our mother, who was affected with such grief last night at the blindness of this Roger, were to see his eyes now, she would rejoice greatly. Hearing which, the said witness, running up and wiping the eye of the said Roger, the knot which he had had in the said eye being removed at the said wiping, saw the eye itself clear; and from that time the same Roger saw well with the said eye, and has had nothing wrong in it ^m.

[99] Agnes della Hulle, of the parish of Clifton ⁿ, A woman contracted for five years, carried to the Saint's tomb, daughter of William della Hulle and Margaret his wife, is said to have been formerly contracted, and miraculously cured at the tomb of the said lord Thomas; who, produced with a swelling and a hump by the said Sir Gilbert, and sworn in his presence according to the form of the oath of the other witnesses, answered, when asked, that she is free, fifty years old and more, and lives by the labour of her hands, and dwells in the city of Hereford, and that she has not been of the kindred or household of the said lord Thomas. Item, she said that she had been sound and robust for many years: and she did not then have a hump or swelling. Afterwards there came upon her a certain sickness with certain prickings, from which she was made humped and swollen, as she is now. She was also for five years so contracted that she could not move herself from the place, nor lift her right arm except with the help of the left. And the said sickness made a rupture in her right shoulder, breast and side. And it having been related to her that God was working miracles for Blessed Mary in the church of Lentwardin, of the diocese of Hereford, she was drawn with a certain vehicle by Lucy her sister, and carried to the said church. And since the rector of that church would not allow her to remain within the church, and she stayed ^o outside, a man unknown to her, leading two animals, said to her, why did she not have herself carried to the tomb of the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford.

[100] And when she had been brought by the said sister with the vehicle to the said tomb, after a vow which she had been bidden in sleep to make, she is set upright. and had measured the said tomb, and had made a candle of the measure, and had stayed in the said church for fifteen days or thereabouts; afterwards, on a certain Friday (in the week of Pentecost it was twenty-one years), there appeared to her as she slept at night in the said church a certain man (she knows not how clothed) urging her to vow that she would do something in honour of the said St. Thomas. And being awakened, having taken counsel with her sister, she vowed that she would fast in honour of the said St. Thomas on the fourth weekday. And then between the hour of Prime and Tierce it seemed to her that she was raised up a little and made better, and after fifteen days she raised herself up into such a state as that in which she now is. And from that time she walked with two staves for the fourth part of a year, and afterwards with one up to the present time; without which also she can walk, and did walk before the said lords commissaries. And this she ascribes to the merits of the said St. Thomas, and she is made from it more devout and firmer in faith; but the said miracle was not made public in the said church of Hereford. Item, upon the last interrogatory, whether by prayer, etc., she deposed in English, like the preceding, and said that she had left the vehicle in the aforesaid church of Hereford [p].

ANNOTATIONS.

his, sons of the late Robert de Kylpek and of Margaret his wife, of the parish of Strangeforde, of the diocese of Hereford, are said to have been blind for many years, and afterwards miraculously given light by the merits of the said lord Thomas: to prove which Sir Gilbert, proctor of the Chapter of Hereford, produced the same Adam and Roger, and their mother, and Sir William de Bradewere, chaplain, having the cure for the time of the said parish of Strangeforde, James de la Pini, Daniel Tudenar, and William de Kilpek, of the same parish: which witnesses indeed, the same proctor being present, having touched, etc., swore, etc. Now let us hear the mother testifying.

p Other witnesses of this cure I have not found, except Brother John de Brompton, but I do not have his testimony. And here is the end of the seventeen miracles which are listed in the first place in the Roman codex 4015, which is inscribed on the back Process concerning the life of the lord Thomas de Cantalupo, or in the second part of the same process. There followed here in the same codex the Rubrics of the miracles placed here and there in the first part of the process, in which the deeds of St. Thomas are treated; but since I have partly already given these, and partly also have them set out much more fully in the depositions of the witnesses, I keep them for the Appendix, and from here proceed to the thirteen miracles which are subjoined there immediately after.

discernere*

i.e. illi*

ut*

cera*

PART II OF THE MIRACLES.

Various miracles and benefits conferred on various persons.

The proctor of the cause offers many miracles in writing, Item, on the same day ^a the aforesaid proctor of the chapter of Hereford exhibited to the aforesaid lords commissaries certain quires of parchment, in which quires indeed are contained the two hundred and seven miracles written below, namely concerning the resuscitation of forty-two dead: item, concerning the enlightening of thirty-three blind: item, concerning the setting upright of thirty-eight contracted: item, concerning the cure of twenty-four lame, and concerning the cure of nine paralytics: item, concerning the restoring of hearing to three deaf: item, concerning the restoring of speech to seven dumb: item, concerning the cure of ten frenzied and mad: item, concerning the cure of forty other diverse infirmities and diverse accidents. Which quires indeed having been delivered to the aforesaid lords commissaries, and having been read out in full before them and before the aforesaid lord Richard, bishop of Hereford, and his chapter and the clergy of the church of Hereford, summoned before them by the same lords commissaries, and an oath having been taken then individually by each of them all (who had not been produced elsewhere as witnesses in this business, and who had not sworn elsewhere to tell the truth concerning this whole business to its end to the said lords commissaries), the most holy Gospels having been touched, the aforesaid lord bishop and his canons, all then present in the city of Hereford, and those of the clergy of Hereford written below, were asked by the lords commissaries themselves, after each of the miracles contained in the quires themselves, read in order, whether they believed that the said miracles, all and each, were true, and could be proved, and had been made public, and were public, and commonly ascribed to the merits of the said lord Thomas.

[2] And all unanimously, none dissenting, answered which, for shortness of time, are proved summarily by witnesses, that they did, under virtue of the oath taken by them; adding nonetheless, in virtue of the oath taken by them, that they knew of no fraud, nor believed any to be or to have been present, in the aforesaid miracles. And the names of the aforesaid persons swearing and deposing are these: Master Henry de Schorne, archdeacon of Hereford: Sir Gilbert, vicar of Great Marcle, and Thomas de Guynes, proctors in this business of the chapter of Hereford: who protested in the name of the said chapter that they and the said chapter, if (which they did not believe) there should be need hereafter, would prove the aforesaid miracles and many others which are written in the said quires. Names of the witnesses. The aforesaid lord Richard, bishop of Hereford; Master Robert of Gloucester, chancellor; the lords John de Kemeseya, Richard de Somesfeld, Master John de St. John, canons.

[3] Sir Hugh, penitentiary, Sir William de Luda, whose names are listed; Richard de Webeleye, John de Pounde, William called the Young, Thomas the Baker, Ralph de Evesham, Alfred, Hugh de Caus, chaplains, and Hugh de la Bache, deacon, keepers of the tomb of the said lord Thomas; William Vallet, Elias de Suitone, Ralph Milet, Thomas de Leministre, Walter de Suitone, Walter de la Bache, John Raci, Richard de Credeley, William Storly, Nicholas de Yaneworche, John de Kingestone, Walter de Tibretone, John Helle, John de Burghelle, Philip de Witeneye, Roger de Posthemente, John de Maureden, Roger de Cruce and John de Witeneye, priests; Richard de Morone, William de Balkemare, John Kok, Walter de Coblintone, Roger de Broynton, Walter Lemason, Philip de Stradel, Walter de Willeye, deacons and subdeacons; and John de Magdalena, sworn, who withdrew during the reading of the rubric concerning the dumb: all of whom are of the choir and bosom of the church of Hereford.

[4] After these things the said lords commissaries, seeing that in many of the miracles and certain things having been decreed concerning these, contained in the said quires neither year nor day was contained, because it was said to have been omitted by those who, in abstracting from other quires and abridging, had dictated the contents of the same quires, charged the same lord bishop and the said three proctors, in virtue of the oath taken by them, that they should faithfully insert in the margin of the said quires, after each of the miracles in which the abridgers had not put the year nor the day, the said year and day, of which they were certain through the inquests ^b and informations and proofs concerning the said miracles long since received and held in the church of Hereford: which they answered that they would do.

[5] Subsequently, when the aforesaid proctors said twelve miracles are proved more specially. that they had many witnesses at hand to prove the truth of many miracles contained in the said quires, and of others, and a great part of the people of the city of Hereford was gathered in the cathedral church to testify, and there remained to the said lords commissaries no time except what was left of that day, the XIIIth of the month of November, until the hour of Vespers ^c, the witnesses written below, named and examined after each miracle, produced by the aforesaid proctors, and sworn in the presence of the proctors themselves, having touched the most holy Gospels, to tell the truth, were summarily received and examined by them concerning the twelve miracles written below, of which six are contained in the quires of miracles (namely the second, third and fourth, seventh, eighth and ninth).

[6] A noble knight, contracted for six years, The first miracle. The aforesaid lord Milo, sworn and examined, deposed in French that on account of the tournaments ^d which he had hitherto followed he had been for six years so contracted in his legs that he could in no way walk, but always remained with shame and pain with his legs folded up, and he could be helped by no art of physicians. And when he had been urged by the lord Richard, now bishop of Hereford, to come to a certain very great solemnity to be held by the bishop himself on the feast of the Resurrection of the Lord, when the bones of the said lord Thomas were translated by the same bishop into the tomb in which they now are ^e, the witness himself had himself brought in a certain cart to the city of Hereford; and having heard that at the said translation of the bones God had worked many miracles for the said St. Thomas on Holy Thursday and on the day of the Parasceve, having confessed his sins, he had himself carried to the said tomb at the hour of Vespers on the Saturday before the said feast of the Resurrection, asking devoutly the said noble St. Thomas that he would have compassion on the same noble knight, thus cast down and wretched, and that he might obtain the grace of a cure.

[7] at the Saint's tomb he is suddenly healed. And when morning had come, while the representation of the resurrection of the Lord was being made in the said church of Hereford, he said that he had been so fully and perfectly cured at the said tomb by the merits of the same St. Thomas that on the same day, exulting in the Lord, he served before the above-mentioned bishop at the solemn banquet held by him; and from that time, he said, he has been sound and strong, as he now appears to be. And be it known that this knight is famous and well known, and the miracle which is said to have happened in his person is very widely spread abroad; and he had been several times before the said lords commissaries on the preceding days, and had offered to prove the aforesaid miracle by many persons worthy of belief; but because of the other proofs furnished concerning other miracles he had not been admitted. The hundred and eighty-first witness, the aforesaid Sir Gilbert, the proctor, deposed from sight concerning the infirmity, miraculous cure and health of the said knight; and be it known that this miracle is not contained in the aforesaid quires.

[8] To a boy, a tongue cut out by his stepmother restored by the Saint's help: The second miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove the second miracle contained in the rubric concerning the dumb; namely, that Hugh de Stoktone, son of Agnes Lescepestere, dumb for two years, received speech, and that to all looking into his mouth a great portion of his tongue is seen to have grown anew by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced Sir John, vicar of Leministre, of the diocese of Hereford, and Walter the dyer, and Walter Walen, chaplain of the same parish, and Robert the Baker, of the same parish. Concerning the aforesaid, the said vicar deposed that the aforesaid things are said publicly and commonly in the above-mentioned parish; the aforesaid Walter the dyer, that he saw the tongue of the aforesaid Hugh cut off, which the stepmother of the said Hugh was said to have cut off *; and afterwards he saw the same

tongue whole, and a new part of the tongue adhering to the old part of that tongue which had not been cut off; and it is said publicly and commonly to have been done miraculously by the merits of the said St. Thomas. Robert said that he had seen the tongue cut off of a certain person of the said parish, whom he did not know by name, but by the sight of his person; and it is said that it was cut off by his stepmother. Of the fitting of a new tongue and of the miracle he knows nothing. Walter Walen said that he had known a child, who is called John, in the said parish, and had seen his tongue cut off, and by his stepmother, as was said; and afterwards a new tongue added to the old by the merits, as is commonly said, of the said St. Thomas.

[9] The third miracle. Item, the aforesaid proctor intends to prove a man and a woman, contracted, granted the power to walk by the same, that John de Hanneleye, of the parish of Credeleye, of the diocese of Hereford, was contracted for seven years, and afterwards miraculously cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas as he was returning from the church of Hereford. For the proof of which miracle, and of the fourth miracle next following, he produces these witnesses; namely Sir Peter de Ekynton , chaplain of Credeleye, Juliana Kinges, John de Hanneleye, of the same parish of Credeleye, Joan della Tuyalle , Philip Leambler, Richard called Leku. This miracle is contained in the quires. The fourth miracle. Item, the aforesaid proctor intends to prove that the above-mentioned Juliana of Credeleye was contracted for many years, and afterwards, admonished in sleep to visit the tomb of the said St. Thomas, was miraculously cured there. This miracle is contained in the quires.

[10] The aforesaid Sir Peter deposed in French that both they themselves and others that he had seen the said John lame; and that the same John had related that he had dreamed and had had a vision that he would be cured at the tomb of the said St. Thomas; and when he had come to the said tomb contracted, he went away from there walking and going well. And the said Juliana, he said, he had seen, while he was chaplain in that parish, lame and unable to walk; and she was said to have had a vision from the said St. Thomas that she should be bathed; and that after the said vision she bathed herself; and afterwards he saw her walking. The aforesaid Juliana, who went bent with a staff ^f, deposed in English that she had been contracted for seven years, and that she had not been able to walk, and that she had a vision in sleep from the said St. Thomas that she should be bathed; and when she had bathed herself, she was cured.

[11] The aforesaid John, in whose person the said miracle is said to have happened, eyewitnesses asserted: deposed in English that he had been for many years contracted and broken, and that in sleep he had a vision that he should come to the tomb of the said St. Thomas; and when he had come, and was not permitted to enter the church and stay near the said tomb, and was returning, he was cured on the way as he returned, by the merits of the said St. Thomas. John de Tuyalle deposed in English that he had seen the said John and Juliana contracted for seven years. And the said John sometimes lay in the public road, having nowhere else to lie; and afterwards he saw them healed by the merits, as was said, of the said St. Thomas, of whom they had had visions. Philip deposed in English that he had seen each contracted, and afterwards, within this year, cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas. Richard deposed in English that he had seen each contracted, and afterwards cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas; and that Juliana had been cured within this year, and John, three years ago.

[12] likewise another, violently contracted, restored by his help. The fifth miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove that Philip Paniot, of the parish of Great Cowerne, of the diocese of Hereford, had been contracted for many years, and afterwards miraculously set upright by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced as witnesses the aforesaid Philip, Sir Robert, vicar of Great Cowerne, John son of Philip, Walter Panyot and Roger de Barat; and it is not contained in the quire of miracles. Philip Paniot deposed in English that for five years he had been so contracted that he could not walk, and afterwards at the tomb and by the merits of the said St. Thomas he had been cured; on the day of St. James it was two years. Robert the vicar said in French that he had seen the aforesaid Philip for five years contracted to such a degree that he could not walk; and that afterwards he had been cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas; on the day of St. James it was two years. John son of Philip said in English that he had seen the said Philip so contracted that his legs clung to his thighs; afterwards he saw him cured, he knows not how. Walter said in English that he had seen him so contracted for five years that he could not move himself; and afterwards he was cured (two years have elapsed) by the merits of the said St. Thomas; he knows not on what day. Roger said in English that he had seen him contracted for five years, and that he was cured at the said tomb, to which he had been brought on a certain horse by the said Roger: on the day of St. James it was two years.

[13] A boy who died a natural death, The sixth miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove that John son of Adam de la Hulle, of the parish of Credeleye, was dead, and by the merits of the said St. Thomas miraculously raised to life. To prove which he brought forward John Honwit, Sir Peter de Ekintone, chaplain of the parish of Credeleye, of the diocese of Hereford, and Adam Leuremon *. It is not contained in the quires of miracles. John Honwit deposed in English that he had seen the aforesaid John, son of Adam, then half a year old, fifteen years having now elapsed, dead by a natural death; and he himself measured him to the said St. Thomas: and when he had remained dead, and he had seen him dead from cockcrow until the hour of None, being measured to the said St. Thomas, he revived. Sir Peter deposed in French that he had heard the aforesaid related publicly and commonly in the above-mentioned parish. Adam deposed in English that he had seen (fifteen years have elapsed, he knows not on what day) the said John, son of Adam de la Hulle, dead from cockcrow until the hour of None, and, measured to the said St. Thomas, revive.

[14] and a girl drowned in a pond, The seventh miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove that Lucy of Aspertone, daughter of Matilda of Eldeburg, of the diocese of Hereford, having been submerged by accident in a certain pond, and dead, was raised to life by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced the witnesses written below, namely Sir Richard, chaplain of Asperton, Matilda of Eldeburg, Reginald Bayard, Hugh Bayard, and Walter de Capel. This is contained in the quires of miracles. Richard deposed in French that he was not in the parish when the above-mentioned miracle happened; but it is said publicly and commonly that by the merits of the said St. Thomas the said Lucy was raised after death. Matilda, mother of the said Lucy, deposed in English that the said Lucy her daughter was submerged in the water about the hour midway between Tierce and None, and that she was drawn out of the water dead about the hour midway between None and sunset. And she was measured to the said St. Thomas; and afterwards about cockcrow she revived, on the Friday after the feast of the Exaltation of the holy Cross ^g in May, eighteen years ago.

[15] Raynald deposed in English that the aforesaid Lucy was submerged about the hour of midday, measured to St. Thomas, they revive. and lay submerged in the water until the hour midway between None and sunset: and when she had been drawn out dead, she was measured to the said St. Thomas, and revived, when she had remained dead until cockcrow; on the Friday after the feast of the holy Cross in May, eighteen years ago. And he said that when the aforesaid Lucy had revived, she said that she had been with the lord Thomas, the witness himself asking her where she had been. Hugh Bayard deposed in English that the said Lucy was submerged about the hour of midday on the Friday after the feast of the Holy Cross (in May, eighteen years ago), and about the hour midway between None and sunset was drawn from the water and measured to the said St. Thomas; and that she remained dead until cockcrow; and then revived, and said to all who asked, when she had revived, that she was the daughter of the said St. Thomas. Walter said that it is publicly and commonly reported in the said above-mentioned parish, concerning the things of which the other witnesses deposed from sight.

[16] The eighth miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove A woman contracted for seven years, that Anicia de la Putte of Castelfrome, of the diocese of Hereford, was for many years contracted, and afterwards miraculously cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced the witnesses written below, namely William Siward, parish chaplain of the said Castelfrome, Geoffrey de la Putte, William de la Putte, Richard le Carpenter, and Emma * de la Putte. This is not contained in the quires of miracles. Richard the chaplain deposed in French that he had seen the said Anicia sound before he himself was in the said parish, and afterwards he saw her contracted for seven years: and when she had been measured to the aforesaid St. Thomas, she was cured (on the day of St. Nicholas ^h it was seven years) in the church of Hereford. Geoffrey said that he had seen the same Anicia contracted for seven years; and afterwards he had her carried by four persons to the church of Hereford. And when she had been measured and had stayed three days, she was cured.

[17] And first he said that it was now twenty years; after a vision she had, she comes away sound from his tomb; afterwards that it was twelve, and that that was the fourth miracle which God had worked for the said St. Thomas. William deposed in English that he had seen the said Anicia contracted for seven years. Afterwards she was said to have had it in sleep that she would be cured at the tomb of the said St. Thomas; and when she had been measured and carried to the church of Hereford, she was cured there; on the feast of St. Nicholas it was twenty years. Afterwards he said that he does not remember how many years it is since she was cured. Richard deposed in English that he had seen the aforesaid Anicia contracted for seven years, and afterwards cured, twenty years ago now (he knows not on what day), when she had been measured to the said St. Thomas, and had had from him, as was said, a certain vision. Emma deposed in English that the aforesaid Anicia was her sister, and that she had seen her contracted for seven

years; and when she had had a vision that she was to be cured at the tomb of the said St. Thomas, and had been measured to him, having been brought to the said tomb by four women, she was cured there, the said Emma being present; she knows not on what day, but it was seven years. Afterwards she said that it was more than nine; because the said Anicia had married after the said cure, and had a certain daughter of nine years.

[18] likewise to another contracted woman The ninth miracle. The said proctor intends to prove that Quenelda Tidihorn *, of the parish of Foy, of the diocese of Hereford, contracted for many years, had been miraculously cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he brought forward as witnesses Sir Henry, vicar of Deffoy, Richard de Foy, Henry Hok and Walter Franceys. It is contained in the quires of miracles. Henry the vicar deposed in French, from the report of others, that the said Quenelda had been contracted for three years, as was publicly said, and had her knees and legs bent; and that afterwards she was miraculously cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas; and subsequently he saw her sound. Richard deposed in English that he had seen the said Quenelda for three years so contracted that she could in no way walk for four years ⁱ.

[19] the use of her limbs is granted in the same place. And the lady Juliana de Tregoz, sister of the said lord Thomas ^k, had her make her confession, and measured her to the said St. Thomas, and had her carried to his tomb, and saw her return from there sound. Henry deposed in English that he had seen the said Quenelda so contracted for a good four years that she could in no way walk except by creeping with her hands along the ground. Afterwards, having been carried (he knows not in what year, nor on what day) to the tomb of the said St. Thomas, and measured to him, she was cured there and well set upright. Walter deposed in English that he had seen the said Quenelda so contracted for three years that she could not walk except by creeping with her hands along the ground; and when the said lady Juliana Tregoz (nine years have now elapsed; he knows not on what day) had urged her to make her confession, and had had her measured to the said St. Thomas, she was cured; and the said lady Juliana brought her to the church of Hereford.

[20] A little girl, hanging from her cradle, measured to the Saint, The tenth miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove that Margaret, daughter of Richard Pinke, of the parish of Welinton, of the diocese of Hereford, was dead, and was raised to life by the merits of the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced those written below, namely Sibyl Tilie, mother of the said Margaret, Sir Roger, vicar of Welintone, Cecilia Wade and Sibyl Adevode *. It is not in the quires of miracles ^l. Sibyl deposed in English that she had left her said daughter, then sixteen weeks old, in the cradle; and when the said Sibyl had gone to shear a certain sheep at the morning hour, and had returned, the sheep being shorn, to the house, she found her said daughter dead, hanging suspended by the arm in the cradle ^m. And when she had remained dead until the hour of Vespers, and the chaplain of Blessed Mary of the same place had measured her to the said St. Thomas, she revived. Roger, vicar of the said place, deposed the same in French from the common and public report of the people of the said place, and that on the Monday after the feast of the holy Cross in May it was eighteen years. Cecilia deposed in English that she had seen the said Margaret dead from the aforesaid hanging from the morning hour until the hour of Vespers, and that, measured to the said St. Thomas, she revived; on the Monday after the feast of the Holy Cross it was eighteen years. Sibyl deposed in English that she had seen her dead from the morning hour until the hour of Vespers; and that, measured to the said St. Thomas, she revived; on the Monday about the feast of the Holy Cross in May it was eighteen years.

[21] The eleventh miracle. Item, the aforesaid proctor intends to prove likewise an infant born lifeless that John, son of Robert de Boklond ⁿ, of the parish of Elemare, of the diocese of Hereford, was born dead, and afterwards by the merits of the said St. Thomas was and still is alive. To prove which he produces Sir Richard de Kuolle, vicar of the same place, the aforesaid Robert, and Agnes d'Abitot his wife, and Joan Hobin. It is not in the quires of miracles. Gerard the vicar deposed in French from the common talk in the parish and from the report of the father, and that these things had been in this year in which the said proctor intends to prove ^o, and that the father had him baptized for fear of death [p] before the infant was presented in the church of Hereford; but he did not see him dead. Robert deposed in French that his aforesaid wife had reported to him that she had not felt movement in her womb, when she bore their said son, from the hour of None of the preceding Sunday until the middle hour of the Monday, on which she bore him dead, in mid-Lent of this year [q]; and after he was born dead, he saw him dead for so much time as he could have gone one mile and more, as he believes.

[22] And when he had been measured to the said St. Thomas, and measured to the same, signs of life appeared in him, and he still lives; and he presented him before the aforesaid lords commissaries. And he said that afterwards he was sick, and that, measured again, he recovered. Agnes, mother of the said John, deposed in English that he was born dead; and that she had not felt in him movement in her belly from the middle hour of the Sunday until the same hour of the following Monday in mid-Lent last past. And when he had been thus born dead and afterwards measured to the said St. Thomas, he revived, and is still alive. And she saw him dead for so much space (as she judges) as a man would have gone half a mile. And it was reported to her that after her childbirth, before she saw him, he had remained dead so long a time as a man would have gone another half mile. Joan deposed in English that the said Agnes had borne the aforementioned John dead, she seeing it, who was the midwife, about the hour of Vespers; and the said Agnes had related to her that she had not felt movement in him in her womb from the hour of None of the preceding Sunday until she bore him; and it seems to her that he had remained dead for so much space as she could have gone half a mile.

[23] another infant also, overlain by her mother, are raised to life. The twelfth miracle. Item, the said proctor intends to prove that Letitia, wife of William the smith of Kinges, of the parish of Yeune , of the diocese of Hereford, overlay Agnes her daughter by night while sleeping, and that from the said overlaying the said Agnes had died, and afterwards revived, being measured to the said St. Thomas. To prove which he produced the aforesaid Letitia and Joan, wife of William the smith [r]. This is not contained in the quires of miracles. The aforesaid Letitia deposed in English that her said daughter was overlain by her, who was then sick, in her bed, and died from the overlaying (about the feast of St. Michael it was nineteen years), and, being awakened, she saw her dead for so much space as a man would have gone one mile and more. And when she had been measured to the said St. Thomas, she revived; and that she was a tender thing of four weeks only; and she was crushed by the overlaying: much blood flowed from the mouth and nostrils of the aforesaid Agnes. The aforesaid Joan deposed in English that she took up the said Agnes dead from her mother's lap (about the feast of Blessed Michael it is many years, but she does not recall how many), and saw her dead for so much space as a man could have gone one mile and more. And when she had been measured to the said St. Thomas, she revived. It is not in the quires of miracles.

ANNOTATIONS.

p This the father did not say, as will presently appear.

q By this manner of speaking he seems to indicate the year in which he was testifying, namely the year 1307, which also will be established from the testimony of Agnes presently.

r Either this was a different man from the father of the girl raised to life, or an error lurks: for above Letitia is said to have been the wife of William the smith, the father of the said girl Agnes.

abscidisse*

al. de Kynton*

al. Guyalle*

al. Leureinon*

al. Annam*

al. Quentilda Gydihorn*

al. Acewode*

in eo*

aliud*

al. Pyeune*

al. revera*

PART III OF THE MIRACLES.

PREFACE.

In this schedule are contained certain of the miracles which the power of the most high God has worked in these days in the cathedral church of Hereford, and in divers parts of the world, announced to the same church on the oath of persons worthy of belief ^a, to the praise and glory of his name, and to the declaration of the merits and praiseworthy life of his servant, the lord Thomas de Cantulupo of pious memory, sometime bishop of the church above-mentioned, whose bones are buried in the same church.

ANNOTATION.

CHAPTER I.

The dead, and those held for dead, restored to life and health.

A girl dead by a natural death, another drowned in the waters, A certain girl, an infant, of Broinzard ^a, of the diocese of Hereford, by name Isabella, was being carried to the tomb of the said Man, concerning whom such a miracle happened; namely, that after she had evidently been dead for the space of four hours, the suffrage of the same Man of God having been invoked by the parents of the said girl and by others, God raised her from the dead. Item, a certain girl, Lucy by name, of Asperton, of the diocese of Hereford, daughter of Matilda of Aeldebrugge, having been submerged by accident in a certain deep pond about the sixth hour of the day, lay thus drowned beneath the waters until the eleventh hour of the same day, and then, being drawn out of the waters, although she had already been dead a long while, those who were present at such a sight commended her most devoutly to the said Servant of God; and a candle having been offered for her of her own length and breadth, as is the custom of the country, to the aforesaid Man of God, she at once rose from the dead.

[3] Item, a certain girl, Alice by name, daughter of Robert Mathias of King's Pion ^b, likewise another dead of the quinsy, and another from drowning, revive. of the diocese of Hereford, the disease which physicians call squinancia ^c growing strong, dying at the morning hour, lay dead until after the first hour of the same day. And then, being commended to the aforesaid Servant of God by her parents and others, and an offering of a candle having been made for her to her own length and breadth, as is the custom of the country, she was at once raised from the dead by heaven. Item, a certain girl, Mabel by name, daughter of John de Asschewede, in the parish of Lombleye, of the county of Stafford, of the diocese of Worcester ^d, having been submerged by accident in a certain deep pond about the hour of None of the day, lay thus drowned beneath the waters until the first hour of the following night. And then, drawn out of the water, although she had already been dead a long while, yet those who were present at this sight commended her most devoutly to the Servant of God, Bishop Thomas. And an offering having been made for her of a candle of the length and breadth of the girl herself, as is the custom of the country, at once by the power of the most high God she rose from the dead through the suffrage of the aforesaid Man of God.

[4] An infant overlain by her mother, another hanging from her cradle, Item, a certain woman, wife of William called le Sunth of Kingespenne, overlay her daughter while sleeping: and when she had awakened and found her dead, howling and weeping she showed her thus dead to many whom she called together. Who, pouring out tears of compassion, commended the infant, as is the custom of the country, with the offering of a candle, as has been said before, to the aforesaid Servant of God; and at once the infant, through the infinite power of God, rose again ^e. Item, a certain infant, by name Margaret, daughter of Richard Pink of Welinton, of the diocese of Hereford, left in the cradle rather incautiously under the keeping of a certain other child, her mother being absent for some while, and the bands of the cradle having been loosed, or too much slackened by the movement of the infant, fell from the cradle, and, her head with her shoulders sinking to the bottom, but her feet and legs being firmly bound above, thus hung horribly from the dawn of the day until the first hour of the same day. Her aforesaid mother then returning to her, she was found to have expired through such hanging. Crying out, therefore, and howling, the aforementioned woman gathered many of the neighbours to that pitiable sight, among whom was also the chaplain of the parish church. It pleased, therefore, those who were present that an offering should be promised for her resuscitation to God and to his aforesaid Servant: which done, at once through the infinite power of God she revived, and moved her hands through the help of the aforesaid Man of God ^f.

[5] a drowned girl, and another dead two days, are raised to life. Item, a certain girl, Alice by name, daughter of Robert Lutesone , of Herdewik in the parish of Derherste, of the diocese of Worcester, by misfortune fell into a deep pond: she lay and lay hidden beneath the waters, thus submerged, for so long a space of time as two miles could be traversed by a man at a slow pace. And when her friends had drawn her out onto dry land, and had commended her to the Servant of God in the usual manner, and an offering had been made for her of a candle of the length and breadth of the girl herself, as is the custom of the country, forthwith, to the wonder of many, she revived. Item, a certain man, Laurence by name, called Haraud, of Gipeswik , of the diocese of Norwich ^g, and his wife, Mabel by name, with their household and many others worthy of belief, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that the said Mabel, consumed by a grave infirmity, had breathed out her spirit and had been dead two days. All things pertaining to the office or obsequies of the dead having been completed also in her house, there came up a certain stranger from the parts of Hereford, and, seeing the master of the house and his household weighed down with great grief, counselled them that they should pour a little water, in a certain silver cup which he then saw placed to one side upon a bench there, into her mouth, in the name of the Saviour and of his servant Bishop Thomas, invoking their help for her resuscitation: and at once, by the merits of the said Servant of God, she revived. And they most devoutly offered the silver cup itself, with other offerings, at the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God.

[6] Item, there were brought to the tomb of the Man of God two little sons of the noble man Sir John Burdun, A boy dead of disease, another found dead, two others drowned, knight, of the county of Nottingham ^h, whose friends swore that the aforementioned younger son had laboured for seven days under so grave a sickness that, they standing by and seeing, he breathed out his spirit, and thus lay dead from the first hour of the day until the eleventh hour of the evening, at which, by the counsel of the chaplain of the same, they made a vow to the Servant of God for the resuscitation of the said boy. Which done, the boy at once miraculously revived and opened his mouth, taking food, through the help of the most high God. Item, a certain woman of King's Pyon came to the aforesaid place and said that her little son was found dead between her arms about midnight, and thus lay dead until the first hour: and when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and on the third day following was brought sound with his father and mother to the aforesaid place. Item, a certain boy of Okynton of Gloucestr. ⁱ was drowned, and thus lay dead for half a day; and when he had been measured to the Man of God, on the same day he was restored to his former health. Item, a certain boy near Tenkeb. was drowned in a tub ^k full of ale, and thus lay dead for half a day; and when he had been measured to the Man of God, on the same day he was restored to his former health.

[7] Item, a certain householder of Spalding came to the aforesaid place and said and four, extinguished in various ways, are called back to life. that his son lay dead from the morning hour until the first hour; and when he had been measured to the Man of God, on the same day he was restored to his former health. Item, the nurse of Adam le Wife * of Gloucester overlay the child of the said Adam lying with her in bed, and thus he lay dead for the space of one hour of the day. And when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and in the following week, carried by the said nurse, he came sound to the aforesaid place, with the attestation of the neighbours of the place, namely of Gloucester. Item, a certain woman of Mancestre, of the county of Lancaster ^l, by name Margaret, came to the aforesaid place with her son and said that her same little son, on the day of St. John of Beverley ^m, being sound, suddenly fell to the ground at the first hour, and thus lay dead until evening. And when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and on the same night was restored to his former health. Item, the little son of Philip the Cook was found dead about midnight between the arms of his mother, when she had been roused from sleep, and thus lay dead until dawn; and when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and soon afterwards was restored to his former health.

[8] Item, a certain woman near Bristoll ⁿ came with her son to the aforesaid place, To others, drowned in various ways, life is restored. and said that her same little son was drowned in a certain well; and thus he lay dead from the ninth hour until evening. And when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and on the morrow was restored to his former health. Item, a certain householder of Forneby , of the county of Lancaster, came to the aforesaid place with his little son, and said that the same boy was drowned in a certain fishpond, and thus lay in the water from the ninth hour until the evening hour; and when he had been drawn out and measured to the Man of God, the same night he revived, and on the morrow was restored to his former health. Item, a certain householder, by name Gervase of Lancadot near Druslay, with his wife, by name Agnes, and his little daughter, by name Mabel, came to the aforesaid place and declared that their same daughter was cast down by a flood of water into a certain water, by name the Thuy, and thus lay submerged in the same water from the ninth hour until the evening hour. And when she had been drawn out of the said water, she was dead until the first hour following; but soon, when she had been measured to the Man of God, she at once revived, and on the morrow was restored to her former health. Item, a certain woman near Bristoll came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that a certain little son of hers, walking rather incautiously beside a certain well, fell into it: at whose misfortune the mother, greatly compassionating him, at once had him drawn out of the well; and, drawn out dead, he lay thus from the ninth hour until evening; and when she had measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, he at once revived through the merits of the Man of God.

[9] [One from disease, another from the fall of a door, a third extinguished in the waters, revive.] Item, a certain householder of Salop ^o swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his son had been afflicted with so grave a disease and acute fever that soon, all seeing it, he breathed out his spirit, and thus from the evening hour until the following midnight he lay lifeless without hope of life; but when the parents of the dead boy had vowed a vow to the Servant of God, and had measured him, as is the custom of the country, at once that dead boy revived, obtaining entire health through the help of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, by name William Stari, of the parish of Bureford, of the diocese of Hereford, with his wife came to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore that their little daughter, by name Matilda, overwhelmed or crushed by a certain door, in the judgement of all the bystanders

breathed out her spirit; and thus, dead, she lay for the space of two miles and more [p]; and when the parents of the dead girl had measured her to God's Servant, she at once revived, restored quite suddenly to health and life through the help of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman, by name Matilda de Conpestre, of Malmesbury [q], came to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore that her daughter Eleanor, submerged in the waters, lay thus dead from the first hour until the ninth hour of the day; and when the mother of the dead girl had measured her to God's Servant, she at once revived through the omnipotence of the most high God.

[10] Likewise a boy in a flood, and a girl in a well. Item, a certain woman, Margaret by name, of Scardeburg *, coming with a certain little son of hers to the tomb of the Man of God, asserted that her same son, submerged in the aforesaid township by a flood of water, lay thus dead that night, and on the morrow until the first hour of the day; but when his mother had measured her dead son to God's Servant, he at once revived through the aid and merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain young man of Kerstolston in the vale of Beuver, by name Richard, came to the aforesaid place with his wife, by name Emma, and, sworn, they declared that their son, by name Nicholas, was drowned in a certain ditch; and thus he lay dead for the space of five leagues: and when he had been measured to the Man of God, he soon revived, and on the morrow was restored to his former health. Item, certain persons asserting faithfully that Felicia, daughter of William de Weston, of the county of Stafford [r], falling into a certain well, lay thus drowned in it for the space of one mile; and when the father of the aforesaid girl was searching for her, and could not find her at all, at length he came to the above-mentioned well, and seeing his daughter dead there, at once drew her out; who, without any breath and life, lay thus lifeless from the morning hour until the third hour. And when the friends of the dead girl, grieving at her death, measured her, as is the custom of the country, to the Man of God, she miraculously revived, being made sound through the help of the most high God.

[11] Item, William le Mercer of Pinchebeck near Spaldon in Holonde [s], coming to Hereford, One dead four days is raised to life, evidently proved that, when Walter his son was making his way, walking rather incautiously, beside a certain very deep well, he fell into it, and lay hidden in it dead and submerged for two days and two nights. And when he had long been searched for, at length he was found in this well; and when his parents had drawn him out, and for two more days and two whole nights he lay thus lifeless upon the ground, awaiting the coming of the king's coroner [t]; and at length they had obtained from him leave to deliver the body of the dead boy to burial, they called to memory the many miracles which God himself has worked through the merits of his servant Thomas, and, vowing the aforesaid dead boy to the Man of God, they bent a penny over him; and behold, quite suddenly, he who had been dead miraculously revived, restored to entire health by the merits of the Man of God.

[12] Item, a certain esquire came to the tomb of the Man of God, as also another dead man, a vow having been made by his mother. by name John de Colevile, of the county of Suffolk [u], offering one horse, of the price of two marks, at the tomb of the aforesaid blessed Man; relating with faithful assertion that when it chanced that he was riding the said horse on a certain day, a certain sudden infirmity, whirling his head about on all sides with phantasies, seized him, through which he at once lost sight and speech. Seeing which, the companions who had accompanied him brought him to the house of his mother, not far distant from that place; and when he came to the aforesaid mother's house, taking him from the horse, they put him into bed; and thus he lay the whole night without speech and sight. And when morning had come, his friends, coming to him, found him dead. Lamenting him greatly, they prepared for him, as for a dead man, the things necessary for burial. But at the evening hour the mother of the dead man, afflicted with excessive grief for the death of her son, fled devoutly to the suffrage of Blessed Bishop Thomas, promising him the horse of her dead son if he would pour out prayers to God for his life. Which done, he who had been dead at once revived, and, addressing his mother, began to rebuke her because she had wished to rouse him from a sweet sleep; and thus he obtained from heaven life and health through the merits of the Man of God.

[13] Item, there came to the tomb of the Man of God persons who asserted with testimony worthy of belief A woman reckoned dead, one fallen from a tree, one drowned in a well, restored. that the lady Isabella de Massy, wife of the lord Richard de Massy, of the county of Chester [x], was reckoned dead for the space of two leagues; and when the friends of the said lady had made a vow for her to the Man of God, she was made alive and sound from heaven through the power of the most high God; and in evidence of this miracle the said lady afterwards offered a tunic of silk at the tomb of the Man of God. Item, the miracle which follows was proved at the tomb of the Man of God with testimony worthy of belief, namely, that when a certain man, by name John de Syrop, was climbing to the nest of a certain raven in a certain oak, to the estimate of sixty-five feet and more, and, holding himself rather incautiously in it, had fallen by chance, and thus had lain reckoned dead for the space of one hour, and the bystanders had measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, and had bent a penny over him, he at once opened his eyes and obtained life through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman, Eva by name, called Kuaytho *, of Peterestowe in Irchenfend, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that her son, Gregory by name, had fallen into a certain well, in which, submerged and dead, he had lain for the space of half a day; whom, drawn out of the well, they measured to the Servant of God according to the custom of the country: which done, soon that boy revived and was made sound through the merits of the Man of God.

[14] A dying man, the demons being put to flight, is healed by the Saint. Item, John Gunselyn of Stanes, of the diocese of London, and many others with him came to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore there that the said John had been weighed down by so great an infirmity that he was believed by the bystanders to be near death or about to die forthwith; and while he had lain for some while thus, placed as it were in ecstasy, he saw demons, horrible and very many, coming to him, and, tearing him and dragging him by the hands and feet from place to place, insolently trampling on him; whence, terrified with excessive fear (no wonder), he prayed God earnestly, as he could, that through the merits of his servant Bishop Thomas he would come to his help in that moment of need. And behold, while he was thus praying more devoutly within himself, he saw the Man of God coming forthwith to him, who took the head of the sick man into his hands; and when the said demons had long contended with him as to which should have more mastery over the sick man, at length, about the dawn of the day, through the help of the Man of God all the demons were put to flight, the head of the sick man remaining in the hands of the Servant of God himself. And the sick man himself, as it were awaking from a heavy sleep, soon found himself cured and divinely restored to health through the merits of the Servant of God.

[15] Life granted to a woman and to an infant born dead: Item, a certain man, Philip by name, of Peneburgg, a baker, and Edith his wife, swore at the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God that a certain girl, Tibot by name, their daughter, had been tormented by so grave a sickness that she breathed out her spirit, according to the testimony of all who were standing by there at the time; and thus she lay dead from the first hour of the day until the ninth hour of the same. And her parents, distressed with most vehement sadness and grief for the death of their aforementioned daughter, at length began most devoutly to entreat the Father and God of all consolation that by the merits of his servant Bishop Thomas he would deign to restore life to their daughter. Which done, almost suddenly the girl miraculously revived, raised from the dead by the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman, Placentia by name, of the township of Malling, of the diocese of Rochester [y], swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when she had borne a dead son, and he had lain dead three days according to the testimony of all the neighbours, at length, measured to God's Servant, he suddenly and miraculously revived through the help of the Man of God; whom his friends at once taking up carried to the font, and, he being baptized, the name of the Servant of God was given him as a sign of the miracle.

