Читать книгу The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich - Thomas of Monmouth - Страница 5

Table of Contents

When the body of the dead boy was found in Thorpe Wood, the monastery at Norwich had not been opened much more than forty years, and it was little more than twenty-four years since Bishop Herbert had died. The founder had contemplated a convent of sixty monks, but it may be doubted if at any time the full complement of brethren was reached. It is hardly probable that as many as fifty can have been admitted to the house during Herbert's lifetime. In the year 1144 there must have been many among the brethren who remembered and had known him well. Nor can the Prior, William Turbe, have been the only member of the community who had been actually trained under Herbert's eye and educated by him in the routine of monastic discipline. Under a Prior whose life from boyhood had been passed in the rigorous discipline of a strict Benedictine house, we may be sure there would be small toleration of laxity. The Cluniac rule, which was intended to revive the ascetic life, or at least to restore the old rigour, had been introduced into the Norwich diocese by the foundation of the Cluniac priories of Castle Acre and Thetford; and the influence of this reform cannot but have made itself felt in the older religious houses. Everything in Brother Thomas' narrative goes to show that the Benedictine rule was somewhat scrupulously enforced at Norwich. There had scarcely been time enough for any bad tradition to grow up in the cloister.

From the monks' choir (the limits of which extended westward, nearly as far as the still existing twisted pillars in the nave; and eastward comprehended all the choir with its chapels–the transepts being probably screened off) the laity were excluded; an altar–the altar of the Holy Cross–being provided for them, at which mass was duly said. The whole convent were required to attend the midnight services, and lamps were lit in the cloister to lighten the darkness. The old rule of silence was observed, and apparently the language of signs was still in use upon occasion, for when Brother Thomas had seen his vision of the founder in 1150, he did not venture to tell it to ihe Prior until, in obedience to the rule, he had first gained permission to speak (ubi juxta ordinem loquendi daretur facultas). The vision itself too was granted when Thomas was lying upon his bed after matins, at which time it was usual for a monk to remain in the dormitory. The sacrist slept not in the dormitory, but in the church, a duty which in later times was often shirked as irksome and disagreeable.

The schoolboys were taught in the eastern walk of the cloister, and they seem to have actually had seats in the Chapter House at the daily meeting of the convent in Chapter. Unless indeed we are to infer no more than that the school was kept in the Chapter House: in either case, however, the practice was very unusual of the boys having any recognised place in that building. There appear to have been fourteen boys educated in the school originally.

The story of the black pig that made its way into the precincts during the night shows that there was some access to the cloister from the outside through the "dark entry" which I think must have been the ordinary passage to the latrines; and the people who flocked to see the martyr's tomb when he lay in the Chapter House can only have entered by this approach, which in the nature of things could not always be kept closed. The infirmary buildings which extended from the dorter in the direction of the river protected the monks' cemetery to a great extent from intrusion.

The ordinary way of approach from the cloister to this cemetery was through the undercroft over which the dorter was built. The slype or passage through which a dead monk was carried to his burial lay between the Chapter House and the Church, and the doorway to this slype may still be seen in the eastern alley of the cloister, as may the steps which led up to the dormitory.

Of the twelve or thirteen monks named by Brother Thomas, six are Obedientiaries or office-bearers in the priory, viz., the Prior, Sub-Prior, Sacrist, Chamberlain and the Cantor or Precentor. Brother Thomas has enabled us to correct some mistakes which Blomefield was led into by the authorities which alone he had access to in his day.

William Turbe appears to have succeeded Ingulf as Prior sometime in 1121, that is about two years after Bishop Herbert's death, and of course vacated this office on his election to the Bishopric in 1146. The convent elected Elias to succeed him, and it is abundantly evident that Prior Elias set himself firmly against giving unquestioning credence to the story of the martyrdom. Indeed I cannot resist the suspicion that when William Turbe as Prior was doing his utmost to induce the monks to accept the tale with unquestioning credulity and to turn it to account, there was a strong party in the convent who set themselves against the whole business, and that of this party Elias was the head. If it were so, we must infer that the election of Prior Elias turned mainly upon the question of recognising the dead boy as indeed the victim of the Jews, and so as a saint and martyr, and that at this early stage the sceptical party among the monks was the stronger and carried their man.

Prior Elias, however, evidently found Bishop Turbe's continued presence at Norwich and his fanatical determination to glorify the boy saint too strong to resist, and when the body had lain in the monks' cemetery for six years and brother Thomas was allowed to tell his vision in open chapter and received the strong support of the bishop, the little saint–for by this time he had begun to be spoken of as such–was taken up from his grave in the cemetery and removed to the new sarcophagus in the Chapter House; but March when Thomas, presuming upon his success in obtaining the removal, and confident of receiving the bishop's countenance and support, presumed to provide a carpet to be spread before the new tomb, and a taper to be kept burning there, Prior Elias promptly ordered the removal of these things. Only a new outburst of miracles and visions availed to bring about the restoration of the light, Elias evidently having given way with no little reluctance.

The formal appointment of Thomas as sacrist to the martyr, means apparently that somebody by this time had been told off to account for the offerings made at the shrine by pilgrims and visitors, but I suspect that the new office was created by the bishop and not by the prior.

