Canterbury, Christ Church

These working notes originated in the early 1990s. See now Charters of Christ Church, Canterbury, ed. N. P. Brooks and S. E. Kelly, Anglo-Saxon Charters 17-18 (Oxford, 2013).

A church dedicated to the Holy Saviour (and later known as Christ Church) was founded by St Augustine, with the help of Æthelberht, king of Kent, c. 597, on the site of an older Roman church (Bede, HE i. 33); it was established as the church of the episcopal see of Canterbury, and maintained a continuous existence thereafter. <Archbishop Theodore (669-90). Following the death of King Wihtred, in 725, the kingdom of Kent appears to have been divided into its ‘eastern’ and ‘western’ parts, controlled in some sense from Canterbury and Rochester respectively; the loss of the Christ Church muniments for the seventh and eighth centuries (see below) is grievous indeed, but enough records survive from other Kentish archives to suggest how the division worked in practice, and they show (as one might expect) that the ‘eastern’ kingdom was dominant. In the second half of the eighth century the rulers of Kent fell increasingly under Mercian control; Offa in conflict with Archbishop Jænberht (765-92), and Cenwulf in conflict with Archbishop Wulfred (805-32). West Saxon kings Ecgberht and Æthelwulf, and their compact with Archbishop Ceolnoth (833-70). Series of ninth-century charters afford impression of contrast between Mercian regime and the West Saxon regime which replaced it. The community of Christ Church was transformed into a monastic chapter in the late tenth and early eleventh centuries. Eadsige, Stigand, and Earl Godwine; depradations sorted out by Lanfranc in the 1070s, at Penenden Heath (c. 1072) and on occasion in the later 1070s (represented by BL Cotton Augustus ii. 36).>

The Christ Church archive

The composition of the Christ Church archive is the product of a complex set of circumstances. It is unfortunate that the documentation which must have accumulated at Christ Church in connection with the earliest stages of its endowment in the seventh and eighth centuries appears to have been lost or destroyed at the end of the eighth century, perhaps in the turmoil of the years 796-8 (as suggested by Brooks 1968, pp. 20-6, and Brooks, Church of Canterbury, p. 121). A few of the oldest records have survived (e.g. S (Add.) 1428b); but other ‘early’ charters may not in fact have entered the archive until the ninth century or later (e.g. S 65, 106 and 128), or prove on inspection to be later copies or forgeries of purportedly early texts (e.g. S 22, 50, 90, 100, 108, 110, 111, 132, 230, 1609-10, and 1614-18). Christ Church also ‘acquired’ the lands -- and the archives -- of certain Kentish minsters in the ninth or tenth century (see Brooks 1968, p. 6, n. 1, and Brooks, Church of Canterbury, pp. 205-6): thus, S 19, 21, 23, 24, 39, 123, 153, 160, 270 and 1611 are from Lyminge (see also S 125, 1439, 1635); and S 8, 31, 38 and 1612 are from Reculver (see also S 546, 1436); S 20 could have come from any Kentish minster. Some charters in favour of laymen may have been acquired in the same way, though most of them presumably came into the archives in connection with the regular process of endowment. <It is more difficult to account for the preservation at Christ Church of certain charters which appear to have no obvious connection with the interests of the archbishops or the community. Examples include S 204 (a vernacular charter of Berhtwulf, king of Mercia, granting land at Wotton Underwood, Bucks., to his thegn Forthred); S 214 (a charter of Burgred, king of Mercia, granting land at Upthrop to Wulflaf); S 1276 (a charter of Swithwulf, bishop of Rochester, with a later endorsement to the effect that the land was given by King Edgar to a certain Leofric); S 1445 (a document submitted by Ealdorman Ordlaf to King Edward the Elder, in connection with a dispute over land at Fonthill in Wiltshire); S 1454 (a record of the settlement of a dispute over land at Hagbourne, Berks., and elsewhere); and S 1862 (an excerpt, produced in the tenth century, from a charter of King Æthelwulf). At the same time, it must be said that there is no evidence that Christ Church was used as a place of safe-deposit for the muniments of local landowners (unless, of course, all such muniments were discarded).> <A group of charters appears to have ‘strayed’ to Canterbury from Exeter (S 433, MSS. 1-2 [OSF i.14; BAF 30]; S 963 [Aug. ii. 69]; ? S 971, MS. 2 [BAF 31]; S 1005 [Aug. ii. 59]; S 1019 [OSF i.24]).> It is apparent that by the end of the eighth century a distinction had begun to be recognized between lands assigned to the archbishops and lands assigned to the community of Christ Church (Du Boulay, Lordship, pp. 18-22; Brooks, Church of Canterbury, pp. 157-9); but it is not clear to what extent, if any, a distinction was maintained thereafter between the respective archives of each party.