[16] likewise to a man after two days, to a drowned boy, to a newborn infant, Item, a certain man, by name Nicholas de Box , of the township of Malling, of the diocese of Rochester, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that in the time of autumn he had been so exhausted by excessive labour that, as it were suffering a syncope [z], nay rather, as was said by all the neighbours, as it were dead and without any breath, he lay lifeless for two days; and his friends, having compassion on him, had invoked the help of God and of his servant Thomas, and had measured him in the usual manner, the dead man at once revived through the help of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, William de Crowedone by name, of the county of Cantebrugg [aa], swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had a son by name John, who, while he was running or playing beside a well of water, fell into the well, in which the boy lay submerged from the first hour of the day until the ninth hour; and then, drawn out of the well, he was found dead. And when the friends of the dead boy had promised an offering to God's Servant for his resuscitation, he at once revived, and within three days was restored to his former health. Item, certain persons were present at the tomb of the Man of God who reported and asserted in good faith that, when Joan, then wife of Peter de Bosehin *, of the diocese of Cistren. [bb], on the morrow of St. Bartholomew had borne a son with such great pains that he was thought dead by all who saw him; and he had thus lain lifeless from the morning hour until the ninth hour of the same day, by the counsel of friends the parents vowed a vow for the boy; which done, suddenly that infant, by the infinite power of God, revived through the merits of the Man of God.

[17] Item, a certain Walter de Hayles, miller [cc], swore at the tomb of the Man of God and to three others. that his little son was drowned in the millpond of the aforesaid abbey of Hayles [dd]; and thus he lay lifeless from the ninth hour of the day until the dawn of the following day. But when the parents of the boy thus dead had drawn him out of the waters,

and had measured him, as is the custom of the country, to the aforesaid Servant of God, he at once revived, restored to his former health. Item, Agnes, daughter of William Pendok, of the parish of Mirdeford , was brought to the tomb of the Servant of God, concerning whom such a miracle was proved; namely, that she lay in the weakness of sickness and dead; at length, measured to the Man of God, as is the custom, she was cured from heaven through his suffrage. Item, Agnes de Beadehede, of the parish of Chetkelee near Crokesden in the county of Stafford, had a son, by name Henry, who was overlain with * his nurse, and lay dead from midnight until the third hour of the following day; and, measured to the lord Thomas, bishop of Hereford, he received life from heaven. Be it known that mention is made below, under the rubric concerning accidents, of three dead raised to life, that is, XLI, XLII and XLIII of the accidents [ee].

[18] Item, Florence, daughter of John Austin, of Cacenhuam near Cantebrugg, and also to three drowned. fell into a certain spring, and remained in the water, and lay there, until a certain other child ran from the spring to her father's house, and her father ran ahead to the spring, and drew his daughter out of the water. And she was dead upon the ground for the space of half a league: and at length they vowed to God and to Blessed Thomas; and at once she revived. Item, John, son of Gilbert [ff] of Crowedon in the county of Cantebrugg, fell into a certain pit of water, and lay in the water from midday until night: and, drawn out of the water, he was dead until dawn; and thus, measured to Blessed Thomas, bishop of Hereford, he received his former life from heaven. Item, John, son of Hugh the Londoner of Radenheche, of the common of Gokynham *, fell into a pit of water; and, drawn out of the water, he lay dead from the hour of None until evening; and he was measured to Blessed Bishop Thomas, and at once from heaven, through the merits of the Servant of God, he was given back to his former life.

[19] Held for dead from a grievous wound, he is healed. Item, it happened in the court of the lord Alan Plokenet [gg] that, at his command, they wishing to inspect his armour by testing it, he commanded a certain servant of his, John de Auste by name, to put on his arms: and when he had stood before him clad in them, there came up one of his companions, wishing to test whether one could now have confidence in them; he took a knife, and, testing, struck him, and grievously wounded him with the knife on the left side about the heart. And the knife having been drawn out, they measured that five inches of the knife had been within the body, through the said arms. And blood dripped in such quantity that scarcely anything remained in him, and he, falling forward to the ground, collapsed as though dead; and the bystanders, stricken * with lamentation and pity, were afraid as to what they should do. At length they measured him to Thomas de Cantalupo of good memory, to the blessed man Thomas; and at once he began to mend and to be called back to life. The lord Alan came with the greater persons of his household to the tomb of Blessed Thomas, swearing and attesting that he was personally present and saw the doing of the thing done, and bore witness with the aforesaid.

ANNOTATIONS.

p That is, in that space of time in which one could have made a journey of two miles and more.

q Malmesbury, formerly the famous monastery of Maldunum, is a small town of England in the county of Wilton, commonly called Wil-Shire.

r Staffordia, commonly Stafford-Shire, is likewise a county of England, whose head is the city of Staffordia, called by the natives also Stafford.

s In our other copy, for Pinchebeck is read Pointhebeck, the rest in the same manner: but whether these places have been written rightly or faultily, they are unknown to me.

t I have already said above that the Coroner in England is a magistrate or royal officer whose part it is to take cognizance of those killed, whether death came upon them by accident or was violently inflicted upon them by others: and that it is unlawful to bury their bodies before they have been inspected by the coroner.

u Suffolcia is a county of Eastern England, called by the inhabitants South-Folke and Suffolke.

x The county of Chester is situated on the coast of the Irish sea, named by the natives Ches-Shire. Its head is Cestria, an episcopal city under the metropolis of York.

y Roffa, in the vernacular Rochester, is a city of Southern England in Kent, having an episcopal see, suffragan to Canterbury.

z Syncope, a Greek word, signifies in Latin a sudden failing of the strength.

aa The county of Cambridge is indicated here, commonly Cambridge-Shire, one of the provinces of England.

bb So in both our copies; but one must read Cicestrensis: now Cicestria, commonly Chichester, is a city of England in the county of Sussex, having a bishopric under the metropolis of Canterbury.

cc That is, molitor miller.

dd In the Monasticon Anglicanum, tom. 1, page 928, the monastery of Hayles, or de Hayles, is said to have been of the Cistercian Order, founded in the year 1246 in the territory of Gloucester by Richard, earl of Cornwall and afterwards elected king of the Romans.

ee These things therefore, that they may be referred to their place, I subjoin here.

ff Our other copy has: John, son of William, son of Gilbert.

gg Perhaps one should read Plugenet, a baron Alan of which name is recorded by Camden in his description of the county of Hereford.

al. Intesone*

al. Gipeswyt*

al. le Wyse*

al. de Forne*

al. Lantadoc*

al. Stardebury*

al. Knaytho*

al. de Bor*

add cum*

al. de Boschuam*

al. Madeford*

perhaps ut*?

perhaps a*

al. de Bokynham*

read intra*

read corruit*

confecti*

CHAPTER II.

Soundness granted to the blind, the one-eyed, the contracted, the lame and paralytics.

Christina, daughter of Geoffrey de Mortone, dwelling in the above-mentioned city, blind for eight years and more, obtained sight from heaven at the new ^a tomb of the above-mentioned Bishop. Item, John Pertehaie of Mansinton in the parish of Ledebur under Malvern, Various blind and one-eyed persons cured, among whom one woman blind for two years and more, receives sight. Item, Margaret of Heredesl. , daughter of William the Beadle, blind for one year and more in the left eye, obtained the power of seeing. Item, Walter, son of William Chitre, of Weston near Lugwardin, blind for a long time in the left eye, obtained the power of seeing. Item, Sibyl de Brugg, having blindness in the right eye for three years, obtained sight. Item, Agnes Atebroke, of Bilinghope, blind for seven years, received sight. Item, John de London *, from the parts of Breton, of the diocese of St. Davids ^b, formerly a glover ^c in the city of Hereford, blind for two years and more, received sight. Item, Agnes Moreth, of the aforesaid city of Hereford, blind for seven years and more, received sight.

[21] had earlier paid the penalty of her rashness: likewise others Item, Juliana de Warevik, blind for sixteen weeks, received sight. Item, Juliana Pectrix the Comber, of the aforesaid city, lacking sight in the right eye: who, mocking at the above-mentioned miracles, behaved irreverently in many ways in speaking, and on that account, as was reasonably thought by the bystanders, fell to the ground as if dead. When she was being carried to the tomb itself by a certain woman, Matilda de Corderhale *, who on the preceding night had been freed there from heaven from madness, and had lain lifeless there for some while, at length, recovering her breath, she departs made alive, and, confessing and publicly acknowledging those sins which a little before she had committed against God and against his Servant, together with life she obtained from the Lord also the faculty of seeing in the right eye. Item, Kikilda, wife of William Clement, of Hereford, blind for two years, received sight. Item, Alditha of Penna Canonicorum, widow of John de Colewelle, blind for six years and more, received sight. Item, Alice de Welbell, blind for seventeen years, divinely obtained sight. Item, Nicholas Brid, having had his right eye blinded for one year and more, received sight.

[22] some deprived of one eye, others of both Item, Margaret de Hompton, blind for a long time before, received sight. Item, Thomas de Kilpek, deprived of the sight of one eye for ten years, received sight. Item, Thomas, daughter * of Huell the smith of Burhulle, lacking sight in both eyes for five weeks, and wholly in the left from birth, obtained sight from heaven in both, and more clearly in the left. Item, Emmata de Ros, having her right eye blinded, received sight. Item, Richard, son of Geoffrey Huot of

Carwiton , blind for ten years, received sight. Item, William, son of William Crurele of Brompton, a clerk, having a spot in the left eye and blindness for seven years and more, received sight from heaven. Item, Richard Cursum, of Taddeford, of the diocese of Norwich ^d, blind before for three years, received sight. Item, Richard Godefray of Harlay near Stafford ^e, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield ^f, blind in the right eye, received sight. Item, Christiana Muleward, having a spot over her eyes and a swelling on her left hand for eight years, was freed from both deformities by the suffrage of God's Servant.

[23] Item, Juliana, daughter of Thomas Haket, of Petreston in Goldesmor, blind for fourteen years, obtained sight from heaven. Item, Richard Pulle of Teukesbur ^g, blind for a long time, obtained sight from heaven. receive the faculty of seeing, Item, William of Bishop's Castle of Hereford ^h, blind, received sight. Item, John Noryerwent, of the diocese of Llandaff ⁱ, blind, received the light of his eyes, the suffrage of the Servant of God having been invoked. Item, David, called Erum, of the land of Clifford, of the diocese of Hereford, having his left eye blinded, who also had been lame for three years before, received sight in the aforementioned eye, and upright walking, through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Robert of Winburgg, blind in the right eye for a long time, received sight. Item, Margaret, daughter of John Tumbald of the city of Hereford, of the age of almost one year, having her right eye so dangerously swollen that it seemed to be moved out of its proper place to the breadth of three fingers, through the help of the Man of God was cured from heaven so healthily and perfectly that after this cure neither the place of the disease nor a trace of it appeared.

[24] Item, a certain man, by name Walter de Cluton, of the diocese of Bath and Wells ^k, among whom one was sent by St. Etheldreda to the Saint's tomb. who had incurred blindness and had remained blind forty days and more, grieving at the aforesaid blindness, had himself led for the sake of prayer to a certain church, and before a certain altar which had been dedicated in honour of St. Etheldreda, virgin ^l, he devoutly prostrated himself, asking that divine help be bestowed upon him through the merits of the aforementioned virgin; and when he had prayed thus for some while, sleep fell upon him; and behold, the aforesaid virgin appeared to him while he slept, who touched his jaw, saying thus: Go to the tomb of St. Thomas, which is at Hereford, and there you will receive the health you desire. And he, awakened from sleep, not unmindful of the vision, had himself brought to the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God; and there, devoutly persevering in prayer, he obtained what he asked, namely the light of his eyes, on the aforesaid day, through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, John Hod, of Wigemore, of the diocese of Hereford, who had lost the sight of his eyes for two months, when he had prayed for two days at the tomb of the Man of God, suddenly received sight through the merits of the Man of God. Item, Thomas of Ehilhm., of the county of Canter. ^m, who had been blind seven years and more, praying at the tomb of the Man of God, on that very day received sight through the help of the Man of God.

[25] Hugh, son of Hugh, son of Rader Atteke of Hompton, Many, deprived of various members, contracted for seven weeks, obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, Roger, son of Walter the miller, of the city of Hereford, having for six years a right hand withered and contracted, divinely obtained health. Item, William Gaint, of the parish of Wellington, having for three years and more a contracted hand, and the thumb closed in the fist, received health and straightness, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, Agnes of Mordeford, wholly maimed and contracted for five years, was healed from heaven. Item, Eva of Webbeton in the parish of Welbell, contracted for three years so that she was carried in a basket, leaving the basket to the church, went back; she was wholly freed from her sickness. Item, Emma of Hepe under Dunemora, contracted for twelve years so that, propped on two staves under the armpits ⁿ, she walked most wretchedly, returned safe to her own home, the staves being left to the church. Item, Joan, daughter of Thomas the baker of Great Marcle, contracted from birth, obtained for the first time the power of walking. Item, John, son of John de la Were of Kencestre , contracted from birth, likewise obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, Isabella, daughter of William Griffit, a citizen of Hereford, having for one year the left hand withered and contracted, received health.

[26] or wholly contracted, Item, Isabella of Chirithward, daughter of John of Tyberton, contracted for three years so that she could not raise or move her head, or look at her own feet, received the health she desired. Item, Robert, son of Thomas Tilterache, of the parish of Tatinton, lame for one year and more, and so contracted that he was carried in a certain cradle, divinely obtained straightness of walking. Item, Margaret de la Hyde, of the parish of Yrakhulle, contracted for four years, received health. Item, Hugh of Salophuris , contracted from birth, obtained for the first time the power of walking. Item, Agnes of Frompton upon Severne ^o, contracted for ten years, divinely obtained the power of walking upright. Item, Alice de Cupestre of Borsebur , having for ten years and more the right hand withered and contracted, received the health she desired. Item, William de la Welle of Newenherni upon Temede [p], contracted for two years, was likewise cured. Item, Sedonia of Talgar, for seven years dumb and likewise contracted, obtained from heaven the right power of speaking and walking. Item, Alice of Tullinton, contracted for seven years, divinely obtained the health she desired. Item, Joan of Forhamton, having a contracted hand for five years, received health. Item, John, son of William Compre, of Norton, of the age of four years and a half, wholly contracted from the time when he had only three weeks of age, obtained the power of walking and running.

[27] through the patronage of St. Thomas Item, Alice de Frenes, dwelling in the above-mentioned city, having for twenty-seven years before a neck so twisted that she always had her head and face leaning upon her left shoulder, received the health she desired, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, Christina, daughter of Ralph of Ledewith near Lodelawe, contracted for twenty years and more, received health. Item, Christina, daughter of Richard Martin of Chirburg, so contracted on her left side that she walked with two staves for a year and more before, obtained from heaven the power of walking upright. Item, Christiana, daughter of Walter the merchant of Allkrugg, of the parish of Ledebury, contracted for seven weeks, obtained health from heaven. Item, Matilda, daughter of Dionysius Northin of Gloucestre, of the age of four years, having from birth the left hand withered, contracted, received health from heaven. Item, William, son of William de Humbre, contracted for three years, divinely obtained straightness of walking. Item, Andrew, son of William Sely, of the parish of Penrkumbe , contracted for seven years, was restored from heaven to upright walking. Item, Catherine, daughter of Matilda Hunestre of Ros, having a twisted back and so bent and humped that she could not raise herself up, nor walk otherwise than by marvellously supporting herself with her hand placed upon her knee, deformedly bowed, the hump being taken away, received, the Lord granting it, straightness of stature and the power of walking upright.

[28] Item, Agnes, daughter of William de Essch, in the parish of Burford, obtain the use of their members. contracted for five years, was restored from heaven to upright walking. Item, Agnes, daughter of Hugh Borbi, of the same, who for four years had walked with her hands placed upon her knees, deformedly bowed, obtained straightness of stature and walking. Item, Alice Weredegeos of Bewerdesert near Barewik [q], contracted for a year and a half, walking propped on forked staves, was restored to upright walking. Item, a certain daughter of William Gydehorn, of the parish of Foye, having for seven years and more a humped and bent back, was restored to health. Item, Nicholas of Weston near Malmesbury, having his left hand withered and contracted, was cured from heaven. Item, Petronilla, daughter of Adam Coti, of Standon Pichard, having her right leg contracted for a long time, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. Item, Wendliana of Oswaldestre, having for eight preceding years the right hand wholly contracted, was cured from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Edith of Ailimni Destre , contracted for four years, received health. Item, Agnes, daughter of Regin. * le Hirche, of Ewasharald, so contracted in her legs that she had no power of walking at all, was cured from heaven. Item, a certain youth, Thomas called Cok, of the city of Dublin in Ireland [r], who, while he slept in the open air near Bristoll [s], was made so wretchedly contracted that he moved all the faithful who saw him walk to compassion and horror; when he had laboured under this affliction for three months, through the suffrage of the Man of God he was suddenly restored to his former health.

[29] Joan de Birches, daughter of Hugh Ked. of Pionia Canonicorum [t], The lame, and those otherwise deprived of walking, lame for one year and more, and contracted, obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, Agnes Moreth of the aforesaid city, lame for eight years and more, was healed. Item, Margaret, daughter of William Mael, a citizen of Hereford, lame in her feet and contracted for twenty-seven weeks, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. Item, David, son of Matthew of Baldinghuam, lame for one year, obtained straightness of walking. Item, Margaret, daughter of Alexander of Dimoc, lame for three years and more, obtained straightness of walking through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Alice de la Hulle in the parish of Buthulle, lame for seven years, was likewise healed. Item, Flanndrith of Astone, in the parish of Eye , for fourteen years so lame and contracted that she could neither sit nor go in any way, was cured through the suffrage of the Servant of God. Item, Matilda Child of Chideshendh, lame and likewise contracted on the right side, obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, Thomas Brundedif of Deornifeld , lame for ten years, was restored to upright walking. Item, William de Ros, called de Stone, lame for four years, obtained straightness of walking.

[30] Item, Matilda, daughter of David of Talgar le Englevs, and subject to other ills, of the diocese of St. Davids [u], for eight days

lame and likewise contracted, was healed. Item, Reginald of the house of St. John of Stafford, lame for seven years, divinely obtained the power of walking upright. Item, Herdevel of Ledebur North., lame for two years, and having a deformed and great swelling on her jaws, was cured from heaven of the swelling and the lameness. Item, Christiana, daughter of Hugh Hugerssaat, of the parish of Kingesleve, lame for five years, obtained from the Lord the power of walking upright. Item, William, called Dunepese, of the parish of Haneute near Portesmuwe [x], lame for one year, obtained the power of walking upright through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Richard de la Hulle, of Welbel, having a swelling on the left side of his face to such an extent that he was frequently hindered from seeing in the left eye, and also continually vexed with so grievous a pain of the kidneys that he could not walk unless supported by a great staff, was suddenly healed of both diseases through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Philip, son of Philip Abseys of Ewaslati *, lame, was restored from heaven to upright walking. Item, Dionysia, daughter of John Forsenet, of the parish of Jorubur, lame for VI years, was likewise cured.

[31] invoking him, they come away sound. Item, a certain man, by name William, son of Roger the clerk, of the parish of Grete, lame for three years, miraculously received the power of walking upright. Item, Juliana Faysant of Kudinart , lame for a long time, divinely obtained upright walking. Item, Griffin Apwillini of Ewiaslati , lame on both sides for half a year, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. Item, Henry, called the Merchant, son of Henry of Hupton near Seuherne, struck with a grievous infirmity in the left leg to such an extent that for half a year he walked most wretchedly with one staff, was cured from heaven at the first tomb of the Servant of God. Item, a certain man, John by name, of the county of Caucie [y], who had been lame for four years before, came to the tomb of the Man of God, supporting himself on two staves; and while Mass was being celebrated beside the tomb of the Man of God, he prostrated himself before the tomb, praying devoutly that through the merits of the Man of God the clemency of the Saviour would restore health to him; and behold, the Mass itself being completed, that man was at once restored to entire health through the help of the Man of God. Item, a certain clerk of Cirncestre, of the diocese of Worcester [z], by name Roger, who, as he swore, had become maimed in both hands, or at any rate contracted, for this reason, that he had presumed to distort the life and miracles of the Servant of God, came to the above-mentioned tomb, and placed his contracted hands, as best he could, upon his sarcophagus, and, thus praying with tears, suddenly, many seeing it, was healed [aa].

[32] Eight paralytics, Agnes of Wynton, struck for five years with the paralytic disease on the right side of her whole body, and contracted in the right hand, was healed through the suffrage of the Servant of God. Item, the same Agnes of Wynton, struck with the paralytic disease on the right side of her body, who had been healed, and fell again into the same sickness, perhaps her sins requiring it, returned devoutly and obtained from heaven a lasting health. Item, Robert de la Heche, of the parish of Schobbedone, struck with the paralytic disease, was divinely cured of a disease of that kind. Item, Margaret of Boseburg, lying paralytic in bed for twenty-three preceding years, received health from the Lord through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Robert, son of Adam of Witebache, of the parish of Bromfeld, paralytic for four years, divinely obtained health. Item, Juliana Textrix the Weaver of Mordford, struck with the paralytic disease, received health. Item, William de la Wiche near Chester [bb], paralytic and dumb for one year, received health. Item, Richard Cosyn of the city of London, struck with the disease of paralysis to such a degree that he was deprived of the strength of all his limbs, was restored from heaven to health in all his limbs.

[33] Item, a certain messenger came to the tomb of the Man of God swearing among whom one Irishman, are healed. that a certain man, by name Rader, of Kylkenni in Ireland, of the diocese of Lyminik [cc], his lord, had been so grievously struck with the paralytic disease that he was thought by all who saw him to be about to die in a short time; and when his friends had bent a penny over him, and had invoked the help of the Man of God for him, he obtained health from heaven, and therefore by the said messenger he sent the silver image which he had promised.

ANNOTATIONS.

p For Newenherni in our other copy is read Neuenshuam: but in both places, as I suspect, faultily, super Temede.

q The other copy has: near Warewik. Further, Barvick, in Latin Borcovicus, is a town or castle in Northumberland: but Warewick, or Warwicus, is the head of the county of Warwick in the same kingdom of England.

r Dublinium, commonly Dublin, the chief city of Ireland, is archiepiscopal, in the province of Leinster.

s Bristolium or Bristolia is a city of England, which I have already mentioned above.

t In vain have I sought this place, which is said below to have been a city. In our other manuscript it reads here: de Provincia canonicorum. Further, before those which follow is prefixed in the place of a title Rubric concerning the lame.

u See the Annotations here at letter b.

x In our other manuscript it is: near Portesinwe; in neither way is that place known to me.

y So plainly the other manuscript also has it, and they ought, I think, to be explained thus: of the community of Caucie; for England has no county of this name.

z Wigornia, in the vernacular Worcester, is an episcopal city of England under the metropolis of Canterbury, and the head of the county of the same name, commonly called Worcester-Shire.

aa Before the following, in the process, this title is prefixed: Rubric concerning paralytics.

bb Cestria, to the inhabitants Chester, is an episcopal city of England in the county of Chester, commonly Ches-Shire, of which it is the head.

cc In the other copy is had Lyminth, but it seems one should read Limerick or Limrick, in Latin Limericum and Lumniacum, which is a city of Ireland in Munster, head of the county of Limerick, with an episcopal see suffragan to the archbishop of Cashel.

al. Masinton*

al. Hereford.*

al. de Landon*

al. Colderhale*

perhaps filius*?

al. Carinton*

i.e. tuber*

al. Gumbaldi*

ætatis*

perhaps filii*?

al. Leneestre*

al. de Salophur*

al. Bosebur*

al. Alicia*

al. Peukumbe*

al. Alicia*

al. Aylmundestre*

al. Reginon*

al. de Cye*

al. Deorshicamfeld*

al. Ewpaslati*

al. Nidinart*

al. Ewaslati*

CHAPTER III.

Many others, beset by various diseases and perils, are freed through the help of the same Saint.

Three deaf John ^a of Dokkelowe, deaf for seven weeks, obtained the power of hearing. Item, Miriel, wife of Gilbert Travers, deaf and lacking sight in the left eye, received hearing and sight. Item, a certain youth, John by name, of the house and household of the lord John de Haveringes, justiciar of the lord king in Snowdon ^b, deaf for three years, received hearing suddenly through the suffrage of the Man of God ^c.

[35] and seven dumb are cured, William Ap David, dumb and likewise contracted, obtained the power of speaking and walking. Item, Hugh de Stoktene, son of Agnes de Stepestre, dumb for two years, received speech, in which fact this wonderful thing appeared, that to all looking into his mouth a great portion of his tongue was most manifestly seen to have grown anew by the working of supernatural power. Item, Sedonia of Talgar, for seven years dumb and likewise Col. 653A contracted, obtained from heaven the right power of speaking and walking. Item, Thomas, son of Thomas Mile, of Eton near Leomer , of the age of XII years, dumb from birth, received speech. Item, Wendliana, daughter of John Eynon of Ewyas , dumb for six weeks, obtained from heaven the power of speaking. Item, Margaret, daughter of William Bret, of the parish of Novelonde in the forest of Dene ^d, dumb for seven years and more before, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked at the place of his first burial, her silence being loosed, obtained from the Lord the faculty of speaking. Item, Hugh, called Suel, of Marstone in the parish of Pentecumbe, who had lost speech for three days before, was suddenly cured ^e.

[36] Matilda of Coldelhale *, frenzied or demented for seventeen years, ten frenzied or insane persons restored to a sound mind. was restored to health. Item, John of Cokebrugg near Dunsesarum, of the diocese ^f, for XII years before mad

or demented, when he was being led on the way by his friends to the tomb of the Man of God, bound with ropes and chains, all the bonds being suddenly broken of themselves, divinely obtained health. Item, Hugh, son of John Hove, of Austre, mad for a long time, obtained health from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain priest, by name John of Tendebur, mad for seven weeks, obtained health from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain young man, by name John, a priest of the diocese of Dunsisarum ^g, who had been mad from the sixth day of the month of April, was restored from heaven to his sound sense at the tomb of the Servant of God. Item, a certain man, by name Adam le Yewynd, of Burton, who had been mad for three weeks before, was restored to his right sense through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, John, son of John of Herdesley, of the diocese of Hereford, demented for almost three weeks, was restored to his former health through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman, Edith by name, of Wynton, mad for one year and more, obtained from heaven her right sense through the suffrage of the Man of God at his tomb. Item, a certain man, John by name, of Rynemarford *, likewise mad for half a year and more, was cured in like manner. Item, Robert the goldsmith of Bristoll ^h, who had been mad for almost three months, was restored from heaven to his sense ⁱ.

[37] Rosa of Acton , having for eight years her hands swollen to such an extent A swelling of the hands, the quinsy, arthritis, that she could not move them, received the health she desired in these. Item, Adam, called Absalon, a chaplain dwelling at Hereford, having from the disease which is called squinantia ^k so great and hard a swelling in his throat and neck that he could neither speak nor swallow anything; when he was thought by physicians and friends to be about to die forthwith, by chance he fell asleep, in which sleep, as he afterwards asserted, it seemed to him that the man of God Thomas, clad in red priestly vestments, came to him, and touched the place of the disease strongly with his hand, commanding him to rise as quickly as possible and speak freely: who, at once obeying the one commanding, rose up sound through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, Juliana, daughter of William the Cook of Credehulle, weighed down by the disease which is called squinantia, miraculously received health. Item, William of Gosinton , vexed for five years and more with so grievous a disease, which is called the gout ^l, that with staves he scarcely walked at a slow pace and with distress, when he had most devoutly undertaken the journey of coming to the tomb of the Servant of God, many asserting that he could not accomplish the journey, on the very journey was made so sound that he came to the tomb without staves, and from there returned wholly sound to his own home with joy.

[38] a disorder of the thumb and a fever cured: a broken leg healed. Item, Robert, perpetual vicar of Clifford, by a certain accident horribly cut off a great part of the thumb of his left hand, and, having taken up again the part cut off, when he wished to join or fit it to its whole, he was vexed with so grievous a pain that he let go from himself that part of the thumb which he had bound to its whole, and most devoutly invoked the suffrage of God alone and of his servant Bishop Thomas. Which done, all the distress of the pain so suddenly ceased that he felt no trouble in it afterwards, but within a few days his thumb, through the help of the Man of God, without any deformity of nail or flesh or length, was restored to wholeness, many marvelling. Item, Thomas London, saddler ^m of Hereford, vexed with fevers for eleven weeks, received health. Item, a certain woman of the castle of Goderiti , by name Eva Cokes, having a leg broken by accident, which could not be helped, although diligence had been applied for a long time to its cure, when at the tomb of the Man of God she had for some long while invoked his suffrage most devoutly, suddenly, many marvelling and praising God, was healed, so that, running in the church and outside, and clapping her hands for joy, she paid thanks to God with wonderful devotion by words, signs and gestures of the body.

[39] [Likewise a fever driven away: speech restored to a dumb girl; poison, gout and a swelling of the face taken away.] Item, Roger Gernun, of the parish of Malmes Hulle Gramages, vexed with fevers for ten days before, obtained health from heaven. Item, Wendliana, daughter of John Eynon of Ewyaslati, a dumb girl, who had been healed by the merits of the Man of God, when, returning from the sepulchre of the aforesaid Man of God toward her own home, she had come to St. Mowhan Minchenesili ⁿ, of the diocese of Hereford, lost again the speech which she had miraculously received: who afterwards returned more devoutly with her parents to the tomb of the Servant of God, and there, her silence being loosed, received the desired faculty of speaking. Item, Petronilla of Elehangre, vexed for a long time with a most grievous pain of the head, and with a swelling belly as though dropsical, infected with the poison of a toad which, as she asserted, had poisoned her as she slept, suddenly vomited the poison in great quantity, and received health in head and in body, many marvelling. Item, Gilbert of Compton, vexed with the infirmity of the gout, obtained health from heaven. Item, Henry, son of Walter de Baskewile, lord of Kishope , of the age of half a year, having his face so swollen that he could not see, when his parents, fearing that he was about to die forthwith, had most devoutly invoked the suffrage of the Man of God for him, suddenly received health, all the swelling being taken away. His aforesaid parents, that they might have discharged what they had vowed for him, brought him to the tomb of the Servant of God with devout offerings .

[40] A fever cured, a pain of the side, a disorder of the foot and arthritis, etc. Item, Richard, son of Ralph of Crumpewalle, of the diocese of Lincoln ^o, vexed with fever for seven years, received health, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, John, called Picard, of the household of the earl of Gloucester [p], vexed with a grievous pain in the left side, received health, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, Nicholas, son of William Noreys, of Mora Canonicorum, having for two years on his left foot a hard and swollen lump [q], received health. Item, a certain man, by name Philip, called de Stepleton, of the diocese of Hereford, who had before been vexed for three continuous days so grievously by the infirmity which physicians call the Gout that he could move neither hands nor feet without most grievous pain, when he had most devoutly invoked the suffrage of the Servant of God, was forthwith healed. Item, the lord Geoffrey de Abbetost, knight, of the diocese of Worcester, had a falcon which had been dead for a whole natural day; while, thrown out of the house, it had lain there thus dead, a certain person, grieving at this, bent a penny over the falcon, imploring the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas; and behold, suddenly the falcon revived, and was carried alive and sound to the tomb of the Servant of God. Item, it happened that a certain precious horse, which they call a destrier [r], was brought to the tomb of the Servant of God; which was suddenly healed there, many marvelling, both of a blindness which had marvellously come upon it, and of a grave infirmity which it had in its leg and in its foot.

[41] After these things, when the aforementioned nobles were besieging the castle of Yruslanh [s], The Saint, invoked, comes to the help of those in peril of life, which the Welsh had seized, one of the Welsh, shooting from the castle, struck the lord Rader le Buteler [t], knight, beneath one of his eyes, so that the iron of the arrow was horribly fixed deep in his head. And when it was most certainly believed by the bystanders that he had lost not only his eye but also his life, and he himself, as he then could, by signs, together with his friends who were then there, had for some while invoked the help of God and of his servant Thomas, he miraculously received sight in the injured eye itself, and the health of life. Item, when the above-mentioned nobles had brought such force and skill to bear on the castle that its outer wall fell, and in falling, by misfortune or accident, crushed many of the said nobles, two knights, however, according to the assertion of those then standing nearer, escaped the peril of death miraculously through the help of the Servant of God. One of them, however, was saved much more marvellously than the other; for whom, while he lay crushed among the dead, and nothing of his body appeared outwardly except his feet, his esquire invoked the help of the Man of God, and drew him out unhurt from under the stones and mortar with marvellous ease.

[42] Item, Thomas de Peshale, rector of the church of Frompton, as also to one suffering in the kidneys, and to a woman believed dead, vexed with so grievous a pain in the kidneys and in the feet that for half a year before he could not walk or ride, obtained the full power of walking and riding, and was cured of all languor of body through the suffrage of the Servant of God. Item, John, son of Adam of Kingescaple, coming to the tomb of the man of God Bishop Thomas, bringing with him his wife and one cow, and many other friends and neighbours, related in a great multitude of people that, his aforesaid wife having been laid low a few days before by so grave a sickness that she was thought dead by all who were about her, he promised that he would offer that cow to God and to his servant Thomas for the health and restoration of his wife, and had the woman herself measured, as is the custom; which done, at once, made alive, she sat up and asked that food be given her, and within a few days was restored to her former health.

[43] Item, a certain youth, John Tregoz [u], and also to a youth tormented with a disorder of the side. namely the nephew of the lord John Tregoz, knight, who had been vexed for four years before with a grievous pain under the right side, of which he could not be cured by the manifold help of physicians applied to him, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and passing the night in prayer beside it, about the middle of the night, when he had fallen asleep a little, it seemed to him, as he asserted, most manifestly in sleep that the man of God Thomas came to him, and, his hand stretched out, pierced the place of the side under which the disease lay hid so strongly that he, awakened from sleep, many hearing, cried out horribly, asserting before all that St. Thomas had inflicted a grievous wound on him in the side; by which marvellous cry he gathered very many to himself, desiring to see that marvellous wound, if there were any; who found him without any wound and pain, wholly cured and sound from heaven through this unwonted aid of the Man of God.

[44] He helps those in peril on the sea, preserves a roebuck; Item, the lord Roger de Poywlesdon *, knight, then keeper of Anglesey [x], and fourteen other knights, and thirty other men, sailing on the sea

began, having good calm through all that day: on the following night the sea began to be troubled by a most savage storm, and their ship to be so tossed in the waves of the sea that they despaired of human remedy. At length, the suffrage of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas having been invoked, at once the storm ceased, and they were brought to harbour with the greatest calm and sweetness. Item, a certain little beast, namely a roebuck, which in French they call chevreul, which the son of the lord Alan Plukenet [y], knight, had held dear, as one who had had it reared with care for a long time, fell from the wall of the castle of Broslan * from so high to the ground that, one of its legs being broken, and its bowels also shattered, blood burst out through the lower passages of its body; and when it was with likelihood thought by all who were then standing by there to be dead, or about to die forthwith, some of them, grieving at this accident, promised an offering for the little beast to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; and behold, the little beast at once rose up alive and sound, and, many seeing, marvelling and praising God, forthwith took food.

[45] he draws men away from shipwreck. Item, a certain man, namely Nicholas Pop of Bristoll, and very many companions of his were in a certain great ship laden with divers precious merchandise, sailing on the Irish sea; and there having arisen so great and horrible a storm that they plainly saw many ships near them at that time sink, they fell into so grave a peril that, all hope of safety being taken away, and every instrument of the ship, and even the rudder, being abandoned, they committed the ship itself to the savage waves of the wild sea and the thrusts of the deadly storm, awaiting the hour of death with horrible fear. And then the Father of mercies and God of all consolation inspired them, as is with likelihood believed, with such counsel that they should invoke the help of God himself and of his servant, the aforesaid Bishop Thomas: whence also they promised a silver ship to the aforesaid Servant of God, if the Most High would deign to save them through his merits: which done, at once, as it were in a moment, all that storm ceased, and was suddenly and unexpectedly changed into so great a calm that they reckoned that sudden change for a great miracle. And they, thenceforward sailing prosperously, landed happily at the port they desired, and most devoutly offered the silver ship which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God.

[46] Item, a certain man, by name Geoffrey, called le Bruth, A fire put out; a horse cured; a small bone taken out of a throat. of Tylsak * in Ireland, came to the tomb of the Man of God, that, when his house had begun to burn with a horrible flame from the burning of a certain neighbouring house, and he, invoking the help of the same Man of God, had bent a penny on bended knees against the fire, by the wonderful power of God the whole fire was suddenly put out. Item, a certain man, by name William Heyward, serving-man of the noble man the lord Robert de Ros, lord of the castle of Bavier [z], of the diocese of Lincoln, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his aforesaid lord had had a palfrey [aa] which had lain as though dead for seven days; and when at length it had been measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, it soon received entire health. Item, a certain man, by name William of Tynewelle in Rote Londa, of the diocese of Lincoln, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when at a certain time he was eating beef, by a marvellous chance a certain bone, entering his throat, stuck so fixed in it that by no force or skill could it be drawn out from there; but it so afflicted him for six continuous days that his friends most certainly despaired of his life; but when they had promised an offering to God's Servant for his health, he was at once freed from the bone and from the said peril; and for that reason he carried it, together with the promised offering, to the tomb of the Man of God.

[47] Item, a certain woman, Anicia by name, wife of William, One contracted by a grave infirmity is restored to soundness. called Oliverius, of Croydon in the county of Sucheray [bb], of the diocese of Winc. [cc], in whose lodging the Man of God had been accustomed sometimes to lodge, and many others with her swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain Walter, a scholar, son of the aforesaid woman, was so contracted in his whole body by a most grievous infirmity that he lay as though deprived of all the strength of his body for about six months; for whom the mother, having great compassion, one day with a tearful voice broke out into these words, directing her speech to the bystanders: O how often has St. Thomas de Cantilupe rested in this lodging, as it pleased his will, with his household! Would that it might now please him to come to our help in this dwelling in so wretched a moment of need! And these things said, she turned her speech to God and to his Servant, humbly supplicating them for the health of her son; and the prayer having been made, when her aforesaid son was soon afterwards asleep, he saw in sleep a certain venerable man, clad in white, touching him and saying to him: Rise, for you are now made sound: who, at once awakened and wholly restored to health, rose up through the suffrage of the Man of God.

[48] Item, certain nobles of the county of Norwich [dd], asserting evidently The cardiac disease twice driven away; a falcon raised to life; a fire put out; that a certain man sprung from their parts, afflicted with the cardiac passion for ten years, had vowed that he would go as a pilgrim to God's servant Thomas at Hereford if God, by the merits of the Man of God, would free him with a swift remedy from the aforementioned sickness. Which done, the pain of all his languor departed from heaven, and he, as one ungrateful, forgetful of his Healer, negligently put off fulfilling his vow for the seven following years. Which seven years having elapsed, he began again to be horribly tormented by the said disease; who, devoting himself anew to God and to the aforesaid Servant of God, and finding sureties for visiting him in person, within three days again received health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, Walter de Banford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had had a certain falcon which, extinguished by a sudden death, had lain cold for a great space of time, a vow having been uttered for it to the Servant of God, he received it forthwith made alive and sound through the help of the Man of God. Item, a certain person was present at the tomb of the Man of God who, sworn, related truthfully that, when his house had been set on fire on every side, and was ablaze, and the flame of the fire was spreading hither and thither in different directions, nor was human remedy to be looked for there, he fled devoutly to the refuge of God alone and of his servant Thomas. And when, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, he had bent a penny in his memory, as is the custom, very soon all that fire was put out.

[49] [a grievous wound of the leg healed: light restored to a one-eyed woman; to the lame] Item, a certain young man of Berkel came to the tomb of the Man of God, who asserted that he had been struck through the middle of the leg by a certain arrow; and when he had come to the Man of God to make an offering for the cure of his leg, within a short time he was restored to his former health, no human care having intervened in this. Item, Cecilia, daughter of Juliana of the county of York [ee], dwelling in the parish of Wyrshop near Blythe, blind in the left eye through the infirmity which is called Pockes, or per cota [ff], measured afterwards to Blessed Thomas, bishop of Hereford, and coming, setting out as a pilgrim, to the tomb of the said Saint, and on returning home , received sight, and is freed from heaven, through the suffrage of the Servant of God, from all the deformity she had before in the eye. Item, Juliana Kynges of Credelee, being lame and drawn up for five years, and she being admonished in sleep that she should visit the tomb of Blessed Thomas, bishop of Hereford, and would receive her former health: and so on the morrow she was measured to the said Bishop, and a little after, through the merits of the Man of God, she was divinely healed.

[50] the faculty of walking granted. Item, a certain youth, by name John, of Hamlee in the parish of Credelee, lame and drawn up for seven years, and being mindful of the miracles which were being done at the tomb of the said Saint, afterwards visited the said tomb, and, on returning home, near Luggebrug, weeping and wailing, invoking the help of God and of St. Thomas, for the first time stood, and at once obtained from heaven free walking through the suffrage of the Servant of God [gg]. Item, Richard of Multon near Northamton [hh], contracted from birth until four years, and measured to the Man of God, staying at his tomb for two nights, and on returning home received from heaven free walking through the merits of the Man of God.

ANNOTATIONS.

p Glovernia, otherwise Glocestria, is a city and county, of which the latter is called by the English Glocester-Shire, the former, which is episcopal under the archbishop of Canterbury, Glocester.

q This word seems to indicate a small lump, and to be the Italian boccio, which signifies the cocoon of the silkworm, etc.

r In the other exemplar it is dextimum, but here is denoted a horse commonly called by the writers of the middle age dextrarius, by which word were meant war horses and horses in armour.

s The other copy has: Castrum de Yncilan; but by neither name is this castle known to me. Below, in Part 4, chapter 2, it is called Troslam: whether more rightly, I shall not divine. See, however, the Annotations there at letter ee. The Walenses, or Wallenses, of whom mention follows immediately, are the inhabitants of Wales, which is the western part of the kingdom of England, called by the English The Walles, and which long obeyed its own princes.

t William Camden in his Description of Britain lists Butler also among the more illustrious families of the same island.

u That one of the sisters of St. Thomas was married to a certain baron de Tregoz we have said in the preliminary Commentary.

x Anglesey, or Mona, is an island of Great Britain and a county of Wales, in the Vergivian or Irish sea, over against the county of Arvon, from which it is separated only by the narrow strait of Menai. The keeper of this island, that is, the governor, as I think, was Roger, of whom treatment is given here.

y Our other manuscript has Pulkenet. In Camden, in the description of the county of Hereford, page 470, Alan Plugenet is recorded with the title of baron. In the same manuscript, for filia is read filii, and the rest consequently in the plural number.

z In the praised Camden, in the description of the county of York, the Barons de Rosse are named. The castle which in the edition is called Bavier, in the other exemplar Bewer, I have not found. Concerning Lincoln, of whose diocese it is said to have been, I have already treated above.

aa Palefridus, Palafridus, etc., to the French Palefroi, is an ambling horse.

bb The other copy has Hicheray: but I think that here is indicated the county of England Surria, called by Bede Suthriona, now called by the English Surrey and Suthrey.

cc In the other exemplar: Wync. dioces. In both places the diocese of Winchester seems to be designated, whose see is Wintonia, to the English Winchester, a city in the county of Hampshire, to which Surrey lies adjacent.

dd In the same place is read de com. Norwycen. One should read de communitate Norwycensi or Norvicensi. Further, Norwicus, to the English Norwich, is the chief city of the county of Norfolk, having a bishopric suffragan to the metropolis of Canterbury. Concerning it Camden, in the description of Norfolk, says this from William of Malmesbury: And in the seventeenth year of King Stephen (who reigned in England in the XIIth century) Norwich was founded anew, as a peopled township, and made a community.

ee The county of York, commonly Yorck-Shire, is the greatest province of all England. Its head is the city of Eboracum, called by the English Yorck, made illustrious by the title of archbishopric and of duchy.

ff Pockes, or in Dutch Pokjes, in English the smallpox, are pustules, otherwise also called varioli, by the French la petite verole. Why, however, this disease is explained here by the words per cota, I do not see; unless perhaps cota is the French word cote, or quote or cote part, in Latin quota pars a share; which is also used for a tribute which individual subjects must pay to their prince. For since the disease of the smallpox is so common that by far the greatest part of men suffers from it at least once, it can in a way be called a certain tribute owed to nature.

gg Here there follow in our copies four miracles concerning the dead raised to life, which I have referred above to their class. One, however, was mixed in with these, which, since it belongs here, I subjoin.

hh Northantonia, to the natives Northampton, is a city of England, head of the county of the same name.

al. Jeon*

al. Cynon de Ewas*

al. Colderhale*

al. Kynemarford*

al. Atton*

al. de Bosvinton*

al. Goderici*

al. aliquandiu*

al. de Kysthope*

add illum*

al. de Poywleston*

al. Brollan*

al. Tylsab*

al. Winshop*

perhaps domum*?

