On this page:What did it mean to be Cistercian? //What do we know about the way of life in the nunneries? //Daily life in the nunneries

The Cistercian life appealed to many women who wished to be part of this renowned Order and to embark upon what was purported to be ‘the surest road to salvation.’ TheGeneral Chapter did not share their enthusiasm and although a number of female communities during the twelfth century claimed to be Cistercian, they were not at this time officially recognised as part of the Cistercian family. In 1213, the General Chapter was forced to revise its position, and to embrace these women as part of the Order. The status of these nunneries, however, remained rather ambiguous.

The nunneries flourished during the first half of the thirteenth century, spreading ‘like the stars of heaven.’ The General Chapter sought to control this expansion and in 1228 prohibited the incorporation or foundation of any more nunneries. Whilst this put an end to the growth of official Cistercian nunneries, namely those that were formally sanctioned by the Order and visited by theFather Abbot, the number of unofficial Cistercian communities continued to increase. Many female communities throughout Europe adopted Cistercian customs, wore the characteristic Cistercian habit of undyed wool or claimed Cistercian privileges, such as exemption from the payment of tithes. In fact, the number of nunneries claiming a Cistercian identity greatly exceeded the number of those formally recognised by the Order.

Recent historical research has highlighted the difficulties there are in establishing which nunneries were Cistercian, and what precisely this meant. It is not, as was once thought, simply a case of defining communities as Benedictine, Augustinian, Cistercian or Gilbertine. It is rather more complex. Contemporaries were frequently confused as to what constituted a Cistercian nunnery, especially in England where Gilbertine and Cistercian communities were sometimes muddled.(1) The Gilbertine priory of Halverholme, for example, was endowed at its foundation by Bishop Alexander of Lincoln who gave land ‘to the nuns following the life of the monks of Cîteaux as far as the strength of their sex allowed.’ (2) Whereas Bishop Gravesend of Lincoln pronounced that several nunneries in his diocese were Cistercian on account of their poverty, their adoption of the white habit and observance of Cistercian customs, Abbot John of Cîteaux (1265-84) stated that these female communities were not, in fact, members of the Cistercian Order.(3) To confuse matters yet further, the organisation of these Cistercian nunneries was generally not straightforward. It often combined customs and practices of different orders resulting in what has recently been described as a ‘cross-fertilisation of influences’. The Yorkshire priory of Swine, for example, was ‘possibly Gilbertine-influenced yet not Gilbertine …. calling itself Cistercian yet not officially recognised as such.’ (4) Clearly, we cannot simply describe nunneries as Cistercian or non-Cistercian. There were various ways in which a community might claim Cistercian identity and various degrees of its acceptance by the General Chapter; indeed some communities that were not formally acknowledged by the General Chapter were nonetheless fairly well accepted by the Order. Analysis of the Cistercian nunneries is therefore a complex and rather murky area, which should be broached with care and an awareness of the wider implications of the term ‘Cistercian.’

Thelist of Cistercian nunneries in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, is a guideline to those communities that either thought of themselves or were described at some time in their history as Cistercian, whether this meant that they were fully acknowledged by the General Chapter of Cîteaux or whether they simply followed the Cistercian customs, wore the Cistercian habit, or claimed Cistercian privileges.

Keep reading to learn more about life in Cistercian nunneries, or follow these links (or the menu on the left) to learn more aboutstructure, community and order in the nunneries, and thewider Cistercian community and their involvement with the nunneries.

What did it mean to be Cistercian?

The Cistercian General Chapter was at first reluctant to embrace female religious communities and to recognise women as an integral part of the Order. In the early thirteenth century it was forced to review this position and for a brief period incorporated female communities within the Cistercian family. This meant that a number of nunneries across Europe were now officially recognised by the General Chapter. Still, there were many more that claimed a Cistercian identity or were described as such by outsiders. Communities that claimed to be Cistercian may simply have followed the customs of the Order; the nuns may have adopted the distinctive Cistercian habit of undyed wool or claimed privileges granted to the Order, such as exemption from the payment of tithes. Accordingly, there was, on the one hand, a group of nunneries that had been formally sanctioned by the Cistercian Order and, on the other, a larger group of communities that claimed to be Cistercian or were described by others as such, yet were not officially recognised by the General Chapter of Cîteaux.