Single sheets

The singular distinction of the Christ Church archive as a whole arises from the fact that approximately 120 charters survive in single-sheet form, representing about 40% of the total number of Anglo-Saxon charters preserved in this way. Leaving aside the charters which were ‘acquired’ by Christ Church from other houses (and ‘strays’ which may not have come to Canterbury until after the Reformation), it is possible to derive from this material a rough idea of the relative quantities of the various kinds of documentation which accumulated in the archive during the Anglo-Saxon period: 39 royal diplomas (of which 24 date from the ninth century, a further 10 from the first half of the tenth century, just one from the second half of the tenth century, and 4 from the eleventh century); 47 documents of varied import (mostly ‘original’, with more from the ninth century than from the period 900-1066), including 10 vernacular wills; and 19 non-contemporary copies of royal diplomas, nearly all of which were written in the tenth or the eleventh century. It is immediately striking, on these figures, that so much ‘genuine’ documentation survives from the ninth century, relative to the material which survives from the tenth and eleventh centuries; of course Christ Church was far from being a typical establishment, though it is interesting in its own terms that the emphasis of activity should seem to have been more on the first half of the ninth century than on the second half of the tenth. It is no less striking that the genuine charters of the tenth and eleventh centuries are outnumbered by later copies or forgeries produced during the same period, affording some impression of the extent of fabrication practised at Canterbury before and after the Conquest. It is also significant that about 70 of the documents preserved in single-sheet form do not appear to have been entered in any of the Christ Church cartularies; for if circumstances had not combined to preserve the single sheets in such quantity, and if we were therefore dependent on the interests of those who compiled the cartularies, we should have had no idea of the quantities in which royal diplomas for laymen, and vernacular documents of miscellaneous character, had accumulated in the archive. <NB instances of tampering with the single sheets in the twelfth century: operative part of S 425 (charter of King Æthelstan) re-written; main part of text of S 1088 (writ of King Edward) re-written.> <Finding-lists of single sheets; see Brooks 1968, pp. 61-2.>

Records in gospel-books

<See Cheney.> Ninth-century inscription in the ‘Codex Aureus’ (Ker, Catalogue, no. 385), recording its restoration to Christ Church by Ealdorman Alfred, in return for prayers. At least four of the gospel-books which belonged either to the archbishops of Canterbury or to the community of Christ Church in the eleventh century were used then and thereafter for the preservation of records deemed to be of particular significance. It is important, however, to distinguish carefully between the nature of the records which were entered in each book:

(i) BL Royal I D. IX (Davis 179; Ker, Catalogue, no. 247), written in the early eleventh century. This book contains a record of confraternity naming King Cnut, his brother Harold and three other Scandinavian laymen (Thorth, Kartoca and Thuri), as well as the text of a writ of King Cnut to the effect that in response to Archbishop Lyfing’s complaint about the diminishing privileges of his church the king himself took the ‘charters of freedom’ (freolsas) and laid them on the altar (S 985). The scribe who entered the text of the writ in the gospel-book has been identified as Eadwig Basan, who was also responsible for writing a charter of King Cnut in favour of Archbishop Ælfstan, i.e. Lyfing (S 950), for producing a version of King Wihtred’s privilege for the Kentish minsters (S 22, MS. 1), and for writing various parts of several service-books; see Bishop, ECM, no. 24, and for further discussion (raising the possibility that Eadwig Basan had served as a royal scribe before settling at Christ Church), see Dumville, English Caroline Script, pp. 111-40.

(ii) London, Lambeth Palace, MS. 1370 + BL Cotton Tiberius B. iv, fol. 87 (Davis 177; Ker, Catalogue, no. 284; Keynes, ‘King Æthelstan’s Books’, pp. 153-9), known as the ‘MacDurnan Gospels’, written in Ireland in the ninth century and given by King Æthelstan ‘to the metropolitan see of Canterbury’. The texts entered in this book seem as a group to represent the particular interests of successive archbishops, and it may be that the book had been intended for the archbishop’s personal use. The texts are as follows: a writ of Archbishop Wulfstan addressed to King Cnut and Queen Ælfgifu, informing them that Æthelnoth has been consecrated archbishop (S 1386); a note concerning the boundary between the dioceses of Canterbury and Rochester (S 1564); three writs of King Cnut (S 986, 988, 987), all of which directly concern Archbishop Æthelnoth; and records of Æthelnoth’s agreement with a certain Toki (S 1464) and of Archbishop Eadsige’s reaffirmation of the same agreement (S 1466), both arising from proceedings which took place at the archbishop’s estate at Risborough in Buckinghamshire. None of the writs has survived in single-sheet form, and it is conceivable that the ‘originals’ were discarded once the texts had been entered in the gospel-book; the Risborough records, on the other hand, clearly originated in the gospel-book itself. The Latin summary of S 959 is a later, twelfth-century, addition.