PART IV OF THE MIRACLES.

CHAPTER I.

Miracles and benefits obtained at the Saint's sepulchres in the year MCCLXXXVII, in the months of April and May.

Preface concerning what follows. That which follows in the following quires up to the report was not drawn up in the process of all, nor was any examination made upon them by the commissaries of this process, except in so far as the contents of these following quires had been abridged, omitting the year and day in many, and set in the quires of miracles previously delivered on the thirteenth day of the month of November before the aforesaid commissaries ^a. Here are noted certain miracles proved by faithful assertion, which the power of the most high God has worked in these days in the cathedral church of Hereford, to the praise and glory of his name, and to the declaration of the merits and praiseworthy life of his servant, the lord Thomas de Cantilupo of pious memory, sometime bishop of the church above-mentioned, whose bones are buried in the same church.

[2] On the fifth weekday, then, at the Lord's Supper, namely the IIII Nones of April ^b, in the year of grace one thousand two hundred and eighty-seven, On the very day of the translation, blind persons given light at the tomb. and in the fifth year from the passing of the said Bishop from this life ^c, when the lord Richard, by the grace of God bishop of the same church, and his immediate successor, had buried the bones of the aforesaid Servant of God from the place where they had formerly been buried, for various and lawful causes, according to the ordinance of those who had formerly been executors of his testament ^d, and with the will and consent of the chapter of the church above-mentioned, in another more fitting place in the same church ^e, and had had the Mass which is commonly celebrated for the dead celebrated in his presence beside his new sepulchre; a certain man, by name John de Masintona, of the parish of Ledebury under Malvern, of the diocese of Hereford, blind for two years and more, obtained sight from heaven at the new tomb of the above-mentioned Bishop ^f. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, by name Cristina de Mortone, dwelling in the above-mentioned city, blind for eight years and more, received sight. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, by name Margaret of Erdesleye, of the same diocese, blind in the left eye for one year and more, obtained the power of seeing. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, Walter by name, of Westone near Inswardin, of the same diocese, blind in the left eye for a long time, obtained the power of seeing. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, Richard by name, of the aforesaid city, lacking the sight of both eyes for five years and more, obtained the power of seeing in the right eye.

[3] On the sixth weekday next following, namely the day of the Parasceve, On the next day, and on Holy Saturday, contracted persons, Philip the harper of the aforesaid city, contracted for sixteen years to such an extent that his crossed legs could not be separated by any strength of his own nor by the help of physicians, obtained there such health through the aid of the Servant of God that he could easily separate and move those legs by himself, and with a little support go round the tomb itself. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, by name Juliana of Etone, near Sugwas, of the same diocese, contracted for nine years and more to such a degree that she was carried in a basket to the said tomb, came out of the basket by herself, having divinely obtained health. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, John by name, of Mathefeld in the parish of Madeleye, of the same diocese, of the age of XXV years, maimed in both hands and almost dumb and likewise humped, returned sound in all these things. Item, on the same day and in the same place Hugh, son of Hugh Atey, of Hompton, of the same diocese, contracted for seven weeks, obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain young man, Roger by name, of the aforesaid city, having for six years a right hand withered and contracted, divinely obtained health.

[4] and others afflicted with other infirmities, healed in the same place, On the following night, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Sibyl by name, of Bruge Solers, of the same diocese, having blindness in the right eye for three years, obtained sight in it. Item, on the same night and in the same place a certain man, William by name, of the parish of Welintone, of the same diocese, having for three years and more a contracted hand, and the thumb closed in the fist, received health and straightness in it, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. On the next Saturday, namely Holy Saturday of Easter, in the aforesaid place a certain woman, Agnes by name, of Mordeford, wholly maimed and contracted for five years, was healed from heaven. On the following night, in the same place, a certain woman, Matilda by name, of Codhale, frenzied or demented for seven years, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked, was restored to health. Item, on the same night and in the same place Joan de Birches, of Penna Canonicorum, of the same diocese, lame for one year and more, and contracted, obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, on the same night and in the same place a certain woman, Agnes by name, of the parish of Bullinghope, of the same diocese, blind for seven years, received sight.

[5] [On the following day of Easter others, contracted women, blind persons, a lame woman] On the holy day of Easter, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Eva by name, of Webbetone in the parish of Welbeleye, of the same diocese, contracted for three years to such a degree that she was carried in a basket, returned wholly freed from her sickness, leaving the basket to the church. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Emma by name, of Hope under Cinemor, contracted for twelve years to such a degree that, propped on two staves ^g under the armpits, she walked most wretchedly, returned safe to her own home, those staves being left to the church. Item, on the same day, where the bones had formerly been buried ^h, a certain man, John by name, of Landun, from the parts of Brehenok ⁱ, of the diocese of St. Davids, blind for two years and more, received sight. On the first night following, at the new tomb, a certain woman, Agnes by name, surnamed Moreth, of the aforesaid city, lame for eight years and more, was healed from heaven.

[6] a one-eyed woman, in the same place, were made sound. Item, on the same night and in the same place a certain woman, by name Juliana, of Warewik ^k, blind for sixteen weeks, received sight. Item, on the same night and in the same place a certain woman, by name Juliana, of the aforesaid city, lacking sight in the right eye, who, mocking at the above-mentioned miracles, behaved irreverently in many ways in speaking, and on that account, as was reasonably thought by the bystanders, fell to the ground as if dead, when by a certain woman, by name Matilda de Coldahale *, who on the preceding night had been freed there from heaven from madness, to the tomb itself

was being carried, and had lain there lifeless for some while, at length, recovering her breath, she departs made alive, and, confessing and publicly acknowledging those sins which a little before she had committed against God and against his Servant, together with life she obtained from the Lord also the faculty of seeing in the right eye.

[7] On the next second weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain man, by name John de Holhamptone, then reeve of the lord Roger de Bradeleye, knight, having on his neck an old and swollen hump, while he invoked the suffrage of the Servant of God, was speedily freed from the aforesaid hump. [On the 2nd and 3rd weekdays, a humped man, the deaf, the lame, the contracted and a one-eyed woman cured.] On the next night, in the aforesaid place, John of Dokkelawe, of the same diocese, deaf for seven weeks, obtained from heaven the power of hearing. On the third weekday next following, a certain girl, by name Margaret, daughter of William Mael, a citizen of Hereford, lame in her feet and contracted for twenty-seven weeks, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. Item, where the bones had formerly been buried, a certain infant, John by name, son of John de la Vere, of Kencestr ^l, of the age of two years, contracted from birth, likewise obtained from heaven the power of walking. Item, in the same place a certain woman, Muriel by name, wife of Gilbert Travers, deaf and lacking sight in the left eye, received hearing and sight. Item, on the same day, at the new tomb, a certain girl, Joan by name, daughter of Thomas the baker, of Great Merkeleya, of the age of four years, contracted from birth, obtained for the first time the power of walking.

[8] On the fourth weekday next following, at the new tomb, a certain girl, On the three following days, others again by name Isabella, daughter of William Grifith, a citizen of Hereford, having for one year and more the left hand withered and contracted, received health. On the following night, in the same place, a certain woman, by name Dikibo, wife of William Clement, of the aforesaid city, blind for two years, received sight. On the fifth weekday next following, at the place of the first burial, a certain widow, by name Alice, of Uptone, blind for three years and more, received sight. Item, at the new sepulchre a certain woman, by name Isabella of Chirtheyard, of the parish of Marchel, contracted for three years to such a degree that she could not raise or move her head, nor look at her own feet, received the health she desired. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain widow of Penna Canonicorum, Alditha by name, blind for six years and more, received sight. On the next sixth weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Alice by name, of Webbel, blind for seventeen years, divinely obtained sight.

[9] Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, David by name, [the contracted, the blind, paralytics, the dumb, obtained health in the same place.] of Baldinghtram, lame for one year, obtained straightness of walking. On the following night, in the aforesaid place, a certain man, by name Nicholas, surnamed Bridab, having for one year and more his right eye blinded, received sight in it from heaven. Item, on the same night and in the same place a certain girl, Agnes by name, of Ynintone, struck for five years with the paralytic disease on the right side of her whole body, and contracted in the right hand, was healed through the suffrage of the Servant of God. Item, in the same place Margaret of Homptone, blind for a long time before, received sight. On the Saturday next following a certain man, by name Robert de Gilderate, in the parish of Andintone, lame for one year and more, and so contracted that he was carried in a certain cradle, divinely obtained straightness of walking. Item, a certain man, David by name, dumb and likewise contracted, obtained the power of speaking and walking. Item, a certain girl, Helena by name, daughter of the same Agnes, of Bromiard, dumb and likewise contracted, obtained a health like the former.

[10] On the next Sunday, namely on the Ides of April, a certain woman, Margaret by name, of Dimmok, A like benefit conferred on others in the following four days, lame for three years and more, obtained straightness of walking through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, William by name, constable of Stepeltone ^m, having a withered hand for twelve years, received health. On the next second weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain man, by name John of Kingescone, of the diocese of Hereford, lame and likewise contracted on the left side for five years and more, divinely obtained straightness of walking. Item, a certain woman, Edith by name, of Kingtone, of the same diocese, lame on the left side for seven years, was likewise healed. Item, a certain woman, Matilda by name, of Wbitenburne, of the same diocese, lame for a long time, was cured there from heaven. On the next third weekday a certain young man, Hugh by name, of Stoctone, of the same diocese, dumb for two years, divinely obtained the power of speaking in the aforesaid place, in which fact this wonderful thing appeared, that to all looking into his mouth a great portion of his tongue was most manifestly seen to have grown anew by the working of supernatural power. On the next fourth weekday Alice of Stokemelle, of the parish of Bodenhtram, of the same diocese, lame for three years, obtained from the Lord straightness of walking through the suffrage of the Man of God.

[11] and again to others on the day after. On the next fifth weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Alice by name, of Bokelnitone, of the same diocese, lame for two years, was likewise healed. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Alice by name, de la Hulle, in the parish of Burehulle, of the same diocese, lame for seven years, was likewise healed. Item, a certain woman of Dindindale, in the parish of Bodinham, by name Marserra, lame for two years, was healed in like manner. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Alice by name, of Avenebyri, of the same diocese, lame for one year, was healed in like manner. Item, a certain woman, Roisia of Hope under Dinemor, of the same diocese, lame for two years, was likewise cured. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain girl, Agnes by name, of Ymintone, of the same diocese, struck with the paralytic disease on the right side of her whole body, who had been healed, as is plain above, on the sixth weekday next preceding, and fell into the same sickness, perhaps her sins requiring it, returned devoutly a second time, and obtained from heaven a lasting health. On the following night, in the same place, a certain young man, William by name, of Ledewik, of the same diocese, struck with the paralytic disease for two years, was healed by the Lord through the suffrage of the Servant of God.

[12] Similar miracles On the sixth weekday next following, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, by name Margaret, of the parish of Yarchull, contracted for four years, received health. Item, a certain woman, by name Flandritha, of Astone in the parish of Cya, for fourteen years so lame and contracted that she could neither sit nor go in any way, was cured through the suffrage of the Servant of God. On the next Saturday, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Alice by name, of Stok near Leomistre, lame for two years, obtained from the Lord the power of walking upright through the suffrage of the Servant of God. On the following Sunday, namely the XII Kalends of May, in the aforesaid place, a certain man, by name Robert, of the parish of Sobbedone, of the same diocese, struck with the paralytic disease, was divinely cured of a disease of this kind. On the next fifth weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain boy, Hugh by name, of Salopresbury, of the diocese of Xychefeld ⁿ, contracted from birth, obtained for the first time the power of walking. On the next sixth weekday, in the same place, a certain woman, Joan by name, of Forhamptone, contracted for five years, obtained from the Lord straightness of walking. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Himith by name, of Rolvestone, lame and likewise contracted from birth, obtained from heaven the health she desired in these.

[13] On the next Saturday, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, obtained in the same place by various persons in the rest of the month of April. Matilda by name, of Childerheuley, lame and likewise contracted on the right side, obtained from the Lord from heaven the power of walking. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, by name William of Lude, deaf for two years, obtained hearing from heaven. Item, a woman, Emmota by name, of Ros, of the diocese of Hereford, having her right eye blinded, obtained sight in it. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, Thomas by name, of Clif of Berminfeld, lame for ten years, was restored to upright walking. Item, a certain woman, Agnes by name, of Fromptone upon Menerne, contracted for ten years, divinely obtained the power of walking upright. On the next following Sunday, namely the fifth of the Kalends of May, a certain man, by name Thomas de Kilpek, deprived of the sight of one eye for twelve years, obtained sight in it. On the next fourth weekday a certain woman, by name Roisia, of Candintone, blind for ten years, received sight. Item, on the same day a certain woman, Alice by name, of Rosebur, of the diocese of Hereford, having for ten years and more the right hand withered and contracted, received the health she desired. On the next fifth weekday a certain man, William by name, de la Welle, of Nevenham upon the river Severn ^o, contracted for two years, was likewise cured.

[14] On the third weekday next following, namely the second of the Nones of May, Likewise similar and other a certain woman, by name Sedonia, of Galsar, for seven years dumb and likewise contracted, obtained from heaven the right power of speaking and walking. On the next fourth weekday a certain woman, Alice by name, of Tilintone, contracted for seven years, divinely obtained the health she desired. On the next sixth weekday a certain woman, Joan by name, of Forhamptone, having a contracted hand for five years, received health. On the next following Saturday, in the aforesaid place, a certain boy, Thomas by name, of Burhulle, lacking sight in both eyes for five weeks, and wholly in the left from birth, obtained from heaven sight in both, and more clearly in the left. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, William by name, called de Bos, of Stone, lame for four years, obtained straightness of walking. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain boy, of the age of four years and a half, John by name, of Nortone, wholly contracted from the time when he had only three weeks of age, obtained the power of walking and running. On the next Sunday, namely the fifth of the Ides of May, a certain woman, Rosa by name, of Actone, having for eight years her hands swollen to such an extent that she could not move them, received the health she desired in these.

[15] Item, on the same day and in the same place Adam the Painter, of the aforesaid city, was divinely cured of a like disease. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Agnes by name, de la Stone, of Afforwik, was cured of a like disease. On the second weekday next following a certain chaplain, infirmities of the body in the same month of April

called Adam Absalon, dwelling in the city of Hereford, having from the disease which is called schinancia [p] so great and hard a swelling in his throat and neck that he could neither speak nor swallow anything; when he was thought by physicians and friends to be about to die forthwith, by chance he fell asleep, in which sleep, as he afterwards asserted, it seemed to him that the man of God Thomas, clad in red priestly vestments, came to him, and touched the place of the disease strongly with his hand, commanding him to rise quickly and speak freely. Who, at once obeying the one commanding, rose up sound through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the next third weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain young man, William by name, of Brampton, a clerk, having a spot in the left eye, and blindness for seven years and more, received sight in it from heaven. On the next fifth weekday, namely the day of the Ascension of the Lord, in the same place a certain man, by name Richard of Gaddefort, of the diocese of Ronesorwic [q], blind before for three years, received sight.

[16] and in the next month of May Item, about the same time a certain man, John by name, of Kokebrugg near Divises [r], of the diocese of Salisbury, for twelve years before mad or demented, when he was being led on the way toward the tomb of the Man of God by his friends, bound with ropes and chains, all the bonds being suddenly broken of themselves, divinely obtained health. On the next sixth weekday, at the above-mentioned tomb, a certain man, Richard by name, of Arleya near Stafford [s], of the diocese of Lichfield, blind in the right eye, received sight from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the next Sunday, namely the XVI Kalends [t] of June, a certain man, Adam by name, of Stransford, blind for three years and more, obtained sight from heaven in the aforesaid place. On the next third weekday, namely the day of St. Ethelbert [u], a certain woman, by name Alice, of Fremes, dwelling in the above-mentioned city, having for twenty-seven years before a neck so twisted that she always had her head and face leaning upon her left shoulder, received there the health she desired, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman, by name Juliana, of Credenhulle, weighed down by the disease which is called squinantia, miraculously received health. On the next fifth weekday, at the first tomb of the Man of God, a certain woman, by name Christiana, of Ledewiba near Lodelawe, contracted for twenty years and more, received health. On the same day and in the same place a certain woman of Chirbury, of the diocese of Hereford, by name Christiana, so contracted on her left side that she walked with two staves for a year and more before, obtained from heaven the power of walking upright.

[17] driven away through the patronage of the same Saint. On the same day, in the same place, a certain boy of Etone near Leoministr, Thomas by name, of the age of twelve years, dumb from birth, divinely obtained speech. About the same time Robert, perpetual vicar of Clifford, of the diocese of Hereford, by a certain accident horribly cut off a great part of the thumb of his left hand, and, having taken up again the part cut off, when he wished to join or fit it to its whole, he was vexed with so grievous a pain that he let go from himself that part of the thumb which he had bound to its whole, and most devoutly invoked the suffrage of God alone and of his servant, the aforementioned Bishop Thomas; which done, all the distress of the pain so suddenly ceased that he felt no trouble in it afterwards, but within a few days his thumb, through the help of the Man of God, without any deformity of nail or flesh or length, was restored to wholeness, many marvelling. About the same time a certain man, William by name, of Gohntone, vexed for five years and more with so grievous a disease, which is called the gout [x], that with staves he scarcely walked at a slow pace and with distress; when he had most devoutly undertaken the journey of coming to the tomb of the Servant of God, many asserting that he could not accomplish the journey, on the journey was made so sound that he came to the tomb without staves, and from there returned wholly sound to his own home with joy.

ANNOTATIONS.

p Schinancia or squinancia, in Latin angina.

q To confess the truth, I do not know what diocese this is. Perhaps our copyist joined two words, so that, the first two syllables being cut off, one should read Norwicensis, which I have mentioned above?

r Divises, or the Devises, with a Latin ending Divisæ and Divisio, is a castle or small town of England in the county of Wilton. Of Salisbury it has been spoken above.

s Staffordia is a city of England, head of the county commonly called Stafford-Shire.

t One must read XV Kalends, which day in the year 1287 was a Sunday.

u St. Ethelbert, king and martyr, is venerated on the 20th day of May, and that day in the aforesaid year 1287 was the third weekday.

x Although the word gutta is wont to be used by the writers of the middle age for various diseases, it is clear from what follows that it is employed here for arthritis, or the disease of the joints, called by the French la goutte.

above Codhale*

CHAPTER II.

Continuation of the miracles obtained in the same year MCCLXXXVII through the Saint's help.

Many others in the same month of May On the next VIth weekday a certain man, Thomas by name, cellarer in the city of Hereford, vexed with fevers for fifteen weeks, received health at the above-mentioned tomb. On the same day and in the same place a certain woman, Matilda by name, of Talgar la Engleche, of the diocese of St. Davids, lame and likewise contracted for eight days, was healed. Item, a certain woman, by name Christiana of Alkerugg, in the parish of Ledebury, contracted for seven weeks, obtained health from heaven. On the next following Saturday a certain brother, by name Reginald, of the house of St. John of Stafford, lame for seven years, divinely obtained there the power of walking upright. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain woman of Owias, by name Wenthliana, dumb for six weeks, obtained from heaven the power of speaking. On the next third weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain girl, having four years of age, of Glont, Matilda by name, having from birth the left hand withered and contracted, received health in it from heaven. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, William by name, of Humbre near Leoministr, who was contracted for three years, divinely obtained straightness of walking. Item, on the same day and in the same place a certain man, William by name, of Pentumbe, contracted for seven years, was restored from heaven to upright walking. On the next fourth weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain woman, Isabella by name, of Gloutis, lame for three years, was likewise cured. On the same day a certain woman, Erdudenel by name, of Bidebury North. *, lame for two years, and having a deformed and great swelling on her jaw, was cured from heaven of the aforesaid swelling and lameness.

[19] Item, a certain woman, by name Margaret, of Rosebury, were granted soundness at the Saint's sepulchre. lying paralytic in bed for twenty-three preceding years, received health from the Lord through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman of the city of Hereford, by name Cristiana, having a spot over her eyes and a swelling on her left hand for eight years, was wholly freed from both deformities through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the next fifth weekday, in the aforesaid place, a certain girl of Ros, by name Catherine, having her back twisted and so bent and humped that she could not raise herself up, nor walk otherwise than by wretchedly supporting herself with her hand placed upon her knee, deformedly bowed, the hump being taken away, received, the Lord granting it, straightness of stature and the power of walking upright. On the next sixth weekday a certain woman of Castle Goderici ^a, Eva by name, having a leg broken by accident, which could not be helped, although diligence had been applied for a long time to its cure; when at the tomb of the Man of God she had for some while invoked his suffrage, suddenly, many marvelling and praising God, was healed; so that, running in the church and outside, and clapping her hands for joy, she paid thanks to God with wonderful devotion by words, signs and gestures of the body. On the same day a certain man, Roser by name, of the parish of Malmeshulle Gamages, vexed with fevers for ten days before, received health. On the next Saturday a certain woman, by name Margaret de la Newalande in the forest of Dene ^b, for seven years and more

dumb before, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked at the place of his first burial, her silence being loosed, obtained from the Lord the faculty of speaking.

[20] On the next following Sunday, namely the first day of the month of June, Continuation of the miracles a certain woman, Agnes by name, of Esshele in the parish of Bureforda ^c, contracted for five years, was restored to upright walking. On the next second weekday a certain woman, by name Cristiana, of the parish of Kingellone, lame for five years, obtained from the Lord the power of walking upright. On the same day a certain woman, by name Agnes Derby, of the same, who for four years before had walked with her hands placed upon her knees, deformedly bowed, obtained straightness of stature and walking. On the next fifth weekday a certain young man, Robert by name, of Witebache, in the parish of Bromfeld, paralytic for four years before, divinely obtained health. On the same day a certain woman, Alice by name, of Beandesert near Warewick ^d, contracted for a year and a half, walking propped on forked staves, was restored to upright walking through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the next Saturday a certain man, William by name, of the parish of Havonte near Portesmue ^e, lame for one year, obtained the power of walking upright. On the same day a certain man, William by name, of Prestone Canonicorum ^f, deaf for four weeks and more before, divinely obtained hearing.

[21] On the next fourth weekday, namely the day of St. Barnabas the apostle, in the month of June a certain woman, by name Wenthhana of Ewyas Lascy ^g, dumb, who had been healed before by the merits of the aforesaid Man of God, * returning toward her own home, had arrived, lost again the speech which she had miraculously received; who afterwards returned more devoutly with her parents to the tomb of the Servant of God, and there, her silence being loosed, received the desired faculty of speaking. On the sixth weekday next following, Richard de la Hulle of Webbele, having a swelling on the left side of his face to such an extent that he was frequently hindered from seeing in the left eye, and also continually vexed with so grievous a pain of the kidneys that he could not walk unless supported by a great staff, was suddenly healed of both diseases through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the same day a certain woman, by name Petronilla, of Clehuragre, vexed for a long time with a most grievous pain of the head, and with a swelling belly and dropsical, infected with the poison of a toad which, as she asserted, had poisoned her as she slept, suddenly vomited the poison in great quantity, and received health in head and in body, many marvelling. On the next following Sunday, the XVII Kalends of July, a certain woman, by name Juliana, of Prestone in Gokesmore, blind for fourteen years, obtained sight from heaven.

[22] the days on which each happened being added. On the same day a certain woman, by name Juliana of Mordeford, struck with the paralytic disease, received health. On the fifth weekday next following Gilbert of Comptone, vexed with the infirmity of the gout, obtained health from heaven. On the next sixth weekday a certain man, by name Philip, of Ewias Lascy, lame, was restored to upright walking. On the fourth weekday next following, namely the VII Kalends of July, a certain woman, by name Margaret, of the parish of Kingellone, lame for four years, was restored to upright walking. On the same day a certain woman, Dionisia by name, of Thomberwe, lame for six years, was likewise cured. On the sixth weekday following a certain man, Hugh of Austre, mad for a long time, obtained health from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. About the same time a certain infant, Henry by name, son of Walter de Baskervile ^h, lord of Knines Hore, of the age of half a year, having his face so swollen that he could not see; when his parents, fearing that he was about to die forthwith, had most devoutly invoked the suffrage of the Man of God for him, suddenly received health, the swelling being removed; whom afterwards, wholly sound, namely on the second weekday, on the morrow of the Apostles Peter and Paul ⁱ, his aforesaid parents, that they might do according to what they had vowed for him, brought to the tomb of the Servant of God with devout offerings.

[23] Likewise in the month of July On the next fifth weekday ^k William de la Whiche near Chester ^l, paralytic and dumb for one year, received health and speech from heaven. On the same day a certain man, Richard by name, of Pulle, in the parish of Teukesbiny ^m, blind for a long time, obtained sight from heaven. About the same time a certain young man, Richard by name, son of the lord Ralph de Crampewele, of the diocese of Lincoln, vexed with fever for seven years, received health, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked. On the next sixth weekday John, called Picard, of the household of the earl of Gloumme, vexed with a grievous pain in the left side, received health. On the same day a certain woman, Quenith by name, of the parish of Hoye, having a humped and bent back for seven years and more, received health. On the next second weekday, namely the day of the translation of Blessed Thomas the martyr ⁿ, Nicholas, son of William Norreis, of Mora Canonicorum, having for two years on his left foot a hard and swollen lump ^o, received health through the suffrage of the Man of God.

[24] various miracles were obtained through invoking him. On the fifth weekday next following, namely on the feast of the holy seven Brothers [p], a certain priest, by name John de Teme, of Bury, mad for five weeks, obtained health from heaven. On the next fourth weekday a certain man, by name William, son of George, a clerk of the parish of Grete, lame for three years, miraculously received the power of walking upright. On the second weekday next following, namely on the vigil of St. Margaret the virgin [q], a certain youth, John by name, of the house and household of the lord John de Havinger, then justiciar * of the lord king in Snoudon, deaf for three years, received hearing suddenly through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the next fourth weekday, namely on the morrow of St. Mary Magdalene [r], a certain man, William by name, of Bishop's Castle of Hereford [s], blind for a long time before, received sight. On the same day a certain man, John by name, of Neycrevent, of the diocese of Llandaff, blind, received the light of his eyes, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked.

[25] On the fourth day of the month of August, namely on the morrow of the Finding of St. Stephen [t], Again many others in the months of August, a certain young man, by name John, of Divises, a priest of the diocese of Salisbury, who had been mad from the sixth day of the month of April, was restored from heaven to his sound sense at the said tomb of the Servant of God. On the fourth of the Ides of August, namely the day of St. Laurence the martyr, a certain man, by name David, called Erum, of the land of Clifford, of the diocese of Hereford, having his left eye blinded, who also had been lame for three years before, received sight in the aforementioned eye, and upright walking, through the suffrage of the Man of God. On the fourteenth of the Kalends of September, namely the day of St. Magnus the martyr [u], a certain man, Adam by name, called Lethewind, of Burtone, who had been mad for three weeks before, was restored to his right sense through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, on the eleventh of the Kalends of September, namely on the Octave of the Assumption of Blessed Mary, a certain man, by name Philip, of Stepeltone, of the diocese of Hereford, who had before been vexed for three continuous days so grievously by the infirmity which physicians call the gout that he could move neither hands nor feet without most grievous pain, when he had most devoutly invoked the suffrage of the Servant of God, was forthwith healed. Item, on the V Kalends of September, namely the day of St. Augustine [x], a certain man, by name Nicholas, of Westone near Malmesbury [y], having his left hand withered and contracted, was cured from heaven. On the same day a certain man, by name Robert, of Wermbruge, blind in the right eye for a long time before, received sight in it from heaven.

[26] Item, on the second day of the month of September a certain man, and September, by name Thomas, of Clone, so contracted that he walked upon his hands and knees, obtained from heaven the power of walking upright. On the same day a certain woman, by name Juliana, of Rodmerleye, lame for a long time before, divinely obtained upright walking. Item, on the XVIII Kalends of October, namely the day of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, Petronilla of Standone Picard, having her right leg contracted for a long time, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. On the next following day a certain man, by name Abwilmi of Ewyas Lascii, lame on both sides for half a year, obtained from heaven straightness of walking. Item, on the XV Kalends of October a certain other woman of Shireburne [z] upon Walda, lame on both sides for fourteen years, obtained from heaven upright walking. Item, on the XI Kalends of October, namely the day of St. Matthew the apostle, a certain man, by name Odobekard, of the county of Oxford, who for one year and more, namely six months, was vexed by so grave and wonderful a sickness that blood dripped almost continually from his mouth by spitting or by vomiting, when he had most devoutly invoked the suffrage of the Man of God at his tomb, was suddenly healed of an affliction of this kind.

[27] others at other times, but in the same year There are also certain other signs which God did for the declaration of his Servant's merits, which are not written above, of which some are noted here [aa]. For the lord Ralph de Abbetost, knight, of the diocese of Worcester, had a falcon which had been dead for a whole natural day; while, thrown out of the house, it had lain there thus dead, a certain person, grieving at this, bent a penny over the falcon, imploring the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas; and behold, suddenly the falcon revived, and was carried alive and sound to the tomb of the aforesaid Servant of God in the presence of the lords John, by the grace of God bishop of Ely [bb], and Edmund, earl of Cornwall [cc], and of a great multitude of nobles, who had then come together at Hereford, setting out toward Wales to Peesmeredith, then an enemy of the king of England, to be subdued [dd]. Item, in the presence of the same, a certain clerk of Cyrencestr, of the diocese of Worcester, by name Roger, who, as he swore, had become maimed in both hands, or at any rate contracted, for this reason, that he had presumed to distort the life and miracles of the Servant of God, came to the above-mentioned tomb, and placed his contracted hands, as best he could, upon his sarcophagus; and thus, praying with tears, suddenly, many seeing it, was healed.

[28] through invoking the Saint, rescued from various ills: These and many other wonderful signs happening about the feast of Blessed Margaret the virgin, which are contained above, the aforementioned nobles saw. And after these things, when the aforesaid nobles were besieging the castle of Troslan [ee], which the Welsh had seized, one of the Welsh, shooting an arrow from the castle, struck the lord Ralph le Buteler, knight, beneath one of his eyes, so that the iron of the arrow was horribly fixed deep in his head; and when it was most certainly believed by the bystanders that he had lost not only his eye but also his life, and he himself, as he could, then

by signs, together with his friends who were then there, had for some while invoked the help of God and of the same servant Thomas, he miraculously received sight in the injured eye itself, and the health of life. Item, when the oft-mentioned nobles had brought such force and skill to bear on the castle that its outer wall fell, and in falling, by misfortune or accident, crushed many of the said nobles, only two knights, according to the assertion of those then standing nearer, escaped the peril of death miraculously through the help of the Man of God; one of them, however, was saved much more marvellously than the other: for whom, while he lay crushed among the dead, and nothing of his body appeared outwardly except his head, his esquire invoked the help of the Man of God, and drew him out unhurt from under the stones and mortar with marvellous ease.

[29] others again in the months of October. Item, on the second of the Nones of October a certain woman, by name Wenthliana, of Oswaldesne, having for eight preceding years the right hand wholly contracted, was cured from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, on the X Kalends of November the rector of the church of Fromptone, by name Thomas de Pelhale, vexed with so grievous a pain in the kidneys and in the feet that for half a year before he could not walk or ride, obtained the full power of walking and riding, and was cured of all languor of body through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, on the IV Nones of November a certain man, John by name, of Kingeskaple, coming to the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God, bringing his wife and one cow and many other friends and neighbours, related and proved before a great multitude of people that, his aforesaid wife having been laid low a few days before by so grave a sickness that she was thought dead by all who were about her, he promised that he would offer that cow to God and to his servant Thomas for the health and resuscitation of his wife, and had the woman herself measured, as is the custom; which done, at once, made alive, she departs, and asked that food be given her, and within a few days was restored to her former health.

[30] Item, on the second of the Ides of November a certain Harper of Wis, in November and December, by name Robert, vexed for two years with a grievous gout in the kidneys to such a degree that he walked most wretchedly now with one, now with two staves, was cured from heaven at the first tomb of the Servant of God through his suffrage. Item, on the XIII Kalends of September * a certain young man, by name Gilbert de Pophram, esquire, of the house and household of the lord earl of Warewik, came to the tomb of the Man of God, relating in good faith to all who were then standing round there that for almost five years he had been accustomed to be tormented with a grievous pain in the left side, from the place of the girdle downward; but most lately, for twenty-one days before he came to the tomb, that most grievous pain began to increase so intolerably that his life was despaired of by physicians and friends; and, being made even almost out of his mind, crying out often he asked the bystanders to cut off the aching part and to throw it away from him, thus horribly cut off; but his friends, wholly refusing to do this, rather fled to the help of God and of his Servant, measuring the sick man himself, as is the custom, to Bishop Thomas; which done, at once he became quiet, and fell asleep, and was cured from heaven of the said pain through the suffrage of the Man of God.

[31] Item, on the IIII Kalends of December a certain youth, chiefly at his sepulchre, by name John de Tregoz, namely a kinsman of the lord John de Tregoz, knight, who had been vexed for fourteen years before with a grievous pain under the right side, of which he could not be cured by the manifold help of physicians applied to him, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and passing the night in prayer beside it , about the middle of the night it seemed to him most manifestly, while he was bending his knees before the tomb, that a certain Bishop clad in white vestments, having also on his head a white mitre, yet of small size, as not exceeding one foot in length , whom a small white cross also went before, came out from under the bronze image which is cast upon the sarcophagus of the Man of God; and when he had come to him, he thrust his right hand within the place of the side under which the disease lay hid so powerfully that it seemed to him that he had torn his belly apart from that side to the opposite side.

[32] And after his touch there appeared to him, as he swore, were granted soundness. a certain head, as it were of an Ethiopian, very black, creeping upon the ground between his knees; and behold, suddenly there appeared to him a great cleft in the earth, into which that head entered, as though swallowed up by the earth, so that no trace of it appeared thereafter. And he who had been sick, after these things, lay motionless for about the space of one hour, after the manner of those who suffer a syncope [ff]; and then he was found wholly freed from all pain and from the spirit of the infirmity which he had had for fourteen years, as is probably believed, through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, on the VII Ides of September * a certain knight, by name Roger, of Pinelescone [gg], then keeper of Angleseye, and fourteen other knights, and thirty other men in number, began to sail on the sea, having good calm through all that day: on the following night the sea began to be troubled by a most savage storm, and their ship to be so tossed in the waves of the sea that they despaired of human remedy. At length, the suffrage of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas having been invoked, at once the storm ceased, and they were brought to land with the greatest calm and sweetness.

[33] others finally in February and March. Item, on the Kalends of February Henry, called the merchant, of Coptone near Severne, struck with a grievous infirmity in the left leg to such an extent that for half a year he walked most wretchedly with one staff, was cured from heaven at the first tomb of the Servant of God. Item, on the VIII Kalends of April, namely on the day of the Lord's Supper [hh], a certain infant of Bromiord, by name Isabella, was brought to the tomb of the Servant of God, concerning whom such a miracle was solemnly proved: namely, that her, after she had received the grace of baptism, reckoned dead for the space of four hours and truly lying so, God himself, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked, raised from the dead. Item, on the Kalends of April [ii] a certain infant, by name Margaret, of the city of Hereford, of the age of almost one year, having her right eye so dangerously swollen that it seemed to be moved out of its proper place to the breadth of three fingers, was cured from heaven healthily and perfectly through the help of the Man of God, so that after this cure neither the place of the disease nor a trace of it appeared. On the same day a certain woman, by name Edith, of Ailmundestre, contracted for four years, obtained health from heaven through the suffrage of the Man of God.

ANNOTATIONS.

p The Seven Brothers, martyrs, sons of St. Felicity, have their Office in the Roman Breviary on the 10th day of July, on which day in the year 1287 fell the fifth weekday, as is said here.

q St. Margaret, virgin martyr, is venerated in the Roman Martyrology on the 20th of July, which, since in the year 1287 it was a Sunday, its vigil then fell on the Saturday, not the second weekday, unless this feast was celebrated on another day in the church of Hereford.

r St. Magdalene is venerated on the 22nd day of July, on the day after which, in the aforesaid year 1287, was the fourth weekday.

s This castle, which formerly belonged to the bishops of Hereford, is still today called by the English Bishopcastle, and is situated in the county of Salop, or Shropp-Shire.

t The Finding of the body of the holy protomartyr Stephen is designated, whose memory is kept on the 3rd day of August. The chief festival of the same Saint is held on the 26th of December, where we shall have to write of him.

u Treatment has been given of this martyr by us at the said 19th day of August.

x Namely of the holy bishop of Hippo, whose deeds you have illustrated in our Work at the same day.

y Malmesbury is a town of England in the county of Wilton.

z There is a town of this name in the county of Dorset, formerly distinguished by an episcopal see, which was transferred to Salisbury. Whether, however, this is designated is doubtful to me from the added words super Waldam.

aa What follows up to the end of the chapter has been given almost entirely in Part 3, chapter 3; some things, however, are read here more explicitly.

bb Elia or Elis, to the natives Ely, is a city of England in the county of Cambridge on the river Ouse. In Godwin, in the Commentary on the Prelates of England, John de Kirkby is said to have held its bishopric from the year 1286 to 1290.

cc He was the son of Richard, earl of Cornwall and king-elect of the Romans.

dd Of this warlike expedition Nicholas Trivet, in his Chronicle at the year 1288, makes mention thus: Meanwhile (while Edward III, king of England, was staying in Gascony) Rhys, son of Maredudd, troubled Wales, and began to attack some of the king's castles… Earl Edmund of Cornwall, to whom the king of England in his absence had committed the keeping of the kingdom, leads a great army into Wales against Rhys, etc. This Rhys, therefore, son of Maredudd, is the very one who in the copy which we publish is called, I know not whether rightly or wrongly, Peesmeredith.

ee The castle which is here called Troslan is called above, in Part 3, chapter 3, number 41, Yruslanh, and in the Annotations there Yncilan; but by Trivet, just praised, Druselan. It will help to have copied his words for the illustration of the aforesaid and what follows. After the words just given he proceeds thus: But when he (Edmund, earl of Cornwall) was besieging the castle of Druselan, which was Rhys's, and was having its walls undermined, by their sudden fall the noble man William de Monte Tanisii, and very many other knights and esquires, are crushed.

ff Or syncope, is a fainting of the spirit.

gg Above, in Part 3, chapter 3, number 44, it is written de Poywlesdon. Consult the Annotations there.

hh This and the preceding miracle pertain to our common year 1288, whose beginning is reckoned from the Kalends of January. In that year Easter fell on the 28th day of March, the Lord's Supper on the 25th of the same month, as is rightly asserted here. But because these things in the copy which we publish are referred to the year 1287, it seems that the beginning of the year was reckoned from Easter; for if the year had been begun from the feast of the Annunciation, or from the 25th day of March, the Lord's Supper would have pertained not to the year 1287, but to 1288. On the contrary, however, from the beginning of the first chapter it should rather be said that the start of the year was taken from the feast of the Annunciation, because the days later than that feast and earlier than Easter of the year 1287 are numbered with the same year 1287, as will be plain to one who considers it. I prefer therefore to believe that the beginning is reckoned from the day of the translation; but not even this beginning is observed everywhere.

ii Perhaps one should read here VII or VI Kalends of April, lest we wander outside the year 1287, whether it is to be ended at the feast of the Annunciation, or at Easter, or on the day of the translation.

perhaps Northumbriæ*

add cum*

perhaps justitiarii*

rather Decembris*

rather illum*

perhaps excedentem*?

read Decembris*

CHAPTER III.

Miracles continued in the year MCCLXXXVIII.

A paralytic, a dying woman, and a boy born dead In the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and eighty-eight, and in the sixth year from the passing of the said Bishop from this life ^a, namely on Saturday the fourth of the Nones of April ^b, a certain man, by name called Richard Cusin, of the city of London, struck with the paralytic disease to such a degree that he was deprived of all use of his limbs, miraculously received health in all his limbs through the suffrage of the aforesaid Man of God. Item, on the VIIIth day of April a certain woman, Agnes by name, of the parish of Mordeford, was brought to the tomb of the Servant of God, concerning whom such a miracle was proved; namely, that she lay in the weakness of sickness, and at length, measured to the Man of God in peril of death, was cured from heaven through his suffrage. Item, on the III Ides of April John, son of Roger de Pentan and of Christiana his wife, was carried to the tomb of the Man of God, concerning whom it was clearly proved that on the IX Kalends of December, namely on the day of St. Clement ^c last past, he came forth from his mother's womb dead, stillborn; whom when the midwives saw dead, and remaining so for the space of two leagues' journey, they called together some neighbours, among whom there came a certain woman who had been cured of a certain infirmity before the tomb of the Man of God, suggesting to the bystanders that they should pour out their prayers for the infant to the Lord God and to his servant Bishop Thomas, and forthwith measure him. Which done, at once the little infant moved, raised to life without any interval.

