# Archaeological Journal/Volume 3/Notices of New Publications: The History of the Monastery founded at Tynemouth

Notices of New Publications.
During the last three years several important and costly works have appeared on the history of ancient monastic foundations in England, together with minor essays on the same subject. The volume before us is the most attractive of these contributions to English ecclesiastical history. It is profusely decorated with coloured initial letters by the accurate pencil of Mr. Shaw, chiefly copied from catholic examples of different periods. Besides the objections, in point of taste, which may be justly urged against this style of embellishment, which has so widely prevailed of late, we may observe that not the least of the evils resulting from its adoption is that its expense unavoidably places works like the present, and others which might be named, beyond the reach of ordinary book-buyers, at once restricting the general usefulness of the publication, and limiting the reputation of the author, who in all such cases seems, unavoidably, to rely for success as much upon the ability of the artist he may employ, as upon his own literary merits. In the present instance, moreover, we would gladly have seen a larger expenditure on the delineations of the ruins of the priory, which belong to a most interesting period of architecture, and are but poorly exhibited, both as to general effect and to details, in the etchings by Mr. Richardson.
Having thus discharged our conscience by protesting against a fashion which is equally erroneous in principle and injurious in effect, we gladly turn from the decorations to the text of Mr. Gibson's work, on which he has bestowed much zealous labour united with varied and extensive research.
Votive Altar found at Tynemouth.
Inscribed Tablet found at Tynemouth.
Nothing certain is known of the history of Tynemouth until the close of the eighth century. It may be possible, as Mr. Gibson seems to believe, that soon after the conversion of the northern parts to Christianity, it obtained a reputation for local sanctity; but in the entire absence of evidence, it is useless to discuss the question. Yet one or two points raised by the author require observation. It is improbable, as he is disposed to think, that Tynemouth was the monastery of the holy Abbess Virca, mentioned in Beda's life of St. Cuthbert, as the words of that writer present this objection, that the house referred to, if situated near the mouth of Tyne, must have stood on the southern bank of the river. The legend of St. Oswin, patron of the foundation, was not written until five centuries after his death, and like many legends it is obnoxious to criticism in respect both of events and dates: but even admitting the fact therein stated, that Oswin was buried in the oratory of the Virgin Mary, at the mouth of the river Tyne, A.D. 651, we are not told whether on the north or south side; it must be also admitted that the earliest genuine mention of the place, anterior to this legend of the twelfth century, is a notice, in the Saxon Chronicle, that Osred, king of Northumbria, was interred at Tynemouth A.D. 792. From this, indeed, it may be fairly inferred that at the close of the eighth century a church, and possibly a convent, existed there, but beyond the slight record of Osred's burial, there is not an iota of evidence, ​not even a respectable tradition, to guide us in the investigation of the history of the spot previously to that date.
Whatever may have been the character or extent of the religious house at Tynemouth in which Osred was interred in 792, it would appear that, owing to successive ravages of the Danish pirates, to which, from its situation, it was particularly exposed, or to some other cause, the place was ruined and deserted when the relics of St. Oswin are said to have been discovered, A.D. 1065. No great weight can be attached to the story of the refoundation of the building by Tosti, earl of Northumberland: under any circumstances that chief could have done little more than commence the good work, as he was slain in the year following the discovery of the martyr's remains. The next authentic notice, then, of Tynemouth, after the Saxon Chronicle, is in the charter whereby Waltheof, earl of Northumberland, granted "the church of St. Mary in Tinemuthe, together with the body of St. Oswin, king and martyr, which rests in the same church," to the monks of Jarrow.
By this concession, which Mr. Gibson supposes to have been made circa A.D. 1075, Tynemouth eventually became a dependency of the church of Durham: for on the removal of the brethren of Jarrow and Weremouth to that monastery, Alberic, earl of Northumberland, confirmed Waltheof's gift, to the church of St. Cuthbert and its occupants, for ever. Confirmations, however, even though well attested, were not unfrequently set aside, in the unsettled times at the close of the eleventh century. Robert de Mowbray, who succeeded Alberic in the earldom of Northumberland, restored the monastery of Tynemouth, expelled the monks of St. Cuthbert, and granted it to the abbat of St. Alban's, who with a truly mundane disregard of the solemn warnings of the monks of Durham, "to forbear from seizing the property of others," sent his people to dwell there; and Tynemouth remained a cell to St. Alban's until it fell with the maternal house at the Dissolution. In this sketch of the early history of the priory we have not followed Mr. Gibson into the pleasant but unprofitable regions of conjecture.
The annals of the priory subsequent to its union with St. Alban's offer no very remarkable incidents. Like other religious establishments it largely increased its possessions during the twelfth century, a period favourable beyond any other, before or after, to the growth of monastic institutions. The chapter of St. Alban's used it as a conveniently remote prison for its refractory or guilty members, and in early times an exile from the pleasant fields and temperate climate of Hertfordshire to a rugged rock exposed to the storms of the German ocean, and in the dangerous vicinity of the Scots, must have been a severe penalty. In one respect however the history of this priory becomes important, and that is when considered in its relations with the neighbouring town of Newcastle; to this part of the subject Mr. Gibson has given less attention than could have been desired.