<Dumville, ‘Annalistic Writing’, p. 53, challenges Ker’s view that Tib. B. iv, fol. 87, was removed from MacDurnan Gospels; but the view seems secure. For S 1464 and 1466, see Brooks, Canterbury, pp. 301-2. Monks Risb.>

(iii) BL Cotton Tiberius A. ii + Cotton Claudius A. iii, fos 2-7, 9* + Cotton Faustina B. vi, fos 95, 98-100 (Davis 178; Ker, Catalogue, no. 185; Keynes, ‘King Æthelstan’s Books’, pp. 147-53), known as the ‘Coronation Gospels’, written on the continent in the late ninth century and given by King Æthelstan ‘to the primatial see of Canterbury, for the church dedicated to Christ’. Whereas the ‘MacDurnan Gospels’ had been used in the eleventh century for preserving documents of particular interest to the archbishops, the ‘Coronation Gospels’ appears in contrast to have been used for the preservation of documents relating to the lands and privileges of the Christ Church community. The Latin text and vernacular version of a charter which purports to represent King Æthelred’s refoundation of the community in ‘1006’, and his confirmation of its endowment, were entered probably in the second quarter of the eleventh century (S 914); the scribe responsible for making this addition also entered Latin notes of grants made by Archbishop Ælfheah (S 1640) and the ætheling Æthelstan (S (Add.) 1640a). Another scribe added a Latin note of a grant by Archbishop Lyfing (S 1641), three vernacular records (S 1229, 1389, 1222), and the first part of the composite S 1047, representing King Edward’s grant of Chartham, Kent. A copy of a writ of King Edward confirming the grant of Mersham, Kent, to the community (S 1090) was added in the third quarter of the century. S 1047 was ‘improved’ by the addition of a passage in twelve lines which has the effect of affirming the community’s right to all the estates which belonged to it in the days of King Edward’s father (presumably with intended reference to S 914); and the same charter was further ‘improved’ by the addition of a list of the estates in question (the names of some of which were subsequently erased). Other additions include the famous series of (forged) papal privileges establishing the primacy of Canterbury; the texts appear to have added on different occasions in the last quarter of the eleventh century, and it has been suggested that they reflect the aspirations of Christ Church in response to the pretensions of St Augustine’s, as opposed to the claims of the archbishops (see Gibson, Lanfranc, pp. 231-7). The text of a charter which purports to represent King Æthelstan’s grant of Folkestone to Christ Church (S 398), dated 927, and which probably originated in connection with the dispute over that estate in the late 1070s, was added in the late eleventh or early twelfth century.

(iv) Oxford, St John’s College, MS. 194 (Davis 180), written in the eleventh century. <This book contains a text of S 1636, added in the twelfth century.>

Christ Church cartularies

The ‘main’ cartulary of the cathedral priory of Christ Church was compiled perhaps as early as the late eleventh century (c. 1090), and seems to have been intended to protect the interests of the monastic community against the threat of encroachment on their rights by the archbishop. The cartulary does not itself survive, but its form and contents can be reconstructed from the three twelfth- and thirteenth-century manuscripts which derive from it; see Brooks 1968, pp. 53-4 and 102-28. A distinct quire of charter-texts (Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS. 189, fols. 195-202 (Davis 163)), now bound up with other material, contains the earliest surviving copy of the lost cartulary, written in the mid-twelfth century; printed by R. Twysden, Historiae Anglicanae Scriptores X (London, 1652), cols. 2207-26. A second version of the lost cartulary is Canterbury, D. & C., Muniments, ‘Reg. P’, fols. 11-29 (Davis 163A), written in the early thirteenth century. The third version is in London, Lambeth Palace, MS. 1212, pp. 304-39, forming part of a composite cartulary of the archiepiscopal see (Davis 159) compiled towards the end of the thirteenth century (see below). CCCC 189 and ‘Reg. P’ represent the lost cartulary more or less in its original form. It should be noted, however, that CCCC 189 is the less faithful copy, since it derives from a version in which the texts of the original cartulary were to some extent abbreviated; it should also be noted that ‘Reg. P’ contains three charters (S 952, 914 and 1258) which are not present in CCCC 189, and apparently descends from an augmented version of the original. At some stage in the early twelfth century, another version of the cartulary was produced, containing the same series of charters but partially re-arranged in an attempt to ‘correct’ certain irregularities in the chronological sequence. The charters in Lambeth 1212, pp. 304-39, were derived from the revised version of the cartulary; S 914 and 1258 (in ‘Reg. P’, but not in CCCC 189) are included, and the only further ‘pre-Conquest’ additions are S 1647 (entered in a lower margin, by a different scribe) and 1087. The ‘main’ cartulary of Christ Church can be seen on this basis to have contained a selection of about 80 pre-Conquest texts, all relating directly to the church and its endowment. About a quarter of the texts in question happen also to survive in their original form; and comparison between these originals and the copies entered in the cartularies shows that the compiler of the lost cartulary tampered substantially with the texts in front of him, sometimes modifying them in the interests of the community and sometimes conflating two separate charters into one of his own. The transmitted texts of charters preserved only in these three versions of the lost cartulary must therefore be approached with all due circumspection.