[35] Item, on the Ides of April Agnes, daughter of Reginald le Riche, a contracted woman, one drowned in the waters, of Ewias Haralo ^d, so contracted in her legs that she had no power of walking at all, was cured from heaven. Item, on the XVI Kalends of May, about the sixth hour of the day, a certain girl of the age of four years, Lucy by name, of Aspertone, of the diocese of Hereford, daughter of Matilda of Hardebrugge, having been submerged by accident in a certain deep pond, lay thus drowned beneath the waters until the eleventh hour of the same day; and then, drawn out of the waters, although she had already been dead a long while, yet those who were present at such a sight measured her to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas; which done, at once, by the infinite power of God, she rose from the dead through the suffrage of the Man of God; and this so notable a miracle was proved by most truthful witnesses, who beheld this work of God with their own eyes, as, having touched the most holy Gospels, they swore beside the tomb of the aforesaid Servant of God. And the names of the aforesaid witnesses are these: Robert de Heldeffeld, Walter de Castro, Matilda, mother of the aforesaid girl, Isabella, her co-mother ^e; and many others also worthy of belief swore this likewise.

[36] Item, on the XV Kalends of May a certain girl, of the age of two years, two dead of the quinsy, all divinely recovered. Alice by name, daughter of Robert Stute, of the province of Reg … ^f, of the diocese of Hereford, the disease which they call squinancia growing strong, dying at the morning hour, lay dead until after the first hour of the same day, and then was measured to the Servant of God, as is the custom, and at once raised from the dead by heaven. And this the aforesaid Reginald, the father, and Alice his wife, the mother, and Walter le Maszun, co-father godfather ^g of the same girl, swore, and many others also worthy of belief likewise proved it. Item, on the XIIII Kalends of May Joan, daughter of Adam, called le Schirrene, of the parish of Maurdin ^h, of the same diocese, dying of a like disease, was raised in like manner; and this is notorious in the aforementioned parish.

[37] Item, on the Nones of May a certain youth, of the age of XVI years, A youth born without a tongue obtained a tongue and speech. John by name, son of John, of Burhtone near Bishop's Castle of Hereford, dumb from birth, because he did not even have a tongue; whence also, whenever he had at any time * to swallow, he found it necessary to put one or two of his fingers into his mouth, that thus he might supply the office of the tongue by pushing the food inward; by the counsel of the religious man brother Hugh de Bromptone, then Guardian of the Friars Minor of Hereford, who found him at Lodelawe, and saw with his own eyes that he lacked a tongue, together with his fellow-brother whom he had then with him there, he came to the tomb of the Man of God; and when he had remained there some while devout, he so miraculously received a tongue, which he had never had, and with the tongue skill in speaking in a double idiom, namely English and Welsh, of both of which he had also at once free expression. Of a miracle of this kind, many-sided and never before heard of among us, all the burgesses of Lodelawe most worthy of belief are witnesses, among whom he lived for many years a beggar and dumb. The said brother Hugh also, after he had seen this miracle, to the honour of God and of his aforesaid Servant, solemnly made it public on the very day on which it happened in the cathedral church of Hereford ⁱ.

[38] The frenzied restored to a sound sense, a drowned girl to life: Item, on the same day a certain woman, Edith by name, of Wintonia ^k, mad for one year and more, obtained from heaven her right sense through the suffrage of the Man of God at his tomb. Item, on the VII Ides of May a certain man, John by name, of Kinemafford, likewise mad for half a year and more, was cured in like manner. Item, on the XV Kalends of July, about the ninth hour of the day, a certain girl, Mabel by name, daughter of John de Asschewode, in the parish of Kimbley, of the county of Stafford, of the diocese of Worcester, having been submerged by accident in a certain deep pond, lay thus drowned beneath the waters until the first hour of the following night; and then, drawn out of the water, although she had already been dead a long while, yet those who were present at such a sight most devoutly measured her to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas; which done, at once, by the infinite power of God, she rose from the dead through the suffrage of the Man of God: and this was proved by witnesses worthy of belief, namely by Isotha, mother of the said Mabel, and Juliana, daughter of Adam de Kusteley.

[39] likewise frenzy cured, speech to a dumb man, life restored to two dead women. Item, on the XIII Kalends of July a certain man, Robert by name, of Bristol, a goldsmith, who had been mad for almost three months before, was restored from heaven to his sense through the suffrage of the Man of God. And the witnesses of this miracle were N. de Windchillese, and Joan, wife of the said Robert. Item, on the VI Kalends of July Hugh, called Suel, of Marston in the parish of Pentumbe, who had lost speech for three years before, was suddenly cured through the suffrage of the Man of God. The witnesses of this thing were Agnes, wife of the said Hugh, and Matilda, called la Clare. Item, on the V Nones of July Margaret, daughter of John of Leicester ^l, who had been dead for three days, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, by the wonderful power of God himself rose from the dead. And the truth of this great miracle was sworn by John and Helena, parents of the said Margaret, and Robert le Crutoheur, of Leicester, and Agnes, wife of the same Robert. Item, on the XVI Kalends of August Margaret Kenè, wife of Robert Kenè, of Penyard in Glamorgan ^m, who had been dead for a long space of time, through the help of the Man of God in like manner * rose from the dead; and this was sworn by Walter Rossel and Matilda Kenè, sister of the said Robert Kenè.

[40] A contracted man is set upright, a fallen roebuck is preserved. Item, on the VII Kalends of August a certain youth, Thomas, called Kok, of the city of Dublin ⁿ in Ireland, who, while he slept one day in the open air near Bristol, was made so wretchedly contracted that he moved all the faithful who saw him walk to compassion and horror, when he had laboured under this affliction for three months, was suddenly restored to his former health through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, on the VI Ides of August ^o a certain little beast, namely a roebuck, which in French they call Chevreuil*, which the son [p] of the lord Alan de Plukeneth, knight, had held dear, as one who had had it reared with care for a long time, fell from the wall of the castle of Oroslan [q] from so high to the ground that, one of

its legs being broken, and its bowels shattered, blood burst out through the lower passages of its body; and when it was with likelihood thought by all who were then standing by there to be dead, or about to die forthwith, some of them, grieving at this accident, promised an offering for the little beast to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; and behold, the little beast [r] at once rose up alive and sound, and, many seeing, marvelling and praising God, forthwith took food. And this miracle is quite notorious in the whole house and household of the aforementioned lord.

[41] Item, on the Kalends of August a certain woman, by name Alice, [The use of her hands to a contracted woman, a sound mind to a frenzied woman, life restored to a dead man.] of Cliftone near Bristoll, who for fifteen days had had her hands contracted through an infirmity by which she had been weighed down before for fifteen weeks, through the help of the Man of God was suddenly healed of both troubles. Item, on the II Nones of August a certain woman, Matilda by name, of Cote in the parish of Wesburic *, who had been mad for seven days before, was restored from heaven to her sound sense at the tomb of the Man of God. Item, on the Nones of August a certain man, by name Walter de Walkere, of Leoministr, who died of an intolerable infirmity about the space of one hour after sunset, when he had lain thus dead until the middle hour of the same night, and the faithful standing by at his funeral or corpse had invoked the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas for the restoration of his life, at once by the power of the most high God revived and rose from the dead: and this Robert de Gubeford and Richard de Brugg swore before the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God upon the holy Gospels of God.

[42] Item, on the VII Ides of September a certain man, by name Patrick le Rus, [Drawn away from the peril of shipwreck, a contracted woman granted the power of walking,] of Bristoll, and William Cuppenar, and very many others, crossing the sea, as is the custom of merchants, fell, a most savage storm having arisen, into an immense peril of death: and when they had most certainly weighed that human help would not avail them, they fled to the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, entreating God with a strong cry and tears that for the love of the aforementioned pious Prelate he would deliver them from the imminent shipwreck, and they vowed a ship of wax to God's Servant: and behold, this done, at once all the crashing of that horrible storm ceased, so that thenceforward they sailed with the greatest calm, and landed at the port which they had desired. Item, on the II Ides of September a certain woman, Letitia by name, of Norton Missom [s], of the diocese of Worcester, who had been so contracted in her legs and shanks for six years before that she could not move herself in walking, received entire health from God at the tomb of the Man of God.

[43] Item, on the XV Kalends of October a certain horse, which they call a palfrey, a horse given back to life: a detractor of the Saint which belonged to the lord abbot of Gloucester [t], in the priory of St. Guthlac at Hereford, dying by chance, lay thus extinguished for the space of four hours and more. And when a certain man who was present at this sight, grieving at this, had most devoutly promised an offering to God and to Bishop Thomas for the recovery of its life, the horse, which had been dead, rose up alive, many who stood by marvelling. And this miracle was proved by the prior and convent of the aforesaid house. About the same time a certain young man, by name Jordan Natonne fflandien [u], esquire [x] of the wife of the noble youth Richard, lord of Arondel [y], while he sat at table in the house of a certain burgess of Hereford, foolishly presumed to speak against the Servant of God, asserting in his foolish talk that it could not be but that the Man of God had been covetous in life, who after death accepted so many precious gifts of divers kinds, animals and even birds, offered to him out of devotion by the faithful, asking back wholly nothing taken away from himself .

[44] divinely punished twice, and as often, repenting, healed. And behold, while he was striving to follow up foolish talk of this kind, one of his hands suddenly began to be contracted violently with so great pain that, many seeing and also hearing, he was compelled with a strong cry to invoke the help of the Man of God. Which done, his hand was at once restored to its former health. Without delay, when he remained ungrateful to his Deliverer, and, on the occasion of his sudden cure, attempted to assert before many still standing by that a contraction of this kind had happened to him by chance, and not in punishment of his offence, suddenly there fell upon his hand, previously healed, so great a pain and so deformed a contraction as he had never before felt in it: whence also it was made plain to all who were present that he was paying the fitting penalty of his aforementioned foolish talk. He therefore, seized with such pain, repenting of the deed, and acknowledging his own guilt, began, together with the bystanders who then had compassion on him, to implore the divine help and that of his servant Bishop Thomas and to promise an offering: and his hand was restored to its former health from that hour through the aid of the most high God, who is wonderful in his Saints, to whom be honour and glory for ages of ages, amen.

[45] An infant called back to life: one infected by poison made sound: Item, on the V Nones of October a certain woman, wife of William, called le Sinith, of Kingespenne, overlay her infant daughter while sleeping; and when she had awakened and found her dead, wailing and weeping she showed her thus dead to many whom she called together; who, pouring out tears of compassion, measured the infant, as is the custom, to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; and at once the infant, by the infinite power of God, revived. Item, on the VII Ides of December a certain youth, by name John Tregoz, who in the year next preceding, namely on the fourth of the Kalends of December, had been freed from a most grievous infirmity through the merits of the Man of God, as is contained above among the miracles, had by chance tasted poison treacherously given him to drink, as he asserted, by a certain woman, so that, almost suffocated with a swelling distension, he had lost speech for six months, except that perhaps at times he murmured, as it were, certain scarcely intelligible words in the depth of his throat; he came devout with great faith to the tomb of the Man of God; who, when he had remained there some while in prayer, suddenly vomited the most foul poison he had swallowed in great quantity, and so, all the swelling of the distension being at once taken away, received speech and perfect health of body through the help of the Man of God.

[46] life given to a child brought forth dead: those in peril on the sea, Item, on the VI Ides of January a certain woman, Golluthith, of Straddel, of the diocese of Hereford, who had brought forth seven births dead, when she had borne an eighth child likewise dead, by the counsel of certain of the faithful the bystanders measured that dead offspring to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; and at once the child revived through the power of the most high God at the invocation of the aid of his Servant. Item, on the XIII Kalends of November a certain man, by name Roger Beauflour of Bristoll, with many companions was in a certain ship on the Irish sea; and behold, when they had sailed a great space of sea, suddenly in the hindmost part of the ship, which is properly called the poop, a great break or hole appeared to the sailors, into which the water entered with such force that it was already beginning to sink the ship by its weight to the bottom. And when the sailors, running hither and thither in the ship for a remedy, had been able to accomplish nothing for checking the said peril, they saw their ship beginning to sink, approaching the horrible whirlpool of the sea which is called Charybdis, into which if they had entered they would at once have been swallowed up by the aforementioned whirlpool.

[47] They therefore, set in such great perils, and destitute of all human help, after the Saint's help was invoked, marvellously delivered. fled to the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, invoking the aid of the Servant of God himself with tearful cries, and promised him * a silver ship, if he would deign to snatch them from the aforesaid perils: which done, at once the part of the ship which had before been broken was made whole again, to such an extent that no trace of it appeared, and half of the water which had entered through the break was found to have miraculously disappeared. And lifting up their eyes, they saw that they were already removed by a great space from the above-mentioned whirlpool, beside which they had been. And they, throwing out the part of the water which had remained in the ship, thenceforward sailing prosperously, landed happily, sound and safe, at the port they desired, praising and hallowing God, who had so miraculously saved them for the love of his aforesaid Servant; and the silver ship which they had promised they afterwards offered with great devotion at the tomb of the Man of God, namely on the day of St. Vincent the martyr, that is, the XI Kalends of February, and on that very day they proved the aforesaid miracle in the church of Hereford.

[48] Item, on the III Ides of November a certain youth, going in his fifteenth year, A youth drowned in the water raised to life: William by name, of the parish of Froma Canonicorum, of the diocese of Hereford, sat upon a beast of burden which was carrying a sack full of flour; and when he had begun to cross by a very narrow bridge over a pit, hollow within and deep, beside the river which is called by the inhabitants the Froma [z], he fell into the water in such a way that the beast and the sack fell upon him; whence (no wonder), thus crushed by a double weight, he ended his life, and lay hidden beneath the waters for so long a time as two miles could be traversed at a man's pace. When his mother, by name Dionisia, knew of this, with a lamentable cry she gathered the neighbours to the river, who, drawing him out of the river, found him dead; and he remained thus dead from the first hour of the day until after the sixth hour of the same; and then, by the counsel of the bystanders, they measured the dead youth to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas; who, by the power of the most high God, at once rose from the dead. This miracle his mother and the neighbours who were present at the aforementioned sight proved in the church of Hereford. And be it known that Ralph, son of Magota of Eglintone, Lucy in Yehomme, Cecilia, called de la Clerkes, found the said William drowned and dead in the waters; and William de la Leye, William called le White, the miller, Juliana la White and Juliana de la Pyrie, running together at the cry of this misfortune, drew the said drowned youth, dead, out of the pit with their own hands: and the said Juliana la White measured the dead body to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas.

[49] a father with his household suddenly healed: a contracted man cured. About the same time a certain man, by name John le Yreis of Morton near Hereford, with his wife and his whole household fell so grievously into sickness that no one of the whole household could help another or minister to him in necessities: which when the aforesaid John had noticed, made humble and contrite by the punishment, the infirmity which had befallen him and his, to his own demerits

he imputed, and fled devoutly to the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, imploring his aid, and promised the correction of his conduct if he should recover, and vowed that for himself and his sick he would offer to the aforesaid Man of God the best ox that he had. And behold, almost suddenly the man was made sound and his whole house; whence also he afterwards faithfully offered the ox, as he promised. Item, on the IX Kalends of March a certain boy, by name Roger, son of John de Solers of Little Marcleya, about the first hour of the day, contracted in both hands and arms, was made so deformed that he drove all who saw him to amazement; and under this deformity, together with the distress of grievous pain, he remained thus until the third hour of the following day, and then was measured to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, and at once was restored to his former health; as they swore who carried him to the tomb of the Man of God with devout offerings on the day of St. Milburga the virgin, that is, the VII Kalends of March [aa], in the year of the Lord above-mentioned.

[50] A pregnant woman, dead, given back to life: About the same time a certain woman, by name Margaret, wife of John de Stokkinge, of the parish of Prestemede, pregnant, when she was near childbirth, expired from the distress of pain, and lay thus dead from the third hour of the day until the ninth hour of the same: for whom the said John, her husband, promised a cow to God and to his servant Thomas, and had her measured, as is the custom; and she at once revived, and bore a living child; and he offered the cow on the II Kalends of March at the tomb of the Man of God.

[51] those sailing on the sea drawn away from shipwreck. Item, on the first day of the month of November a certain man, by name Nicholas, called Rop , of Bristol, and very many companions of his in a certain great ship, which was called by the name Janetis, laden with divers precious merchandise, sailing on the Irish sea, there having arisen so great and horrible a storm that they plainly saw many ships near them at that time sink, fell into so grave a peril that, all hope of safety being taken away, and every naval instrument, and even the rudder, being abandoned, they committed the ship itself to the savage waves of the wild sea and the thrusts of the deadly storm, awaiting the hour of death with horrible fear. But then the Father of mercies and God of all consolation inspired them, as can with likelihood be believed, with such counsel that they should most devoutly invoke the help of God himself and of his servant Bishop Thomas; whence also they promised a silver ship to the aforesaid Servant of God, if the Most High would deign to save them through his merits. Which done, at once, as it were in a moment, all that storm ceased, and was suddenly changed into so great and unlooked-for a calm that that sudden change was reckoned * for a great miracle. They therefore, thenceforward sailing prosperously, landed happily at the port they desired, and on the eighth day of the month of March most devoutly offered the silver ship which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God [bb].

[52] About the same time a certain boy, by name Philip, a boy suddenly freed from a foul disorder of the face. son of Stephen the Marshal, of Cirencestr, of the diocese of Worcester, was vexed with so grievous a disease in his face that the horrible swelling of the face, which had come from the disease, had moved his eyes from their proper places almost down to the lower part of his jaw; and when an offering to be conferred on the Servant of God was promised for him by his parents and friends, he was suddenly restored to his former health, to such an extent that his eyes were given back to their natural places or hollows, all the disease and swelling being taken away through the help of the Man of God [cc].

ANNOTATIONS.

g That is, godfather.

p These same things are had above in Part 3 of the Miracles, number 44, where for filius is read filia, and in another copy also filii, as I observed there.

q In the same place is read Broslan, elsewhere Brollan.

r What you see enclosed in brackets I have added from the place just cited, because they were lacking here.

s I confess that I do not know what this word means.

t This was the abbey of St. Peter of the Order of St. Benedict in the city of Gloucester in England, concerning which Roger Dodsworth and William Dugdale treat at length in tom. 1 of the Monasticon Anglicanum, page 108 and following. In the same place also, page 406, is recorded the priory of Hereford, a cell of the abbey of St. Peter of Gloucester, which seems to have been the very place of which mention will presently be made.

u This word appears faulty to me.

x Concerning esquires, both military and civil, of whom this man seems to have been one, Spelman in the Glossary can be consulted.

y Camden in his often-praised Work mentions in various places the illustrious family of the Arundels.

z In the same Camden, in the geographical map of the county of Hereford, the river Frome flows in the same county.

aa Of this holy royal virgin treatment has been given in our Work at the same day.

bb This miracle also has already been related in part 3, number 45.

cc Here ends the second year from the translation of the sacred body.

read aliquid*

read simili*

perhaps hujusmodi*?

perhaps Westbury*?

perhaps oblatum*?

perhaps repellendo*?

i.e. illi*

al. Pop*

rather commiserint*

rather reputarent*

CHAPTER IV.

Miracles continued in the years MCCLXXXVIII and the two following.

A woman greatly contracted Item, on the III Nones of April ^a a certain woman, Alice by name, daughter of William le Hopere, of Sancombe in the county of Gloumme ^b, who had been so wretchedly contracted for one year and more that she could not move herself otherwise, namely with forward motion, except by walking deformedly upon her hands and knees. When she had been brought to the tomb of the Man of God, she saw there in sleep, as she afterwards asserted before many, a certain man clad in the ornaments of a bishop, coming out of the tomb itself, and approaching her, and touching her, and commanding her to rise quickly; at whose command she soon rose up wholly sound.

[54] and a frenzied youth, healed by the Saint appearing. Item, about the same time a certain youth, by name Ralph, son of Roger Agath, of Bradewey, was turned into so great a madness, and behaved in it so irrationally for almost a whole day, that he strove with all his strength to kill his own father and mother; seeing which, his aforesaid parents most devoutly measured him to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; which done, he who was vexed suddenly fell to the ground after the manner of those who suffer a syncope; and when he had lain thus for a short time, he fell asleep, and when he had awakened from sleep, he was found sound and safe. Seeing which, his parents paid devout thanks to God and to the aforesaid Man of God; asking him afterwards, who had been mad, for what cause he had wished so cruelly to kill them; to whom he gently answered with an oath that he knew nothing whatever of the things which they said had been done or said by him that day. This, however, he asserted, many hearing, that in sleep, while he slept, he had seen a certain man adorned with pontificals signing his forehead with his hand with the sign of the holy Cross. He asserted also that, this done, as it seemed to him, he at once disappeared, and he remained sound through the help of the Servant of God.

[55] Item, on the XVI Kalends of May a certain woman, by name Alice, A grievous bodily ill taken from a woman, blindness from a horse; daughter of Hubert of Bromp, in the county of Warewik ^c, who for thirty-six weeks before had been tormented in her body with so grievous a disease from her navel downward that she was deprived of all the strength of her lower limbs; when she had been brought to the tomb of the Man of God, and had there for a little while invoked the help of the Servant of God, suddenly, many seeing and being astonished, she rose up by herself wholly sound and returned to her own home with joy. Item, on the IX Kalends of June a certain man, William by name, of Stanicton, which is called Hamptelir, had a horse which had for a long time lost the sight of its eyes; and when he had most devoutly promised an offering to the Servant of God for its health, and had bent a penny over it, at once it received sight by the work of the most high God.

[56] Item, on the VIII Kalends of June an infant of the age of almost three months, an infant hanging from her cradle raised to life. Margaret by name, daughter of Richard Pinke, of Welinton, of the diocese of Hereford, left in the cradle rather incautiously under the keeping of a certain other infant of the diocese, her mother being absent for some while, and the bands of the cradle having been loosed, or too much slackened by the movement of the infant, fell from the cradle, and, her head with her shoulders sinking to the bottom, but her feet and legs being firmly bound above, thus hung horribly from the dawn of the day until the first hour of the same. Her aforesaid mother at length returning to her, she was found to have expired through such hanging. Crying out therefore and wailing for grief, the aforementioned woman

gathered many of the neighbours to that pitiable sight, among whom was also present the chaplain of the parish church. It pleased therefore those who were present that an offering should be promised for her resuscitation to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; which done, she, by the infinite power of God, at once revived and moved her hands through the help of the Man of God ^d.

[57] About the same time a certain woman, by name Agnes, A contracted woman set upright: a double fire put out. daughter of John, called le Despenser, of Whitthirke Mau, of the diocese of Hereford, who had been for many years so contracted that she could not walk, received health suddenly through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the Ides * of June, when a fire by misfortune was burning nine houses in the township of Stamiton near Movenurta, of the diocese of Hereford, a certain man, Thomas by name, son of Robert, seeing his house beginning to burn, measured it, as best he could, to the Servant of God, and, many marvelling, the fire which had touched it being put out, it remained unburned through the help of the aforesaid Servant of God. Item, on the XVI Kalends of August, when a certain woman, Eleanor by name, who had been the wife of William, called ab Howel, of Clenehok near the township which is called Haye, had lit a fire in the house to cook her necessaries by it, the fire suddenly seized the house itself to such an extent that the devouring flame, bursting out through the roof, spread itself far and wide, horribly driven by great blasts of wind. And when she saw that the fire could not be put out by any human help, but rather would consume that house with many others then neighbouring, she fled devoutly to the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, praying the omnipotence of the most high God that, for the love of the pious Prelate, his servant, he would succour that dwelling with a saving remedy. And praying this, she began to bend a penny toward the fire: which done, suddenly the whole aforesaid flame seemed to be put out as marvellously and easily as the flame of a candle when it is strongly blown upon; nor did it burn anything further thereafter.

[58] The use of his limbs to a paralytic, life given back to the drowned. About the same time a certain monk, by name Thomas de Sutton, of the convent of la Bruere of the Cistercian Order ^e, who had been paralytic before for three years and six months, was suddenly healed of the aforesaid disease, the suffrage of the Man of God having been invoked: and of this miracle the abbot and convent of the aforesaid house are witnesses. Item, on the Nones of June a certain girl, Alice by name, daughter of Robert Lucæ Sone, of Herdewik, in the parish of Derbust, of the diocese of Worcester, by misfortune fell into a deep pond, and lay and lay hidden beneath the waters, thus submerged, for so long a space of time as two miles could be traversed by a man at a slow pace; and when her friends had drawn her out onto dry land, and had measured her to the Servant of God in the usual manner, forthwith, to the wonder of many, she revived. This miracle also was proved in the church of Hereford by the father and mother of the above-mentioned Alice, Nicholas Alisamior, John Brun, Margaret, daughter of Gilbert, and Amicra Jori, neighbours of the aforesaid parents. About the same time there came to Hereford William, called le Tackare, and Nicholas, called de Oxoneford, asserting that a certain boy, son of Walter, called de Graston Oxon., had been drowned in a certain water-vessel, which in French is called a CUVE ^f; whom his friends drawing out, when he had lain dead for a great space of time, most devoutly measured to the Man of God; which done, at once, by the infinite power of God, that boy rose from the dead, and with a clear voice, in his mother tongue, many hearing, said this: Let us go to Hereford.

[59] [An infant overlain by her nurse restored to life: drawn away from the peril of shipwreck,] Item, on the VII Ides of June an infant, by name Helena, daughter of John de Schireburne, who dwells at Huscard, of the diocese of St. Davids, whom her nurse had overlain while sleeping, was measured to the Servant of God with devout tears by her father and mother, after they had seen her truly dead; and at once she was raised from the dead by the power of the most high God, the suffrage of his Servant having been invoked. Item, on the XIV Kalends of September Thomas Richer, John de Hanelbur, and William Petri, with many others, in a certain ship which was called the Mariette, sailed the sea, as is the custom of merchants; and behold, suddenly so horrible a storm fell upon them that, hope of life being taken away, they were almost sunk by the thrusts of the waves of the wild sea; who, when they had seen that they could not help themselves by any tackle of the ship or human help, especially since not even the iron anchor which they had cast out could hold the ship itself even for a little, but rather the ship itself, notwithstanding any remedy whatever, followed most perilously the thrust of the storm, fled to the help of God and of his Servant, humbly beseeching God himself that for the love of his Servant he would deign to snatch them from the peril, and promised him * an anchor of wax to be offered with other offerings. Which done, the aforesaid ship remained so quiet and without motion in the midst of the waves as though it had been fixed in the mud of the earth; and so it rested there for a short time, until the crashing of the aforesaid storm had ceased, and then they landed happily at the port they desired.

[60] Item, about the end of the month of September brother Gilbert, a horse's tongue cured. master of the hospital of Brugge-Water ^g, had a horse whose tongue its bridle had so entangled that, while the groom ^h, the keeper of the horse, was striving to draw the bridle out with violence, he drew out * a great part of the tongue together with the bridle; and so the horse remained as though about to die forthwith, as one who, deprived of its tongue, could neither eat nor drink; which, however, the bystanders devoutly measured to the Servant of God. At once the horse itself began to neigh and to eat, as one restored to its former health. And the aforesaid master brought the horse itself with him, wholly sound, to the tomb of the Man of God on the seventh day of the month of October.

[61] There are also certain other signs which God worked in Gascony ⁱ through the merits of his Servant, An ungrateful man loses the health he received, and, repenting, recovers it; while the lord Edward, king of England, was there ^k: for about the feast of St. Peter's Chair, in the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and eighty-eight, a certain man, Robert de Bodethram by name, who at that time was serving the aforesaid lord king, was vexed there by a grievous languor of long-lasting infirmity, nor could he be cured by the help of physicians. But when he had had himself measured to Bishop Thomas, he was forthwith healed. But he, judging rashly and presuming, ascribed his sudden health to the proper and natural strength of his body, and affirmed this, many hearing: which done, at once he fell into a relapse more grievous than the root infirmity which had gone before, to such an extent that the penal bitterness opened the eyes of his mind, which his fault had closed when through the miracle the punishment had ceased. That man therefore began to invoke the aid of the Servant of God with repeated and more devout prayers; and forthwith he was restored to lasting health.

[62] Item, a young man, Robert by name, first-born and heir of the lord earl of Oxford ^l, [a noble young man, having abused the same grace, is in peril for the salvation of his soul,] who was with the lord king at that time in the aforementioned Gascony, began to be weighed down by the paralytic disease and to be vexed by the most perilous distress of the cardiac passion to such an extent that he was believed by many to be about to die in a short time; especially since the remedies of physicians could not avail him. He therefore, set in such great perils, devoutly invoked the help of the Man of God, and promised him * an offering; and he was at once restored to health. But when he had been made sound, he did not remember the benefit of the Saviour nor of his aforesaid Servant. Nay, neglecting what he had promised them, and making little of the mercy of God, mixing himself, after the manner of wanton young courtiers, with vanity and levity, he fell into various temptations and hurtful desires of his flesh.

[63] Yet the goodness of the Redeemer so looked upon him, set in grave peril, but, doing penance, he comes away safe and sound. that he returned to himself, and bewailed his state, and, contrite, besought the mercy of God and of his Servant, praying with tears that God himself would either snatch him from the temptation and culpable misery of his flesh, or bring him back into his former sicknesses: for, prevented then by the grace of God, he chose rather to be in peril in body than in mind; and to this contrition he joined the remedy of penitential confession, showing himself, as was fitting, to the priest. Which done, he was so cured, through the clemency of God, of all the heat of carnal concupiscence that he has not experienced henceforth either the aforementioned sicknesses of the body or the culpable affections of the flesh, as he himself afterwards confessed at the tomb of the Man of God, many hearing; and, as a sign of the aforesaid cure, he devoutly offered at the above-mentioned tomb a silver image in his own likeness, of great weight, gilded on the outside, on the last day of the month of October in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-nine.

[64] The Saint saves those in peril on the sea, Item, about the same time Nicholas Daniel and very many companions of his were sailing in a certain ship, and, a most grievous storm driving them, they entered, as a remedy against the storm, a certain bay of the sea almost surrounded by land. And behold, when they had rested there some while, the robbers of that region came out to slaughter them, and also to despoil them, if they had landed. Nor could they go out of the bay because of the savagery of the storm. When therefore they had seen themselves set in such great perils, they measured their ship to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas, and at once the storm so ceased that they could go out with calm, and thenceforward sail prosperously to the port they desired. And in sign of this miracle they offered the wooden ship which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God on the XII Kalends of December in the year of the Lord next above-mentioned. About the feast of the Purification of Blessed Mary, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-eight, Bernard and Thomas, called Wulpeii, and John, called the Young, of Kaer Nervam, of the diocese of Bangor ^m, were in a certain ship laden with wine on the sea of Ireland; and behold, a most grievous storm having arisen, they were driven by the thrusts of the storm into such remote parts of the Ocean sea that for eighteen days they could not see land. And when they were thus afflicted, they cried to the Lord that for the love of his aforesaid Servant he would deign to snatch them from the peril; and at once the clemency of the Saviour was present to them, which showed them land and brought them to the port of their will; and therefore they presented the ship of wax which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God on the XI Kalends of December in the following year.

[65] he drives away the quinsy, raises a dead man, heals a thumb and a leg, Item, on the IV Kalends of December, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and eighty-nine, the lord Geoffrey Parey, knight, of the house and household of the lord Geoffrey de Genville ⁿ, was labouring so perilously and grievously from the disease which is called squinancia that he was thought about to die suddenly:

who promised an offering to God and to the aforesaid Servant, and was forthwith healed, all the swelling and the distress of pain being taken away by the merits of the Servant of God: and this is notorious in the whole house and household of the aforementioned lord. Item, about the same time there came to the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God a certain man, by name Philip, by surname Abbot, of the city of Coventry ^o, asserting before many that his son, by name Richard, who had been dead for a great space of time, was measured to the Servant of God; and, dead, he forthwith rose again, about the feast of St. John the Baptist in the year next above-mentioned. Item, about the same time there came to the tomb of the man of God Thomas, son of Robert le Hoteler, of Leminton in the county and diocese of Worcester, whose thumb had been so horribly crushed between two trestles [p], and one of his legs swollen with so great a swelling, that he could not be helped, as he asserted, by human aid; which misfortunes befell him about the feast of St. Peter which is called Ad Vincula, in the year of the Lord next noted above. But when he had been measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, he was suddenly freed from both troubles.

[66] Item, about the same time there were present persons who related at the tomb of the Man of God he restores dead pigs to life; that on the IV Ides of October, in the year of the Lord last mentioned, it happened in the priory of Wocton [q], of the diocese of Worcester, that twenty-one pigs were found dead in the little house where they were wont to be shut up, namely in the morning of that day; which when it had been announced to brother Geoffrey de Aqua, monk, proctor * of the abbot and convent of Conch [r], he came to the place and saw with wonder that they were lying thus dead, together with the brothers R. Neroin, N. de Constant, W. de Brocia and Stephen of the same, and certain esquires and others, very greatly wondering that they had expired so suddenly; for they were wholly ignorant of the cause of this misfortune; yet they forthwith drew the pigs out of the little house, and placed them in a certain spot of the outer court, as it were in one heap, praying God that he would deign to give them back life for the love of his aforesaid Servant; and, if he should do this, they promised one pig of the dead to the Servant of God, and, as it were marking it for his use, they cut off one ear. And behold, by the wonderful power of God, the said pigs on that very day, many seeing and marvelling, revived sound and safe.

[67] Item, on the II Ides of January the lord Roger de Mortuomari [s] had a falcon he makes sound a gravely injured falcon, and a man dying from a fall; which at Drompton near London received from the throw of a stone so grievous a wound in the head that, the head itself being shattered, its right eye, knocked out of its due place, hung down outside, and then it was thought dead by all. They measured it to Bishop Thomas, and, leaving it apart in a secret place, on the next following day they found it sound and safe, as the aforesaid lord Roger and his household swore at the tomb of the Man of God on the feast of the Finding of the Holy Cross in the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and ninety. Item, on that very day, namely the second of the Ides of January, John, called Gran, of Tikeswelle in the county of Harksire *, of the diocese of Salisbury, fell from a certain tree from so high that, as it were shattered in his whole body, he was believed by the bystanders to have expired; yet John, called Barkulle, of Farndon, Walter Alith, and Richard Ballus of the same, coming up, measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas: which done, at once he who had fallen opened his eyes and revived through the power of the most high God. This the three aforesaid men swore in the church of Hereford on the VII Ides of May in the year above-mentioned.

[68] Item, about the same time a certain young man, John by name, he heals a paralytic, called Hoket, of Denhram in the county of Boking [t], of the diocese of Lincoln, struck with the paralytic disease for two years and more, to such an extent that all his limbs from the navel downward were rendered as it were dead and insensible; when he had been measured by his friends to Bishop Thomas, he at once began to be better; perceiving which, his friends brought him to the tomb of the Man of God, and left him there, still weak, walking wretchedly with two staves [u]; but after the departure of his friends, a short time following, the Most High looked upon him with the eye of goodness, granting him through the merits of his Servant health in all the limbs of his body, so that he returned wholly sound to his own home with joy, the staves being left at the tomb of the Man of God.

[69] Item, on the II Kalends of March a certain young man, by name William, called the Merchant, of Helston in the county of Cornwall [x], of the diocese of Exeter [y], had been mad before for two years and six months; to whom his friends said: Think of the blessed Bishop of Hereford, and another madman, first corrected in a friendly way. and, the Lord granting it, you will receive health. To whom he, mocking, thus foolishly answered: I think indeed that that Saint is such a one as that Simon de Montfort, whom you have also called a Saint, who is buried at Oveshram [z]. Scarcely had these words been finished when he fell asleep, in which there appeared to him, as he swore, a Bishop clad in episcopal vestments, standing most beautifully before him, and addressing him in this form: Friend, do not any longer mock the Servants of God with your unskilled words. And these things said, he signed him with the sign of the holy Cross, and at once disappeared, he having been signed: and he who had been mad forthwith, that very day, obtained full health, the Lord granting it, through the merits of the aforesaid Servant.

[70] he keeps sound six men who had taken poison, About the same time there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain young man, William by name, of Wusput, of the diocese of Hereford, swearing that he, with thirteen companions of his returning with him from the Holy Land, in the city of Reate [aa], which is said to be not forty miles distant from the city of Rome, took from a certain man who had received them there into lodging, in a dish of pulse made of rice [bb], a poison or venom so strong that he and all his Companions, before they had risen from dinner, felt themselves so heavy and sleepy that none of them could help another, or himself. But yet of them, namely the said William, Hugh the Baker, Roger Camer, Henry de Neuverk, Simon Cappells, John de Ravenhul, of the diocese of Hereford, fearing that death forthwith threatened them, measured themselves to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas; and these only were forthwith freed from the poison, and cured through the merits of the Servant of God, the other eight Companions, who had not, as is said above, been measured, being extinguished by the aforementioned poison within three days from the time of that tasting.

[71] he raises a girl already dead on the fourth day. Item, on the XV Kalends of April there came Richard, called the Tailor, and his wife, of the township of Ystelworth in the county of Middlesex [cc], of the diocese of London, to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing there, and in the presence of very many, that their daughter was drowned in the river which is called the Brente [dd], in which she had lain and lain hidden for a whole natural day; whom her parents themselves afterwards drawing out kept dead beside the bank of the river upon the ground for three whole days with great sadness, not daring to bury their daughter's body until it should be seen by him who by reason of his office is called in England the coroner [ee], to whom it pertains according to the law of the kingdom to inquire into the manner and cause of those dying by misfortune, or also of those slain, and to announce what he has inquired to the king's justices, that it may be known how the peace of the kingdom itself, which pertains to the royal crown, is preserved, or also broken. And when the aforementioned coroner had seen her dead, behold, a certain woman of the neighbours came up, asserting before those then standing by there that on the night next preceding she had been admonished in sleep that she should measure the dead girl above-written to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas of Hereford. She therefore boldly approached the corpse, and measured the dead girl according to what had been revealed to her; and forthwith water began to flow abundantly from the body without the support of human co-operation, and the girl herself at once revived through the power of the most high God at the invocation of the help of his aforesaid Servant.

ANNOTATIONS.

p Trestellus, perhaps from the English Trestle, is a three-footed support holding up the board of a table. The French also call a like support Tresteau or Treteau.

q In tom. 1 of the Monasticon Anglicanum, page 558, I find the priory of Wottona, otherwise also named Wotten-waden; and it is said there to be situated in the territory of Warwick, and to be a cell of the abbey of Conches in Normandy. Wherefore, since just below mention is made of the proctor of the abbot and convent of Conch, I should think that this cell is designated here.

r That is, of Conches in Normandy.

s Camden, in the catalogue of the more illustrious families of England, names the barons de Mortuo Mari, in the vernacular de Mortimer.

t I think one should read de Buckingham, which is one of the counties of England.

u That is, supports under the armpits.

x Cornubia, commonly Cornwall, is a county of England.

y Exonia, formerly Isca and Isca of the Damnonii, now commonly Excester, is an episcopal city of England in the county of Devon, or Den-Shire, suffragan to the archbishop of Canterbury.

z Read Eovesham or Evesham, which is a town of England on the river Avon in the county of Worcester. That Simon de Montfort, then, was earl of Leicester and steward of England, who, pretending for his rebellion the name of restoring the commonwealth, moved arms against his lord Henry III, king of England, and, fighting against his army in the year 1265, was cut down and slain with his men at the aforesaid town of Evesham.

aa Reate, to the Italians now Rieti, is an episcopal city of the Pontifical dominion in Umbria, on the border of the kingdom of Naples and of Further Abruzzo, distant forty miles from Rome toward the North.

bb Ris, a French word, in Latin oryza rice. And by legumen a pottage is indicated here.

cc Midlesexia, commonly Midle-Sex, is a county of England, in which is situated London, the chief city and head of the whole kingdom.

dd This river, in the same county, flows into the Thames near the town of Great-Brentford.

ee Of the Coroners of England treatment has also been given above.

perhaps Idibus*?

i.e. ipsi*

extraxerit*

i.e. illi*

perhaps procuratori*?

perhaps Hant-Shire*?

CHAPTER V.

Other miracles obtained in the same year MCCXC through the Saint's patronage.

A contracted woman, and another affected with another infirmity, Item, on the II Kalends of April, in the year of Grace one thousand two hundred and ninety, then the day of the Parasceve ^a, a certain woman, by name Alice la Waleys, of Bibenton in the county of Stafford, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, had a hand and arm contracted for three years and six months, to such an extent that it clung so strongly to her side, as though fixed in it, that it could not be moved from that place by any skill unless the arm were broken; through the merits of the Man of God she obtained full health from the Lord. And this was proved both by men worthy of belief of the city of Hereford and also by others, who saw her contracted, and, after she had been restored to health, openly saw the place of the side hollowed out from the long-continued clinging of the aforementioned arm to the body of the sick woman. Item, on the VII Kalends of May, in the year next above-mentioned, a certain woman, by name Alditha Page, of Penetris in the county of Stafford, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, came to the tomb of the Man of God, asserting before many that for two years and six months she had been so weak and infirm and destitute of the strength of her whole body that she could scarcely accomplish the space of one mile by walking through a whole day. But when she had promised to visit the tomb of the Man of God in person, and had undertaken that journey, suddenly she was made so sound and safe that, together with others going for the sake of devotion to the aforementioned tomb, she could accomplish a whole day's journey ^b, such as is customary for pilgrims of this kind, walking on her own feet through the help of the Servant of God.

[73] and others in peril on the sea freed by the Saint. Item, on the day and in the year aforesaid a certain man, William by name, called Touy, a merchant of Bristoll, swore at the above-mentioned tomb that he had been in a certain ship, called the Mariett, with others, who, when they had begun to sail from the land of Ireland toward Bristoll, about the middle hour of the night, a most savage storm having suddenly arisen, were being carried so headlong toward a certain bank that, if it had struck upon it with such force, without doubt the ship itself, with the men and all the things which it carried, would have perished by shipwreck; and since the sailors, set in so great a peril, could not help themselves, they fled to the suffrage of the Servant of God, promising him * a silver ship if God would deign to snatch them from such peril for the love of him. And this done, the clemency of the Saviour freed them from shipwreck through the merits of his Servant, and brought them with prosperity to the port they desired; whence also they most devoutly offered the silver ship which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God on the day noted just above.

[74] Item, on the XIII Kalends of May there came a certain man, by name Nicholas, called Mon, Blindness taken from one man, a disorder of the tongue from another. namely son of Philip Mon, of Direwode in Ireland, and with him Nicholas Harpe of Drohada and Geoffrey, called Paliner, of Neueton, to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that the said Nicholas Mon, sailing with others on the Greek sea toward the Holy Land, had lost the sight of his eyes for XV days; and when his companions of the same pilgrimage had vowed an offering for the blind man to the Servant of God, had bent a sterling ^c over his blinded eyes, he at once received sight through the merits of the aforesaid Servant of God. Item, on the IV Kalends of May a certain man, by name Roger, son of John of Castelfrom, which Roger dwells in the parish of Chirkestok near Chireburn, of the diocese of Hereford, swore before many at the tomb of the Man of God that he had been so troubled by a grievous infirmity under the tongue that the swelling which had come from the pain had so filled his mouth by growing out that, almost suffocated, he had lost the use of speaking; and when those who stood by with compassion had perceived this, judging with likelihood that he was about to die forthwith, they promised to God's Servant for his health and life the better cow which he then had of the two which alone he had among his goods, and led the cow itself into the presence of the sick man. Which seen, he ratified, as he could, what they had done for him; and behold, at once the swelling which he had under his tongue burst, and, the matter of his disease coming out, he began to speak, and within a few days was restored to fitting health through the merits of the Servant of God; and he offered the cow which they had promised on the said day.

