English brethren either sneaked or ran away) as to demand the restitution of the lands belonging to his see, of the Conqueror in the synod where Stigand was deprived. Aldred, late archbishop of York, had had several predecessors who held the see of Worcester together with that of York : this caused a confusion and uncertainty in the estates belonging to the two sees, and gave Aldred a reason or pretence to claim and enjoy some of the lands, which in truth belonged to Worcester; but by the death of Aldred, all these lands were come into the custody of the king, as guardian of the temporalties; of him, therefore, Wulstan made his demand, and it seems he made good his claim, and recovered his right next year at the council of Pendred*, when the chair of York was now filled with Thomas the Norman, as all the other vacant dignities now were with men of the same blood.

I ought not wholly to omit the struggle between these two Norman archbishops concerning the primacy. It was at last declared in a synod of fourteen bishops and eleven abbots, with consent of the king, queen, and pope, that York must be subject to Canterbury in all things relating to religion, and obey his summons to a synod; that the province of York should contain all Britain from Humber to the extremity of Scotland, [and] all the rest to be the province of Canterbury; that the archbishop of York should, with the rest of the bishops of that church, go to Canterbury to consecrate him that was elected to that see, and the elect of York, after having received the archbishopric as a gift from the king, should receive his consecration at Canterbury, or wherever that archbishop should require his attendance; that the archbishop of York should swear obedience to him

* [Deinde Lanfrancus Thomam Eboracensem consecravit episcopum. Quo consecrato, reverendi Wistani Wigornensis episcopi mota est iterum querela; et in Concilio in loco qui vocatur Pedreda celebrato coram rege et Doroberniæ archiepiscopo, et primatibus totius Angliæ, Dei gratia amminiculante est terminata. Cunctis siquidem machinamentis non veritate stipatis, quibus Thomas ejusque fautores Wigornensem ecclesiam deprimere, et Eboracensi ecclesiæ subicere, ancillamque

facere modis omnibus satagebant, justo Dei judicio attritis, ac scriptis evidentissimis penitus adnichilatis, non solum vir Dei Wlstanus proclamatas, et expetitas possessiones recepit, sed et suam ecclesiam Deo adjuvante, et rege concedente, ea libertate liberam suscepit, qua fundatores ejus rex Aluredus, Edwardus senior, Athelstanus, Edmundus, Eadredus et Eadgarus ipsam liberaverant. Radulf de Diceto, X. Script. p. 483. Compare Spelman, vol. ii. p. 4; Wilkins, vol. i. p. 324.]

of Canterbury upon his consecration; though Lanfranc contented himself with Thomas's subscription*. Upon Anselm's consecration at Canterbury, Thomas objected against the church of Canterbury's being styled metropolitan of all Britain for then says he, York is no metropolis: his objection was allowedt, Thomas, successor of the present Thomas of York, refused to swear subjection to Canterbury till the peremptory command of King Henry I. forced his compliance ‡.

Sir H. Spelman, vol. ii. p. 11, 12, mentions three councils in the year 1076, and the canons of the first of these you will find inserted at that year: but the other two must have been holden, I conceive, some years before; especially because the rates of penance are subjoined to these councils in two old books from which Sir H. Spelman transcribed them, and those rates are said to have been confirmed by Hermenfride the pope's legate. For it is notorious that he came hither in the beginning of the year 1070, and summoned a council to be holden at Winchester on the third day after Easter the same year, in which Archbishop Stigand and others were deposed, and in which I suppose the first set of canons were made. The next council holden at Winchester was that mentioned by the Latin continuator of the Saxon chronicle, who says that Lanfranc in his second year held a general council at Winchester, in which many things relating to the Christian worship were enjoined; and this very well agrees with the titles of those sixteen canons, which I have therefore placed in the year 1071, though it is possible the council might not be holden before the next year; a great part of which falls in with the second of Lanfranc: and he must have returned back from Rome, whither he went in his second year, before he could keep this council. I put the rates of penance immediately after the titles of the canons. then made, for they could not be sooner decreed by the

[Spelman, vol. ii. p. 5, 6. Wilkins, vol. i. p. 324-5, "ex MS. Cott. Domit. A. 5. fol. 13. et regist. Arundel. i. vol. fol. 13, 14. et MS. Cant. eccl. A. 5, 6." Cf. Will. Malm. De gest. Pont., lib. i. p. 206-7.]