The respective muniments of the archbishop and of the community were separated in 1238 (see Sayers, p. 96, and Brooks 1968, pp. 56-7), though it would appear that the bulk of the pre-Conquest charters remained in the custody of the monks. When the archiepiscopal cartulary in Lambeth 1212 was put together, during the reign of Archbishop John Pecham (1279-92), the compiler needed to turn to a manuscript of the community’s cartulary for evidence of the endowment of Christ Church before the Conquest; the charters on pp. 304-39 are said to have been copied ‘de veteri libro Cant.’ (heading on p. 304; see also table of contents on pp. 286-9). The quite separate group of 28 charters copied in Lambeth 1212, pp. 382-408, appear to represent a further attempt to secure evidence pertaining to the archbishops of Canterbury. The charters are headed ‘Transcripta de codicellis primariis siue cartis terrarum antiquitus dictis landboc’ (p. 384), and are preceded by a list headed ‘Capitula codicellorum siue cartarum ecclesie Cant.’ on p. 383 (with an addition to the group on p. 382); but they do not appear to have been assembled in any particular order. Many of them are royal grants to an archbishop, and almost all of them concern Christ Church directly; the exceptions are S 50 (Ealdwulf, king of the South Saxons, to Hunlaf, comes, for land in Sussex), S 230 (Cædwalla, king of the West Saxons, to Bishop Wilfrid, for land at Pagham and elsewhere in Sussex), S 108 (Offa, ‘king of the English’, to Bishop Oswald of Selsey, for land at Bexhill, Sussex), S 497 (King Edmund to his thegn Ælfstan, for land in Thanet), and S 489 (King Edmund to his mother, also for land in Thanet). The charters seem to have been copied from single sheets (the note ‘Duplicata est hec carta prescripta de verbo ad verbum’ occurs after S 175, 286, 1438 and 546), and in many cases the originals still survive; shortened versions of several of them occur in the manuscripts of the ‘main’ cartulary, and full versions of some occur in ‘Reg. E’ and ‘Reg. A’ (see below); but this collection in Lambeth 1212 is the only authority for the texts of S 108 and 489.

The efforts of Archbishop Pecham were matched for the priory by Prior Henry of Eastry (1285-1331); see Ramsay, ‘Cathedral Archives’, pp. 353-62. A new register of charters was compiled under his aegis, now represented by Canterbury, D. & C., ‘Reg. E’ (Davis 168), and Canterbury, D. & C., ‘Reg. A’ (Davis 169). The new register incorporated a distinct group of 20 pre-Conquest charters (‘Reg. E’, fols. 40-5; ‘Reg. A’, fols. 138-45), arranged in chronological order. Most of them do seem to relate to the particular interests of the monks; shortened versions of a few had been incorporated previously in the ‘main’ cartulary, and some had also appeared among the ‘archiepiscopal’ group of charters copied in Lambeth 1212; the majority still survive in their original form. ‘Reg. A’ has been described as a ‘contemporary copy’ of ‘Reg. E’ (Davis, p. 21); but in fact it seems likely on textual grounds that both manuscripts are independent copies of a common exemplar (see Lowe, ‘Will of Wulfgyth’). Three other cartularies compiled in the time of Henry of Eastry - Canterbury, D. & C., ‘Reg. I’ (Davis 165), ‘Reg. O’ (Davis 166), and BL Add. 6159 (Davis 167) - contain pre-Conquest texts: ‘Reg. I’ has copies of four charters for Christ Church (S 959, 1088-9 and 1047) on fols. 57-9; S 959 recurs in ‘Reg. O’, and S 1089 in Add. 6159.

‘Reg. A’ received substantial additions in the fifteenth century, and for convenience was broken up into four parts: ‘Reg. A’ itself, ‘Reg. C’ (Davis 170), ‘Reg. D’ (Davis 171), and ‘Reg. B’ (Davis 172). Six royal grants of privileges to Christ Church were added in the part which remains ‘Reg. A’, fols. 77-9; one of these (S 20) seems to have been derived from a single sheet, but the others were copied from a manuscript of the ‘main’ cartulary. About 14 pre-Conquest records occur among the texts added to the part which became ‘Reg. C’, dealing with lands in Kent; all but one appear to have been derived from a manuscript of the ‘main’ cartulary, the exception being a version of S 1202 which otherwise occurs in ‘Reg. E’ and ‘Reg. A’. The three records added in the part which became ‘Reg. D’, also concerning lands in Kent, were similarly derived from a manuscript of the ‘main’ cartulary. ‘Reg. B’, dealing mainly with estates outside Kent, contains 13 pre-Conquest records; again, the majority of the texts were derived from a manuscript of the ‘main’ cartulary, though among them occurs the sole surviving text of S 882, a charter of King Æthelred confirming Archbishop Sigeric’s grant of land at Monks Risborough, in Buckinghamshire, to Bishop Æscwig of Dorchester (followed by S 1378, to represent the return of the land to Christ Church).