[75] Item, on the VIIth day of June a certain woman, Alice by name, Two paralytics, and a man believed dead, healed, of the city and diocese of Worcester, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving by testimony worthy of belief that in her right arm she had been so struck by spasm or paralysis for forty days and more that no strength remained in the arm; whence she could not do anything with it. But when she had had the aforesaid arm measured to the Servant of God, it was at once restored to its former health through the help of the Man of God. Item, about the same time there came to the tomb a certain man, by name Wasmeyi, son of David Hergin of St. Weynard, who had been struck with the paralytic disease in the whole left side of his body for three months and three days, to such an extent that he could help himself by no member of that side, as he asserted; but when his friends had measured him to the Servant of God in the usual manner, he was suddenly restored to his former health. Item, on the IV Kalends of June John, son of Roger of Fekenham, in the county and diocese of Worcester, had laboured under so very grievous a sickness that it was said most certainly by all who saw him that he had expired, and thus, in the judgement of many, he remained dead for so long a space of time as four miles could be traversed by a man at a common pace: and when the help of the Man of God had been most devoutly invoked over him, soon, to the wonder of many, made alive, he rose up sound and safe through the suffrage of the Servant of God.

[76] those sailing snatched from the peril of shipwreck. Item, on the fourth of the Nones of June a certain man, by name Geoffrey, called Brut, of Tillach in Ireland, came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing with others, in a certain ship called the Nicolas, which was Robert Smeye's of Ervelyn, with many companions, he sailed from Chester ^d toward Ireland; and behold, a most ferocious storm suddenly arising, he and the others began to be in such peril that, the instruments or many tackles of the ship being broken, destitute of all human help, they feared that death forthwith threatened them; nevertheless, amid the perils they remembered the aforesaid Man of God, invoking his help and most devoutly promising him a ship of Col. 673E wax, if the Most High would deign to snatch them from so horrible a peril for the love of him; and while they were thus crying out, vowing and praying, behold, fire came from heaven, and upon the part of the ship which seemed higher lit as it were three candles sent from heaven, which being lit, all the crashing of that horrible storm ceased, and there was suddenly a great calm. Those men, therefore, when they had seen this evident sign of the clemency of the most high God, showing the merits of his Servant, thenceforward sailing prosperously, and praising God himself, came to the port of their will, and afterwards offered the ship which they had promised at the tomb of the Man of God, namely on the IV Nones of June, as has been expressed above.

[77] Life given back to a horse, a toothache driven away, Item, on the Nones * of June a certain man, by name Geoffrey Bidel, of Bliburn, in the county of Suthfolk ^e, of the diocese of Norwich ^f, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain horse of the lord Edmund de Mortuo Mari, which he was keeping at Feireford, expiring of a certain infirmity, remained dead from the morning hour until after None; and when, grieving at this, he had measured it to God's Servant, in a moment it revived and at once rose up wholly sound through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the XVI Kalends of July a certain man, William by name, surnamed Gras, esquire, of the township of Luston in the county of Penebrok ^g, of the diocese of St. Davids, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had been weighed down by so great a pain of the teeth that he would rather die than live with the distress of so great a torment. But when he had undertaken the journey toward Hereford to recover a remedy through the merits of the Servant of God, forthwith he was wholly freed from the aforesaid pain; for also his teeth, which had been the occasion of the pain, without the skill of medicine and without the pricking of pain, fell very easily from his gums on the way.

[78] an eye cured, a demon driven out of a woman, Item, that man then asserted this, that the son of his reeve, manum ^h de la Huche, had lost one eye; but when his father, namely the aforementioned reeve, had bent a penny over the blinded eye, and had carried this penny to the tomb of the Man of God and had returned to his home, he found his son's eye restored to its former health. Item, on the IX Kalends of July, that is, on the vigil of St. John the Baptist, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety, there was led to the tomb of the Man of God a certain woman, Agnes by name, called Noreys, daughter of Geoffrey of Muchel Dene, of the diocese of Hereford, having a demon, and it was dumb; for when it had infested her with many distresses and times for a long time before, at length it made her fall silent for three days, as though dumb. But when the woman herself, together with others, was passing the night in prayer at the tomb of the Man of God, she saw in sleep,

as the aforesaid woman asserted, a certain man touching her and signing her with the sign of the holy Cross, at whose signing the demon was cast out, and she who was before dumb spoke freely, and was made sound and safe through the merits of the Servant of God.

[79] About the same time there came a certain noble man, John by name, a disorder of the stomach taken away, of Tudehram, of the diocese of Hereford, to the tomb of the Servant of God, asserting before many that the lady Joan, his wife, both for a long time had been tormented for so long a time ⁱ of the cardiac passion and with the loathing or abomination of the mouth or orifice of her stomach, namely for fourteen years, that, whenever she had to swallow food, she could not do this while reclining at table with others; but she found it necessary to rise from the couch, and to move herself hither and thither, often walking, and to beat her breast; otherwise she could retain nothing of the food. But when she had been measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, she was forthwith cured of all infirmity. And this miracle was proved at the aforesaid tomb on the XVIII Kalends of July by the said aforesaid * John, and by his whole household, when he offered an image, made for the occasion of wax, to the likeness of the aforesaid woman, together with twenty shillings sterling.

[80] Item, on the VIII Ides of July there came to the tomb of the Man of God Philip, Two dead women raised to life; son of Seykelet, Tanguster his wife, of Rolveston in Yrchenefeld ^k, proving that the aforesaid Tanguster expired of a most grievous infirmity, and lay dead for a great space of time; and when the bystanders had most devoutly measured her to the Servant of God, and the said Philip had promised that he would offer him a cow for her, she forthwith rose from the dead through the infinite power of the Saviour; whence also both faithfully offered, on the aforesaid day, the cow which the husband had vowed. Item, on the XV Kalends of August a certain man, called by name Thomas de la Ware, of Rolveston in the county of Somiersete ^l, and his wife, by name Christiana, and many others worthy of belief solemnly proved before the canons and very many others in the cathedral church of Hereford that a daughter whom they had, Agnes by name, had been dead for six hours of the day; and when they had prepared all things necessary for her burial, one of the bystanders, greatly compassionating the sadness of the friends, approached the corpse, and measured the dead Agnes to God and to his servant Bishop Thomas; which done, at once she revived through the merits of the aforesaid Servant of God.

[81] Item, on the VI Kalends of August a certain girl, by name Agnes, another at least believed dead, and another next to death, recover. daughter of the lord William de Gravuson, knight, who was in the keeping of the lord Roger de Pullesdone, sheriff of Anglesey, then in the parish of Staves, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, had been tormented so long by divers infirmities that at length she was believed by all who saw her with likelihood to have expired. Noticing which, the aforesaid lord Roger, troubled with grievous sorrow, especially since she was dying in his keeping in the absence of the girl's father, bending a penny over the body of the girl, which he reckoned dead, promised that he would visit the tomb of the Man of God with the aforesaid girl, walking on his own feet, if God would deign to grant her life. Which done, the girl herself, who was believed dead, at once revived, or suddenly recovered, through the infinite power of the most high God. Item, on the IX Kalends of August the lord John Carbonel and the lady Margaret his wife, of the diocese of Norwich, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and proved there that Thomas, their son, had had such grave and otherwise unheard-of infirmities that, hope of life being taken away, they awaited with horrible fear that death forthwith threatened him . They therefore vowed him to God and to his aforesaid Servant, and promised that they would offer a silver image for him to Bishop Thomas. Which done, the sick boy was at once restored to his former health; whence also they then offered the silver image, as they had promised.

[82] A contracted woman, a man with a grave disease, are freed at the Saint's tomb, Item, on the III Nones of August a certain woman, by name daughter of Adam, called le Skennere, of Monemuth ^m, of the diocese of Hereford, who had been contracted before for seven years and destitute of the strength of her whole body from the navel downward, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and, passing the night there in prayer, there appeared to her in sleep, as she swore, a certain man commanding her to rise, and pouring lukewarm water into her bosom; and soon she, as it were from the aforesaid pouring of water, cured of all infirmity, rose up, praising and glorifying God himself, and returning thanks to his aforesaid Servant. Item, on the twenty-fourth day of the month of June, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety, there came to the tomb of the Servant of God the lord William de Suillington, rector of the church of Gnimolston in the county of Notingham ⁿ, and when he was passing the night in prayer at the tomb of the Man of God, a man appeared to him in sleep, asking him a question of this kind: Why have you such a girdle? And saying this, he showed him a girdle adorned with most pure gold, with which also he girded round the body of the aforesaid William, who had laboured under a grave sickness from the eighth day of the month of April up to that hour. Which done, that man disappeared, and the aforesaid William from that same hour was restored to entire health through the aid of the man of God Bishop Thomas, as he faithfully believed and swore. And to how perilous a sickness the aforementioned William had laboured under, the discreet man master Simon of Ghent, archdeacon of Oxford ^o, bore testimony.

[83] likewise a man and a falcon. Item, about the same time the lord Robert de Suillington, canon of Lincoln, had a certain sudden affliction in his body, which afflicted him so grievously that all who saw him believed that he would die very shortly. Weighing which, William, named above, namely the nephew of the sick Robert, vowed to God and to his aforesaid Servant that he would fast on bread and water every sixth weekday until he had visited the tomb of the Servant of God at Hereford for the recovering of the health of the said Robert; and behold, the vow having been uttered, at once the sick man was restored to his former health. Item, the same William swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had a certain falcon which had had at the same time infirmities incurable according to every judgement of those experienced in these things; but when he had measured the sick falcon to Bishop Thomas, it received health. The same William swore also that God himself had miraculously bestowed on him many other benefits through the merits of his aforesaid Servant, by reason of which he wished, and ought, to be devoted to him * for ever, as he promised.

[84] Item, on the first day of the month of September certain persons were present at the tomb of the Man of God, Others, from other infirmities, among whom was William, called de Hara, a pleader in the bench of the lord king [p], asserting, an oath having been taken, that a certain man, by name Richard de Gosefelo, likewise a pleader in the bench, had two sons, of whom one had so great a pain in the head that, losing his natural sense, he appeared frenzied. And when the pain was horribly increasing, his father and all the bystanders believed for certain that he would forthwith die. The bystanders therefore measured him to the Servant of God; by whose merits he was at once restored to his former health; and without delay, behold, the other son of the aforesaid man, and brother of the one healed, began to suffer in all things a like distress: who, likewise measured, at once received perfect health through the help of the Man of God. Item, on that very day, the first day of September, there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, by name John of Warewik, of the diocese of Worcester, called the Tailor, asserting that while he was staying at Paris he had had a flux of the belly and many other most grievous and, as it were, before unheard-of infirmities; and when for a long time he could not be cured of them, his friends measured him at Paris to the aforesaid Servant of God; by whose merits he was soon freed from heaven from all the aforementioned infirmities.

[85] Item, on the VIII Ides of September there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, were freed, as also a gravely wounded horse, by name Alan, called de Fflor, of Warewik, of the diocese of Worcester, asserting that for one month he had been vexed with the dropsical disease, the matter of which disease afterwards rising to his head, he lost his natural sense through the violence of the said disease. And when he could not be helped by the aid of physicians, as is the case with those labouring, as is said above, under a disease incurable by nature, the bystanders measured him to the Servant of God, and he was restored almost suddenly to his former health through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the XIth day of the month of September there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain knight, by name Robert de Keynis, of Middelton in the county of Buckingham, of the diocese of Lincoln, affirming that he had had a horse whose belly a sharp iron had pierced with so broad a wound that, its bowels being laid open, its intestines fell upon the ground. And when it could not be helped by any medicine, one of the household of the aforementioned knight, running up, and bending a penny over the horse for its health, implored the help of Bishop Thomas: which done, the aforesaid horse was soon restored to entire health.

[86] Item, on the same day and in the same place the said knight asserted and other animals healed. that he had had a sparrowhawk which a dog had so trampled that it had broken one of its wings; and when it was thought dead or for ever useless, he nevertheless had a penny bent over it for it, humbly invoking the help of the Man of God: which done, he placed it in a certain chamber, and on the morrow received it sound and safe through the help of the Man of God. Item, the said knight asserted this also, that, when a certain little beast, which in French they call Leyrum [q], much like a weasel, whose property among others is by nature to sleep much, had been crushed by chance under the foot of a certain man coming along, and by the same man, wholly ignorant of a little beast of its kind, had been thrown strongly against the wall which was nearest, and was with likelihood thought dead, there came up a certain woman who had reared the little beast, and with a tearful voice promised an offering to the Servant of God if he would deign to obtain from the Lord life for the little beast which she had held as her delight. Which done, she laid the little beast, dead as she thought, in her bosom, and quite soon drew it out from there sound through the merits of the Servant of God.

[87] One from disease, another from a fall, being in peril, recovered, Item, on the VIII Kalends of October a certain man, by name John, called Duc, of Winton, in the county of Warevik, of the diocese of Worcester, and his wife, Matilda by name, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and proved there that a certain son of theirs, Henry by name, had been so grievously sick that from the vehemence of his disease, as one about to die forthwith, he had wholly lost the sight of his eyes. But when they had measured him to Bishop Thomas, he was restored

at once to his former health through the help of the Man of God. Item, about the same time it happened that a certain boy, by name Robert, son of William, called Knoston, of Ticiford in the county of Leicester, of the diocese of Lincoln, fell so horribly upon the ice that his neck seemed thrust back into his body, so that scarcely a little of it appeared outside; whence also he was believed dead by all the bystanders. And when his friends had most devoutly measured him to the Servant of God, the boy at once rose up sound through the help of the Man of God.

[88] others snatched from the peril of falling into the hands of pirates. Item, about the same time a certain man, by name Geoffrey, called Page, of Bristoll, with seventeen other companions was in a certain ship which was laden with divers merchandise, with which they were sailing from Normandy toward Ireland; and behold, four-score pirates, or more, in a certain galley [r], were approaching them to despoil the ship and slaughter the sailors; and when those who were in the ship saw that they could not resist the said pirates by human strength, they fled to the most safe refuge of devout prayer, beseeching the almighty Lord with weeping and on bended knees that for the love of his servant, the aforementioned Prelate Thomas, he would deign to defend them from the assaults of those perverse men; and with one accord they promised an offering to the Servant of God. Which done, the pirates, who were already beside them, as though struck divinely with a horrible fear, as with likelihood appeared, fled from them with swift rowing. And the aforesaid sailors, seeing themselves so marvellously freed from their assaults, paid most devout thanks to God and to his aforesaid Servant, and afterwards, coming with offerings to the tomb of the Man of God, lawfully proved the said miracle.

[89] Life given back to a falcon and to a girl: Item, on the XVII Kalends of October there came to the tomb of the Man of God John de Frenyngham, asserting that he had had a falcon which had been dead for a great space of time; but when, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, he had bent a penny over it, dead, as is the custom, it at once revived; and of this miracle the witnesses were the lord Robert de Seyntler and his whole household. Item, on the Kalends of October a certain man, by name Adam Smyth, of Sponley in the county of Solopsir [s], of the diocese of Hereford, and his wife came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving that they had had a daughter dead for a natural day; but when they had measured her corpse to the Servant of God in the usual manner, and had vowed a vow for her resuscitation, she at once rose from the dead.

[90] Item, on the IV Nones of October Nicholas, called Bon, the sick, brought to extremity, suddenly recover: dwelling in the parish of All Saints of Bristoll, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving that he had laboured under so grievous a sickness that he had been destitute of the strength of all his limbs, except his head, for XXXV days; but when he had most devoutly promised an offering to the Servant of God, he was at once restored to his former health through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the XIV Kalends of November Henry de Stroperi, of the household of the lord Gilbert de Gannt [t], in the county of Oxford, had laboured for six days under so strong and acute a sickness that it was most certainly believed that he would die on the seventh day. And when the bystanders wished to measure him to divers Saints, the aforesaid lord Gilbert said to them: Do you not know how much this sick man has been accustomed to love that servant of God Thomas, formerly bishop of Hereford? Now therefore measure him most devoutly to him. Which done, at once the sick man was freed from all distress, and suddenly restored to his former health through the help of the Servant of God.

[91] Item, on the V Kalends of November John de Lindan a like thing happened to a woman: those sailing marvellously preserved. and his wife Alice, in the county of Lincoln, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving that the above-mentioned woman laboured under so strong a sickness that, as though struck with the paralytic disease, feeling nothing in her arms and hands, she had lacked the strength of all the members of her body below the girdle for almost two months. And when she could be helped by no medical remedy, there came up a certain man who had before been at the tomb of the Man of God for the sake of devotion and prayer, and measured her to the Servant of God, as is wont to be done; by whose merits the aforementioned woman divinely received her former health. Item, on the III Ides of November Robert, called Cloterbo, of Pireton Actewyle, and very many of his companions, sailing in a certain ship which is called the ship of St. Leonard, fell by the thrust of a most grievous storm into such peril that the ship itself settled so fixed upon a certain rock that it could not be moved by any human device. Seeing which, the aforesaid men measured the ship itself to God's Servant: and behold, at once, this done, the compassion of the most high God was present to them; for that rock, miraculously split through the middle, afforded the ship and the sailors a safe way of withdrawing, and of escaping all loss and peril through the help of the Man of God.

[92] Item, on the IV Nones of December the noble man the lord William de Breuse [u] and his wife with his household, A young man hanged three times from the gallows, many being present, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving by very many persons worthy of belief that a certain young man, William, called Crawe, of Guer, in the land and lordship of the aforementioned lord, had on the VI Kalends of December been finally condemned to hanging: hearing which, the aforementioned young man fled devoutly to the help of the Servant of God, praying that he would obtain for him from the Most High a longer space for repenting and for changing his ways for the better, and he had a penny bent to the Servant of God; and behold, when the officers deputed for his hanging had nonetheless hanged him, at once, the bond by which he hung being broken, he fell to the ground half-alive: and when they had hanged him again, in a short time the crossbeam of the gallows was broken in its middle, and so he fell to the ground, then dead, as they said.

[93] and, just about to be buried, preserved among the living. The officers, however, lifting the corpse, hanged it horribly a third time at the top of one post of the gallows, and waited about him with a great multitude of men until they should be most certain of his death; and then, leaving him hanging on the gallows, all returned to their own homes. And after this the friends of that hanged man went to the aforementioned lord, and asked leave to take down and bury his body; which being obtained, and he being taken down and carried to the pit of burial, when they had begun to bury him, suddenly, to the wonder of many, he revived, and, drawing his hands and feet to himself, began to speak; and when he was asked by many how he had revived, he answered with a clear voice, saying: I confess that by the merits of the blessed prelate Thomas de Cantilupe my life has been restored to me by the Most High. Hearing which words, all who were present at this sight paid most devout thanks to God and to his aforesaid Servant [x].

ANNOTATIONS.

p A narrator is a patron of causes, whom we are accustomed to call an advocate; and the king's bench is the supreme tribunal in England after Parliament. See, if you please, Du Cange and Spelman in their Glossaries.

q Read Liron, otherwise Loir, rat Liron, and Lerot, in Latin Glis Alpinus dormouse.

r Galleys are ships of swift course.

s Salopia is designated, in English Shropp-Shire.

t Perhaps one should read de Gaunt, concerning which illustrious family see, if you please, Camden in his description of the county of Lincoln, page 402.

u Elsewhere he is called de Brewes.

x This very resuscitation, or preservation in life, of a hanged man has been set forth above at greater length, but with some variety of circumstances, in Part 1 of the Miracles, from number 77.

i.e. illi*

add quod*

i.e. illi*

Nonis*

prædictum* is superfluous

i.e. illi*

illi*

illi*

ejus*

i.e. illi*

CHAPTER VI.

Miracles continued in the years MCCXCI and MCCXCII.

A dying man, and another labouring grievously in the side Item, on the XIXth day of the month of January ^a there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, by name Walter, son of Henry Philip, serving-man of Reginald de Ledelawe, affirming by his oath that the son of his aforesaid lord, by name Robert, was weighed down by so acute a sickness that he was believed by all to be about to die forthwith. And his father, greatly grieving at this, measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, with wonderful devotion, promising that he would faithfully offer a sparrowhawk to the Servant of God every year of his life, if God would preserve his son's life through the merits of the aforesaid Man of God. And behold, that sick boy was restored to health almost suddenly through the mercy of the Saviour. Item, on the IV Kalends of February there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, by name Menric of Arwistly in Wales, serving-man of the lord Owen, lord de la Pole, swearing that he had laboured under so grievous an infirmity of the side that he had much rather desired to die than to live; yet, set in such distress, he had promised that he would offer an ox to the Servant of God for obtaining the health of his side; and behold, this done, suddenly the man was freed from all distress through the merits, as he asserted, of the Man of God.

[95] Item, on the III Ides of March a certain man, by name Paganus, [and a third, from the kidneys, suddenly cured, sight to a beast of burden, hearing to a deaf woman,] a goldsmith of Gloucester, of the diocese of Worcester, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had so much pain in the kidneys that he believed he would die without delay; but when he had been measured to the aforesaid Servant of God, he was at once restored to health. Item, on the VI Ides of April a certain man, by name

Robert Rolws, of Staveley, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had a certain beast of burden which had wholly lost its sight for one week and more; but when he had measured it to God's Servant, it received sight. Item, on the XVI Kalends of May a certain woman, by name Rosa, wife of Walter Boter, of Dunshulle, of the diocese of Hereford, who had been almost deaf for a year, and wholly deaf before for three days, came to the tomb of the Man of God to recover health, and when, weeping and praying, she had leaned her head a little upon the tomb of the Man of God, she suddenly received hearing.

[96] Item, on the XVI Kalends of May a certain man, by name John, the use of her members restored to a contracted girl: a fire put out: of the city of Winton, with his daughter, by name Cecilia, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving there that his aforesaid daughter, who had had her hands and feet contracted for two months and more, and her whole body diseased for a long time, had been restored, almost suddenly, to entire health, the help of the Man of God having been invoked. Item, on the III Nones of May a certain man, by name Luke of Snitton, in the county of Salopsir, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when his house had begun to burn nine times with a horrible flame from the burning of a certain neighbouring house, and he, invoking the help of the same Man of God, had bent a penny on bended knees against the fire, by the wonderful power of God the whole fire was suddenly put out.

[97] a dead woman called back to life, Item, on the II Nones of May a certain man, by name Laurence, called Harant, of Gipwys, of the diocese of Norwich, and his wife, by name Mabel, with their household and many others worthy of belief, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that the said Mabel, consumed by a grave infirmity, had breathed out her spirit, and had been dead two days, all things pertaining to the office of the dead having also been completed in her house; there came up a certain stranger from the parts of Hereford, and, seeing the master of the house and his household weighed down with great grief, counselled them that they should pour a little water, in a certain silver cup * which he then saw placed to one side upon a bench there, in the name of the Saviour and of his servant Bishop Thomas, invoking their help for her resuscitation, into her mouth: which done, the dead woman at once revived through the infinite power of the most high God; and on the aforesaid day they most devoutly offered the silver cup itself, with other offerings, at the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God ^b.

[98] a paralytic healed, his mind restored to a frenzied man. Item, on the first day of June there came to the tomb of the Man of God brother Walter de Neuvent and a certain companion of his, a fellow-brother of the Order of St. Mary of Mount Carmel, of the convent of Chester ^c, asserting that the aforesaid brother Walter had lost all the vigour of his left arm for almost half a year; and when he had bent a penny to the Servant of God, to be brought for recovering his health, his arm was at once restored to entire health through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the IX Kalends of July Gilbert, called Croppe, of Acle Picardi, of the diocese of Hereford, had been so worn out by an acute fever that, being made frenzied, he had lost his natural sense; who, when he had offered at his tomb the offering which he had vowed to Bishop Thomas, at once, by divine power, obtained his former health.

[99] A girl long solicited and vexed by a demon, as was believed, Item, a certain girl, by name Christiana, daughter of Nicholas, called Nevenon, of Ingelthorp in Norfolk ^d, of the diocese of Norwich, had been solicited for five years, and wearied in many ways, by a certain demon, an incubus, as is believed, who many times promised her various gifts that she might suffer him to lie with her; but she, wholly refusing and abhorring this, and fortifying her body with the sign of the Cross, notwithstanding many molestations, at length remained unharmed. At a certain time also the same evil spirit led her into a certain pleasant place, where she beheld many marvellous things, among which also a table adorned and filled with many kinds of delightful foods, who invited her to eat of them; but she, terrified and fortifying herself in her usual manner with the sign of the Cross, invoked the aid of God, through which she was freed from these illusions.

[100] at length came away wholly sound at the Saint's tomb. But from that same hour until the fourth day following she lay as though dead, without motion: on which day, as it were awaking from a heavy sleep, she related the things which had happened to her, and then the fingers of her hand were found so contracted that the hand itself could in no way be opened, and the girl herself was turned as it were into madness; whom then her friends measured in the usual manner to Thomas, formerly bishop of Hereford, through whose help at once she obtained from heaven both her sense and the straightness of her fingers. But when, as time went on, she perhaps did not render fitting praises to her Saviour, her fingers began again to be contracted. Which a certain boy, the brother of that girl, noticing, and grieving much at her distress, thrust a certain little book, in which were written the matins and the other Hours which are commonly said of Blessed Mary, which he was then by chance carrying in his hand, between the palm of his sister's hand and the fingers already in part contracted; which she held so strongly thus shut in that it could not be removed from her hand by any human device. She at length, weeping and contrite, on the IV Nones of July came to the tomb of the Man of God, and, persevering there a little while in prayer, divinely obtained there the straightness of her fingers through the help of the Man of God, the little book being left there.

[101] Item, on the Nones of July a certain boy, John by name, A sound sense restored to a boy, and to another speech besides: a dying cleric son of Richard, called de Weh, of Wolfres Lowe, of the diocese of Hereford, who, having been without sense for five weeks, obtained his natural sense at the tomb of the Man of God, his suffrage having been invoked. Item, on the Kalends of August Adam, called Barre, of Cans in the county of Saloplir *, of the diocese of Hereford, who for four weeks had lacked understanding and speech, divinely obtained the knowledge of understanding and the power of speaking at the tomb of the Man of God. Item, on the XV Kalends of September there were present at the tomb of the Man of God persons relating that a certain cleric, by name Walter, called Boton, of Cork Castell in the county of Dorlete ^e, of the diocese of Sarr. ^f, had been so grievously sick that he was believed by all his friends and physicians to be about to die forthwith; since therefore he could be helped by no aid of physicians, but was believed as it were dead, his friends who were present vowed him with great devotion to the Man of God.

[102] And behold, at once, they seeing it, he appeared to move after the manner of the living; and to the sick man himself, suddenly healed through a marvellous vision. as he afterwards reported, it seemed that a certain boy of elegant form brought him a certain curtain, which * he fittingly arranged and hung round his bed; which boy was followed by a certain woman of most splendid beauty, carrying reverently in her hands the head of a certain Bishop, saying this to the sick man: Behold the head of Blessed Thomas de Cantilupe, through which you will receive health; and these things said, she forthwith vanished; and behold, forthwith there came up a certain young man most beautiful in aspect, bringing a Bishop with him, clad in priestly vestments, saying to the sick man: Give thanks to this Bishop, by whose help you will receive health; and when he had said this, he at once disappeared, and the sick man himself forthwith found himself freed from all distresses and sound through the merits of the Servant of God.

[103] Item, on the IV Nones of September there came to the tomb of the Man of God John, called the Chaplain, [Light of the eye to a one-eyed woman, life to a falcon, the faculty of walking to a boy given.] of St. Thomas of Bristoll, asserting that a certain woman, Lucy by name, of Bristoll, had lost the sight of her right eye for six months, and, making a vow to the Man of God, had suddenly recovered the sight of the aforementioned eye; and therefore she then sent by the same priest a silver eye to the aforesaid Servant of God. Item, on the VI Ides of September there came to the tomb of the man of God Thomas de Ktobarewe, dwelling with the lord Robert, son of Paen, in the county of Dorlet., of the diocese of Sarr. ^g, asserting that the aforementioned lord had had a certain falcon which had been dead from the first hour of the day until the evening hour; and when they had vowed an offering to the Servant of God for its resuscitation, it at once revived. Item, on the XIII Kalends of October there came to the tomb of the Man of God Robert de Plomtone, of the county of Nevon. ^h, of the diocese of Exom., proving by witnesses that a certain boy, his son, by name John, of the age of five years, had had the joints of his feet so deformedly contracted at the ankles from birth that, lame from his mother's womb, he lacked the power of walking, as though contracted; but when a penny had been devoutly bent over his feet, to be afterwards offered to the Man of God, at once, to the wonder of many, fitting straightness of the feet and joints being received, he obtained the power of walking through the help of the Man of God.

[104] A girl dead under the waters raised to life. Item, on the IX Kalends of October a certain man, John by name, called Campeneis, and his wife, by name Agnes, and many of their household, of the diocese of Worcester, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain girl, by name Alice, their daughter, of the age of two years, falling into a deep well, was drowned, and lay thus dead under the waters for so long a time as one mile could be traversed by a man at a common pace. And behold, a certain priest, by name Richard de la Hulle, namely chaplain of the lord Hugh de Pleyci, knight, by chance, or by the disposition of God, as is more truly believed, came up, and drew the dead girl out of the well; who, drawn out, lay dead upon the ground for the space of time in which two miles could be traversed by a man, as is said above; and then the said chaplain, measuring the body of the girl, vowed an offering to the Servant of God for her resuscitation in the presence of many who had then run together to that dreadful sight. Which done, at once the girl opened her eyes and revived through the aid of the Man of God ⁱ.

[105] [A cleric freed from a grave disorder of the arms, those sailing from the peril of shipwreck.] Item, on the III Kalends of November Robert de Wicumbe, cleric of the lord bishop of Dunelm. ^k, whom they commonly call his crosier-bearer ^l, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had such and so great a swelling in his arms for five weeks that he believed he would die in a short time, because he could not be helped by the aid of physicians; but one night, when he had vowed himself to the Servant of God, and after the vow had slept a little, awaking afterwards he found himself wholly sound, no trace of the infirmity remaining in his body or arms, through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the XIII Kalends of January, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-one, there came to the tomb of the Man of God Matthew,

called Cheven, of Barstaplo ^m in the county of Devon, of the diocese of Exeter, and with him very many others, swearing that they were in a certain ship laden with divers merchandise, which was called by the name Semte-maritok, and, while they were sailing with others, coming from the parts of Gascony, behold, a most savage storm having arisen, they began to be in such peril that they saw ten ships, which had left port with them, sink beside them. When they had seen this, they invoked with a strong cry the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, vowing him a silver ship. Which done, the storm being calmed almost suddenly, they were brought to the port of their will through the help of the Man of God ⁿ.

[106] Item, on the VI Ides of February a certain man, by name Robert le Outiller, Grievously wounded by robbers, he is healed by the Saint appearing. of Catculne in the county of Stafford, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he was betaking himself, as is the custom of merchants, to divers places for the sake of gain, he fell among robbers, who despoiled him, and, having laid many deadly wounds upon him, went away, leaving him not only half-alive but as it were dead; and thus he lay as though dead, and despaired of by surgeons * and physicians, for a whole natural day. And then certain of his friends vowed him to the Man of God, and soon there appeared to him, as he afterwards reported, while he was lying thus as it were in ecstasy, a king and a Bishop, standing beside him: and the Bishop spoke to him most plainly thus: Behold, you will forthwith recover health, and afterwards you will visit on foot the church of this king Ethelbert ^o; and these things said, both disappeared, namely the king and the aforementioned Bishop, and he received entire health through the merits of the Man of God.

[107] Item, on the IV Ides of April there was present at the tomb of the Man of God Agnes, sight granted to a blind man, the use of her members to a contracted woman: wife of Simon Alrich, of Borefort in the county of Oxford, of the diocese of Lincoln, swearing that her husband, the aforesaid Simon, had lost his sight for twenty days and more; and when they had vowed him to God and to the Servant of God, that very day he received sight. Item, on the II Ides of April a certain woman, Cristiana Traynel of Wellescy in the county and diocese of Hereford, who had been so contracted before for two years that she could not walk, except that, with two staves put under her armpits, she moved herself when great necessity pressed. Thus walking and contracted she came to the tomb of the Man of God, namely where he had first been buried, and when she had given herself there to devotion for some while, she suddenly merited to receive entire health through the help of the Man of God, the staves being left there.

[108] Item, on the V Ides of May John, lord of Bokelinton in the county of Worcester, of the diocese of Hereford, The deaf receive hearing, a dead girl life, a blind boy sight: came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving that he himself had lost his hearing for forty-two days, and, coming to the tomb of the Man of God, he suddenly received hearing through the help of the aforesaid Man of God. Item, on the same day, namely the V Ides of May, Philip and Alice, called Hangharath, of the county of Gardif [p], of the diocese of Llandaff, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that Alice, daughter of William de Berkeley, had been dead for about the space of one hour; and when her friends had vowed an offering to the Servant of God for her resuscitation, she divinely obtained life and health. Item, on the Ides of May a certain man, Walter, by name Bernard, of Lorteporte, in the county and diocese of Hereford, and his wife, by name Margaret, brought their son, by name Walter, an infant of about one year, blind, for whom they offered a calf at the tomb of the Man of God, that he might merit to receive sight, who had been blind before for seven days; by whose merits he at once received sight.

[109] Item, on the VII Ides of June John, son of Soreward, of Walnington in the county and diocese of Hereford, two paralytics, and another frenzied man, healed. struck with the paralytic disease on the right side of his body, making a vow to the Servant of God, was restored to entire health. Item, on the II Ides of June there came to the tomb of the Man of God Geoffrey, called Nehelon, of Lesne in the county of Cancie [q], of the diocese of Canterbury, swearing that he had been so grievously struck with the paralytic disease for almost two years before in his whole body that he could neither help himself nor keep food taken in his stomach. But when he had been measured to God's Servant, he was restored to health from heaven through the merits of the Servant of God. Item, on the VIII Ides of July there were present at the tomb of the Man of God persons proving that a certain young man, by name John Hok of Habenhale, in the forest of Dene [r], of the diocese of Hereford, as though seized by a demon, was turned into so great an insanity that he strove with all his strength to kill those standing about. But when his parents and others held him strongly against his will, and bent a penny over his head, vowing it to the Servant of God, forthwith he received his right sense and understanding, he helping.

[110] A boy recovers from a grave disease, a falcon is raised to life, Item, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-two, on the VIII Ides of September, it was proved at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain boy, by name Thomas, son of Thomas Aubrey, of Bretonia, of the diocese of St. Davids, was held by so grievous a trouble of sickness that it was feared he would die suddenly; who, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, was restored to his former health. Item, on the VI Ides of September in the aforesaid year there came to the tomb of the Man of God the noble man the lord Peter Malorre, knight, then justiciar of the lord king of England, with many of his household, affirming by his own oath and the sworn oath of his men that he had had a falcon, killed by a grievous misfortune of violence and injury, which had lain dead for the space of two days and nights, for which, when he had most devoutly promised an offering to the Man of God, he received it raised to life and sound and better than usual through the merits of the Man of God.

[111] a woman cured of a grave sickness, a drowned boy given back to life. Item, on the V Ides of September in the same year there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain woman, by name Juliana Walteri, of Assethorne in the county of Warewak *, of the diocese of Worcester, swearing that for six months before she had been continually tormented by so grievous a sickness of heart and body that she could scarcely walk six or seven paces unless she rested for a time, and so restored her strength and breath, almost lost by a little labour; but when, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, and a vow having been uttered of visiting the tomb itself, she had begun the journey with other pilgrims, she was forthwith made so sound that she made and completed whole days' journeys [s] with the sound. Item, in the same year, on the VIII Kalends of October, a certain woman, Eva by name, called Knache, of Ptreltowe in Irchenfeld [t], of the diocese of Hereford, swore before the tomb of the Man of God that her son, Gregory by name, had fallen into a certain well, in which, drowned and dead, he had lain for the space of half a day; whom, drawn out of the well, they measured to the Servant of God according to the custom of the country. Which done, soon that boy revived and was made sound through the merits of the Man of God.

[112] A dying man, after a wonderful vision, suddenly healed: Item, in the same year, on the VII Kalends of October, John, called Gunselin, of Stanes, of the diocese of London, and many others with him came to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore there that the said John had been weighed down by so great an infirmity that he was believed by the bystanders to be near death or about to die forthwith; and while he had lain for some while thus, placed as it were in ecstasy, he saw demons, horrible and very many, coming to him, and, tearing him and dragging him by the hands and feet from place to place, grievously trampling on him [u]. Whence, stirred with excessive fear, no wonder, he prayed God earnestly, as he could, that through the merits of his servant Bishop Thomas he would come to his help in that moment of need; and behold, while he was thus praying more devoutly within himself, he saw the Man of God coming forthwith to him, who took the head of the sick man into his hands; and when the said demons had long contended with him as to which should have more mastery over the sick man, at length, about dawn, through the help of the Man of God all the demons were put to flight, the head of the sick man remaining in the hands of the Servant of God himself. And the sick man himself, as it were awaking from a heavy sleep, soon found himself cured and divinely restored to health through the merits of the Servant of God; and therefore on the aforesaid day he came from the aforesaid township of Stanes barefoot, with great devotion and offerings, to the tomb of the Man of God with others, as is contained above.

[113] Item, in that same year, on the II Ides of October, a certain woman, [a swelling taken from a woman, the use of hands and feet restored to a paralytic,] by name Margaret, of Limerich [x] in Ireland, of the diocese of Cashel [y], who a short time before had come from Ireland to the tomb of the Man of God, was cured there on the aforesaid day, through the merits of the Man of God, of a certain old lump or hump by which she had been perilously troubled in her side for seven years; for when she had prayed that day at the tomb of the Man of God, she did not find the lump in her body thereafter. Item, about the same time a certain girl of Occle Picard near Hereford, who had had her right hand contracted for three days before, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and when, praying, she had placed that hand upon the tomb of the Man of God, the hand itself was restored to its former health, many standing by and seeing, together with the keepers of the aforementioned tomb. Item, in that same year, on the X Kalends of November, Roger, called Bernard, of Henton in Wilteliria [z], of the diocese of Salisbury, came to the tomb of the Man of God, offering a cow, and swearing that he had been so loosened by the paralytic disease that his hands and feet were deprived of their due office, and were rendered as it were immovable; and he, as it were wasted in his whole body, had languished thus for many years. At length, when he had most devoutly invoked the help of God and of his aforesaid Servant, and had promised that he would offer the cow at the tomb of the Servant of God, he was forthwith restored to entire health through the help of the Man of God.

[114] Item, in that same year, on the XVIII Kalends of January, there came to the tomb of the Man of God many men asserting those sailing snatched from peril, a madman brought back to a sound mind. that, when they were in a certain ship which belonged to William, called Fisser, of Weymod in the county of Dorsete, of the diocese of Salisbury, sailing over the sea, as is the custom of merchants, a most savage storm having arisen, the waves of the sea swelling, the tempestuous gale threw the ship itself far upon the land, and the sea drew itself back to such an extent that the ship remained laden on the dry ground without any hope of saving it: which when they had seen,

the men who were in the ship fled to the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, entreating their help with tearful prayers, and promising a silver ship to God's Servant, if the divine clemency would deign, through his merits, to free them from this wonderful peril: and behold, against hope and against the accustomed manner of the sea, the sea itself, suddenly swelling and rising more than usual, seized the ship and lifted it up on high from the land; and then they, every storm being calmed, thenceforward sailed prosperously without peril to the port they desired, through the merits of the Man of God. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the XII Kalends of January, a certain man, by name John de Chilton in the county of Hant-Shire, of the diocese of Winchester, who had been mad for twenty-one days before, or possessed by a demon, as was more truly thought, was wholly freed from this madness or demon at the tomb of the Man of God.

ANNOTATIONS.

p I suspect that here one should read de Cardiff, or Cardiffa, which, however, is not a county, but a small city of England in the principality of Wales, and in its county of Glamorgan, in which is also situated Landava, to the English Landaff, a small episcopal city, of whose diocese these spouses are said to have been.

q Cantia, otherwise Cantium, in English Kent, is a county or province of England commonly known, whose chief city is Cantuaria, to the inhabitants Canterbury, made illustrious by the archiepiscopal see.

r Concerning the Sylva Danica consult the Annotations above.

s That is, the spaces of a day's journey.

t Irchenfeld, formerly Archenfeld, is the part of the county of Hereford by which it adjoins here the county of Monmouth.

u It is not necessary to say that these things were truly so done by demons, since perhaps it was only a dream sent by God to strike a salutary fear into the said sick man.

x Limericum is a city of Ireland in the province of Munster, head of the county of Limerick, and distinguished by an ancient bishopric; wherefore, when it is added just after that it was of the diocese of Cashel, understand this of its see suffragan to the archbishop of Cashel; unless perhaps mention is made there of another place also called Limerich.

y Casselia, to others Cassilia, commonly Casshel, is an archiepiscopal city of Ireland in Munster and in its county of Tipperary.

z Perhaps one should read Wiltonia, in which is situated Salisbury, of which presently.

i.e. scypho*

Salopiæ*

add per*

i.e. chirurgis*

Warwick*

CHAPTER VII.

Other miracles or benefits obtained in the years MCCXCIII, MCCXCII and MCCXCIV.

A horse healed, the gout taken from a nobleman: Item, in the aforesaid year, on the IX Kalends of February ^a, a certain man, by name William Heyvard, serving-man of the noble man the lord Robert de Ros ^b, lord of the castle of Beauver, of the diocese of Lincoln, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his aforesaid lord had had a palfrey which had lain as though dying for seven days; and when at length it had been measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, it soon received entire health. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the second of the Nones of March, the noble man the lord Humphrey, earl of Hereford, evidently proved, by himself and his men, at the tomb of the Man of God that, when a little before he was so weighed down in his left leg and in his foot by a most bitter gout that he could move neither foot nor leg without the greatest pain, at once, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, and a vow having been made to him of a foot and a leg of silver, which he afterwards offered, he forthwith received the desired health in both.

[116] Item, in the aforesaid year, on the VIII Ides of March, a certain young man, of the age of about twenty-six years, Tongue and speech given to one tongueless from birth, life to a drowned girl: dumb from birth, because he did not even have a tongue, miraculously received at the tomb of the Man of God a new tongue and speech and skill in speaking in English and in Welsh; and this miracle was proved there by many of the city of Hereford, in which he had previously dwelt for three years and more, and by many others from the parts adjacent to the city, who had known him and seen that he had been dumb from his birth, as is said above ^c. Item, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-three, on the XIV Kalends of June, there came to the tomb of the Man of God John de la More and Walter de Hinedon and Eleanor, daughter of Robert Acte Wiswere, of Weremestr, of the diocese of Salisbury, and many of their neighbours, proving that the said Eleanor had fallen into a certain pond and had lain submerged under the waters for so long a space of time as three miles could be traversed by a man at a common pace; and then, having been searched for by her mother and thus found dead, when she had been drawn out of the waters and measured by the father of the dead girl to God's Servant, and a penny had been bent over the corpse, she at once miraculously revived in the presence of the aforesaid witnesses and of many others who had come together to the aforementioned pitiable sight.