In England, for example, whilst some twenty-five to thirty nunneries were defined as Cistercian only two – Tarrant Kaines (Dorset) and Marham (Norfolk) – were fully incorporated. In other words, only these two communities were formally recognised by the Order as belonging to the Cistercian Order and subject to the jurisdiction of the General Chapter. Whereas Tarrant and Marham were abbeys and presided over by abbesses, the others were ruled by a prioress. There was not, however, a clear-cut division between official and unofficial nunneries, but rather varying degrees of acceptance. Some communities were not sanctioned by the Order yet were actually quite well accepted; moreover, their way of life may not have been significantly different to the daily routine of those who belonged to fully incorporated houses. The latter is the subject of current historical research.(5)

Six Lincolnshire nunneries that claimed to belong to the Order and whose nuns wore the Cistercian habit, were exempted by King Henry III from taxation in 1268 on account of their status yet the abbot of Cîteaux wrote to the dean of Lincoln maintaining that even though they wore the white habit they were not members of the Order.
[D. Williams, The Cistercians in the Early Middle Ages, p. 404]

There were thus various ways in which a community could claim to be Cistercian or was described as such. There were different perceptions of what it meant to belong to the Order, ranging from the community that had been sanctioned by the General Chapter and was fully incorporated, to that which called itself Cistercian but was not recognised by the Order, may not have adopted the Cistercian habit or followed what the Order considered to be the Cistercian way of life.

What can we say about the way of life in these nunneries?

Whereas some nunneries were officially sanctioned by the General Chapter of Cîteaux and formally acknowledged as part of the Cistercian family, others simply claimed a Cistercian identity or were considered Cistercian by others. Communities that were officially accepted as belonging to the Order came under the jurisdiction of the General Chapter and were placed under the direct supervision of a neighbouring Cistercian abbot, who conducted a yearly visitation to oversee discipline and the administration of the house. The Order accepted no such responsibility for unofficial nunneries who were generally subject to their diocesan, whether the bishop, the archdeacon or his representative. Nevertheless, the daily life of the nuns may not have been substantially different.

Many of the Cistercian nunneries in Europe were established in towns, but most of those in England had a rural location. The majority were poorly endowed and were financially rather less well-off than the male houses. Bishop Gravesend of Lincoln (1258-79) remarked on the extreme poverty of the nunneries in his diocese which he himself had witnessed, and claimed that the nuns had scarcely enough to eat.(6) In Yorkshire, Handale, alone had a baronial founder (William de Percy).(7)

In most cases the nunneries were founded by important local men, frequently on the understanding that one or several of their daughters might enter the community as a nun; in other words, these grants often functioned as ‘entry fees’.(8) This practice was not peculiar to the nunneries, but it was certainly more common than in the monasteries. The nunneries also received grants to help with running costs, often from relatives of inmates or from members of the locality, sometimes in return for burial within the precinct. These were usually gifts of land, rights, fuel or grain; more unusual bequests include mattresses, gowns, and girdles. In 1341 Elizabeth Patefyn left her sister, the prioress of Esholt, in Yorkshire, all her corn at Burnely and a steed. In the late fifteenth century a local nobleman, William Calverley, left a cow with its calf to his sister who was a nun of Esholt, and five cows with their calves and twenty sheep to his daughter who was also a member of the community there. She received an additional bequest from her uncle of mattress, two coverlets, sheets and blankets.(9)

An unmarried brother provides for his spinster sister
Ralph of Waterville, who was unmarried, gave the Lincolnshire priory of Stixwould a considerable grant of land and rights when his sister, Muriel, took the habit there. It is interesting to note that Ralph and Muriel’s brother was the abbot of Peterborough (1155-1175),
[Graves, ‘The organization of an English nunnery’, p. 350.]

There were several ways in which a community might seek to reduce its expenditures, primarily by limiting numbers and restricting hospitality, which was often a considerable drain on the community’s resources. Bishop Hugh of Wells fixed the number of nuns at Nun Cotham at thirty and lay-sisters at ten; the male community was to be made up of three chaplains and twelve lay-brothers. (10) When Archbishop Wickwane of York visited Nun Appleton in 1281 he expressed concern at the number of seculars visiting the house and the length of time they were staying. The archbishop stressed that although he had no objection to the nuns offering ‘decent hospitality’ for a night or two, he was concerned that long visits might cripple the community financially and lead to scandal.(11)