Obituaries and lists of benefactors

Information about the friends and benefactors of Christ Church, Canterbury, and about the composition of the community itself, can be gleaned from post-Conquest records which draw in one way or another on earlier material. These records are of a complex nature, and are transmitted in the form of obituaries, martyrologies, and lists of benefactors:

(A) BL Cotton Nero C. ix, fols. 19r-21v, + London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS. 430, flyleaves. Fragments (covering the period from mid-August to the end of December) of an obituary compiled c. 1100. The obituary was superseded in the twelfth century (see below), whereupon the book of which it formed part was broken up; a Christ Church shelf-mark on Nero C. ix, fol. 20r, shows that this leaf later served as a flyleaf in a ‘Martilogium nouum’ (presumably (C), below), and it was perhaps in this connection that the leaves which covered the earlier part of the year were discarded, or lost. The obits in Nero C. ix have been printed by Dart, Appendix, pp. xli-xlii, and by Fleming, ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers’, pp. 124-6 (‘B’); the obits in Lambeth 430 were printed by M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Lambeth Palace (Cambridge, 1932), pp. 593-4. For consolidated texts of both fragments, see Boutemy, pp. 296-9, and Gerchow, Gedenküberlieferung, pp. 269-75 and 340-2 (no. 22). The obits relate variously to kings, higher ecclesiastics, members of the community, and friends and benefactors; some details of benefactions are also included.

(B) BL Royal 7. E. VI, fols. 2r-73v. A copy of the (ninth-century) ‘Martyrology of Usuard’, written in the second quarter of the twelfth century, with ‘local’ additions after each entry (including notes of benefactions); followed by a copy of the Rule of St Benedict, and by a set of homiletic texts. The volume as a whole (now in two parts: BL Royal 7. E. VI, fols. 2-103, and BL Cotton Claudius C. vi, fols. 174-203) was described as the ‘Martilogium Vetus’ in the fourteenth-century catalogue of the library of Christ Church priory. It would appear that the ‘local’ additions in (B) were based to some extent on the material in (A), and were used in turn as a basis for the obituary in (C), for the notes on benefactors in (D), and for the comprehensive obituary in (E). Unfortunately, most of the additions were erased, when it was felt desirable to use the space between the entries in the martyrology for another purpose. It is the case, however, that some of the additions, including a few which relate to pre-Conquest benefactors, were not erased; in particular, there are substantive entries for King Ecgberht, King Æthelwulf, Archbishop Ceolnoth and Abbess Cynewaru, under 4 Feb. (fol. 8v), for Queen Emma, under 8 Mar. (fol. 14v), and for King Coenwulf, Archbishop Wulfred and the priest Werhard, under 24 Mar. (fol. 17rv). These entries cannot be taken seriously as evidence for the days on which these kings died; rather, it would appear that kings who died on days unknown were commemorated at Canterbury on the obit-day of the archbishop with whom they were most closely associated. Four leaves preserved in Cotton Claudius C. vi, fols. 170-3, were probably appended to the ‘old’ martyrology (see Robinson, ‘Lanfranc’s Monastic Constitutions’, pp. 385 and 387-8). They comprise an obituary notice of King William I, on fol. 170v; a consolidated record of those houses in confraternity with Christ Church, and an obituary notice of Conrad, prior of Christ Church and latterly abbot of St Benet of Hulme (d. 1127), on fol. 171rv; some later records of confraternity, on fol. 172rv; and an obituary notice of Archbishop Lanfranc (ptd Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, pp. 227-9), on fol. 173r. The confraternity texts contain various references to a martyrology, in which the obits of other parties would be duly recorded.

(C) BL Cotton Nero C. ix, fols. 3r-10v (for January-April) and 11r-18v (for September-December). Fragments of an obituary compiled in the second quarter of the thirteenth century; a gathering of eight leaves (for May-August) has been lost between fols. 10 and 11. In its pristine state, the obituary presumably formed part of the ‘Martilogium nouum’ registered in the fourteenth-century library catalogue; in which case, it was followed by copies of the Rule of St Benedict, and Lanfranc’s Constitutions. The obits are arranged in four columns, each reserved for a different category of person (kings and higher ecclesiastics; members of the Christ Church community; members of other communities in confraternity, notably Glastonbury and Saint-Bertin’s; and assorted ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’, including benefactors); printed by Dart, Appendix, pp. xxxii-xli, and by Fleming, ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers’, pp. 130-48 (‘N’); see also Gerchow, Gedenküberlieferung, pp. 290-1 and 351-6 (no. 25). A significant number of the entries in this obituary relate to the pre-Conquest period; the material was probably derived in part from (B), though details of benefactions were generally omitted. The obituary is otherwise of value in exemplifying one of the more distinctive forms in which material of this kind was preserved, maintained and transmitted.