[117] Item, in the aforesaid year, on the XIII Kalends of June, there came to the tomb of the Man of God John, son of Philip, called the reeve of Remesye, in Hamptesir *, of the diocese of Winchester, and Agnes his wife, swearing [the blindness of an eye taken away: a frenzied woman cured: a small bone taken out of a throat:] that the said John had incurred blindness in his left eye for two months and more; and when he had been measured to God's Servant, he forthwith received sight in the eye formerly blinded through the merits of the aforesaid Man of God. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the X Kalends of June, a certain man, by name Richard, son of William le Carter, of Chelton in the county of Oxford, of the diocese of Lincoln, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his mother, Agnes by name, who had been as it were possessed and mad for four months or thereabouts, the help of the Servant of God having been invoked, was suddenly restored to her former health. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the VI Kalends of July, a certain man, by name William de Tynewelle, in Rotelandia ^d, of the diocese of Lincoln, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when at a certain time he was eating beef, by a marvellous chance a certain bone, entering his throat, stuck so fixed in it that by no force or skill could it be drawn out from there; but it so afflicted him for continuous days that all his friends most certainly despaired of his life. But when he had promised an offering to God's Servant for his health, he was at once freed from the bone and from the said peril, and for that reason he carried the bone itself, together with the promised offering, to the tomb of the Man of God on the day above-mentioned.

[118] a flock of sheep healed: a storm of the sea calmed: Item, in the aforesaid year, on the ninth of the Kalends of August, a certain man, by name William de Wychebant, in the county and diocese of Worcester ^e, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had a great flock of sheep so infected by great infirmities and corruptions that the whole flock was with likelihood thought about to die in a short time. But when he had invoked the help of God and of his Servant, and had promised that he would offer the best sheep of the whole aforesaid flock to God's Servant, at once all that flock was divinely freed from the foulnesses of all infirmity and corruption through the suffrages of the Man of God, which before could be helped by no human medicine. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the VI Nones of September, Jordan Andreu, Robert Andreu, Robert Ravemoc, and Philip called de Winton, offering a silver ship, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when they and very many others were sailing in a certain ship carrying wines from the parts of Lesser Britain toward England, and, a most savage storm having arisen, had begun to be in peril to the very border of death, shaken by the gales of the waves; when they had invoked the help of God's Servant, and had promised him * a silver ship for their deliverance, suddenly, and as it were in a moment, all the crashing of the raging sea ceasing, they came prosperously to the port of their will.

[119] a young man suddenly recovered from a grave disease. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the V Ides of September, a certain woman, Avicia by name, wife of William, called Oliver, of Croydon in the county of Suthreye ^f, of the diocese of Canterbury, in whose lodging the Man of God had been accustomed sometimes to lodge, and many others with her swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain Walter, a scholar, son of the aforesaid woman, had been so contracted in his whole body by a most grievous infirmity that he lay as though deprived of all the strength of his body for about six months; for whom the mother, having great compassion, one day with a tearful voice broke out into these words, directing her speech to the bystanders: O how often has St. Thomas de Cantilupe rested in this lodging, as it pleased his will, with his household; would that it might now please him to come to our help in this dwelling in so wretched a moment of need! And these things said, she turned her speech to God and to his aforesaid Servant, humbly supplicating them for the health of her son. And the prayer having been made, when her aforesaid son was soon afterwards asleep, he saw in sleep a certain venerable Man clad in white, touching him and saying to him: Rise, for behold, you are now made sound. Who at once awakened and to health

wholly restored, rose up through the suffrage of the Man of God ^g.

[120] Item, in the aforesaid year, on the IV Ides of September, Geoffrey of Haverford, of the diocese of St. Davids, those sailing escaped the peril of shipwreck; a dead girl is raised to life. Jordan Bursater and John Waleys, carrying a silver ship, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that, sailing near the borders of Lesser Britain, they had been divinely freed at once from a most grievous peril of shipwreck, the help of the Servant of God having been invoked, when they had promised him * the said silver ship. Item, in the aforesaid year, on the XV Kalends of October, a certain man, Philip by name, of Penebrugge, a baker, and Edith his wife, swore at the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God that a certain girl, Tibbota by name, their daughter, had been tormented by so grievous a sickness that she breathed out her spirit, according to the testimony of all who were then present there. And thus she lay dead from the first hour of the day until the ninth hour of the same; and her parents, distressed with most vehement sadness and grief for the death of their aforementioned daughter, at length began most devoutly to entreat the Father of mercies and God of all consolation that by the merits of his servant Bishop Thomas he would deign to restore life to their daughter. Which done, almost suddenly the girl miraculously revived, raised from the dead by the merits of the Servant of God.

[121] Item, in the aforesaid year, on the V Kalends of November, a certain woman, A dropsical woman suddenly healed: Joan, called Wyken, of Harewelle near Northampton, of the diocese of Lincoln, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that, when for a long time, the members of her body swelling, she had been dropsical, and with her skin distended was almost in peril of death, nor could she be helped by any aid of physicians, as soon as she had vowed herself to the Servant of God, and, praying devoutly, had promised him an offering, that hurtful humour which was the cause of her sickness began so suddenly to flow out through all the passages of her body that at once the woman was restored to entire health through the help of the Servant of God.

[122] Item, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-three, a man whose throat had been cut preserved among the living. a certain young man, William by name, a barber, born in the parish of la Neuvelonde, of the diocese of Hereford, while he was staying alone at London in the parish of St. Catherine in a certain house of John de Hingelford, having compassion on the poverty of a certain carpenter, received him with himself into lodging; and while in the night of the vigil of the Apostles Simon and Jude the barber was sleeping on his bed, his aforesaid guest seized one of his most sharp razors, and cut the throat of the sleeper, and, leaving him for dead, carried off his goods by stealth and went away. And when morning had come, when the neighbours had found him wallowing in his blood and palpitating, and had learned from the surgeons that he could not be cured by any skill, they devoutly vowed him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, bending a penny over him in their manner; and thus, without any medicine, within a short time he was restored to entire health, except that, in sign of the miracle, as it were a trace of a scar is seen to appear on his throat to this day, as the aforementioned William proved and evidently showed at the tomb of the Man of God on the day of St. Sylvester the Pope ^h in the aforesaid year.

[123] a man recovers his lost sight at the Saint's tomb. Item, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-four, which is the eighth year from when the aforesaid miracles began, on the XII Kalends of May, a certain man, by name Walter de Chuton, of the diocese of Bath and Wells ⁱ, who had incurred blindness and had remained blind XL days and more, grieving at the aforesaid blindness, had himself led for the sake of prayer to a certain church, and before a certain altar which had been dedicated in honour of St. Etheldreda ^k, virgin, he devoutly prostrated himself, asking that divine help be bestowed upon him through the merits of the aforementioned virgin. And when he had prayed thus for some while, sleep fell upon him; and behold, the aforesaid virgin appeared to him while he slept; who touched his jaw, saying thus: Go to the tomb of St. Thomas, which is at Hereford, and there you will receive the health you desire. And he, awakened from sleep, not unmindful of the vision, had himself brought to the tomb of the aforesaid Man of God, and there, devoutly persevering in prayer, he obtained what he asked, namely the light of his eyes, on the aforesaid day through the merits of the Man of God.

[124] Those sailing drawn away from shipwreck: Item, in the aforesaid year, on the XI Kalends of May, certain sailors together with many merchants in a certain ship, together with fifteen others, sailed from the parts of Flanders toward Ireland; and behold, suddenly a most vehement wind fell upon them, and so great a storm of the sea, that the aforesaid fifteen ships with what was contained in them were forthwith sunk, and the mast of the sixteenth ship was broken into three pieces. Seeing which, those who were being tossed by the waves in the sixteenth ship, the mast, as is said above, being already broken, invoked with great cries the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, promising him a silver ship. And behold, as they cried out, the help of the most high God was present, which, the storm being at once calmed, brought them to the port of safety through the aid of the aforesaid Servant of God. And for the above-mentioned silver ship the sailors themselves afterwards offered silver pennies on the day above-mentioned at the tomb of the Man of God, and then lawfully proved this miracle there.

[125] a flux of the belly checked; a bird healed, another raised to life: Item, in the aforesaid year, about the same time, a certain man, Walter de Wauford by name, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his wife, Eva by name, when she was near childbirth, began to be dissolved by so grievous a flux of the belly that she was believed by all, physicians as well as others, to be about to die forthwith. And when the bystanders had vowed a vow for her to the aforementioned Servant of God, she was forthwith healed through the help of the Man of God. Item, in the aforesaid year, about the same time, that man also swore that, when a sparrowhawk which he had, pursuing a certain small bird, had foully broken its own wings, as soon as he had vowed a vow for it to the aforesaid Servant of God, it was restored to entire health. Item, in the aforesaid year, about the same time, the aforesaid man swore that, when he had had a certain falcon which, extinguished by a sudden death, had lain cold for a great space of time, a like vow having been uttered for it to the Servant of God, he received it forthwith made alive and sound through the help of the Man of God.

[126] Item, in the aforesaid year, on the V Kalends of June, a certain man, Alexander de Winchelele by name, [a disorder of the shoulder driven away: a man, after the healing of his arm, released from prison,] a burgess of Bristol, swore before the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had been weighed down by so grievous a pain in his left shoulder that he was believed by the physicians without doubt soon to be about to die or to fall into paralysis, when he had been most devoutly measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, he forthwith received most entire health. Item, in the same year, on the VIII Ides of June, a certain man, William Talgar by name, when he had been sent innocent into prison by his earthly lord, and bound with so great a weight of iron that his left arm was broken; when he was excessively tormented as well by the squalor of the prison as by the aforesaid break, he invoked the help of the Servant of God for his deliverance and health, uttering a vow that he would visit his tomb in his own person as soon as it should befall him to be freed from prison. And behold, his arm being at once healed, and he himself shortly afterwards freed from the bonds of prison, he, becoming unmindful and ungrateful toward his Benefactor and his vow, in process of time fell most grievously sick, to such an extent that he fell into frenzy, and became as one possessed, tormented by demons, as it seemed to him in sleep.

[127] And the madman was so tormented that his arm was broken in the place not keeping his vow, he is divinely punished, and, repenting, is healed anew. where it had first been broken. And when on a certain occasion he had dozed a little, he saw in sleep the most glorious Mother of God, saying to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, who, as it seemed to him, was then standing by there: Friend, help this wretched man; who at once answered the glorious Virgin: This man has mocked me; for he promised that he would have visited me before this time, and he has not come to render his vow. And the Mother of mercy said to him again: He will come to you; help him, I beg. And he answered: Let him come then on the day of Pentecost, and he shall be healed in the name of the Lord. These things said, the venerable Virgin disappeared, and the Man of God likewise; and the aforesaid man himself, relating the vision to the bystanders, was afterwards led to the tomb of the Man of God on the aforesaid day, namely that which was the VIII Ides of June ^l, and there on that very day he was divinely freed both from the breaking of his arm and from the frenzied affliction, through the intercession of the glorious Virgin and the merits of the aforesaid Servant of God.

[128] Item, in the same year, on the V Ides of July, a certain woman, An infant born dead, another boy dead, Placentia by name, of the township of Mallingk, of the diocese of Canterbury, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when she had borne a dead son, and he had lain dead three days according to the testimony of all the neighbours, at length, measured to God's Servant, he suddenly and miraculously revived through the help of the Man of God: whom his friends at once taking up carried to baptism, and, he being baptized, the name of the Servant of God was given him as a sign of the miracle. Item, in the same year, on the morrow of the Assumption of Blessed Mary, a certain man, by name John, of Atmondescote in the parish of Treduton, of the diocese of Worcester, and very many worthy of belief with him swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his son, a certain boy, John by name, of the age of nine years, had laboured under so grievous an infirmity that he had ended his life, and had lain as though dead for two days. But when, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, they had bent a penny over his corpse in their manner, vowing a vow, the boy revived, and was forthwith restored to health through the help of the Man of God.

[129] Item, in the same year, about the same time, a certain man, Nicholas de Box by name, of the township of Mallingh, of the diocese of Canterbury, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he, in the time of autumn in the aforesaid year, had been so exhausted by excessive labour [a man held for dead, come away sound, as also an infant from the peril of suffocation.] that, as it were suffering a syncope, nay rather, as was said by all the neighbours, as it were dead and without any breath, he lay lifeless for two days. And when his friends, having compassion on him, had invoked the help of God and of his servant Thomas, and had measured him in the usual manner, the dead man at once revived through the help of the Man of God. Item, in that same year, on the day of St. Luke the Evangelist, a certain man, Heric Laxmon by name, of Nametewich in the county of Chester ^m, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain boy, his son, having the age of twenty-one days, by a certain accident a copper necklace of no

small size swallowed, which remained so fixed in his throat that all the bystanders believed with likelihood that he would die forthwith. And when the parents had invoked the help of God's Servant for the boy, and, vowing a vow, had bent a penny over him, the boy at once vomited up the aforesaid necklace, restored thenceforward to entire health through the help of the Man of God.

[130] Life given back to an infant, strength of hand to a contracted woman; Item, in the aforesaid year a certain man, Hugh of Leoministr by name, of the diocese of Hereford, and very many with him swore at the tomb of the Man of God that Walter his son, of the age of three years, dying of a most grievous infirmity, had lain dead from the morning hour until the evening hour, and then those who were present measured the corpse itself to God's Servant, most devoutly invoking his help. Which done, at once the boy revived through the help of the Man of God. Item, in the same year, namely on the day of St. Leonard the confessor ⁿ, a certain woman, Alice de Weston by name, of the diocese of Worcester, who had before had a hand contracted for three months and twenty days and more, which could not be helped by the aid of physicians, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and when she had there for some while asked the help of the Servant of God, her hand was at once restored to its former health. Which the woman herself first perceiving, exulted with such unspeakable joy that she clapped her hands before the tomb, wishing to show by the clapping of her hands the joy which she had at the health restored to her, as is said above, through the help of the Man of God.

[131] those in peril marvellously brought into harbour: Item, in the same year, about the same time, a certain man, Robert Otri of Bristoll, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he was sailing on the sea in a certain ship of his with others, so horrible and dreadful a pestilence fell upon them that the stormy tempest broke the mast of the ship into many pieces; and when the sailors could help themselves by no tackle of the ship, all with one accord, leaving the rudders of the ship, fled to the help of God and of his aforesaid Servant, prostrating themselves with one accord in the ship, and awaiting the good pleasure of God, and supposing that they would forthwith be sunk unless the clemency of God and of his Servant came to their help. And when they had lain thus prostrate in prayer for some while, and had vowed a vow to the aforementioned Servant of God, they found that the ship itself, as it were under angelic guidance, had come to the harbour of safety which is called by the inhabitants Walemoum, through the help of the Man of God.

[132] dysentery cured; a raging horse made gentle: About the same time a certain man, master John de Lacy, cleric, notary of the lord king of England, coming to the tomb of the Man of God, swore before many that for some time before, in the parts beyond the sea, he had been so troubled by the dysenteric affliction that he could be helped by no medicine, but rather was believed by all the physicians and others without doubt to be about to die in a short time. Seeing which, his friends, vowing a vow to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, measured him in the usual manner; and behold, at once afterwards he began to be better, and on the following day he slept a healthful sleep, who before had for a long time been vexed by continual wakefulness; and so thenceforward he recovered entire health through the help of the Man of God. Item, the same master John also swore before the tomb of the Man of God that about the aforesaid time he had had a certain precious horse, which began to rage with so great a madness that it could not be checked by any bridle, or held by its accustomed tether, although before it had always been very gentle; but at one time it wished to throw itself headlong forward, at another backward, and at times indeed it cast itself upon its sides; which when the bystanders saw, since human help failed it, and it could not be succoured, they measured the horse itself to the Servant of God in the usual manner: which done, it was at once restored to entire health through the help of the Servant of God.

ANNOTATIONS.

Hant-Shire*

i.e. illi*

i.e. eidem*

dysenterica*

read potuisse*

CHAPTER VIII.

Miracles and benefits continued in the year MCCXCV and the following.

A contracted woman granted walking, a drowned boy life. Item, on the IV Nones of July, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-five, a certain woman, Margaret by name, daughter of William the Smith, of Mortone, of the diocese of Worcester, who had been so deformedly contracted for two years that she could not walk unless she were supported by two staves placed under her armpits, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and, persevering there for three days in prayers, obtained most entire health through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the VII Ides of July in the year next above-mentioned a certain man, Walter, by name le Bonde, of Wykewoneford in the county of Worcester, came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that he had had a son, John by name, of the age of five years, who, while he was making his way walking beside a certain very deep well, fell into it, and lay hidden in it dead and submerged for so long a space of time as three miles could be traversed by a man at a common pace; and then, when he had long been searched for, at length he was found in this well, and, drawn out, was laid in his parents' house after the manner of funerals, and they watched him there for almost two days, in case perhaps some sign of life should appear in him. And when none at all appeared, vowing him, dead, to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, they bent a penny over him. And behold, suddenly that boy, many seeing, sighed strongly, restored to life and entire health through the help of the Man of God.

[134] two snatched from the peril of drowning: Item, on the XVII Kalends of August, namely the day of St. Kenelm, king and martyr ^a, a certain man, Milo de Aula by name, of Erdesle, of the diocese of Hereford, swore before the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had been in the war ^b of Wales, on a certain day he was so surrounded * and hemmed in by the Welsh, and destitute of all human help, and of every suffrage or refuge, that he saw nothing left for him but sudden slaughter. When therefore he was thus standing upon the bank of a deep river which is called the Waya ^c, he vowed himself, as he could, to the aforesaid Servant of God, imploring his help, and, committing himself to the divine disposition, entered the river with his horse and one servant whom he had, notwithstanding the horrible and as it were necessary peril of drowning which threatened there. And behold, his horse being swallowed in the whirlpool of the aforementioned river, he and his servant were carried in a marvellous manner across the river to the other bank, and freed from all peril through the help of the Man of God.

[135] a paralytic and one mortally wounded by an arrow healed; Item, on that same aforesaid day, namely of St. Kenelm, there came a certain messenger to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that a certain man, by name Ralph, of Rilreum in Ireland, of the diocese of Dilimuith ^d, his lord, had been so grievously struck with the paralytic disease that he was thought by all who saw him to be about to die in a short time. And when his friends had bent a penny over him, and had invoked the help of the Man of God for him, he obtained health from heaven; and therefore by the said messenger he sent the silver image which he had promised. Item, on the XIII Kalends of August, namely the day of St. Margaret the virgin, a certain man, Hugh by name, of Beldevas in the county of Salop, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, asserted before the tomb of the Man of God that in the war of Wales he had been so grievously shot with an arrow by a certain Welshman that he was believed by many to be about to die forthwith; which the man himself also weighing, vowed that he would visit the tomb of the Servant of God every year of his life, if he would deign to succour him. And behold, when the said arrow by which he had been mortally wounded had been drawn out, he was restored to entire health through the help of the Man of God.

[136] Item, on the Ides of December, namely the day of St. Lucy the virgin, [a falcon held for dead, and a boy, raised to life: a swelling of the hand taken away:] there came the lord John de Jugervi, knight of the house and household of the lady countess of Gloncestre , asserting that he had had a falcon which, suddenly suffocated, had lain as though dead from the first hour of the day until the eleventh hour; and when it was measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, it at once revived. Item, on the V Kalends of April ^e a certain man, William de Croudone by name, of the county of Cantebrugg ^f, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had a son, by name John, of the age of four years, who, while he was running or playing beside a well of water, fell into the well, in which the boy lay submerged from the first hour of the day until the ninth hour. And then, drawn out of the well, he was found dead. And when the friends of the dead boy had promised an offering to God's Servant for his resuscitation, he at once revived, and within three days was restored to entire health. About the same time a certain woman, Agnes de Chipphum by name, of the county

of Cantebrugg above-mentioned, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that she had had so great a swelling in her right hand for five months that she feared with likelihood that she would lose her hand or her life for the pain; and when she had vowed a vow to the Servant of God, forthwith the hand itself was restored to its former health.

[137] Item, on the III Nones of April, namely the day of St. Ambrose ^g, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-six, which is the tenth year a boy drowned in a river called back to life: from when the aforesaid miracles began to be done, a certain man, Richard de Hirnardeston, of the county of Vorte ^h, came to the tomb of the Man of God, relating in good faith that a certain man, by name Ribi of Sturmonstre, a fisherman, had a son of the age of seven years, who, as he was walking over the bridge which is called by the inhabitants the New bridge, fell into the river which is called the Scure, at the bottom of which he lay drowned from the morning hour until the evening hour; and when his father by chance was striving to fish in his usual manner in a small boat near the place where the body of the dead boy lay, he saw the body of the boy at the bottom of the river, but was wholly ignorant what it was. Wishing, however, to know more curiously what this was, he seized a pole with a hook, and, drawing out the body, recognized plainly with the greatest grief that it was his own son, and carried him to his own house with great mourning. And one of the neighbours, compassionating beyond measure the grief of the same man, gave counsel that he should utter a vow to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, for the resuscitation of the aforementioned boy. Which done, at once he revived, to the wonder of many, praising and blessing the omnipotence of the most high God.

[138] A man is healed: after a vow made to the Saint they escape imminent shipwreck: Item, on the XIII Kalends of January ⁱ in the aforesaid year a certain man, by name Simon de Stamiton, dwelling with the prior of Lanthony Prima ^k, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he, in the night next before the day of St. Thomas the apostle, suddenly began to be vexed with so grievous a disease that on that night he believed with likelihood that he had expired, and his friends who were present likewise believed this; but when they had vowed a vow, and in the name of the Lord and of his Servant had bent a penny over him, he was soon restored to his former health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, on the IX Kalends of May in the aforesaid year there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, by name Roger, called of Cornwall, of Berdestaple in the county of Bevon. ^l, relating in good faith that, while he was sailing together with his companions in a ship coming from Gascony toward England, so horrible a storm seized the ship that it was dashed six times with great thrusts upon the rocks by the great waves of the savage sea, and at length the ship had been so driven into a most perilous place, which is called the Canal ^m, that he with his companions wholly despaired of being able to escape a horrible death. But when he had most devoutly promised that he would offer a silver ship to the Servant of God, he was freed almost suddenly by the power of God from the peril of life and the loss of the ship, and he faithfully offered the silver ship which he had promised on that very day at the tomb of the Man of God.

[139] a contracted man healed: the peril from an arrow fixed in him averted: Item, on the III Ides of May in the aforesaid year a certain man, Richard de St. John of Aldinge in the county of Kent, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had been for two years and three months so contracted that he could not walk by himself, unless supported by two staves; and when he had vowed that he would visit the tomb of the Man of God barefoot every year while he lived, within three days he was restored to entire health through the merits of the aforesaid Man of God. Item, on the day of the Nativity of Blessed John the Baptist in the aforesaid year there came Griffin, son of Modak, of Planarustut in the county of Cardigan ⁿ, to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore that in the last war of Wales he had been by chance so horribly shot with an arrow deep in the ear that he was thought by physicians and friends with likelihood to be about to die in a short time. And he vowed the better cow, or its price, to the Servant of God, that through his merits the Most High might mitigate the horrible pain which threatened in the drawing out of the arrow. Which done, he had himself cut, and the arrow drawn out without the burden of pain, as he said, to the vehement wonder of the men who were standing by, and thenceforward in a short time he was restored to entire health. And for that reason he devoutly offered a head of wax with the arrow itself fixed in it, and the aforesaid cow, as he promised, at the tomb of the Man of God.

[140] [a blind man given light: a leg healed: the point of an arrow came out of a wound of itself.] Item, on the III Nones of July a certain man, John Hoe by name, of Wiggemor, who had lost the sight of his eyes for two months, when he had prayed for two days at the tomb of the Man of God, suddenly received sight through the merits of the aforesaid Servant of God. Item, on the IV Ides of July in the aforesaid year there came five men of the township of Osta in the Vale of Eveshanne ^o to the tomb of the Servant of God, swearing that a certain man, John Horm by name, whose leg had been contracted with great deformity for three months, when he had vowed a vow to the Servant of God, within the seventh day was restored to entire health. Item, on the VIIth day of the month of July, namely the day of the translation of Blessed Thomas the martyr [p], a certain man, Henry de Marleclyve by name, in the county of Warevik, came to the tomb of the Man of God, bringing with him a horse, which horse had been shot in the neck by a certain robber so horribly that the iron of the arrow could not be drawn out by any skill of the farriers [q]. But when the aforesaid man, making a vow, had devoutly bent a penny to the Servant of God over the place of the wound in whose depth the iron lay hid, all the bystanders seeing and marvelling, the iron, as it were of itself, suddenly coming out of the wound, fell to the ground, as he swore, through the merits of the Man of God.

[141] Item, on the V Kalends of August a certain woman, A woman freed from a grave infirmity by the Saint appearing; Emmota by name, of Vedeford in the parish which is called Ater Ok, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that she had been tormented for seven days with the trouble of so grave a sickness that she could not help herself, nor did she feel relief from any help of medicine. Weighing which, the above-mentioned woman continually, weeping and groaning, invoked the help of the Servant of God with all the devotion she could, crying out often: St. Thomas, help me. And when she had persisted long in such crying, behold, a certain man clad in priestly vestments appeared to her, asking of her what she sought. To whom she answered: Lord, who are you who ask? To whom he answered: I am he whose help you have so many times invoked. Hearing which, she asked him to have mercy on her soul and body. Which said, that Man, stretching out his hand, touched * her body, and at once she was restored to entire health.

[142] Item, the same above-mentioned woman likewise swore there before, by his help, she had also received teeth. that she had before been so troubled by a certain sickness that she had lost her teeth. Whence she could chew or eat nothing except pulse or foods in liquid substance; and when for a trouble of this kind she had most devoutly invoked the help of the Servant of God, through the help of a certain maidservant who at that time ministered to her, within a month new teeth grew for her to such an extent that she was seen to be toothed as she had been before, through the help of the Man of God.

[143] Item, on the vigil of St. John the Baptist in the aforesaid year a certain man, A man struck with a sudden disorder of the tongue and with insanity, Richard by name, of Brune Burste, of Wembeburis, of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, when he had gone into a certain field to despatch a certain business of his, began to be weighed down abruptly by so great a bodily trouble that at once, there in the open air, before he went further, he was compelled unwillingly to give himself to sleep. When therefore he had dozed a little, he being at length awakened was found to be vexed by so great an infirmity that he was turned into insanity of mind, and was deprived of speech with the office of the tongue, to such an extent that he could not chew food otherwise than by putting his fingers into his mouth and supplying the part of the tongue, turning over food of this kind as nature itself requires.

[144] No wonder; for his tongue clung so firmly to the left jaw at the Saint's tomb he is rendered sound. that it could not be removed from it by human industry without violence. And when this man had laboured wretchedly with so many distresses for two months and twenty-one days, at last, by the counsel and conduct of neighbours, on the morrow of St. Lambert the martyr [r], he was brought to the tomb of the Man of God. Which neighbours indeed, when they had most devoutly invoked the help of the Man of God for him and with him, at once through his merits he was marvellously restored both to speech and to a sound sense, the witnesses written below being present and seeing, who proved the foregoing, a corporal oath having been taken: namely Adam de Brunburst, Adam de Blakenbale, Hugh, son [s] of Claritus, Henry Venrou, Robert Burneth, Ranulph called Monekes, and many others worthy of belief.

[145] A madman, by the counsel of a woman, to the Saint's sepulchre, Item, it is not to be passed over in silence what happened in Ireland, in the county of Couvont [t], on the III Nones of June in the aforesaid year, namely concerning Milo, surnamed Kerry, with two companions deputed with him for the boat on a certain river, who, when he had been carried for some while in a certain small boat at midday, and the solar globe spread its rays more hotly than usual over them, not bearing heat of this kind any longer, hastened to go up as quickly as possible from the small boat itself to land. Who at once were pressed with so great a bodily trouble that they were likewise compelled to give themselves to sleep there. And when they were afterwards roused, they were all found as though possessed, or also out of their minds, as men who had lost human understanding. And one of them was vexed with so great an insanity that he climbed impetuously onto the roof of a water-mill which was near there: from which, falling to the ground, he forthwith expired.

[146] [at which she herself had obtained offspring, he is brought and restored to a sound mind.] And the second, led by his friends to the Cross of Nynvelin [u] in the hope of recovering health, was taken from the midst there. The third, moreover, who is Milo, his friends took, instructed by a certain matron, who faithfully asserted to them that, when she had long been believed barren by many, and held this as it were for a reproach, she had visited by vow the sepulchre of the aforesaid Bishop, begging offspring from him with devout prayers, and, offerings having been laid out, returned to her home, and, not cheated of her desire, conceived and bore twins in that same year. And they, strengthened by confidence in a report of this kind, at once took their way toward Hereford, bringing the aforesaid madman with them: who, when for some while before

the sepulchre of the Servant of God they had persevered together in prayers, most devoutly invoking his help, he who had before been mad was found suddenly gentle, restored by the power of God to the health desired.

[147] A boy believed dead from a long disease, Item, on the VIII Ides of July in the aforesaid year a certain man, Thomas by name, of Nechere Anene, of the diocese of Salisbury, came to the tomb of the Man of God, relating in good faith that, when his son Thomas, seven years old, vexed by a long and grievous disease and already consumed to the uttermost point of infirmity, and lying without breath for three days, both he and all who saw him thought with likelihood had expired; the friends who were present, desiring to soothe the grief of the fathers' kin *, made a vow for him to the Servant of God, most devoutly invoking his suffrage: which done, at once, through the merits of the Servant of God, the vital spirit being taken up again, he gathered his limbs together with strength, entire health being given back to him from heaven. For the sake of which thing his father faithfully offered the promised offering on the aforesaid day.

[148] as also a girl overturned with her cradle, are suddenly healed. Item, on the III Nones of August there came to the tomb of the Man of God, with the offerings which they had promised by vow, William de Clyfburis and Alice his wife, faithfully affirming this which follows; that, when they on the vigil of Blessed James the apostle had given themselves together to sleep in the bedchamber, and the woman herself had placed her little daughter in a cradle, perhaps rather incautiously, it happened that the aforesaid cradle with the infant was overturned, the face being dashed against the ground. That mother therefore, awaking, began to think anxiously of her daughter, because she heard neither her motion nor her breath, as at other times she had been wont. And rising, she found the cradle with the daughter already overturned, and, touching the infant, found her cold and extinguished. And she, struck with a mother's grief, roused her husband with tearful cries, and told him the event of the matter, which she could not conceal. He, destitute of human counsel, more wisely fled to the divine, namely invoking the suffrage of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, making a vow for her: and she, a little interval having passed, began from heaven to breathe, the girl, and to stir her parents to immense thanks to the Lord for the life so suddenly given back to her.

[149] About the same time a certain man, by name Thomas Gaugy, One limping from contraction obtained free walking: of Costane in the county of Leyncestre, of the diocese of Lincoln, for five months and more was so contracted and lame that he walked most wretchedly upon his hands and knees. And when he despaired of being healed by human medicine, having taken sound counsel for himself, he had himself vowed to God's servant Thomas, bishop of Hereford. Which accomplished, at once he obtained such relief in walking that with one staff he presented himself shortly at the tomb of the Man of God, and, his help having been most devoutly invoked, leaving his staff there, he returned upright and sound to his own home.

[150] Item, on the morrow of the Assumption [x] in the aforesaid year there were present at the tomb of the said Father persons a man's split leg healed. who proved that, when Peter Dandevine of Neweutone, in the last war of Wales, had been surrounded by the Welsh, he was horribly struck in the left leg by the blows of two lances, so that from the knee to the ankle-bone of the foot [y] the hollow bone of the leg was split through the middle, and its marrow was wholly poured out. And when physicians were called to apply care of this kind to the wounded man, they, not without reason despairing both of his life and of his soundness, all and each left him despaired of. Hearing this, the aforesaid Peter, committing himself to the help of almighty God and of his aforesaid Servant, little by little recovered; and at length he vowed that, as soon as he could walk, he would visit the sepulchre of that Servant of God. Without delay, forthwith, all pain being taken away, the leg was made whole again for him, fit enough for walking, the merits of the Man of God interceding.

[151] Item, on the VII Kalends of September there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, John, [one mortally wounded, after a vow made by his friends, at once restored to health.] called le Foulere, of Rois in Ireland, with many companions who came with him from the parts beyond the sea with their offerings, saying and clearly proving that, when the said John, placed in the English army at an assault near Burdeg. [z], had been struck so horribly in the head by a certain dart that it entered through one ear and stuck out through his opposite ear; and when the bystanders had wholly drawn the said dart out of his head, he lay as though dead upon the ground. And his companions, compassionating him with a pious affection, vowed a vow for him to the Servant of God. And behold, he who was with likelihood thought dead rose up, having obtained from the Lord entire health.

[152] About the same time there came to the tomb of the Man of God Nicholas de Clistone of Derbystyre A child drowned in a great vessel and Margaret his wife, saying faithfully and proving that their daughter, Letitia by name, having the age of three years, fell into a certain wooden vessel, which some call a cuva [aa], full of liquor, about the first hour of the day; and when she had been drawn out, she was found also dead, and her flesh turned to blackness; and when her friends had vowed for her to the aforementioned Servant of God, she at once revived, and her flesh also was made marvellously white, as before.

[153] and another in a river, called back to life. Item, on the VIII Ides of December it was faithfully proved at the tomb of the Man of God by Richard the miller and Emma de la Forde that a certain boy, John by name, son of William, called le Messur, of Wykebolde in the county of Worcester, going beside the river running through the middle of the same township, and falling, dropped into it, and was carried through a great space of water by the thrusts of the river, until by chance he caught by his clothes on a certain root of a tree growing upon the bank. And thus he lay hidden, drowned, from the third hour of the day until the eleventh hour of the same day; and his parents, anxious at the absence of their son, grieving not a little, seek him, whom at length, found, they drew out of the waters extinguished, with tears, and carried him into their own house, thinking anxiously what they should do about the event. And when they had no human counsel, they began devoutly to entreat the Lord that by the merits of his servant Bishop Thomas he would restore to them alive their son who had thus perished; and they confidently uttered a vow for him. And behold, in a wonderful manner, as quickly as possible, that boy was seen by the bystanders to breathe as though awaking from sleep, and within the following three days to be restored to entire health.

ANNOTATIONS.

p This is the holy archbishop of Canterbury and martyr, of whom treatment will have to be given in our Work, with the Roman Martyrology, at the 29th day of December, on which his birthday into heaven is kept.

q Marescallus, in French Maréchal, in Latin is a veterinarius, or a smith who cares for horses.

r St. Lambert, bishop of Maastricht and martyr, is venerated on the 17th day of September. There is also another St. Lambert, martyr of Saragossa in Spain, who is celebrated in the Roman Martyrology at the 16th day of April.

s Read Hugone filio, and below Henrico.

t This word is faultily written, for there is no county of this name in Ireland.

u In this place, which is unknown to me, there was probably some holy Cross renowned for miracles or benefits.

x That is, as I think, of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, which feast is celebrated on the 15th day of August.

y It is otherwise called the clavicula of the foot and the malleolus, and it is where the leg is joined to the foot.

z Perhaps Burdegala, commonly Bourdeaux, which is a city of France in Aquitaine.

aa From the French word cuve, which is a vessel carefully joined of wood for receiving the wine pressed from grapes. In Latin it is called a lacus, namely a wine-vat.

circumseptus*

Glocestriæ*

add fuisset*,

tetigit*

rather paternum*

CHAPTER IX.

Miracles continued, perhaps in the same year MCCXCVI, and in the years MCCXCVII, MCCXCVIII and MCCXCIX.

An infant believed dead from birth, About the same time there were present at the tomb of the Man of God persons who related and asserted in good faith that, when Joan, then wife of Peter de Bosehram, of the diocese of Chichester, on the morrow of St. Bartholomew had borne a son with such great pains that he was thought dead by all who saw him, and had thus lain lifeless from the morning hour until the ninth hour of that day, by the counsel of friends the parents vowed a vow for the boy. Which done, suddenly that infant, by the infinite power of God, revived through the merits of the Man of God.

[155] Item, on the morrow of St. Dionysius in the aforesaid year there came to the tomb of the Man of God William, another boy in a pit full of water, called le Coliare, and Matilla his wife, with many others worthy of belief, of the township of Nodelwik in the county of Salopis *, proving, a corporal oath having been taken, that a certain boy, Richard

by name, of the aforesaid township, on the morrow of St. John the Baptist, walking, perhaps rather incautiously, beside a certain pit full of water, being in the manor of the abbot of Salop ^a, which is near there, fell by chance into it, and lay there drowned from the third hour of the day until the twilight of the following night. Where at length he was found, and when he was with likelihood believed dead by the bystanders, his parents, drawn together with grief, humbly implored the help of the Lord and of his servant Bishop Thomas for his resuscitation. Who at once, by the merits of the aforesaid Servant of God, revived, restored thenceforward to entire health.

[156] a third, in a river, drowned, restored to life. About the same time a certain boy, Hugh by name, son of Christopher of Norcherwyche in the county of Worcester, falling from a certain bridge, which he had purposed to cross, dropped into the river running under the same bridge, and was carried hand to hand by the waters for the space of half a mile, until he stuck, leaning against a certain root of a willow which he then had as a check. And his friends, anxiously seeking whither he had come, at length found him drowned in the waves, already deprived of the vital spirit; whom with mourning they took up out of the river, devoutly vowing for him, as far as lay in them, that, if it should befall that he was raised to life by the suffrage of God's servant Bishop Thomas, he would from that time visit his sepulchre every year while he lived: and they invoking the help of God for some while, forthwith that boy revived, the mercy of the Saviour working it. Which miracle indeed was proved in the church of Hereford on ^b of the apostles Peter and Paul, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-six ^c, by Stephen the antecedent ^d and Henry son of Stephen, with many others worthy of belief.

[157] A like benefit to a girl Item, about the same time there came to the tomb of the Man of God from the county of Cantebrigg * William de Wynpole, William Vote and Walter de Picheforde, proving that a certain girl, by name Isabella, daughter of the aforesaid William de Wynepole, on the vigil of St. John the Baptist, about the ninth hour of the day, fell into a pit full of water, and lay submerged in it for so long a space of time as the way of one common mile could be traversed by a man at a slow pace: whose spirit those who came up reckoned to be wholly breathed out; for whom, when the bystanders had devoutly vowed to the aforesaid Bishop, suddenly she was seen to breathe, and by the merits of the Man of God to flourish with her former health.

[158] and conferred on another boy. Item, about the same time there came to the tomb of the Man of God Thomas de Croudene, Philip de Brigger and Henry, son of William de Brigger, in the county of Cambridge, proving faithfully that a certain boy, William by name, son of Gilbert de Croudene, on the aforesaid day, at a certain ninth hour, fell into the depth of a well, from which men are accustomed to draw water with a rope and bucket, and lay hidden there drowned for the space of two hours. His friends, anxiously inquiring in what direction he had turned aside, at last found what had befallen him. And when they had come to the boy, his body was found already dead, turned upside down, and his head fixed in the mud of the depth. When at length it had been drawn out, his friends, destitute of human help, persevering in prayers, vowed for him to God's servant Bishop Thomas. Without delay, behold, suddenly that boy revived, the divine power working, and showing the merits of its Servant before many.

[159] Item, it is thought worthy to commit to memory that a certain girl, by name Agatha A dumb girl and a dumb man granted speech at the Saint's sepulchre: of Confinton, of the diocese of Hereford, having thirteen years of age, when for three continuous years she was wholly dumb, and about the aforesaid time had been brought by the counsel of friends to the tomb of the Man of God, and had persevered there in prayers for fourteen days, at length on the fourteenth day, through the suffrage of the Servant of God, obtained from heaven the power of speaking. Item, a like miracle happened about the same time to be done at the aforementioned tomb, namely concerning John, son of Griffin Waleum of Karmerdine, who, having been made wholly dumb for four years and six months, against the will of his parents and friends, took his way toward Hereford with other stranger pilgrims for the grace of recovering speech, to visit the sepulchre of the aforesaid Bishop. Where, when he had given himself for some while to prayers, and out of fervent devotion had kissed the stone of the sepulchre, at once, by the merits of the Servant of God, his silence being loosed, he obtained the free faculty of speaking. Which was proved there on the morrow of St. Bartholomew the apostle by very many who had seen the said John dumb for the whole time noted above.

[160] About the same time a certain man, William by name, a contracted man and a contracted woman healed: surnamed Messur, of Scoppeleye in the county of Hamtone ^e, contracted from the day of St. Andrew in the aforesaid year until the feast of St. Laurence next following to such an extent that he walked deformedly upon his hands and knees, when he had vowed a vow to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, suddenly obtained lasting health, the Lord granting it. Item, on the V Ides of September in the aforesaid year a certain woman, Edith by name, of Esspring in Breudesmerhwe ^f, contracted for two years and six months, came to the tomb of the Man of God, most devoutly invoking his help. Which, when she had persevered ^g in prayer for three days, there on the third day itself she obtained health from heaven, the merits of the Servant of God interceding.

[161] About the same time a certain woman, Eva by name, Abrenon, likewise to another dumb woman speaking, of the parish of St. Waynard in Irchenesclo ^h, of the diocese of Hereford, dumb for nine months, on the day of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross in the aforesaid year came for the grace of recovering speech to the cathedral church of Hereford; who, when she had gone up into the pulpitum which is raised there before the cross, and had uttered a single word, came down in haste, already made more cheerful, and, prostrate in prayer before the sepulchre of the Man of God, obtained by his merits the power of speaking which she had desired.

[162] Item, on the III Kalends of October in the year noted above, the miracle which follows, and to another contracted woman the faculty of walking given there. by the very fact, was publicly proved concerning a certain woman, Florence by name, of the city of London, then dwelling at Maresbure, namely in the parish of St. Edmund, who was so contracted for three years that she could remove neither her shins nor her ankles from her legs . Whose husband and father, condoling with so great a grief and misery of hers, placed her, contracted, in a certain vehicle which is called in French Ciner, but in English Whelberne* ⁱ, and so drew her with their hands through long stretches of land with immense labours as far as Hereford. Whom they presented before the sepulchre of the Man of God for the grace of recovering health; where, when for some while together with her they had most devoutly implored the help of God and of his servant Bishop Thomas, behold, the sinews of the contracted woman being loosened, and her limbs little by little stretched out, she obtained from the Lord sufficient supply for walking upright. The aforesaid vehicle therefore being left there, and offerings having been laid out, the woman, thus set upright, returned cheerful and sound to her own home, together with her guides, praising God in the merits of his aforesaid Servant.