​No people who had to depend on commerce for their existence, could have been more unfortunately situated than were the burgesses of Newcastle in medieval days. The rapid Tyne rolled by their quay as it were in mockery, they had no property in its navigable course. The right of the bishop of Durham to the water south of the mid-stream was recognised, and the limit of his franchise northwards marked by a stone tower which divided Tyne bridge in the centre, the cost of maintaining the southern half of which was defrayed by the episcopal exchequer. On the other hand the abbat of St. Alban's claimed under the foundation charter of Robert de Mowbray all the liberties and customs in the river Tyne which that nobleman had possessed, and confidently maintained that at the date of his grant the river was divided "between the said earl and the bishop of Durham." This was under any circumstances a doubtful title, particularly as Mowbray's grant had disappeared at a very early period, for as the abbat piously observed in the suit temp. Edward the First, "where that charter is, God knoweth." However, under this insufficient title the monks of Tynemouth challenged a right to the water of the river north of the midstream. Although their claim to levy tolls on shipping is not expressly noticed in any of the documents cited by Mr. Gibson, there is no doubt that, at various periods, they endeavoured to assert such a privilege; and, what was even of more consequence to the burgesses, the prior of Tynemouth, with his brother of Durham, had endeavoured to forestal the trade of Newcastle by enlarging the little villages called the "Sheles," at the mouth of the river, which were originally, as the name implies, clusters of wooden huts, or "logges," inhabited by fishermen; he built large fishing smacks for trading purposes, thereby indirectly defrauding the borough of its prisage, and moreover he baked "other people's bread" in his ovens, whereby the burgesses lost their furnage dues.
Thus placed between two fires, it is not surprising that the townspeople should have appealed to the crown in self-defence; and it cannot be said, as Mr. Gibson appears to think, that, because they claimed legal protection against acts and pretensions which vitally affected their prosperity, they were either "jealous" or "encroaching" neighbours of the monks. The result of proceedings in parliament, on this subject, under Edward the First, was a judgment in favour of the burgesses; the question had been already raised though not decided in the reign of Henry the Third; and it was only finally adjusted by the Dissolution. However, time has justified the fore- sight of the monks in attempting to create a town at the mouth of this ​important river, and the primitive appellation of the log-huts of the fishermen of the priors of Tynemouth and Durham is now borne by two flourishing towns—North and South Shields—which send vessels to all parts of the globe. This prolonged and interesting contest between secular and ecclesiastical merchants may be further illustrated by other records than those printed by Mr. Gibson, who has our thanks nevertheless for what he has contributed towards it.
Before parting with Mr. Gibson, and our space admonishes us that we must now do so, we would say a few words touching his remarks upon the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle on Tyne, against whom he has launched a severe philippic. It is true, as he observes, that Society has of late years given few proofs of its vitality; it may be even admitted that it has not made its existence felt; but in passing these strictures on it Mr. Gibson has not taken into consideration how many of its once most active supporters have been overtaken by death, or enfeebled by age. The places of those who have finally departed or merely retired from the scene cannot be readily supplied, at a time when a more precise method in conducting archæological enquiries is expected, and more especially amidst that activity of professional and commercial rivalry which distinguishes the state of society in Newcastle, in common with other northern towns, leading more to considerations of the present and future than to retrospection. Still that, although it may be somewhat dormant, the Society is rich in the material wherewith to pursue its former course of usefulness, the members of the Archæological Institute can testify, who received much valuable assistance from its council on the occasion of the recent meeting at York. Why does not Mr. Gibson, who, although a stranger, has already shewn himself so fully alive to the antiquarian wants of the north, step forward and co-operate with them, instead of railing, because his own particular taste is for monuments of a later time, at the unrivalled collection of relics of the Roman occupation of England which, in our opinion, so gracefully and appropriately decorate the approach to the Society's room—an edifice which is built where the wall of Severus once stood? He may be assured his assistance would be duly estimated whatever the shape it might assume.
It is impossible to speak too highly of most of the illustrations of this work. The fac-similes of charters are especially worthy of remark, as among the best ever executed. The grant of Edgar the son of Gospatric cannot be surpassed for truthful character.
SECOND GREAT SEAL OF EDWARD III.
Seal of the Priory of Tynemouth.
Besides the seal of Edward the Second, Mr.Gibson has engraved the second great seal of Edward the Third. As we are not aware that it has ever been given before, except in Sandford, we gladly use the permission of the author to present it to our readers, whom we may refer for some interesting particulars connected with it, to Professor Willis's paper on the "History of the Great Seals of England," in the second volume of the Archæological Journal.
* ↑ Reference has already been made to the frequent removal, in Northumberland, of Roman remains from their original position, for building purposes. See Archæological Journal, vol. ii. p. 240.
* ↑ See his explanation of the Tynemouth inscriptions, and representations of the three sculptured sides of the altar, Archæologia, vol. viii. p. 326, and Gough's Camden, vol. iii. p. 514. These interesting memorials, discovered in 1783 by Major Durnford, were presented to the Society of Antiquaries of London, with a fragment of an early stone cross, found amongst the ruins with the altars. Mr. Gibson does not appear to have been aware of the existence of this relic; and on recent enquiry regarding the preservation of these remains amongst the valuable collections of the Society, we were informed that they had been long since consigned to the vault serving as a storehouse, under the great court at Somerset-house.
* ↑ "Est denique monasterium non longe ab ostio Tini fluminis ad meridiem situm," &c.
* ↑ Oswin is said to have been born at a town called Urfa, south of the Tyne, and opposite to the site of the monastery, now known as South Shields. Is it not at least probable he may have been interred at his birth-place?
* ↑ Mr. Gibson has mistaken the signification of this word. It meant the profit arising from baking the bread of the burgesses and of the dwellers within the banlieu or franchise of the town, who were all obliged to resort to the municipal ovens; and thus arose an important item in the corporation revenue. In the same way lords of sokes situated within boroughs or cities had their seignorial ovens. The rue Four-Saint-Honoré in Paris preserves to this day the memory o{ the four-bannale of the ancient bishops of that city.