(D) BL Cotton Galba E. iii, pt 2, fols. 32r-34r. A register of benefactors abstracted from a martyrology or an obituary, written in the late thirteenth century. Printed by Dart, Appendix, pp. xxiii-xxv, and by Fleming, ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers’, pp. 126-30 (‘G’); see also Box, pp. 106-7. Much of the material was probably derived from the additions entered in the ‘old’ Christ Church martyrology (B); and while comparison with the surviving entries in (B), and with the material apparently derived from (B) in the later Christ Church obituary (E), shows that the Galba text is woefully corrupt, it is nonetheless of some value for reconstructing the text of the erased entries in (B).

(E) BL Arundel 68 (Davis 187), fols. 12r-52v. An obituary written in the early fifteenth century (with extensive later additions); preceded by (dated) notices of admission into confraternity with Christ Church priory, and followed by further notices of the same kind, by a Martyrology, and by the Rule of St Benedict and other material. The obituary (cited in Fleming’s indexes as ‘A’) is unprinted. For the English saints in the Martyrology, see The Martiloge in Englysshe, ed. F. Procter and E. S. Dewick, Henry Bradshaw Society 00 (London, 1893), pp. 287-91. The original compiler of this work appears to have drawn his material from the additions in the ‘old’ Christ Church martyrology (B), from a (complete) version of the obituary in (C), or perhaps a copy of it with later additions, and from other records (perhaps including other parts of (C)).

(F) Canterbury, D. & C., Cartae Antiquae C. 159 (s. xiii); London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS. 303, fols. 112-18 (s. xv in.); Canterbury, D. & C., Cartae Antiquae C. 158 (s. xv); and related manuscripts (see Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, p. 46). A list of donations to the church of Canterbury, probably based on the ‘main’ Christ Church cartulary and on other records, may have been produced in the first instance by the historian Gervase of Canterbury (d. c. 1210), for the purposes of his Actus pontificum Cantuariensis ecclesiae (Historical Works of Gervase, ed. Stubbs, II, pp. 325-414). An augmented version of such a list, giving date, name of benefactor, and name of place, was in existence in the early fifteenth century; printed (from a manuscript now lost) by Somner, Antiquities of Canterbury (1640), pp. 00-00 (2nd ed., Appendix, pp. 36-41), reprinted in Mon. Angl., pp. 18-22 (rev. ed., i. 96-8). Most of the donations registered in this list correspond to donations represented by documentary records; but a few are not now attested in any other form. For further discussion, see Box, esp. pp. 107-19, and Brooks 1968, pp. 63-4. <Is Cart. Ant. C. 159 really that early?>

(G) London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS. 20, fols. 157-248, a fair copy of (E), made in the early sixteenth century. See James, Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Lambeth, pp. 30-5. The archiepiscopal obits were printed from this manuscript by Wharton, Anglia Sacra I, pp. 52-64. <+ pp. 137ff, etc. - see James.>

The wealth of information bearing on the pre-Conquest benefactors of Christ Church, Canterbury, which can be derived from this material, remains in need of systematic examination. The information incorporated in the ‘old’ martyrology (B) was presumably based to some extent on whatever material might have been contained in (A), or in underlying calendars or obituaries; but this material must have been combined with details recorded in documentary sources, whether in single-sheet form (perhaps including charters now lost), or in the form of records entered in the ‘main’ Christ Church cartulary. <See Brooks, p. 308.>

Certain obits prove to be of interest in their own right. For example, the obit of Leofwynn, who gave land at Bocking and Mersea (Essex) to Christ Church, duly registered under 23 July [X Kal. Aug.] in (D) and (E), evokes the tale of her husband Æthelric, accused of complicity in a plot to receive Swein Forkbeard (cf. S 1501, 939, 1218). It is reassuring to note that the obit of the ætheling Æthelstan, registered under 25 June [VII Kal. Jul.] in (D) and (E), but erased in (B), was commemorated on the same day at the Old Minster, Winchester (BL Add. 29436, fol. 73r); for it is this obit which makes it possible to place the making of Æthelstan’s will, and his death, on that day in 1014 (Keynes, Diplomas, p. 267), as opposed to 1015 or 1016, with significant historical consequences. The obit of a certain Thored, registered under 18 July [XV Kal. Aug.] in (D) and (E), relates to the person of that name who gave an estate at (East) Horsley, Surrey, to Christ Church (cf. S 1222, entered in the ‘Coronation Gospels’); it emerges from the note in (E) that he also gave the community two gospel-books covered in silver, gold and gems, and from the list in (F) that the grant of land was supposed at Canterbury to have taken place with Cnut’s permission in the year ‘1036’. There could be little doubt that this Thored was the putatively ‘Danish’ thegn who flourished during the reign of King Cnut (and thereafter), and who was entered into confraternity with the Christ Church community (Ker, Catalogue, no. 247). If the Thored who ordered a benedictional (BL Cotton Claudius A. iii) to be ‘covered with treasures’ is presumed to have been the same person, it might follow that the benedictional in question belonged to Christ Church at the time; but the script of the operative inscription, and the presence in the manuscript of annotations in the hand attributed to Archbishop Wulfstan, support the view that this Thored was the late-tenth-century earl of Northumbria (cf. Ker, Catalogue, no. 141). According to (A), ‘Esbearn bigga’ died on 24 Nov. [VIII Kal. Dec.]; the obit of Æthelthryth, ‘sister of Æsbern bigga’, was commemorated on 25 Feb. [V Kal. Mar.] in (B), (C) and (E). For some reason, however, the gifts of ‘Osbern Bigga’ (including extensive property in Canterbury, as well as two chasubles (casulae) and three cloaks (cappae) decorated in gold and gems, two gospel-books covered in silver and gold, a large censer (turribulum), and a large silk dorsal) were registered in (D) and (E) under 1 July [Kal. Jul.]. Perhaps there was some confusion with Esbearn’s father Æthelric, also known as ‘Bigga’, and himself a benefactor of Christ Church and St Augustine’s, Canterbury (S 1471, 1502, and (F)); or perhaps the date in fact marked an event other than Æsbearn’s death. <Ealdorman Byrhtnoth, and Ælfflæd, under 11 Aug. [3 Id. Aug.] in (D) and (E).> <Queen Emma commemorated under 8 Mar. [VIII Id. Mar.] in (B), (C), (D) and (E).>

