that the nuns seem often to have found great difficulty in making a canonical election, and there are frequent notices in the episcopal registers that their election has been quashed by the Bishop on account of some technical fault ; in such cases, however, the Bishop's action was merely formal and he almost always reappointed the candidate of their choice[1] An election was, moreover, not only comphcated but expensive; it began with a journey to the patron to ask for his congé d'élire and it ended with more journeys, to the patron and to the Bishop, to ask for confirmation, so that the cost of travel and the cost of pajdng a clerk to draw up the necessary documents were sometimes considerable; moreover a fee was payable to the Bishop's official for the installation of the new head. The account of Margaret Ratclyff, Prioress of Swaffham Bulbeck in 1482, contains notice of payments "to the official of the lord bishop, at the installation of the said prioress for his fee i. li." and to one Bridone "for the transcript of the decree of election of the prioress v. s."[2] An account roll of St Michael's Stamford for the year 1375-6 illustrates the process in greater detail; under the heading of "expenses de nostre Elit" are the following items:
Paid for the hire of horses with expenses going to the abbot of Peterborough [the patron] to get licence to elect our choice 9½d. Paid for the hire of horses going to the bishop of Lincoln and to the abbot of Peterborough and for their expenses at our election 4s. 8½d. Paid for bread, ale and meat for our election on the election day 2s. 11½d.
- ↑ See e.g. V.C.H. Glouc. ii, p. 93; Reg. of Bishop Grandisson, pt ii, p. 742; V.C.H. Yorks. iii, pp. 114-5, 120, 124; Dugdale, Mon. iv, p. 636; ib. v, p. 207; V.C.H. Durham, ii, p. 107.
- ↑ Dugdale, Mon. iv, p. 458.
de Bereburn, proctor, by the subprioress and by the two nuns, instructrices, examined on oath, (14) certificate by the Dean of the Christianity of Worcester that he had proclaimed the election, (15) confirmation of the election by the commissaries, (16) final declaration by the Prior of this confirmation and of the installation and benediction of the new prioress and of the injunction of obedience upon the nuns, and (17) a certificate by the commissaries of the Bishop-Elect that the business was completed. Reg. Sede Vacante (Wore. Hist. Soc), pp. 111-4; the text in Nash, Hist. and Antiquities of Worcestershire (1781), i, pp. 212-6, which also contains many documents relating to the election of other prioresses of this house. There are frequent notices of elections in episcopal registers; for other very detailed accounts, see Reg. of Bishop Grandisson of Exeter, ed. Hingeston-Randolph, pt iii, pp. 999-1002 (Canonsleigh) and Reg. of Ralph of Shrewsbury (Somerset Rec. Soc.) pp. 284-7 (Cannington). See also Eckenstein, Woman under Monasticism, pp. 367-8.