[163] A woman after childbirth, believed lifeless, made sound: blind men Item, on the VIII Ides of November, namely the day of St. Leonard the confessor, in the aforesaid year, there came to the tomb of the Man of God persons who proved that a certain woman, by name Margaret, of Egreton in the county of Cestre *, after the birth of a male child was weakened to such an extent that she was reckoned by the bystanders wholly lifeless. And when, by the counsel of the friends standing around, they had bent a penny over her in memory of the aforesaid Man of God, she obtained from heaven entire health, restored to her former life through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the day of the Conversion of St. Paul in the aforesaid year a certain man, by name Thomas de Chileam, of the county of Kent, who had been blind seven years and more, praying at the tomb of the Man of God, on that very day received sight through the help of the Man of God.

[164] given light; one gravely injured healed. Item, on the VIII Ides of May in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-eight ^k a certain man, by name Thomas, called Sanke, of the county of Verby ^l, who had been blind before for three years, when he had persevered in prayers for three days at the tomb of the Man of God, miraculously received sight. Item, about the same time a certain esquire, by name Simon, of Wincestre ^m, asserted by swearing that, when he had been in a certain conflict in Gascony, he was mortally wounded through the middle of the head and the right eye with a certain lance; and when his friends grieved greatly at his wounding, and vowed an offering for him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, within a few days he obtained health entirely through the help of the Man of God. Item, on the day of the Finding of the Holy Cross in the aforesaid year a certain man, by name William de Eliveleye, of the county of York, blind for almost a year, coming to the tomb of the Man of God, and persevering there in devout prayers for three days, obtained sight from heaven through the merits of the Man of God.

[165] A cardiac man, neglecting his vow, relapses, and, repenting, is healed. Item, about the feast of the Assumption of Blessed Mary in the aforesaid year there were present certain nobles of the diocese of Norwich, evidently proving that a certain man, well enough known in the diocese of Norwich, afflicted with the cardiac passion for ten years, had vowed that he would go as a pilgrim to God's servant Thomas of Hereford, if God, by the merits of the Man of God, would free him with a swift remedy from the aforementioned sickness. Which done, the pain of all his languor departed from heaven, and he, as an ungrateful son, forgetful of his Healer, negligently put off fulfilling his vow for the seven following years. Which seven years having elapsed, on the day of Blessed Stephen at Christmas ⁿ, at Vespers, he began again to be horribly tormented by the said disease; who, devoting himself anew to God and to his aforesaid Servant, and finding sureties for visiting him, within three days again received health through the merits of the Man of God.

[166] Life given back to a drowned girl: Item, on the Wednesday next after the feast of the Nativity of Blessed Mary in the aforesaid year there were present at the tomb of the Man of God certain persons faithfully asserting that Felicia, daughter of William de Weston, of the county of Stafford, a child *, namely of the age of two years, falling into a certain well, lay thus drowned in it for the space of one mile; and when the father of the aforesaid girl was searching for her, and could not find her at all, at length he came to the above-mentioned well, and seeing his daughter dead there, at once drew her out: who, without any breath and life, lay thus lifeless from the morning hour until the third hour. And when the parents of the dead girl, grieving at her death, measured her, as is the custom of the country, to the Man of God, she at once miraculously revived, being made sound through the help of the Man of God.

[167] Item, on the Friday next after the feast of St. Dionysius in the aforesaid year there were present at the tomb

of the Man of God persons the iron of an arrow marvellously taken out of a body: who evidently proved that, when William de Catewik, of the county of Susexie ^o, was shooting arrows in a certain meadow with kinsmen and other strangers, he had been grievously wounded in the right shoulder by a certain arrow by one of his kinsmen. When he had carried the iron of the arrow fixed in his aforesaid shoulder from the feast of the Beheading of Blessed John the Baptist until the feast of Blessed Nicholas [p] next following, nor was there possibility of drawing it out so that he could be helped by the aid of physicians; and therefore * his parents with likelihood despaired of his life, he fled to the help of the Servant of God, and, promising that he would go as a pilgrim to Hereford in honour of the Man of God, he bent a penny. Which done, the aforesaid iron, shut in his flesh and carried so long, suddenly came out miraculously through the loins, through the merits of the Man of God.

[168] Item, in the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-nine, a certain man, one drowned, long dead, raised to life. by name William le Mercer, of Pynchebek near Spala in Holonda [q], coming to the tomb of the Man of God, evidently proved that, when Walter his son was making his way, walking rather incautiously, beside a certain very deep well, he fell into it, and lay hidden in it dead and submerged for two days and two nights; and when he had long been searched for, at length he was found in this well. And when his parents had drawn him out, for two more days and two whole nights he lay thus lifeless upon the ground, awaiting the coming of the king's coroner; and when at length they had obtained from him leave to deliver the body of the dead boy to burial, they called to memory the many miracles which God himself has worked through the merits of his servant Thomas, and, vowing the aforesaid dead boy to the Man of God, they bent a penny over him: and behold, quite suddenly, he who had been dead miraculously revived, restored to entire health through the merits of the Man of God.

[169] Item, there were brought to the tomb of the Man of God two boys, One of two brothers receives life, the other speech. sons of the noble man the lord John Burdun, knight, of the county of Notinghram [r], whose friends swore that the aforementioned younger son had laboured under so grievous a sickness for seven days that, they standing by and seeing, he breathed out his spirit, and thus lay dead from the first hour of the day until the eleventh hour of the evening, at which, by the counsel of a certain chaplain, they made a vow to the Servant of God for his resuscitation. Which done, the boy at once miraculously revived, and opened his mouth, taking food, through the help of the most high God. Item, the aforesaid friends swore this also, that the other son, namely the elder, of the above-mentioned knight had been tormented by so vehement a pain of the head that he had lost speech for the space of one whole day; and since by occasion of the aforesaid affliction, as is said above, he could not speak, he signed with his hand to the bystanders that they should promise an offering to the Servant of God for him, just as he had seen them promise for the resuscitation of his brother: which when the friends standing by had devoutly done, all the distress of the pain being taken away, at once he received speech, and in * entire health, through the omnipotence of the most high God.

[170] One held for dead comes away suddenly sound. Item, on the Vigil of the Chair of St. Peter in the aforesaid year there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain esquire, by name John de Coluyle, of the county of Suffolch [s], offering one horse of the price of two marks, relating with faithful assertion that, when it chanced that he was riding the said horse on a certain day, a certain sudden infirmity, whirling his head about on all sides with phantasies, seized him, through which he at once lost sight and speech: seeing which, the companions who had accompanied him brought him to the house of his mother, not far distant from that place. And when he came to the aforesaid mother's house, taking him from the horse, they put him into bed, and thus he lay the whole night without speech and sight. And when morning had come, his friends, coming to him, found him dead, and, lamenting him greatly, prepared for him, as for a dead man, the things necessary for burial. But at the evening hour the mother of the dead man, afflicted with excessive grief for the death of her son, fled devoutly to the suffrage of Blessed Bishop Thomas, promising the horse of her dead son if he would pour out prayers to God for his resuscitation. Which done, he who had been dead at once revived, and, addressing his mother, began to rebuke her because she had wished to rouse him from a sweet sleep, and thus he obtained from heaven life and health through the merits of the Man of God [t].

[171] Life given back to a horse, sight to a blind boy; Item, about the same time a certain man, by name Walter, called Herbard, of Godermton near Winchetumbe, of the diocese of Worcester, related at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had a horse which he reckoned dead, and therefore purposed to flay it, by the counsel of a certain friend standing by he began to measure it to God's Servant: and it at once revived, having obtained entire health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, on Passion Sunday in the aforesaid year a certain woman, by name Margaret le Solk-Suoark, asserted by her oath and the testimony of very many at the tomb of the Man of God that, when she had a son, by name Robert, of the age of almost two years, who had lacked the sight of his eyes from birth, and, by the counsel of neighbours and pilgrims, she had made a vow for him to God's servant Thomas, and had bent a penny over him in honour of the said Prelate, he received sight from heaven through the merits of the Man of God.

[172] likewise a woman and a man reckoned dead, Item, there came to the tomb of the Man of God persons who asserted with testimony worthy of belief that the lady Isabella de Massy, wife of the lord Richard de Massy, of the county of Chester, was reckoned dead for the space of two leagues. And when the friends of the said lady had made a vow for her to the Man of God, she was made alive and sound from heaven through the power of the most high God; and in evidence of this miracle the said lady afterwards offered a tunic of silk at the tomb of the Man of God. Item, about the same time, namely on the day of the Parasceve in the aforesaid year, the miracle which follows was proved at the tomb of the Man of God, namely that, when a certain man, by name John Tyrop, was climbing to the nest of a certain raven in a certain oak, to the estimate of sixty-five feet and more, and, holding himself rather incautiously in it, had fallen by chance, and thus had lain dead for the space of one hour, and the bystanders had measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, and had bent a penny over him, he at once opened his eyes and obtained life through the merits of the Man of God.

[173] Item, about the same time there were present at the tomb of the Man of God persons one affected with a grave disorder, another lame, are rendered sound. who related that the lord Thomas de Erbalerbethling had so great an infirmity and pain in his neck and in his back that he wholly despaired of his own life; through the increasing distress of which pain he feared that he would fall into frenzy. And when he promised that he would set out to the Man of God at Hereford *, he forthwith received health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, John by name, of the county of Kent, who had been lame for four years before, came to the tomb of the Man of God, scarcely supporting himself with two staves; and while Mass was being celebrated beside the tomb of the Man of God, he prostrated himself before the tomb, praying devoutly that through the merits of the Man of God the clemency of the Saviour would restore health to him; and behold, the Mass itself being completed, that man was at once restored to entire health through the help of the Man of God, as that man swore; and, the supports or staves being left at the tomb, he returned in haste to his own home with great joy without a staff.

ANNOTATIONS.

p If the feast of St. Nicholas, bishop of Myra, is spoken of here, that iron will have stuck in William's shoulder more than three months; for the Beheading of St. John the Baptist is commemorated on the 29th day of August, but the birthday of St. Nicholas of Myra on the 6th of December.

q To confess the truth, I do not know these things.

r That is, Nottingham, or Nottingham-Shire, in Latin Nottinghamia, which is a county of England, whose head is the city likewise called Nottingham.

s Suffolcia, commonly Suffolk or South-Folke, is a county of England.

t This miracle also, like many others, has already been related above.

Salopiæ*

Cantabrigiæ*

perhaps a clunibus*?

Cestriæ*

puella*

proinde*

hoc*

add &*

in* is superfluous

Herefordiam*

CHAPTER X.

Miracles and benefits obtained in the year MCCC and the two following.

A paralysed arm restored: a boy called back from the dead: Item, at the beginning of the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred, a certain man, by name William of Mallinge in the county of Kent, who already for a long time had had his left arm so

shattered or crushed under a certain stone wall that it hung from the shoulder useless, as though dead or paralytic, when he had prayed devoutly at the tomb of the Man of God, his arm was restored from heaven to entire health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, about the same time a certain woman of Manchester in the county of Langastr. ^a, by name Margaret, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain son, quite sound, as appeared, suddenly ^b falling to the ground, had been reckoned truly dead by the bystanders; and when he lay thus dead from the first hour of the day until evening, and the bystanders invoked the suffrage of the Man of God for his resuscitation, at once he miraculously revived through the omnipotence of the most high God and the merits of his Servant.

[175] a man suddenly freed from a swelling of the body; life given back to an infant; Item, about the same time a certain man, by name Hugh de Messingt, burgess of Leoministr. ^c, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had gone to his bed sound, so great a sudden swelling befell him, and so vehement a pain afflicted his heart, that that night he believed, and his friends who were present, that he would shortly breathe out his spirit. But when he had been measured to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, he was soon restored to his former health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, about the same time a certain man, by name Philip, called the Cook, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that, when his wife had a son of the age of two years, and he was resting between his mother's arms with her in bed, he was suddenly found dead; and thus he lay dead from midnight until dawn. And when his parents had measured him to the Man of God, God's Servant, he at once revived through the merits of the Man of God.

[176] a horse healed; a contracted leg restored to use Item, about the same time there was present at the tomb of the Man of God one who asserted in good faith that the lord Roger de Mortuomari ^d had a horse which had been so weighed down by divers infirmity that for nine continuous days it ate nothing at all; and when the keeper of the aforesaid horse had measured it to the Man of God, God's servant, it was miraculously and suddenly restored to health through the merits of the Man of God, to such an extent that the following night it ate two bushels ^e of oats. Item, a certain man, a householder near Bristoll, proved that, when his son, being sound and safe, was walking alone at midday in a garden ^f, he was so suddenly contracted in all the sinews of his leg that by no force of hands or help of his father, who was present there, could his leg be straightened. And when the aforesaid father had measured his aforesaid son to the Man of God, he was at once restored to his former health through the merits of the Man of God.

[177] Item, a certain woman near Bristoll swore at the tomb of the Man of God [a drowned boy is raised to life; hearing is given back to a deaf boy, sight to a blind one.] that a certain little son of hers, falling into a well full of water, breathed out his spirit; but when he had been drawn out of the well, and from the ninth hour until evening appeared thus dead, the bystanders had him measured to the Servant of God; and at once he revived through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain householder of Cherleton swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had a certain son who had been deaf for almost half a year to such a degree that he could hear nothing at all during the aforesaid time, the help of the Man of God having been invoked, his hearing was restored through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain woman of Basconia Schireburn near Marleberg [g] swore at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain son of hers for three weeks incurred so great a blindness that he could see nothing at all. But when she had measured him to God's Servant, he miraculously received sight through the merits of the Man of God.

[178] Item, at the beginning of the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and one, Speech to an injured man, sight to a blind boy, to the dead the lady Juliana de Ebylton related and proved at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain one of her serving-men was so struck on the head that for fifteen days he could not speak. And when she had measured him to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, at once he recovered speech through the merits of the Man of God. About the same time in the aforesaid year a certain woman of Pionia Canonicorum, of the diocese of Hereford, came to the tomb of the Man of God, bringing with her a certain son of hers who had been blind for twelve weeks; and when she had made an offering for him to the Servant of God, he at once miraculously received sight. Item, about the same time a certain woman of Pionia Regis, of the diocese of Hereford, came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing and proving that her little son, lying between her arms about midnight, was found dead, and thus lay lifeless until the first hour of the day. And when he had been measured to the Man of God, he at once revived, and on the third day following was brought sound by his parents to the aforesaid place.

[179] Item, at the same time, namely on Palm Sunday, life granted: a daughter blind, dumb and deaf, and another, a paralytic, healed. a certain boy of Oynton near Gloucester, of the diocese of Worcester, drowned in the waters, lay hidden thus dead in them for half a day. And when his parents had drawn him out of the waters and had had him measured to God's Servant, on the same day he was restored to life and his former health through the merits of the Servant of God. Item, about the same time there was present at the tomb of the Man of God one who proved that a certain daughter of Gilbert de Treneweye, also of Hereford ^h, being sound, afterwards by a sudden change fell to the ground, and lay made blind, dumb and deaf for the two following days. And when her parents had measured her to God's Servant, at once her state was changed for the better from heaven, and she was quite soon restored to her former health through the help of the Man of God. Item, about the same time in the aforesaid year a certain cleric of the diocese of Lincoln swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had for a long time been so grievously struck with the paralytic disease that he lacked the use of all his limbs, especially on one side of his body. And when he had been measured to the man of God, Bishop Thomas, he was miraculously made most sound.

[180] A girl's arm, badly affected, is cured. Item, about the same time in the aforesaid year there came to the tomb of the Man of God certain persons worthy of belief from near Wilesbiny, of the diocese of Lincoln, who related that a certain girl of the aforesaid place had so horrible a certain lump between her hand and arm for the space of three years that she was made wholly useless to herself as regards doing handiwork; but when her friends had measured her to God's Servant, her lump vanished, and she was at once cured through the help of the Man of God.

[181] A savage storm is calmed; Item, in the same year, about the same time, four young men of Gascony swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when they with others were sailing on the sea from Gascony toward Bristoll in a certain ship laden with wines, and had come into Ireland, about Croke ⁱ, so horrible and dreadful a storm fell upon them that the sailors could help themselves by no tackle of the ship: nay, all with one accord abandoned the rudders of the ship. And when they, set in so great a peril, were already greatly astounded, behold, an evil spirit sat among them in the ship. Terrified by so horrible a sight of which, the sailors, by the counsel of the master of the ship, fled to the help of God and of his aforesaid Servant, humbly prostrating themselves in the ship and awaiting the clemency of God. And when they had lain silent for some while thus prostrate in prayer, and had made a vow to the aforementioned Servant of God, soon the evil spirit vanished from their eyes, and every storm of the sea was calmed, and they, freed from all perils, landed prosperously at the port of their will through the merits of the Man of God.

[182] [a boy extinguished in the waters revives; a blind girl is given light; a girl is raised to life.] Item, at the beginning of the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and two, it was proved at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain boy near Teukesbur ^k, of the diocese of Worcester, drowned in a certain water-vessel, which is commonly called a Tina, lay thus extinguished for half a day; and when his friends who were present had measured the corpse itself to God's Servant, he was restored to life and to his former health through the help of the Man of God. About the same time a certain man of Morcebur near Bristoll swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had a certain daughter who had lost the sight of her eyes for a month. But when her father had measured her to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, she at once received sight through the merits of the Servant of God. Item, about the same time a certain householder of Epaldigg swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had a son who lay lifeless without any breath from the morning hour until the first hour of the day; and when his parents had invoked the help of God and of his servant Thomas, and had measured him, as is the custom of the country, he who had been dead at once revived through the help of the Man of God.

[183] A fire put out; a wound of the leg cured; Item, about the same time there was present at the tomb of the Man of God one who related truthfully and proved that, when his house had been set on fire on every side, and the flame of the fire was spreading hither and thither in different directions, nor was human remedy to be hoped for there, he fled devoutly to the remedy of God alone and of his Servant; but when, the help of God having been invoked, he had bent a penny over the fire in memory of his Servant, all that fire was suddenly put out. Item, about the same time a certain young man of Derkel came to the tomb of the Man of God, who asserted that he had been struck through the middle of the leg by a certain arrow. And when he had vowed an offering to the Man of God for the cure of his leg, within seven days he was restored to his former health, no human cure intervening in this.

[184] Item, about the same time there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, a paralytic healed; life given back to a boy; Peter by name, of Clare in Senret in the March of Scotland ^l, who wore the habit of the Friars of St. Augustine, swearing that he had been so grievously struck with the paralytic disease that he had not the use of his limbs, especially on one side of his body. The distress of which disease growing heavier, he lost speech, sight and sense for six continuous days; and when his brother had bent a penny over him, he obtained health from heaven through the merits of the Man of God. Item, in the year of the Lord above-mentioned it was proved at the tomb of the Man of God that Adam le Wise of Gloucestr * had had a nurse who had overlain the child of the said Adam, lying with her in bed at night; which for the space

of one hour of the day lay thus dead; but when the friends standing by had measured the aforesaid child to the servant of God, Bishop Thomas, he at once revived through the help of the Man of God, and in the following week the aforesaid child, miraculously raised to life, was carried sound to Hereford by the aforesaid nurse.

[185] Item, about the same time a certain man, Robert by name, a boy with a crushed head raised to life, a woman in peril of her life healed. called Russel, of Erdefelde near Tenkesbur , of the diocese of Worcester, related at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he was driving his cart laden with earth into the field, and a certain little son of his was beside the cart, its wheel, passing over the head of the aforesaid boy, crushed him and wholly shattered him. And when his father grieved greatly at the death of his son, and invoked the help of God, of his servant Thomas, measuring him in the usual manner, he at once revived through the merits of the Man of God ^m. Item, on the day of Blessed Augustine in the aforesaid year a certain man, by name Nicholas de Trostrei near Orcheton, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when Blunda his wife was so grievously sick with an acute fever that for two continuous days she could neither speak nor see, and therefore her aforesaid husband wholly despaired of her life, he promised that he would give a certain cow for her to the Man of God: which done, at once she opened her eyes, restored to speech and to entire health through the merits of the Man of God.

[186] Item, a certain householder of Salop swore at the tomb of the Man of God A boy reckoned dead of fever, and a young man of the quinsy, made sound. that a certain son of his had been vexed with so grievous a disease, namely an acute fever, that in the judgement of many bystanders he breathed out his spirit; and thus from the evening hour until the following midnight he lay without any hope of life. But when the parents of the dead boy had made a vow to the Servant of God, and had measured him, as is the custom of the country, at once that dead boy revived, having obtained entire health from heaven. Item, about the same time a certain young man of Gylgauri in Ireland swore at the tomb of the Man of God that so vehement a pain, proceeding from a certain inner abscess, had surrounded his throat, afflicted him for eight days, that he could taste nothing nor even speak. And when, by the counsel of a certain brother, the friends of the sick man standing by had measured him to God's Servant, soon all the pain departed, so that at once he obtained the faculty of eating, drinking and speaking through the merits of the Man of God.

[187] Lost sight to a woman, the faculty of walking to a boy, given. Item, a certain man, by name Thomas de Welles, called le Porter, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when Alice his wife was lying in childbed, she suddenly lost her sight, and thus from the evening hour until midnight remained wholly blind. And when her husband had bent a penny over her, and had promised that she would be brought to the tomb of the Man of God at Hereford, she at once miraculously received sight. Item, the same Thomas asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain son of his, William, a boy of the age of three years, had both feet and legs so deadened that for a year and a half he remained wholly powerless and useless to himself. And when his father had bent a penny over him, and had promised that the boy himself would devoutly visit the Man of God, he obtained his former health through the merits of the Man of God.

[188] A woman contracted from a grave disease, a vow having been made, is set upright. Item, a certain woman of Salop, by name Agnes de Detteleye, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that, when one night she had given herself to sleep sound, she incurred so great a swelling through her whole body, and began to be afflicted with so vehement a pain, that for fifteen weeks she ate or drank nothing, except perhaps some liquids or broths in place of food; nor for five weeks did she emit anything from herself by stool, vomit or urine, as nature demands; and thus, as it were lame, for half a year she lay wretchedly, also contracted. And when her friends had measured her to God's Servant, at once, with the support of a certain prop or staff, she received some sort of walking. But when she had promised that she would devoutly visit the Man of God as a pilgrim, soon, each of the bones of her body as it were giving a crack against each other, she raised herself up, stretched out her arms and legs, restored to health through all her members through the help of the Man of God.

[189] An infant given back to life; a man granted walking; Item, a certain man, by name William Stary, of the parish of Wodirford, of the diocese of Hereford, with his wife came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that their little daughter, of the age of two years, by name Matilda, overwhelmed or crushed by a certain door, in the judgement of all the bystanders breathed out her spirit; and thus, dead, she lay for the space of two miles and more. And when the parents of the dead girl had measured her to God's Servant, she at once revived, raised quite suddenly to health and life through the help of the Man of God ⁿ. Item, a certain man, by name Hugh, son of Matilda of Dureford, of the diocese of Hereford, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had been grievously wounded in the left leg by a certain sword, so that, the sinews of his leg being cut, supporting himself on two staves for a long time, he walked wretchedly, he uttered a vow to the man of God Thomas, and promised that he would devoutly visit him; who, not unmindful of the vow he had uttered, was carried to Hereford, and, leaving his staves there, returned to his own home, praising God, through the help of the Man of God.

[190] a drowned girl raised to life. Item, a certain man, by name Gervase of Lankadok, near Druslan, and Agnes his wife came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing that a certain daughter of theirs, by name Mabelia, cast down by a flood of water into a certain * river which is called the Tewy, lay thus drowned in the same river from the ninth hour until the evening hour of the same day. And when she had been drawn out of the water, she lay thus dead until the first hour of the following day; but when they had measured her to God's Servant for the resuscitation of the girl, she at once revived, restored from heaven to her former health through the omnipotence of the most high God.

[191] Item, a certain cleric of the household of the lord Reginald de Grey ^o came to the tomb of the Man of God, a disorder of a horse's foot taken away; asserting with testimony worthy of belief that, when he was making his journey from Worcester toward Hereford, as it were inquiring anxiously about the miracles which the divine power has worked by the merits of its Servant, his horse, being sound before, suddenly began to limp for the space of a journey of twelve leagues, scarcely setting its foot to the ground; which could not be helped by the remedy of a farrier [p]; but when the owner of the aforesaid horse had bent a penny in honour of the Man of God, soon, setting the lame or injured foot to the ground, miraculously made sound, it brought back its master, as before, to the place he desired, through the help of the Man of God [q].

[192] Item, a certain man, by name David Map Phelip of Lancadok, a blind woman given light, life given back to a drowned girl. came to the tomb of the Man of God, swearing and proving that his wife, by name Everik, had lost the sight of her eyes for a year and a half; and when she had prayed devoutly for three days at the tomb of the Man of God, she suddenly received sight. Item, a certain woman, by name Matilda la Coppestr, of Malmesbur *, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and swore that her daughter, by name Eleanor, lay dead, submerged in the waters, from the first hour of the day until the ninth hour of the same day. And when the mother of the dead girl had measured her to God's Servant, she at once revived through the omnipotence of the most high God and the merits of his Servant.

ANNOTATIONS.

p That is, as I have already said above, of a veterinarian, or physician of horses.

q Perhaps that man had brought this ill upon himself by thinking ill of the miracles of St. Thomas.

i.e. circa*

perhaps jacuissent*?

i.e. Glocestria*

Tewkesbury*

ejus* is superfluous

add qui*

rather quemdam*

Malmesbury*

CHAPTER XI.

The remaining miracles and benefits obtained in the years MCCCIII, MCCCIV and MCCCV.

A drowned boy called back to life; a swelling of the arm taken away; In the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and three a certain Walter de Hayles, miller, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that his little son, of the age of four years, drowned in the millpond of the aforesaid abbey of Hayles ^a, lay thus extinguished in it from the ninth hour of the day until the dawn of the following day. But when the parents of the boy thus dead had drawn him out of the waters, and had measured him to God's Servant, he at once revived, restored to his former health. Item, a certain young man of Winchelese, by name Thomas, of Maydenestan, of the diocese of Canterbury, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that, when he had upon his arm a certain very horrible and swelling lump for the space of eight weeks and more, and invoked the suffrage of the Servant of God, and devoutly promised that he would make him a silver hand, he was speedily freed from the aforesaid lump, to the wonder of many.

[194] speech restored to one mutilated in his tongue. Item, there were present at the tomb of the Man of God persons who faithfully asserted that, when a certain man, by name William Francisci, was making his way through wooded places near Dancastr., he fell among robbers, who, grievously wounding him in many parts of his body, inhumanly cut off a great part of his tongue; whence, being made violently dumb for the space of the fifteen years next following, he visited in person the places of divers Saints. But when no remedy came to him thence, at length, turning himself to the man of God Bishop Thomas, he humbly implored his suffrage, and promised that he would visit the Man of God himself as a pilgrim, as he could; and behold, one night, when he had given himself to sleep, a certain Priest, clad in his vestments, and as it were prepared to celebrate, appeared to him *; who, approaching him graciously, put his three fingers into his mouth, and drew out his tongue to the shedding of blood; and at once he miraculously recovered speech by the merits of the Man of God. Nor is it to be passed over that the aforesaid shedding of blood, done to him in sleep, was plainly seen fresh on the morrow by many neighbours in the township of Donnehram ^b.

[195] Item, a certain young man of Blakemore, by name Robert, [One dumb from a wound receives speech; a falcon revives; a boy is raised to life,] of the county of Chester, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that he had been by chance so horribly shot with an arrow that for nine days he could not speak. And when his friends had measured him to God's Servant, within three days he recovered speech, restored shortly to health through the merits of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, by name Osbert Giffard, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that he had had a falcon which, throwing itself down from its perch, hung thus dead for the space of a journey of ten leagues; and when it had been measured to the Servant of God in the usual manner, it at once revived. Item, a certain woman, by name Margaret of Schardeburg, coming with a certain little son of hers to the tomb of the Man of God, asserted there that her same son, submerged in the aforesaid township by a flood of water, lay thus dead that night, and on the morrow until the first hour of the day. But when his mother had measured her dead son to God's Servant, he at once revived through the aid and merits of the Man of God.

[196] Item, a certain man, by name Richard Gregorii of Keycelston in the vale of Beauver, likewise another; blindness divinely inflicted, taken away from one repenting. with his wife, by name Emma, swore at the tomb of the Man of God that their son, by name Nicholas, drowned in a certain ditch, lay dead in it for the space of five leagues. And when he had been measured to God's Servant, he soon revived, restored shortly to entire health through the merits of the Man of God. In the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and four, namely on the Tuesday next after the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain householder of Worecestr. ^c with a certain dumb son of his, and asserted there that, when his same son, a cleric of the age of sixteen years, was negligently burning an image of Blessed Mary in the church of Vorcestr, consumed by excessive age, and God, as it were playing, was scratching with his fingers, or touching less worthily, the head of the said image as it burned, he at once lost speech, and so remained dumb for nine continuous days. Who, when they had come to the aforesaid place, and had made their vows to God and to his Servant, on the same day he received the faculty of speaking.

[197] Item, on the day of the Holy Trinity in the aforesaid year a certain householder of Fornby in the county of Lancastr came to the tomb of the Man of God with a certain little son of his, A boy called back to life: of the age of two years, and asserted then there that the same boy was drowned in a certain fishpond, and lay thus in the water from the ninth hour until the eleventh hour of the day. And when he had been drawn out, and his parents had uttered a vow for him to God's Servant, on the same night he revived, restored to quite swift health.

[198] Item, a certain man of London, by name William Frere, a contracted man, after a vision and a vow, healed; with his mother and others worthy of belief asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that the said William for four years and more lay so lame and contracted that during the aforementioned time he could in no way move himself or walk; but when his mother, compassionating the infirmity of her son, had drawn him to divers places of the Saints in a certain vehicle fitted for this, by means of a certain small rope, not * yet felt any remedy for him from it, after a lapse of time, one night in sleep it was divinely revealed to him that he should visit the man of God Bishop Thomas at Hereford, and he would without doubt obtain health. And when morning had come, when he had made a vow to the Servant of God, he raised his legs and body, so that at once, supported on two staves, he walked reasonably well, and so shortly, the staves being left there as a sign of the miracle, he returned sound and rejoicing to his own home through the merits of the Man of God.

[199] [a blind woman, divinely admonished, setting out to the Saint's tomb, receives sight.] Item, there came to the tomb of the Man of God a certain man, by name John de Wallere, of Wynelestrop, of the diocese of Lincoln, and his wife, by name Matilda de Brokton, asserting that the said Matilda had lost all sight of her eyes for one year and nine weeks. And when one night she was lying in her bed, grieving much for the blindness which she had incurred, she devoutly invoked the help of the man of God Bishop Thomas; and when she was greatly afflicted with distresses and tribulations, sleep suddenly broke in upon her, and at once she heard the voice of a certain boy speaking thus with her: Woman, now awake, and pay fitting thanks to Bishop Thomas of Hereford, through whose invocation you will receive swift health. And she , awakened from sleep, began to pay devout praises to God and to his Servant, and had a penny bent over her in her manner; without delay, when she had taken her way toward Hereford, and had continued the journey taken for one day, she obtained from heaven the sight of her eyes through the merits of the Man of God.

[200] A Canon Regular labouring from a long vomiting of blood, At the entering of the year of the Lord one thousand three hundred and five, a certain man, brother Robert de Cline, Canon Regular of the abbey of Ledes ^d, of the diocese of Canterbury, came to the tomb of the Man of God, proving by his abbot and two fellow-brothers of his aforesaid house that he had suffered for a year and a half so enormous a flux of blood through the mouth that twice or thrice in the week he vomited, to the quantity of half a flagon, or to the fourth part of one flagon, of pure blood without any other admixture of another colour. But when he could be helped by no aid of physicians, and all his friends with likelihood despaired of his recovery, and especially his abbot, who loved him tenderly, he ordered the sick man to be kept, with a certain fellow-brother of his, in the infirmary in the most seemly manner he could.

[201] admonished in sleep, he utters a vow and is healed. And when that sick man had stayed there for some while, one night in sleep a certain young man appeared to him, clad in clerical garments, saying to him: If you desire the health of your state, promise devoutly that you will do some benefit specially in honour of Thomas de Cantilupe, through whose merits you will receive your former health: which things said, at once he vanished. He, awakened from sleep, and made glad by the aforesaid vision, related his vision in order, as he could, as is said above, to his abbot and all his fellow-brothers gathered in their chapter; and then at length, by the counsel of his abbot and his fellow-brothers, he uttered a vow to the servant of God Thomas, namely that he would visit him at Hereford, and also would meanwhile abstain from meat on the fifth weekday until he had fulfilled his vow. Whose vow to the Man of God, as is said above, being thus uttered, at once he was restored to entire health, to such an extent that afterwards he felt no burden in whole or in part of his former languor.

[202] A dead boy restored to life: Item, on the Tuesday in the week of Pentecost in the aforesaid year a certain Welshman, by name Henrich, called Wariok, of the parish of Taliton of Nihervent, proved at the tomb of the Man of God that a certain son of his, Nicholas, a boy of the age of four years, weighed down by a grave infirmity, departed from this life, and lay thus dead for so great an interval of time as six miles could be traversed by a man at a slow pace. But when the mother of the boy was crying out for grief, and calling together many of her neighbours to the corpse of her son, among others his father was present; and while he was devoutly invoking the suffrage of the Man of God, and had bent a penny to him for the resuscitation of his son, he at once revived through the omnipotence of the most high God and the merits of his Servant.

[203] Item, about the same time a certain man, by name Richard of Estowemarkat, a dumb man obtains speech, a contracted or paralytic man the use of his members. son of William de Vrap, of Enthfolk, which is distant from the Borough of St. Edmund [e], king and martyr, by ten miles, having been dumb for ten years before, came to the tomb of the Man of God, and, persevering there for some while in devout prayers, obtained from heaven the power of speaking through the suffrage of the Man of God. Item, a certain man, by name Philip, son of Walter Paynel, of Great Cawerne, of the diocese of Hereford, asserted at the tomb of the Man of God that, when one day at the midday hour he was resting in the house, he was so deformedly and suddenly contracted for the five following years and more that all his limbs from the navel downward were rendered as it were dead or paralytic, nor could he even help himself by the office of his hands. And when his parents with likelihood despaired of his recovery, and the sick man himself, set in such distresses, desired rather to die than to live so, they fled with the greatest devotion to the help of the Man of God, measuring him in the usual manner to God's Servant, and promised that he would visit * the tomb of the Man of God himself. Which done, at once that sick man began to be better, and on the morrow recovered entire health in all his limbs, so that, made wholly sound, he returned to his own home with joy.

ANNOTATIONS.

Conewey in Wales, in the county of Arvonia, having fallen into the ditch and died there, was given back to life through the patronage of St. Thomas; but since I have already recited these letters word for word in the first Part of the miracles, number 58 and the following, I pass them over here.

ei*

nec*

Quæ*

plicari*

visitaturos*

APPENDIX CONCERNING THE MIRACLES.

CHAPTER I.

The Saint's clothes healthfully applied: the bishop of Hereford healed: a frenzied woman restored to a sound mind: warts marvellously taken away: sight restored to a blind man.

The Saint's clothes, soon after his death, held for sacred relics: Although I have recited from the process very many miracles and benefits conferred on wretched mortals through the powerful patronage of St. Thomas, there remain nevertheless others also to be related from the same, which had not been brought into a fixed class and order, but were nonetheless asserted by fit and sworn witnesses. Scarcely had the holy Bishop died in suburbicarian Tuscia when he began to be honoured and profitably invoked privately among his English. I produce as witness William Jaudre, a member of the same Saint's household, concerning whom, among the witnesses, in the fifty-third place in the process, one reads thus. He said that the said lord Thomas, before his departure to the court (the Pontifical one), had given his whole clothes which he used to the same witness; and they were of red brunetta (that is, of woollen cloth dyed a red colour); and after the death of the said lord Thomas, before his bones had been brought to the church of Hereford, people asked of the witness himself that he would give them some small piece of the said clothes as relics in honour and memory of the said lord Thomas; and he gave to them. And they asked the same after the death of the said lord Thomas; and so he gave away in small pieces the garnachia (guarnaccia to the Italians is a garment reaching to the heels) and the tunic of the said lord Thomas. But the mantle and hood he kept for himself, for which there were offered him twenty pounds sterling by a certain rector of a certain church of Wales, whose name he said he does not know.

[2] a pain of the head driven away by his hood; And the said witness would not accept it because of the devotion which he had, and still has, toward the said lord Thomas as toward a Saint, and because God worked miracles by means of the said mantle and hood (that is, in the use of them), afterwards exhibited to the said lords bishops (the Apostolic commissaries, whom I have often praised), not consumed by age nor gnawed by moths, in honour and at the invocation of the name of the said lord Thomas. And he related that it is now XXIII years or thereabouts that a certain Welshman (that is, one sprung from Wales, a province of Great Britain), whose name he said he does not know, came to the city and church of Hereford to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, by reason of a great pain which the said Welshman asserted that he had suffered in his head for many years, and he had come that he might be miraculously cured there by the merits of the said lord Thomas. And the said Welshman, coming to the house of the witness himself, asked him to hand over to him the said hood which had been the said lord Thomas's, that he might put it on, because he hoped from this to be able to obtain health. And when he had held the said hood, handed over to him, put on for a very little while, before the hour of None the same Welshman told the same witness that the whole aforesaid pain of the head had been calmed; and so he went away from the aforesaid witness, nor did he see him afterwards. Since that witness in the year 1307 reckoned 23 years, or thereabouts, as having elapsed since the Welshman's cure, this must have happened about the year 1284, or three years before the translation of the bones, made in the year 1287.

[3] Of more uncertain time are the things which he added in the same place concerning the use of the same mantle, [women in childbirth relieved: the chamberlain of the bishop suffering from the stone,] healthful to women in labour, in these words: When many women of the city of Hereford were labouring in childbirth, and the aforesaid mantle, asked for out of devotion and handed over, was laid upon them, at once they were delivered of the birth by the merits of the said lord Thomas. Asked, however, about the names of the said women, he answered that he does not remember, nor even the certain time at which the aforesaid things happened. Another thing Robert Deyntè, the sixtieth witness in the process, handed down to memory, who, asked upon the third article concerning the truth of the miracles, related that many years have now elapsed since the lord Richard, now bishop of Hereford, whose chamberlain the same witness is, and was then, was grievously sick to such a degree that the physicians and others despaired of his life, especially since, excessively weighed down by the infirmity of the stone, he had not gone out of his chamber for five or six weeks. And one night, the witness himself sleeping in the chamber of the said bishop, it seemed to him that he heard a certain voice telling him to rise, and to wash in wine the inch of the right thumb of the said lord Thomas, which inch the witness himself had with him, which wine was in a certain silver jug in the same chamber in a certain window, and was red; and that he should give the said wine, with which he had washed the said inch of the thumb, to the said bishop to drink, and he would be cured.

[4] Which the said witness, being awakened, put off doing, fearing [warned divinely three times by night, the wine in which he had washed the joint of the Saint's finger] that the said wine would offend the said bishop, and that the aforesaid inch of the right thumb, which he kept secretly, would be taken away from him. And on the following night he heard a like voice, and it rebuked him because he had not fulfilled the aforesaid; nevertheless, however, he put it off for the aforesaid causes. But on the third night it seemed to him that Blessed Mary, with a great company of ladies, who were all clad in white garments, and with the greatest splendour, entered the chamber in which the said bishop and the aforesaid witness were lying, and, approaching the bed of the witness himself, who on the preceding days had devoutly asked her for the health of the said bishop, his lord, said to him in French these words: Deynte, dormez vous? (that is, Deynte, are you sleeping?) And he answered: Nay, that is: No. And she added: Levez sus si prenez le vin en ce cruet de argent, that is, in this silver jug, prene le os, que vous avez en votre garde, que fut le os de Thomas vostre mestre, et lavez le en le vin, qui est en ce cruet de argent, et donnez a boire a vostre mestre, et sera guery; et si vous ne fassez, malheure le vostre. Take these things in Latin from the French: Rise, take the wine which is in that silver jug, take the bone which you keep, and which was your lord Thomas's, and wash it in the wine which is in that silver jug, and give it to your lord to drink, and he will be healed: and if you do not do it, woe to you.

[5] he takes care to have given to the same bishop to drink, with happy result. And after the aforesaid vision the said witness, being awakened, and day coming on, related the vision to Sir Martin, vicar of Bromeren, of the diocese of Hereford, confessor of the said bishop, and to master Adam, physician of the same bishop, vicar of Eye, of the above-mentioned diocese of Hereford, asking counsel of them whether he should carry out the aforesaid vision; and in their presence he washed the inch of the aforesaid right thumb of the said lord Thomas, and the aforesaid physician and confessor, the witness himself assisting, gave the wine with which he had washed the aforesaid inch to the above-mentioned bishop, and urged him to take it; making no mention to him then of the said vision, so far as the said witness knew. And the said draught of wine having been taken to the quantity of three spoonfuls, the said bishop signed himself; who then was not lying (perhaps the word "any longer" is lacking here) in bed, but could walk through his chamber, and went down to the chapel, to which he could not have gone down without great bodily trouble for the five weeks first elapsed, as the same witness said; and in the said chapel he heard Mass, and was so well cured that for that whole year, as the same witness said he believes, he did not feel pain from the above-mentioned infirmity of the stone: after a year, however, he relapsed into the aforesaid infirmity several times. Thus far Robert Deyntè, of which things I have found nothing in the testimony of Bishop Richard himself. I pass on to other things.

[6] A frenzied woman, brought bound hand and foot into the church of Hereford, The things which I have just set forth happened privately; but publicly, and at the bones of the Saint, still then resting in his first tomb, was done the cure of a certain frenzied woman, by name Edith, who had been brought thither bound hand and foot, and the public announcement of which miracle indeed Thomas of St. Omer, official of John Peckham, archbishop of Canterbury, took so ill that for that reason he suspended from sacred functions the witness presently to be produced, and wished it to be ascribed not to Thomas de Cantilupe, but to Robert de Betonia, or de Betum, bishop of Hereford, who died in the year 1148, if Godwin has it rightly, and was buried in the same church. And although I have already given the miracle itself above, in Part 1, from number 73, from the testimony of the same woman's husband, yet the testimony of Gilbert, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, an eyewitness, must be given here also, because it has some singular circumstances, to which a place could not conveniently be given above. Let us hear, therefore, Gilbert's sworn testimony from the process. On the Friday next before the feast of Palm Sunday (that is, the sixth weekday before Palm Sunday), in the year of the Lord MCCLXXXVII, the same proctor, after sunrise and before the hour of Prime, was hearing Mass which Sir John Godhyve, then chaplain of the same altar, was celebrating upon the altar of the Cross in the pulpitum of the church of Hereford; and while he was celebrating the said Mass, all the lamps and all the lights lit about the aforesaid altar and in the whole church of Hereford were suddenly put out, although no wind was blowing on account of which they would have had to be put out.