Dispersal of the archive

<Check Collinson, ‘The Protestant Cathedral’.> Dispersal of the archive in the early seventeenth century; see Brooks 1968, pp. 66-72. Large number of Christ Church charters found their way into the hands of Sir Robert Cotton, and were incorporated in the ‘Augustus II’ portfolio; see above, pp. 00-0. Many also acquired by Sir Edward Dering (above, pp. 00-0). BL Stowe 853, containing ‘Coppyes of diverse Saxon deedes belonging to Kent’, from Dering charters; S 39 known only from this source. Most of Dering’s pre-Conquest charters passed into the hands of Thomas Astle, and are now among the Stowe Charters in the British Library; reproduced in OSFacs. iii. The pre-Conquest charters still preserved at Canterbury in the mid seventeenth century were used by William Somner, for The Antiquities of Canterbury (London, 1640), and for A Treatise of Gavelkind (London, 1660); see above, p. 00. Most of the pre-Conquest charters which remained at Christ Church thereafter were removed from the series of ‘Chartae Antiquae’ in 1839 and assembled under the direction of J. M. Kemble in the so-called ‘Red Book’; these charters are reproduced in OSFacs. i. Others, incl. S 914?>

Charters of Christ Church, Canterbury

Edition: Charters of Christ Church, Canterbury, ed. N. Brooks and S. E. Kelly (in preparation).

Royal diplomas. 8; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24 (+1611); 31; 38; 39; 40 (+ 1615); 41, MSS. 1 and 2; 50; 65; 90; 100; 106; 108; 110; 111; 123 (+ 1614); 125; 128; 132; 153; 155; 156; 160; 161; 163; 164 (+ 1616); 168, MSS. 1 and 2 (+ 1617); 169 (+ 1617); 170 (+ 1616); 175, MSS. 1 and 2; 176 (+ 1618); 177 (+ 1615); 178; 186; 187; 188; 204; 214; 230; 270; 282; 286; 287; 293; 296; 316; 319; 323 (+ 1623); 328; 332; 338; 344; 350; 367; 398; 425 (+ 1210); 447 (+ 1210); 464; 489; 497; 510; 512; 515 (+ 477); 528; 535; 537; 546, MSS. 1 and 2; 717 (+ 1634); 808; 882; 905; 914; 950; 952; 959, MSS. 2 and 21; 959, MSS. 1, 3 and 4; 974; 1005; 1044; 1862. See also 1609; 1610; 1612; 1613; 1619; 1628; (Add.) 1630a; 1632; 1636; (Add.) 1640a. (20 also preserved in the archives of St Augustine’s, Canterbury. 108 came to Canterbury from Selsey; 332 came from St Augustine’s, Canterbury. For 433, MSS. 1 and 2, 963, 971, MS. 2, and 1019, see under Exeter.) <S 1005 also a stray?>

Writs. 985; 986; 987; 988; 1086; 1087; 1088; 1089; 1090; 1386.

