The Abbots of the Cistercian Abbey of Bordesley

The Cistercian Abbey of Bordesley was founded in 1138 by monks from Garendon Abbey in Leicestershire. Although it never achieved the size and standing of Rievaulx or Fountains, it was one of the larger Cistercian abbeys, even though it was near strong Benedictine abbeys at Worcester, Malvern, Evesham and Pershore. As one of the richer abbeys, it escaped dissolution until 1538.

The form of reference for this page is:
Hancox, Peter. The abbots of the Cistercian Abbey of Bordesley. WWW page [http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~pjh/bordesley_abbey/abbots/abbots.html], 31 December 2001.

There have been a number of lists of the abbots of Bordesley, notably that given in the Victoria County History (vol 2, p 154), and most have been inaccurate in large or small part. Knowles, Brooke and London published a more authoritative list in their Heads of Religious Houses, England and Wales, 940-1216. This list extends that of Knowles, Brooke and London, using charter and register sources. Where possible, information is given about the ordinations of the abbot, election, episcopal blessing and commission, latest reference, death or (in the case of the last abbot), resignation.

This list is incomplete: there are clear gaps between the latest mention of one abbot and the first occurrence of the next. For instance, John Braderugge last occurs in September 1413 and John Abyndon first occurs on 19th November 1417: presumably we just lack dateable references to these abbots in this four year span. In another case, there seems to be at least one abbot missing: Richard Feckenham (abbot from about 1424) last occurs in 1431 and William Halford isn't blessed until 12th November 1452.

Two curious incidents stand out. The first is noted in the Patent Rolls of 1257. Ralph of Butlesden, sometime abbot of Bordesley and presumably the Ralph occurring in 1250-1251 (see below), is reported as having "secretly left his house and furtively taken the conventual seal, proposing with it to contract divers debts and consequently to confound and destroy that house; the king has granted the convent of that place that they shall cause him to be arrested." (CPR 1247-58, p 565.)

The second is more obscure. John de Acton became abbot in 1361, was abbot in 1381/2 and may have resigned or died as late as 1384. On 12 February 1366, the Patent Rolls record a commission to Ralph de Stafford, 'le pere' and others "to arrest and bring before the council John de Acton, monk of Bordesle". The charge given is that "the king, hearing that he was purporting to go to foreign parts to prosecute matters prejudicial to him, summoned before the council and forbad to do so, but who notwithstanding went to foreign parts and has now returned, purposes to usurp possessions of the abbey of Bordesle, which is of the king's patronage and the foundation of his progenitors. to occupy it by armed force, and to consume and waste its goods which should be expended on divine services and works of charity." Presumably, the journey abroad was the annual journey to Cîteaux. Edmund de Brugge, sheriff of Worcester is given a mandate to make a "proclamation throughout his bailiwick that none shall go armed to the abbey nor do anything there whereby the king's peace shall be injured, the people disturbed or divine service hindered, and to arrest and imprison all contrariants." This should be seen in the light of the unrest following the Black Death, including assaults on the abbot, servants and property in 1355/6 (CPR 1/12/1355; 10/2/1356). The Close Rolls for 1369 record an instruction for a "stay until further order" of pleas before them "pending between the king and said John de Acton monk of Bordesleye abbey, now abbot thereof it is said, concerning certain contempts and trespasses laid against the said abbot." (CClR 8/6/1369)

Later in 1366, the abbey is "so miserably depressed and burdened by excessive corrodies and debts that divine worship has ceased and alms and other pious works are withdrawn, and there is a danger of the disposal of the monks there through lack of sustenance". The king "committed the keeping of the abbey with its possessions to Ralph, earl of Stafford, during pleasure, to dispose of all issues thereof, beyond sustenance of the monks and their servants to a moderate number, towards the relief of the abbey, to stop all corrodies, farms and other charges, until it be relieved". The reason given for this action is the king's "compassion for the state of the abbey and of John de Stoke, the abbot". Ralph, earl of Stafford is also required to "to expel all suspected persons staying there". (CPR 14/5/1366) In October of that year, the Patent Rolls (CPR 15/10/1366) record a complaint of the abbot of Bordesley that "some evildoers, plotting to destroy the abbey, entered the same and its granges and manors with armed force, carried away his goods and daily commit other grievances to the withdrawal and diminution of chanteries, alms and other pious works established therein for the king and his heirs." A similar complaint is recorded early the next year (CPR 15/2/1367).

On 1 July 1367, the Patent Rolls record that, on the request of the abbot of Bordesley, John de Bello Campo and others are to "arrest and deliver to the abbot of Bordesle of the Cistercian order, John de Stok, Alexander de Evesham, Emery de Hull, Nicholas de la Hay and William de Wych, his fellow-monks, who are now vagabonds in secular attire." (CPR 1/7/1367) (Note that John de Stok is not identified with the abbot.) The Calendar of Papal Registers (January 1369) records an instruction to the abbot of Cîteaux and other bodies to summon those concerned to investigate a statement in a petition of Thomas, abbot of Stoneleigh, that John, abbot of Bordesley had acted as visitor to Stoneleigh, a right presumably based on Stoneleigh being a daughter of Bordesley. This Thomas was deprived of the abbacy during this visitation and two monks of Stoneleigh, William Aston and John Calshul made administrators. "Secular power" was used to ensure that Thomas surrendered Stoneleigh to John, abbot of Bordesley, who then ordered that the monks elect Alexander de Evesham, a monk of Bordesley, as the new abbot of Stoneleigh. The monks elected Thomas against the wishes of the abbot of Bordesley, who refused to confirm the election and, again using "secular power", imposed Alexander de Evesham. Alexander is said to have "plundered the monastery of chalices and books, and wasted woods and other property to the amount of 15,000 florins" then, fearing to be deprived, resigned the abbacy. William Aston then took possession and "Alexander, falsely pretending to have been plundered, ill-used, and imprisoned in the said monastery, began a process before William, bishop of Sabina." (Cal of Papal Registers: Papal letters, 1362-1404, p 80)

On the evidence available, it is difficult to present a reasonable account of the events. We have the record of John de Acton's episcopal blessing of 1361, so there is no doubt that he was the abbot before the events described and he is named as abbot as late as 1381/2. It seems fairly certain that John de Stok(e) is another person. It is true that there are no records of his ordinations in the calendars of the episcopal registers, but this true also of Emery de Hull, Nicholas de la Hay and William de Wych. (Alexander de Evesham was ordained subdeacon in 1350 and priest in 1351.) The difficulty of interpretation is centred on the nature of the visitation of Stoneleigh. It looks as if it was a piece of heavy handedness on the part of John de Acton who attempted to install his favourite, Alexander de Evesham. Perhaps Alexander returned to Bordesley, starting his process before William, bishop of Sabina. However, Alexander (as a former abbot, however briefly) became the focus of disaffected monks (hence the instruction to Ralph, earl of Stafford, "to expel all suspected persons staying there") and eventually left with four other disaffected monks.

During the vacancy between bishops Walter Reynolds and Walter Maidstone, the SVR notes on 5th February 1313 that an unnamed abbot of Bordesley can have a blessing from any bishop. Source: Worcester Sede Vacante Register, fol 87d p 152.