Prior Elias is said by Blomefield to have died 22 Oct. 1149. It is clear from the narrative of Thomas that his death took place in 1150. Elias was succeeded in his office by Richard de Ferrariis, then sub-Prior, a man of high birth, and to all appearance an uncompromising supporter of Brother Thomas and his story. He was no sooner elected than he showed his zeal for the martyr by restoring the carpet which Prior Elias had caused to be removed, and in July next year the body was removed for the third time from the Chapter House into the Cathedral, without any ceremonial, and placed in a position to the south of the high altar and protected by an iron grating. By this time the name of the boy saint had travelled far and wide. The story had gained general acceptance, and pilgrims began to flock to Norwich from all parts of the country. Finally, on the 5th April, 1154, the saint was removed to the apsidal chapel on the north of the high altar now known as the Jesus Chapel, but then designated as the Chapel of the Holy Martyrs. This time Bishop Turbe took a prominent part in the dedicatory services. He had got the desire of his heart, and no further removal was carried out till later times.

Blomefield interpolates a certain prior named Ranulph, of whom I can learn nothing, as the successor of Prior Richard, and he says the next prior, John, succeeded 'about 1170.' Inasmuch as there is a letter from John of Salisbury, which belongs to the year 1168, addressed to John the prior of Norwich, it is plain that Prior Richard must have died before this year. Finally on the 27 April, 1168, Bishop Turbe built and consecrated a chapel to S. William in Thorpe Wood, on the spot where the body was said to have been found 24 years before; and the foundations of this chapel may be traced even to the present day, if indeed the place which tradition has assigned to it be correct. A special service of commemoration of S. William was in use in the 14th century, which has been printed in Dean Goulburn's work from a transcript made by the late Henry Bradshaw.

It was not to be expected that any but incidental mention should be found in the following pages, of the names of the Norwich monks during the period with which the narrative of Brother Thomas is concerned.

Of the monks named, two at least were gentlemen of high birth, and a third was of the kindred of one of the leading families in Norwich.

Peter Peverell and Richard de Ferrariis were both scions of distinguished Norman houses. In the 12th century the monasteries were very different places from what we find them four centuries later. By that time they had to a very great extent ceased to be the homes of disciplined devotion and were no longer places of retirement for men of high birth desirous of spending their last days in seclusion and preparation for the next life among a brotherhood of unworldly ascetics keeping up continual exercises of prayer and praise. In the 12th century, however, the monasteries were still regarded as, and they actually were, the houses and the schools of holiness, and it was only what we should expect that Bishop Herbert's priory offered attractions to men of gentle blood young and old who at this time joined the community and who found a refuge there from mundane cares and anxiety and hoped to find a refuge too from the temptations and proclivities which they had learnt to dread and abhor.

Nevertheless there was doubtless a plebeian element to be found in a great monastery from the first–though it by no means preponderated so largely as it undoubtedly did in later times.

There was always a career open to a lad of promise educated in the monastic schools, and it was never difficult for a clerk wherever educated to gain admission–sometimes too easy and too early admission–into a religious house, if he had shown decided talent and an inclination to enter the monastic profession, even though he were a poor man's son and could contribute nothing to his own support. The time might come when he would bring credit and honour to the house which had received him; and there was exactly the same competition for a young fellow who had the making of a bishop in him among the monasteries as there is now among the schools and colleges for a lad with a brilliant future before him.

Robert, the martyr's brother, who plays such a suspicious part in getting up the story, was received as a monk into the priory, though he can hardly have been other than a poor man; but at any rate he had shown himself a valuable partisan–he was already in minor orders; which means that he had received some education–and in the sequel he became a prominent personage among the hierophants of the new cult. Even he however had apparently to wait some time before he was accepted and admitted as a member of the community. There was, and there must have been, some educational, moral, and, in many monasteries, even a social standard which any postulant for admission would have to attain to over and above the real or pretended vocation which was put to rather severe tests during the period of the noviciate.

There are indications in the narrative of Brother Thomas that the adoption of St William as a kind of patron saint of the priory did a great deal more harm than good to the community. From the first there had been something like bitter dissension in the convent, and even to the time when Thomas wrote his book there was almost acrimonious feeling between him and the sceptics who evidently did not make any secret of their doubts.

The intrusion of sightseers into the cloister, even into the very Chapter House, and the crowds that made their way into the precincts–not always, we may be sure, in a respectful and acquiescent frame of mind–must have been disturbing to the quiet and order of the house, and the burial of the martyr's mother in the Monks' Cemetery must have shocked the feelings of many of the brethren, and can hardly have been agreed to without some protest from the minority. Bishop Turbe died in January, 1175. His successor was a man of a very different temper and cast of mind. He was much away from Norwich during the 25 years of his episcopate. He had no sympathy with the monastic life, and the Norwich Monks probably were, as far as he was concerned, left to their own devices. But it is idle to indulge in conjecture where we have no evidence to deal with. Thomas lifts the curtain: when he drops it we are left without a glimpse of what might still be revealed if another had taken up the tale.