Miscellaneous. 939 (+ 1218); 981 (+ 1643); 1047; 1188 (+ 1626); 1194; 1195; 1196; 1197; 1199; 1200; 1202; 1203; 1204; 1209; 1211 (+ 1212); 1215; 1220; 1221; 1222; 1229 (+ 1638); 1234; 1258; 1259; 1264; 1265 (+ 1618); 1266 (+ 1621); 1268; 1269; 1276; 1288 (+ 1627); 1378; 1389; 1390; 1400; 1414; 1434 (+ 1620); 1436, MSS. 1 and 2; 1438, MSS. 1, 2 and 3; 1439 (+ 1626); 1445; 1454; 1461; 1464; 1465 (+ 1642); 1466; 1467; 1471; 1472; 1473; 1622. See also 1624; 1625; 1629; 1630; 1631; 1633; 1635; 1637; 1639; 1640; 1641; 1644; 1645; 1647. (1400 and 1472 concern St Augustine’s, Canterbury; but both are the Christ Church portions of original chirographs.)

Wills. 1482; 1500; 1501 (+ 1218); 1503, MSS. 1 and 2; 1506; 1508; 1510; 1530, MSS. 1 and 2; 1535 (+ 1646). (1501 also preserved in the archives of Bury St Edmunds; 1503 also preserved in the archives of the Old Minster, Winchester.)

Boundary. 1564.

Select bibliography

WM, GP, pp. 5-36; Mon. Angl. i. 18-22; Mon. Angl. (rev. ed.) i. 81-119; VCH Kent ii. 113-21; MRH, p. 61; HRH, pp. 33-4. <Add Not. Mon. (Kent).>

Boutemy, A., ‘Two Obituaries of Christ Church, Canterbury’, English Historical Review 50 (1935), pp. 292-9;
Box, E. G., ‘Donations of Manors to Christ Church, Canterbury, and Appropriations of Churches’, Archæologia Cantiana 44 (1932), pp. 103-19;
Brooks, N. P., ‘The Pre-Conquest Charters of Christ Church, Canterbury’, unpubl. D.Phil. thesis (University of Oxford, 1968), esp. pp. 51-66;
Brooks, N. P., Church of Canterbury, esp. pp. 167-74 (with pp. 359-62) and 317-30; Brooks, N. P., ‘The Anglo-Saxon Cathedral Community’, A History of Canterbury Cathedral, ed. P. Collinson, et al. (Oxford, 1995), pp. 1-37;
Cheney, C. R., ‘Service-Books and Records: the Case of the “Domesday Monachorum’’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 56 (1983), pp. 7-15;
Dart, J., The History and Antiquities of the Cathedral Church of Canterbury (London, 1726);
Douglas, D. C., ‘Odo, Lanfranc, and the Domesday Survey’, Historical Essays in Honour of James Tait, ed. J. G. Edwards, et al. (Manchester, 1933), pp. 47-57;
Du Boulay, F. R. H., The Lordship of Canterbury: an Essay on Medieval Society (London, 1966), esp. pp. 1-15 (archives) and 16-51 (endowment);
Edwards, Charters of the Early West Saxon Kingdom, pp. 265-80;
Fleming, R., ‘Christchurch’s Sisters and Brothers: an Edition and Discussion of Canterbury Obituary Lists’, The Culture of Christendom: Essays in Medieval History in Commemoration of Denis L. T. Bethell, ed. M. A. Meyer (London, 1993), pp. 115-53;
Fleming, R., ‘History and Liturgy at Pre-Conquest Christ Church’, Haskins Society Journal 6 (1994), pp. 67-83;
Fleming, R., <article on the Anglo-Norman cartulary of Christ Church, Canterbury> (forthcoming);
Gerchow, J., Die Gedenküberlieferung der Angelsachsen, nos. 22 and 25;
Gibson, M., Lanfranc of Bec (Oxford, 1978); Harmer, Writs, pp. 166-90;
Keynes, S., ed., The Liber Vitae of the New Minster and Hyde Abbey, Winchester, EEMF 26 (Copenhagen, 1996), p. 60, n. 91;
Lowe, K., ‘A New Edition of the Will of Wulfgyth’, Notes & Queries 234 (1989), pp. 295-8;
O’Neill, P. P., ‘A Lost Old-English Charter Rubric: the Evidence from the Regius Psalter’, Notes and Queries 231 (1986), pp. 292-4;
Ramsay, N., ‘The Cathedral Archives and Library’, Canterbury Cathedral, ed. Collinson, et al., pp. 341-407;
Robinson, J. A., ‘Lanfranc’s Monastic Constitutions’, Journal of Theological Studies 10 (1909), pp. 375-88;
Sayers, J. E., ‘The Medieval Care and Custody of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Archives’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 39 (1966), pp. 95-107;
Urry, W., Canterbury under the Angevin Kings (<check>, 1967);
Wright, C. E., ‘Sir Edward Dering: a Seventeenth-Century Antiquary and his “Saxon” Charters’, The Early Cultures of North-West Europe, ed. C. Fox and B. Dickins (Cambridge, 1950), pp. 371-93.

<O’Neil on Æthelwulf rubric. Cf. DND, Liturgy, p. 125, n. 221.>

<Canterbury and the Norman Conquest: Churches, Saints & Scholars 1066–1109, ed. R. Eales and R. Sharpe (London, 1994).>

Page maintained by SDK

October 2011