[7] And the witness himself and all who saw were much astonished at this. after the candles were marvellously put out and lit again, And when they had remained thus put out for so long a while (as he reckons,

not, however, fully remembering, as he said) as a man could have said the Lord's Prayer ten times with the Ave Maria, the witness himself and the others assisting at the said Mass heard a certain unwonted sound, as though it had been the sound of many waters; and while they were marvelling at the said sound, the witness himself seeing it, and others, namely Robert Cok, a witness sworn above, and two women sworn above (as he believes), and many others, of whom he said he does not remember, heavenly fire came and was lit in a folded candle, which candle stood before the said altar at the head of the aforesaid Edith, then mad, who lay before the said altar bound hand and foot. And the said candle was lit in three parts, namely at both ends and in the middle, the witness himself seeing it; and it remained lit until all the lights of the said church, then put out, were lit again from it. And the aforesaid candle, as was publicly and commonly said, had been made on the thread with which the said Edith, being in her madness, had been measured by her friends, he knows not by whom (by her husband, as he himself testified), to the said St. Thomas, nay rather to the holy Cross, as the same husband asserted.

[8] And at once, the above-mentioned candle being lit, the aforementioned Edith, is restored to a sound mind through the merits of St. Thomas, the bonds with which she held her hands bound being loosed without human work (of which bonds, of what kind they were, he said he does not remember), rose up and stood on her feet, and said, in rising and standing, the witness himself and the others who were present hearing, these words: That holy man Thomas, who commanded me to be sound; and she repeated the said words many times, and, taking the aforesaid candle thus lit, she said to a certain woman who was then near her, of whose name he does not remember (which woman was holding the said Edith, as it seems to him, being about her feet to loose, as he believes, the bonds of her feet): Let me go: and, approaching the said altar of the Cross, she placed the said lit candle upon it, and gave thanks to God and to the said St. Thomas for her cure. Item, he said (Gilbert the proctor) that, when the said Mass had been celebrated, the aforesaid Edith by herself, without any guide or director, as a woman set in her sense and memory, went to the place in which the bones of the said St. Thomas were then laid in the chapel of St. Mary in the church of Hereford; from which chapel they were afterwards translated into the tomb in which they now are.

[9] And the said Edith prayed for some while over the said place which, when it had been solemnly made public by the clergy and people, in which the aforesaid bones were then laid; and when she had prayed, she returned to the said altar of the Cross, at which the aforesaid Sir Gilbert was then celebrating Mass; and, as a woman set in full sense, she offered at the time of the Offertory, coming to kiss the hand of the said Sir Gilbert, a penny, and stayed in the said place until the end of the Mass. Item, he said that, the Mass having been celebrated by the witness himself, he went to call together the canons then present in the city, namely master Roger de Sevenak, William de St. John, and William de Albiniaco and Thomas de Vinton; and they coming together to the church, the said Edith and the witness himself related to them the above-mentioned miracle. And the bells being rung, the clergy and people gathered and a procession made, the said miracle was made public, the said Edith being present and relating that the said St. Thomas had appeared to her, and that he had cured her. And the said miracle was then publicly and commonly ascribed, and is still ascribed, to the merits of the said St. Thomas. And the witness himself in the said procession began with a loud voice, the others following, to sing the Te Deum laudamus: and those who had come together, exulting in the Lord over the aforesaid, praised and glorified God for it and the said St. Thomas, giving thanks. And he believes that they were made more devout and firmer in faith by it, asserting this of himself: and the said making public of the miracle was done on the same day about the hour of Prime.

[10] [the official of the archbishop of Canterbury the witness who asserted these things] Item, he said that, when on the morrow there had come to the city of Hereford master Thomas of St. Omer, then canon of Hereford and official of Brother John de Pechuam, then archbishop of Canterbury, to govern the spirituality of the bishopric of Llandaff, the see being vacant (through the death of William de Brews, which Godwin writes happened toward the end of the month of March in the year 1287), and had heard of the making public of the above-mentioned miracle, he called the said Gilbert before him and rebuked him because he had made the above-mentioned miracle public, the aforesaid master Thomas saying among other things that this ought not to have been done without the authority of the lord archbishop, on account of the lawsuit which the said lord Thomas had had with the same archbishop in the Roman court, in the prosecution of which lawsuit he died; and because he said that God had not worked the said miracle by the merits of the said lord St. Thomas, but by the merits of the lord Robert de Betonia, formerly bishop of Hereford, buried in the said church of Hereford, for whom God was said to work miracles there.

[11] suspends from office, but afterwards revoked the suspension. And although Edith had constantly asserted before the aforesaid master Thomas, the witness himself being present, in the church of Hereford, that she had been miraculously cured by the merits of the said St. Thomas, who had appeared to her, and whom she had seen when he was bishop of Hereford, and not by the merits of the said lord Robert; and nevertheless, however, by episcopal authority he suspended the same witness from office by reason of the making public of the aforesaid miracle. And when he had remained thus suspended for seven days, he revoked the said suspension at the instance of master William de Montfort, dean of London and precentor of Hereford. And this was the first miracle (as he said) which God publicly worked by the merits of the said St. Thomas in the church of Hereford.

[12] The proctor of the chapter of Hereford produced a Friar Minor, In the first Part of the Miracles, at number 100, letter p, I noted that in the Roman codex containing the process of canonization, and in our copy, which was written out from the same codex, there are subjoined in that place certain rubrics of miracles, of which mention was made here and there in the first part of the same process, in which the life and conduct of St. Thomas had been treated, and which, for the reasons alleged there, I put off to the Appendix. So, that I may discharge my promise, the first rubric is concerning the proof of the eighteenth miracle, of the warts, of which brother Richard de Insula, of the Order of Friars Minor, examined above concerning this miracle, is said to have been cured. Concerning which miracle indeed master Henry de Schorne, archdeacon of Hereford, proctor of the chapter, an oath of telling the truth having been taken according to the form of the oath of the other witnesses, the aforesaid Sir Gilbert, his fellow-proctor, producing him being present, the most holy Gospels having been touched, deposed, when asked, that he had seen in the university of Orléans the said brother Richard having many warts on his hands.

[13] And his hands were on the outside so full of the said warts who testified before the Apostolic commissaries that sometimes two or three warts stood out above the others; from which also he loathed to eat with him *. And the said brother, then a scholar, blushed much at it and grieved. And in the same university he saw him cured of the said warts, and having fair hands, and greatly exulting at it (of the year he does not well remember). And after the aforesaid, while they were both fellows in the university of Oxford, he related to the witness himself that he had been cured of the said warts by the merits of the said St. Thomas. He said he knew nothing more, except that he had applied many medicinal remedies at Paris and elsewhere for the cure of the said warts; and they had not profited him. And upon the last interrogatory, whether by prayer, etc., he answered freely that it was not so. Done in the said chapel of St. Catherine (at Hereford, near the cathedral church) on the twelfth day of the month of November, there being present the aforesaid brothers Walter and John of the Order of Minors, and we, Ranulph, Adam and Raymond, notaries of this process. That brother Richard de Insula, of the Order of Minors, is listed thirty-eighth in the catalogue of witnesses, and is said to have been a professor of civil law (before taking the religious habit, as I reckon), about thirty-seven years of age, and examined by the Apostolic commissaries on the VIth day of August in the chapel of the house of the bishop of Hereford at London. And what he himself testified concerning this cure of warts, learn from his testimony.

[14] Asked whether he knew anything of the miracles of the same (St. Thomas), he answered that for many years he had been foully overrun in his whole body that the miracle written below had happened in his own person. For the witness himself, before he had entered the Order of Friars Minor, had in his body many and great warts, and also on his feet and on his hands, so that by reason of the said warts he had his hands especially so deformed that without great blushing he did not dare to show the said hands unless gloved , and from the said blushing he avoided all company. And when he was a scholar in the university of Orléans, and wore gloves, lest the said warts should appear; and sometimes, that he might take down more quickly the reports which he was writing after the lord Peter de Bellapertica, at that time his master, and others, he drew off his gloves; the scholars sitting round on the benches nearest the bench on which he sat in the schools rose from the said benches to look closely at the said deformity of the warts, which were so thick on his hands that scarcely the point of a needle could have been put between them: so much had they deformed his hands. Nor could he ever be cured of them by the work of physicians, although he had applied divers medicines as well in England as in France; and also sometimes he had burned them away with hot iron and with sulphur, and sometimes had pulled some of them out with a waxed thread: and the more he pulled out, the more sprouted again.

[15] And when the said deformity and infirmity of the said warts had lasted for the same witness from his birth for twenty-two years and more, and he could have no remedy, and was from this much, and almost continually, desolate in his heart, with warts, until, through meeting a pilgrim, and sometimes even placed in the greatest peril of losing his hands because of the violence used about removing them; at length, on one occasion, making his way with others through the plain of Bleans near Orléans on horseback, he came upon a certain pilgrim coming from England, as the said pilgrim asserted; when he had asked for news , the pilgrim told him that no other news occurred to his memory, except that at Hereford in England

there had been a certain Saint, who was called Thomas de Cantalupo, formerly bishop of that church, for whom God was working many miracles. And when the same witness had said, These are not news; for already for a long time such things about that Saint have been commonly published and related by many; they both went away from each other. And as they went off apart, when the said witness had pondered for some while in his mind upon this renewal of miracles, looking out after the said pilgrim, he could not see him in the whole of that plain, although the plain is such, as regards the place in which they spoke with each other, that he could not have lain hid in so short a time, nor gone out of the plain itself, or gone out of the sight of the witness himself or of another, if he had been a man.

[16] [and, encouraged by his wonderful departure, he made a vow to the Saint, and within three days was freed from them,] And from this, because he could not see the said pilgrim, pondering more within himself, he uttered a vow within himself, humbly invoking the suffrages of that holy Thomas, when he had said five times the Lord's Prayer with the Salutation of the blessed Virgin, that, if God through the patronage of that Saint would free the witness himself from the said deformity of warts, he would hasten to the place of that Saint as soon as it should befall him to return to England. Which vow having been thus uttered, on the same night all the warts, like mud, or like paste, if he had held these in his hands, began to grow less on his hands, and they were so continuously wasted away that within the third day all wholly, without any medicine, by rubbing, went away from all parts of his body without any burden and pain whatever; and also many of them fell off and went away without any rubbing. And when, according to the reckoning of the witness himself, for afterwards revealing this miracle to others, one single wart had remained on the index finger of his left hand in a prominent place; by which, after he had changed his secular life, being in the Order of Friars Minor, having received priestly Orders, he was sometimes troubled on account of celebrating the Divine offices, he pulled it out violently with a waxed thread; and at once it put itself back on the same index finger, but in another place, namely crosswise, so that, joining the index finger with the middle one, the said wart appeared little.

[17] except one, which marvellously remained on the index finger. And so, for the commendation of the said St. Thomas, the said wart remained on the said index finger (as he said); and the said lords bishops, examining the fact of this, beheld the said wart with their eyes, and we notaries did the same. Item, asked concerning the time at which the aforesaid happened, he answered that it was in the twenty-second year of age of the witness himself, namely in the year of the Lord MCCXCII, on the morrow of Pentecost, after dinner, about the hour of None. Item, asked concerning those present when the said pilgrim appeared, he answered that there were many scholars and other horsemen, and they were a good fifty in number; and he named master John de Insula, his brother, professor of civil law, then associate and chancellor of the lord patriarch of Jerusalem, and John de Roderhuam of the diocese of York, out of reverence and honour for whom, as he was returning to his own country, the said horsemen had been gathered according to the custom of the country and of students; master Geoffrey de Blaston, of the diocese of Linc. *, rector of the church of Blasby, canon of the church of Lichefeld., Roger de Heslarton of the diocese of York, at that time master of the said witness.

[18] There follows in the process the rubric of the proof of the nineteenth miracle, Hugh the barber, from a grave disorder of the head, made concerning the enlightening of Hugh the Barber, concerning which the same Hugh, and the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth witnesses depose. The testimony from the process of Hugh, whom I have often praised by the name of Hugh le Barber, and who was then seventy years old and more, is this: Asked whether after the death of the said lord Thomas miracles had been done, he answered that they had. Asked which and of what kind the said miracles had been, he related first that it is now fourteen years or thereabouts that the same witness and his wife, being at London, had supped one night with masters James de Hulles and John de Baldok, executors of the testament of master William de Montfort, formerly dean of London, a kinsman of the said lord Thomas; and while they were returning to their house, and were near the church of Little * Holy Trinity at London in the public way, it seemed to the said witness (who before saw well, and had had sharp sight, as he said, so that in those times he could well put a thread into a needle without any difficulty) that he had his right eye full of ashes; and through all that night he was greatly afflicted with pain of the said eye.

[19] And when on the morrow the same witness had heard Mass in the church of St. Paul at London, medicines applied in vain, he remained wholly blind for three years: and was returning to his house, and was near the gate leading to the place in which bread and ale * are made for the canons of the said church of St. Paul, it seemed to the witness himself that he had the other eye full of ashes, and he felt pain in the above-mentioned eye, and by reason of the pain of both eyes he lay a good eight days greatly afflicted. And a certain surgeon, who then dwelt at London, who was called master Robert, called to the care of the said witness, applied to him a certain plaster; after which plaster he was worse than before, and had his head swollen, and his said eyes and his face, and he lost his sight altogether; and he was so altered in his face (as was told him) that he seemed to be a leper. After this the said surgeon gave him medicine; and it did not profit him; but, having had four shillings sterling from him, he left him uncured and seeing nothing. Afterwards divers remedies were applied to him, so that the swelling of the head and face went away, but he remained blind, and for three years he could not see light, nor brightness, nor any bodily thing visible to others having sound eyes.

[20] And it happened sometimes within the said term that, but after the Saint's help was invoked, when his wife was troubling him in some things, and he perceived that she did not go away from him, she placed herself to sit, as she afterwards reported to him, on one side of the table at which the said witness was eating, and the witness himself did not see her. He also every day within the said time in which he lacked sight, after he rose from the said infirmity in which he had lain sick, had himself led to the said church to hear Masses there by Roger or by William, his sons, who led him by the hand, as a blind man is led: and this he said was public and manifest, and is still notorious in his neighbourhood and in the church of St. Paul. And afterwards the same witness asked Blessed Mary and St. Thomas de Cantalupo that they would ask God for him that he might receive his sight, that he might see the body of Christ elevated in the church, and see to walk, and also see those playing at chess * and at dice, and he himself see to play and take pastime with them. And through Juliana his wife he had himself measured to the said St. Thomas, and sent the said measuring and eyes of wax by William de Badolk, of the diocese of Lincoln, to Hamelden., in which place the said lord Thomas had been born.

[21] and, measured twice to him, he received sight, Afterwards, within two days from the time of the said measuring, he said that he had recovered his sight, so that he could see the hens going about in his house near him. And thereafter he again had himself measured by his said wife to the aforesaid St. Thomas, and sent the aforesaid measuring to Hereford to the tomb of the said lord Thomas by Joan, wife of William le Hasteler, of Kyngeslave, five English leagues beyond Hereford. And from then, within eight days from the first measuring, he went without a guide whither he would, and saw the body of Christ when it was elevated by the priest at the altar, provided, however, that the aforesaid witness was not far removed from the altar at the time of the said elevation. Afterwards, within a year, the said witness went to the church of Hereford for the cause of pilgrimage by reason of the above-mentioned miracle, and carried with him the offerings of others to the tomb of the said lord Thomas, and visited Sir Philip the Welshman, rector of the church of Streiton, of the diocese of Hereford, with whom he had been accustomed at other times to play at chess and dice when the said Sir Philip came to the city of London.

[22] as he himself testified to the commissaries and proved. And when there was playing in the house of the said rector at the said chess and dice, and the said witness was invited to the said game, he played first at dice and afterwards at chess; and he then saw well the pips of the dice and the play of the chess and of the said dice; and he still sees and plays frequently, as he said. And, examined by the lords commissaries concerning the said sight, he discerned from a distance of five great paces and more the cap in their hands; and the more he came near, smaller and finer things, such as a dry and fine rush, or a straw, and he discerned the pips of the dice. The witnesses who are said above to have confirmed the same miracle were: the seventh witness, Sir John de Wynton, priest and rector of the church of St. Benedict; the eighth witness, Juliana, probably the same Hugh's wife; the ninth, Adam Aspelon; and the tenth, William de Eston.

urceolo*

lavisset*

i.e. medico*

laverat*

i.e. cum eodem*

i.e. chirothecis tectas* covered with gloves

i.e. commentationes*

i.e. subselliis*

decoxisset*

venit*

i.e. nova*

perhaps Lincolniensis*

i.e. parvam*

cervisia*

i.e. latrunculos* chessmen

perhaps invitaretur*?

perhaps quando*?

CHAPTER II.

A drowned infant made sound: a girl suffering from fistulas and paralysis healed: sight restored to a blind man: a prodigy which is said to have happened while St. Thomas was living.

An infant found in a vessel full of water In the same process there follows the Rubric of the proof of the twentieth miracle, made concerning this, that Gilbert, son of Rader Sporo, is said to have been drowned, and afterwards raised to life. Of the witnesses who were examined upon this matter we have the testimonies of only two, namely of Alice, mother of Gilbert, and of Joan, sister of the same infant, of which, since the first is mutilated, I shall recount the second. So Joan, the thirty-third witness, of XXXIV years and more, as is said here, or only

of XIV years and more, as is read in the catalogue of witnesses, asked to relate the fact of the submersion and resuscitation of the said infant, and the circumstances of the fact, said that in the present year, on the Monday next before the feast of the translation of Blessed Thomas the martyr, or after his translation, which translation is celebrated on the seventh day of the month of July (that it happened on the Monday next before the feast of the translation the mother Alice testified), about the hour of None, the aforesaid Gilbert, her brother, went away from his nurse, namely Beatrice, a witness sworn above, and went out of the hall in which the said nurse and the mother and the sister of the said infant and others of the house were busy with their work; and the said infant went to a certain vessel of water placed outside the said hall beside the door * of the hall, which vessel could not be seen by those who were within the said hall. Before they knew anything of the submersion of the said infant, so much time passed that a man could have gone at a common pace from the house of the said Rader to the greater gate of the church of the Friars Minor of Lond., and the said house is distant from the gate of the aforesaid church of Lond. by a hundred and twenty paces or thereabouts.

[24] Afterwards John, the little brother of the said Joan, and believed dead, who is seven years old or thereabouts, going out of the said hall, saw that the aforesaid Gilbert, his brother, had fallen into the aforesaid vessel, the head being downward at the bottom of the vessel, and the feet of the said Gilbert being upward, and hooked over the rim or lip of the said vessel; and one part of the tunic which the said Gilbert was wearing had fallen into the said vessel with him: for the said vessel had within, in breadth, three palms of the rod and more, and had in height a palm and the fourth part of a palm; and the said vessel was assigned for receiving the water flowing from the eaves-drip, and it did not stand flat on the ground, but was raised on one side about one palm from the ground. And the said John cried out that his brother was drowned. And Matilda de Cherteseya, maidservant of the said house, running up first, the mother and Joan, sister of the said Gilbert, and Beatrice herself following and seeing, lifted and drew the aforesaid Gilbert out of the said vessel, and the mother, receiving him from the hand of the said Matilda into her arms, and all the bystanders said and reckoned that the said Gilbert was dead, because he was all cold and livid, and held his mouth closed, and neither drew in nor let out breath, and held his eyes like one dead, and there appeared in him neither sense nor motion.

[25] then, measured to St. Thomas, he comes away sound. Then the mother of the said infant laid the said infant on his back on the ground in the upper hall of the said house, and with a certain thread measured her said son to St. Thomas de Cantalupo, and she and the other women standing by asked God and the said St. Thomas with tears that he would restore the said Gilbert to life. And after the said measuring and prayer, a little while having elapsed, which while she could not well determine, Joan, sister of the said Gilbert, opened his mouth, and the said Beatrice, pressing her breast, poured milk into the mouth of the said Gilbert, because before the pouring of the said milk they had felt some movement and had heard some gurgling in the throat of the said Gilbert; and after the pouring of the said milk, which milk the said Gilbert did not draw in, but it remained in his mouth, they bent the head of the said Gilbert toward the ground: then the aforesaid milk and water flowed out of the mouth of the said Gilbert; but she cannot determine the quantity of the water, because it was poured out on the ground. Afterwards, almost forthwith, the said Gilbert, who is eighteen months from his birth or thereabouts, was in the state in which he had been before the submersion, except for his colour, which he did not have for eight days as he had it before. Besides the already named Joan, Alice, and Beatrice le Marechal, Catherine, wife of the Tailor, also testified for the same matter; but their testimonies, if you except the mutilated one of Alice, we do not have, so that we cannot say more here.

[26] When a poor little girl of five, having dislocated I continue with the process, in which, under the title of the XXIst miracle, there follows the Rubric of the proof of the miracle concerning this, that Alice de Lodenesdale is said to have been contracted, and afterwards miraculously cured; concerning which the thirty-ninth, fortieth, forty-first, forty-second, forty-third and forty-fourth witnesses depose. Let us relate the testimony of Alice herself, to whom the miracle happened. Alice de Louesdale (so it is written there), the fortieth witness, produced before the commissaries on the Xth day of the month of August, asked about her age, said that she was nineteen years old or thereabouts, and that she was sprung from the region (that is, contrada, or district) called Louesdale, because as an infant she was brought up there. She said also that she was the daughter of William, the witness last examined, and of Idonea, the late wife of the said William. And asked to relate in order the infirmities of which she was said to have been miraculously cured, and the manner of the cure, she answered that, while her father was bringing her from her said region toward London, and they were near Staunford, of the diocese of Lincoln, the said Alice fell in the public way, because she put her foot through a certain hole which was in the way, which she did not notice, since she was five years old or thereabouts.

[27] and then, her foot rotting, she had long laboured under a grave paralysis, And from the said fall she twisted or dislocated her foot, so that she could not walk; but her father carried her upon his neck toward London. After a little, when they were at Suthwerk, which is continuous with the city of London, the water being between, and the said Alice, as a poor little girl, not having where to lay her head, had lain and slept between two doors *, she found herself in the morning powerless in the foot and in the arm, and in the whole left side of her body, and so weakened that she could not help herself with her body except with her right hand: for in the right foot she had received the said dislocation and twisting; and the said foot was thickened, swollen and inflamed, so that she could not help herself with it. Afterwards the said right foot was almost wholly rotted, and from the said rotting, swelling and pus there were made there of themselves three quite large holes; and the said foot grew continually worse. At length, when she was beside the spring of the church of St. Clement of the Danes near London (namely, begging alms there), she was more than usually burdened by the pain of the said foot; for through the said holes some corrupt and rotten bones had come out.

[28] Afterwards, to remove the pus, she washed her foot in a certain stream flowing from the spring of the said St. Clement; after a vow made by her father, she was carried to the church of Hereford, not out of devotion which she had toward the spring or the stream, but because, begging, she had no other fomentation for cleansing the said wounds, and because master Gilbert the surgeon , who was then dwelling in the city of London, and who, for the love of God and out of regard of pity, had twice applied plasters to the foot of the said Alice, the third time, when he had seen the said foot, told the father of the said Alice that the aforesaid infirmity was incurable, and had left the above-mentioned Alice as incurable. Item, she said that after the aforesaid she had remained contracted for ten years, and could not stand on her feet, nor walk; but she dragged her body along the ground, steadying her thigh on the ground and her right hand; and sometimes her father carried her on his neck, seeking alms. Afterwards the father of the said Alice, being at London, vowed her to St. Thomas de Cantalupo, formerly bishop of Hereford, and, according to the custom of England, in honour of the said St. Thomas, and invoking his name and help, and saying certain prayers, of which the said Alice said that she does not remember, he bent a penny over the head of the said Alice, and brought her to the church of Hereford upon a certain small cart of one wheel, which the father pushed before him with his hands.

[29] And they arrived at the said church of Hereford where in sleep she seemed to herself to see an old man on the vigil of Pentecost, four years having elapsed. And in the said church the said Alice stayed in devotion for three days with Leticia her stepmother, who was blind: and on the third night, when the said Alice had fallen asleep near the tomb of the said lord Thomas, it seemed to her that there came to her a certain man, old, great, fair, grey-haired and white as a lily, having white garments and a ring on his hand with four precious stones, and on his head he seemed to wear a black covering or cap, whose tails hung down under the neck after the manner of the almuce which is worn within the church by chaplains; and he seemed to hold milk in his hand in a certain small box; and the said old man with his own hand anointed the said Alice with the said milk on the breast between the breasts down to the navel. Afterwards he anointed her on the right side, handling with both hands her right knee and leg and the whole foot, in which she then had three wounds, or ulcers emitting pus. He handled also her left knee, leg and foot, which she had deadened, so that she could not help herself with them; so deadened and paralysed were they, nor did she feel pain in them, nor even touch when she was handled, as she said; and he anointed likewise the said left knee, leg and foot with the aforesaid milk.

[30] anointing her afflicted limbs, and soon, rising, Afterwards the same old man again handled the knee and leg and right foot of the said Alice, drawing his hands over the said knee, and descending step by step along the leg to the ulcerous and painful foot. Then the said Alice stretched out her legs, and it seemed to her that she was made better; and although she had had her left shoulder before somewhat deadened, and could not help herself with her left arm, nor raise her left hand without the help of the right hand, nor hold it raised; nor did she feel when she was handled in the aforesaid left arm and hand; after the handlings of the said old man she raised both hands and both arms toward heaven above her head, and cried with a loud voice: Lord St. Thomas, lord St. Thomas, have mercy on me! And then, while she was thus crying out, and holding her hands raised to heaven, that old man who had handled

her and anointed her, as though smiling, made the sign of the Cross over the forehead and face of the said Alice, not touching her, however, and disappeared, the aforesaid sign of the Cross having been made over the above-mentioned Alice. Then the said Alice moved herself from the place in which she was lying, and her stepmother, in whose lap the said Alice, falling asleep, had laid her head, asked the said Alice why she was moving herself; and she answered that it seemed to her that she could walk.

[31] she found herself divinely cured; And the said Alice rose, and fell; and again rose, and stood upright on her feet, and could stand upright a little while without a staff, but could not yet walk without a staff; she felt herself, however, much bettered, and could lift her left arm, and move and help herself with it, but not fully; for she still had weakness in it. She could then also move and raise her left leg and foot, which before she had had deadened; and she felt when she was touched in them. The wounds also which she had in her right foot were drawn together, but not wholly closed; but from then they did not emit any pus or corruption; and the said foot, of which she had begun to be bettered after her father had bent the penny over her, as she deposed above, was then much bettered and strengthened. Afterwards the said Alice remained in the said church of Hereford through all that week and also on the day of the Holy Trinity, which feast of the Trinity is celebrated in England on the eighth day after Pentecost. And in the said week the said Alice was so much bettered that, leaving there the vehicle or cart in which she had been brought to the said church of Hereford, she went away from there on her own feet, and could walk with a staff and somewhat without a staff, limping, however, because she cannot well move the left foot, which she had deadened and paralysed, nor well draw to herself the joints of the said foot.

[32] she remained, however, somewhat limping, And the sinew of the right foot behind the cavilla (that is, the ankle, from the Italian word caviglia), near which the said wounds had been, is somewhat drawn back; and because of the aforesaid the said Alice cannot fully set the said feet on the ground at will, and in going she limps, whether she walks with a staff or without a staff. So the aforesaid lords bishops of Mende and of London saw with the witness of their eyes, and we, the notary of this process, with them. Asked at what hour of the night the said old man had appeared to her, who had handled and anointed her, she answered that it was at the first ringing of Matins. Item, asked whether the said miracle was at once known and spread abroad in the said church of Hereford before the day dawned, she answered that, when she had cried out, a certain cleric, keeper of the said church of Hereford, came to her with a light, and asked what she had: which being related, he led her beside a certain altar, and there she stayed until day. And when day came, the aforesaid miracle being known and seen, the clergy of Hereford were gathered, and, the bells being rung and a procession made, there was sung, she knows not what (probably the hymn Te Deum laudamus), and she was led before the high altar of the church of Hereford.

[33] Item, asked what persons were present near her in the said church of Hereford as she herself before the Apostolic commissaries when the said old man appeared to her, and when she cried out, she answered that there was no one, so far as she saw, except her said stepmother and the said keeper, who came up at her cry: she knows not, however, whether there were more. Item, asked whether the said wounds which she had in her right foot had been wholly closed on the said feast of the Trinity, she answered that they had, but were not yet perfectly healed; yet they emitted no corruption or pus. Item, asked whether afterwards the said wounds had relapsed, and she had had again * the deadening and paralysis and the other infirmities of which she deposed above that she had been cured, she answered that she had not, except this, that every month, when the moon first changes, she has pain for one night on that side of her body on which she had been paralysed, and the sinews of the left arm and of the left leg draw themselves back somewhat, and bring pain and affliction upon her; and from this she is weak on the morrow; but on another day she feels no hurt.

[34] Besides Alice, the fortieth witness in the process, the same miracle was confirmed by William de Lonesdale or Lovesdale, and others testified, father of the same Alice, the thirty-ninth witness; Amicia Rysshwyk, forty-five years of age, sprung from Bernastonia, of the diocese of Norwich, and long living at London, the forty-first witness; William of Oxford, of the diocese of Leicester, about forty years of age, the forty-second witness; Nicholas Chiket of Gloucester, of the diocese of London, about forty years of age, the forty-third witness; and Sir William of London, perpetual chaplain of the church of All Saints at the market of London, about fifty years of age, the forty-fourth witness, who saw the said Alice contracted for five years; but the testimonies of these I do not have in our copies, except the testimony of the aforesaid father of the same Alice, which, since it differs a little in certain circumstances, I have judged not beside the point to recite also.

[35] The said William, asked to relate, under the obligation of the oath taken by him, the truth concerning the aforesaid miracle and among these the father of the same Alice, which was said to have happened in the person of Alice, daughter of the same William, said that he was sprung from England, from the Northern parts, from a certain region called Louesdale, of the diocese of York; and that he had vowed to go to St. James of Compostela in Galicia, and when he had taken his way and was taking with him the aforesaid Alice his daughter, who was a tender and young girl, and had been near Staunford, of the diocese of Lincoln, the aforesaid girl on the public road stumbled * and fell to the ground, and hurt one foot so much that she could not then walk on her own feet; because from the said fall some bones in the foot of the said girl had been broken; and it was necessary that the witness himself should carry his said daughter upon his neck as far as the city of London, which city is distant from Staunford by LXXIV English leagues or thereabouts. And when he had crossed the bridge of the said city of London and had passed the night in Suthwerk, which is joined, the water being between, to the city of London itself, that night a certain infirmity seized the said girl, on account of which infirmity a great part of the body of the said girl was rendered insensible and powerless to such a degree that the said girl could not help herself, from the head and from the neck downward, with one half of her body, because that half was deadened.

[36] whose testimony, After these things the said witness carried his said daughter on his neck, asking alms and begging with her; and sometimes the said girl went by herself, not on her feet, but upon her thigh, dragging her body along the ground, since she could in no way go on her feet. And one night he came with the said girl to a certain place beside the spring of the church of St. Clement of the Danes near the said city of London, and that night the said girl began strongly to cry out and call the said witness, her father; and he came to the said girl, who had her said foot, some bones of which, as he deposed before, had been broken, so swollen and infected with pus that he does not believe now, nor did he then believe, that by the work of any physician or by the benefit of nature the said girl could ever be cured. For in the aforesaid night the said pus made many holes, and afterwards brought together into one great hole; which hole passed through the middle of the foot of the said girl beneath the ankle , so that the bone of the said ankle could be seen through the aforesaid hole, and one finger of a common man, namely a middling one, could have passed through the said hole; and through the said hole came out rotten and gnawed bones, and also rotten and corrupt flesh.

[37] because it varies in a few things, After the aforesaid, the said witness, having heard that God was working many miracles for the lord Thomas de Cantalupo, formerly bishop of Hereford, turned himself to the said St. Thomas, and, according to the custom of the country, measured his said daughter with a thread to him, and asked God and the said St. Thomas that he would give health to his said daughter, and he would visit the tomb of the said St. Thomas. And after the said measuring and the aforesaid vow, he again vowed his said daughter to St. Aloy (to confess the truth, I do not know this Saint by that name), on condition, if St. Thomas de Cantalupo should not heal her; and he employed certain witnesses to the aforesaid vow, who were sureties for the aforesaid witness and the vow to the said St. Aloy, if the said St. Thomas de Cantalupo should not cure her. After these things he came (on the vigil of Pentecost it was four years) with his aforesaid daughter to the church of Hereford; which daughter was still weighed down by the above-mentioned infirmities, and the wounds of the foot of the said girl were open and emitting pus. And the said girl, without any medicine and without any human help and counsel, against or beyond the force and power of nature, was cured in the said church of Hereford within a week, the name of the said St. Thomas having been invoked, of all her aforesaid infirmities, and the wounds of the foot were closed and wholly dried up, so that from then they did not emit any pus.

[38] And she was so perfectly cured that she could walk on her own feet, is recited here also. as she now goes, and now goes, and went before the lords bishops and before us the notaries, with a staff and without a staff, limping, because the sinews of the foot are drawn back, and scars and great hollows appear in the foot of the said girl, from which hollows the aforesaid bones are believed to have come out. The same witness said also that, although within a week his said daughter had been, as he deposed, miraculously cured, and could go away on her own feet, some wished that she should remain in the said church of Hereford for the showing of the aforesaid miracle until the feast of the Holy Trinity inclusive; which feast is celebrated in England on the eighth day after Pentecost: and on the morrow he went away from there with his said daughter. Thus far the testimony of the father of Alice, who, if, as she herself affirmed, she was five years old when she first dislocated her foot, and nineteen years old when she testified these things,

was in the year 1307, and she herself had then been healed four years before, it must be that the same girl was afflicted with that grave ill for almost ten whole years, which is to be observed for the greatness of the cure. For the rest, it is not necessary that we should believe that the anointings and handlings which Alice mentions were done in reality, but they seem to be referred to a dream sent by God, and Alice perhaps also explained them less rightly. Finally, the slight variation of circumstances which occurs in the narration of each could have arisen partly from forgetfulness, partly also from a confused memory. And this miracle has been inserted in the bull of canonization.

[39] There is subjoined the Rubric of the proof of the twenty-second miracle concerning this, An infant of a few days, from a flux of humours that John, son of Hugh le Chamideler, is said to have been miraculously given light. Concerning which the forty-fifth and forty-sixth witnesses depose; namely Hugh le Chamideler, or, as is read elsewhere, le Chaundeler, of Shorhm, of the diocese of Canterbury, father of the same John, and Agnes the mother. The testimony of the father has it thus with me: Hugh de Chaundeler, of the diocese of Canterbury, the forty-fifth witness, produced on the XIIth of the month of August, said, sworn, that it is now eighteen years or thereabouts since Agnes his wife bore him John his son; and when he was born, he had fair and whole and sound eyes, and saw with them. But on the sixth day from the birth of the said John there came upon him an infirmity in the eyes, from which infirmity the said John held the left eye wholly closed, so that he could in no way open the said eye. In the right eye also so many humours flowed together that the said right eye did not appear. And when the aforesaid John was being held at the fire, and, as a tender little infant, cried much and could not sleep, the humours began to flow from the said right eye to such an extent that it seemed to his mother that the eye had been wholly dissolved.

[40] And because the said Hugh, at the time when the said humours began to flow, made blind, after a vow to St. Thomas made by his father was not in the house which he then inhabited, the mother of the witness himself, since deceased (namely already dead when Hugh was testifying these things), sent for the witness himself, showing him the blindness of his said son, and exhorting him to vow and measure him to St. Thomas de Cantalupo, formerly bishop of Hereford, for whom God was working many miracles. Then the witness himself, on bended knees, with tears asked God that by the merits of the said St. Thomas he would restore sight to his aforesaid son, that he might not rear a blind infant; and the mother of the witness himself, on bended knees, with tears asked God also for the same, the witness himself being present; and the wife, who was then in bed and in the same chamber with them, and saw them, made the same prayers with tears. And the said witness then vowed that, if God by the merits of the said St. Thomas would restore sight to his aforesaid son, he would visit on foot the sepulchre of the said lord Thomas in the church of Hereford; and according to the custom of England he bent a penny over the head of the said son, and measured him to the said St. Thomas: and these things were done on a certain day, which he does not remember, about Compline; the said infant, however, did not cease crying for this, nor was he quiet until midnight.

[41] receives his sight, and the eye that was lost. But in the morning, when the said witness had risen, he found his said son having sound and whole eyes, as he had had them before the said infirmity came upon him; and his said son saw with both eyes, and still sees, as the said lords bishops proved by inspection and by experiment, and we, the notary of this process, with them, at Westminster on the fifth day of this month of August, when the said John had come in person before the above-mentioned lords bishops. The said John has, however, small eyes, and the right one, from which, as is said, the said humours flowed, seems to be somewhat smaller than the left; and the father of the said John seems to have eyes alike in the aforesaid smallness and lesser size. Asked whether he believes that his said son could have recovered sight without a miracle according to the strength and power and course of human nature, he answered that of the right eye he does not believe that it could have been cured without a miracle; because after the dissolving of the humours which flowed down from the said right eye, there remained there nothing but the hollow of the eye, nor did the black or white pupil of the eye appear, nor was there anything under which the eye could have lain hid; and the mother of the witness himself told him that she had seen when the black pupil of the said eye and also the white, dissolved into muddy water, had flowed from it.

[42] Two prodigies already related elsewhere. There follows in our copy of the process the Rubric of the proof of the twenty-third miracle concerning this, that the stone laid over the bones of the said lord Thomas, at the translation of the bones themselves, is said to have been moved with wonderful ease, as though not heavy, and afterwards, as heavy, put back with difficulty. Concerning which the fifty-seventh and sixty-first witnesses depose. Item, the Rubric of the proof of the twenty-fourth miracle, of the miraculous awakening of the venerable father, the lord bishop of Hereford (Richard, often praised), done when he was to translate the bones of the said lord Thomas. Concerning which the same lord bishop, the sixty-first witness, and the fifty-seventh depose. Of neither shall I add anything here, because of the first treatment has already been given in the Compendium of the Life, numbers 38 and 39, and of the second in the same place, number 37. What is subjoined, the other, is said to have happened while St. Thomas was living, and yet it has no place in the aforesaid Compendium, and therefore it is to be related here, although in a place not its own.

[43] Rubric of the proof of the twenty-fifth miracle concerning this, [while the Saint, when he was living, was intoning the verses of the hymn of the Holy Spirit,] that, while the said lord Thomas was celebrating Mass on the feast of Pentecost in the chapel of the castle of Walingforde, of the diocese of Lincoln, many small birds are said to have come to the windows of the said chapel, he himself beginning each verse of the hymn Veni, Creator Spiritus. Concerning which miracle the two following witnesses depose. Then immediately in the same place it is subjoined: After these things, on the XIIIth day of the month of November, which is the last day of the four months fixed by Apostolic authority for the said lords commissaries for making the present inquisition into the faith, life, conduct, fame and miracles of the said lord Thomas, Sir Gilbert, proctor of the chapter of Hereford, for the proof of the aforesaid miracle of the small birds, produced the venerable father the lord Richard, bishop of Hereford, and Robert Deyntè, formerly chamberlain of the said lord Thomas, and now of the aforesaid lord Richard, witnesses examined upon this whole business and upon the other articles of this process.

[44] The aforesaid Robert Deyntè deposed that he had seen the aforesaid small birds coming together to the said windows small birds in great number are said when the said lord Thomas was beginning each of the verses of the hymn Veni, Creator Spiritus; and they seemed black, and such as are pernæ, jackdaws or daws: and forthwith, when the lord Thomas had begun the said verses, and the choir was following up the chant of the verse, they withdrew; and when he began another verse, at once they came back *, and, the choir following, they flew away, and at their coming they struck the windows and made a great chattering; and he believes that they were more than forty, and that the aforesaid things were about the third year after the said lord Thomas was bishop; and it was said that the lord Edmund, then earl of Cornwall, marvelling at the aforesaid, went out of the chapel to see the aforesaid. And they believed that this had come about on account of the holiness of the said lord Thomas. Thus far Robert Deyntè.

[45] The lord Richard, the aforesaid bishop of Hereford, deposed that he had been present in the chapel of the lord Edmund, then earl of Cornwall, in the castle of Walkford, of the diocese of Lincoln (he does not recall by their coming to the windows and their withdrawing in what year, but he reckons that it was about the second or third year of the pontificate of the said lord Thomas), on the feast of Pentecost, about the hour of Tierce, when many small birds, more than thirty, as he reckons, which seemed to be cornuliæ , doves and stornelli , the said lord Thomas beginning with due solemnity, on bended knees, while saying Tierce before the altar of the said chapel, each verse of the hymn Veni, Creator Spiritus, suddenly came to the windows of the said chapel, and in the middle, when choreis (perhaps one should read "when his choir") were following up the chant of the verse begun by the said lord Thomas, they flew away; and they returned as many times as he began each verse. At which the said earl, who had invited the said lord Thomas and many other nobles to the aforesaid solemnity, and others, very greatly marvelled.

[46] presented a wonderful spectacle. And for wonder the aforementioned earl with many others went out of the said chapel to behold with his own eyes the spectacle of the aforesaid small birds: and the said earl and many others ascribed the aforesaid to the holiness of the same lord Thomas; and the said earl related, the said lord Richard, the bishop, then chancellor of Lincoln, hearing, that he had as great confidence and devotion in the blessing and prayers of the said lord Thomas as in the blessing and prayers of St. Augustine, bishop of the English, who converted the English to the faith. Edmund, of whom treatment is given here, was the second-born son of Richard, earl of Cornwall and king-elect of the Romans, who after the death of his brother and father obtained the same earldom. Further, because Richard the bishop, and a doctor of sacred Theology, did not hesitate to hold the aforesaid comings and goings of the birds for a miracle, something singular must have been observed in them. Of St. Augustine, apostle of the English, treatment has been given in our Work at the XXVIth day of May, on which he is venerated. Further, here end the rubrics of the miracles, to which I could add also other things related here and there in the process; were I not afraid that I have long since bred disgust in the reader. I therefore put an end here.

ostium*

i.e. ostia*

i.e. chirurgus*

i.e. fuerit*

i.e. perseveravit*

intra*

perhaps rehabuerit*?

i.e. cespitavit*

supply sunt*

i.e. tibiam*

i.e. eidem*

dexter*

redibant*

perhaps corniculæ*?

perhaps sturni*?