+ [Spelman, vol. ii. p. 15, 16; Wil

kins, vol. i. p. 370, "ex Matth. Paris. in anno MXCIII. et Eadm. Hist. Nov., p. 21."]

[Spelman, vol. ii. p. 30; Wilkins, vol. i. p. 390-1, "ex Eadmer. Hist. Nov., lib. iv. p. 102. seq."]

Normans, that is Lanfranc, and the new bishops; but for distinction's sake I date them 1072. It seems probable that Hermenfride left them with those of the bishops in which he had the greatest confidence, and they in this council resolved to execute them. Upon the whole it is evident, that the Conqueror never intended wholly to suppress ecclesiastical synods; though Stigand durst not call any, as knowing himself obnoxious. But when the Conqueror by the pope's help had eased himself of the old English prelates, the new Norman prelates knew their right to ecclesiastical synods, and frequently made use of them.

A.D. MLXX.

THE HEADS OF A COUNCIL CELEBRATED AT WINCHESTER.

1. CONCERNING the coming in of bishops and abbots by LATIN. simoniacal heresy.

Sir H.
Spelman,

2. Of ordaining men promiscuously, and by means of vol. i. money +.

3. Of the life and conversation of such men.

4. That bishops should celebrate councils twice a year.

5. That bishops ordain archdeacons, and other ministers of

the sacred order, in their own churches.

6. That bishops have free power in their dioceses both over the clergy and laity.

p. 12. [Wilkins, vol. i. p. 365.]

[One may wonder to see such a canon as this made by an archbishop [Addenda.] who was witness and approver of the exemption granted by King William to the abbey of Battle, which seems to have been the first precedent of this sort; and from which the popes quickly copied, and thereby not only raised great sums of money, but created to themselves great bodies of men immediately subject to the see of Rome, and independent on any other power, either secular or ecclesiastical. (For exempt monks and friars were so esteemed in the following ages.) If Lanfranc had obstructed this innovation, he had acted consistently with himself in making this canon, and shewed the world that he had not muzzled himself by accepting the archbishopric. For certainly these exemptions were one of the most flagrant invasions of episcopal authority, and one of the great scandals of popery (as they were afterwards improved by the see of Rome) and not removed by our Reformation. Yet it is probable this exemption of Battle abbey had been dropped in King Henry the Second's reign, if Thomas Becket had not supported it. The bishop of Chichester had brought the abbot to make profession of obedience to him, and when the abbot came (as the practice then was) to have his charter renewed soon after the king's accession, Bishop Hilary opposed it as to the

["E libro Saxonico Wigorniensis Ecclesiæ; etiamque e libro Excestrensis Ecclesiæ."-Wilkins who here follows Spelman gives the above and next two sets of canons under A.D.

1076, but quotes the latter part of
Johnson's preface in a note. See Wil-
kins, vol. i. p. 366, note.]

[2. De ordinationibus passim fac-
tis, et per pretium. S. W.]

point of exemption; and so far prevailed, that the renewal of it was
deferred from time to time. But Becket being now chancellor, did so
effectually oppose the bishop as to frustrate all his endeavours; so that it
may truly be said, no man that ever wore a mitre in England did more
injury to episcopacy than Becket.]

7. That bishops and priests invite laymen to penance.
8. Of apostatizing clerks and monks.

9. That bishops have their sees ascertained, and that none conspire against the prince.

10. That laymen pay tithes, as it is written.

11. That none invade the goods of the Church.

12. That no clerk bear secular arms.

13. That clerks and monks be duly reverenced. Let him that does otherwise be anathema.

A.D. MLXXI.

LANFRANC'S CANONS AT WINCHESTER.

HEADS OF A COUNCIL CELEBRATED AT WINCHESTER*.

LATIN.

1. THAT no one be allowed to preside in two bishoprics. 2. That no one be ordained by means of simoniacal heresy.

3. That foreign clergymen be not received without commendatory letters.

4. That ordinations be performed at the certain seasons. 5. Of altars, that they be of stone.

6. That the sacrifice be not of beer, or water alone, but of wine mixed with water only.

7. Of baptism, that it be celebrated at Easter and Whitsuntide only, except there be danger of death.

8. That masses be not celebrated in churches, before they have been consecrated by bishops.

* [These heads of a council at Winchester, as also the next set of canons, are extant in (X.) MS. Bodl. Jun. 121

f. 2b, to f4 a. Johnson's translation has been compared with this copy as well as with Spelman and Wilkins.]