To help boost the community’s finances, the nuns might sell corrodies to outsiders. This meant that in return for a lump sum of money or a grant of land the community promised to supply the donor with certain provisions (and perhaps also lodgings) on a regular basis. Some corrodies simply provided food, drink and maybe candles; others were fairly comprehensive. A sixteenth-century corrody that Richard Loghan and his wife received from the nuns of Handale, in Yorkshire, included a house in which to live and seven loaves of bread each week – the weight of these loaves is stipulated. Every year the couple was to receive half a cow and a pig, a bushel of oats, a bushel of peas, one and a half bushels of salt, seven salt fishes, one hundred herrings, one pence from each mutton killed and six pence from every other beast killed, as well as four loads of turf, a load of wood, and a pound of candles. The corrody also included the milk of a cow in summer and winter and a quart of milk each week from Easter to Martinmas. In addition, Richard and his wife were to dine with the prioress on each principal feast.(12)

The sale of corrodies could be a quick and effective way of raising cash but there was an element of risk. The corrody only worked well for the community if the donor died soon after the sale had been made but backfired if the donor enjoyed longevity. Such was the case at Nun Cotham in the mid-fifteenth century, when one man who had bought a corrody from the nuns for twenty marks lived for another twenty years; a second lived for twelve years after making the agreement.(13)

An unwelcome bedfellow
A lay-sister of Heynings Priory complained to Bishop Gravesend of Lincoln in 1440 that secular serving women, who had purchased corrodies, were sleeping in their dormitory. The lay-sisters were far from pleased with this and asked that they be removed.
[Records of Visitations held by William Alnwick, Bishop of Lincoln 1436-1449, II no. xxx (pp. 132-5, at p. 133)].

Daily life in the nunneries

In many ways the daily life of the nuns was similar to that of the monks. Their day revolved around the Canonical Hours that were celebrated in the church and the ideals of poverty, simplicity and obedience were paramount; prominence was given to manual work, although strict rules of enclosure may have meant that this was later left to the lay community.(14) The nuns of Swine, in Yorkshire, engaged in silk work, but were warned in 1314 that this should not take them away from their celebration of the Divine Office in church.(15) Like the monks, the nuns were expected to conduct themselves appropriately by rising to celebrate the night Office, preserving silence in the church and claustral areas, tending their sick and upholding the Benedictine Rule.

Nunneries that were not officially recognised by the General Chapter were generally visited by a representative of the diocese, perhaps even by the archbishop or bishop in person. He interviewed the community, dealt with matters of misconduct and noted where improvement was needed. The prioress of Catesby allegedly threatened that if any of her nuns snitched on her, they would be imprisoned.(16) The survival of episcopal records offers a glimpse of life in the medieval nunneries and underlines that these were not always quiet retreats, but the scene of riots, rebellions and scandals. When reading the more colourful and racy accounts, we need to bear in mind that the purpose of these records was to address areas of misconduct, to document the exceptional and the intolerable, rather than the commendable. As such they only offer a perspective of life in the nunneries and do not provide a complete picture. Still, these records shed light on what is otherwise a poorly documented area – there are no chronicles for the English Cistercian nunneries and only three surviving cartularies (Marham, Nun Cotham and Stixwould). Not least of all, these accounts show a more human side to those who belonged to the religious communities in the Middle Ages.

Lap-dogs in church
Yorkshire visitation records reveal that in the fourteenth century the nuns of Keldholme and Rosedale owned lap-dogs which they brought with them into the church. Injunctions were issued warning the nuns that this must stop for the dogs were a distraction in the church.
[Register of Greenfield, nos. 1328 (p. 88), 1379 (p. 114).]

Just as the monasteries were embroiled in land disputes, litigation and political affairs, the nunneries were also caught up in current affairs and sometimes clashed with their neighbours – not least of all fellow religious – over lands, rights and even bodies. One rather colourful example concerns the nuns of Swine, in Yorkshire, who engaged in what can best be described as a tug-of-war with the Cistercians of Meaux Abbey, over the body of Amandus the cup-bearer (pincerna). The account of this tussle is recorded in the chronicle of Meaux Abbey, and thus reflects the monks’ perspective of events. According to this report, Amandus had granted Meaux certain lands along with his body for burial yet, upon his death, the nuns of Swine violently seized his body and buried it at their own priory. This, and other matters, led to an ongoing dispute between the two communities.(17)

Despite similarities between the monasteries and nunneries, there were also fundamental differences, both in the organisation and structure of the communities and the daily lives of the inhabitants. An important aspect of female religious life was the incorporation of men, who were needed to tend to the nuns’ spiritual needs, since women were not permitted to exercise spiritual care. Another defining feature was stricter enclosure. This meant that more rigid rules were enforced preventing the nuns from leaving their enclosure and separating them from outsiders within the confines of the precinct.

References
(1) See J. Burton, ‘The ‘Chariot of Aminadab’ and the Yorkshire priory of Swine’, in Pragmatic Utopias: Ideals and Communities 1200-1630, ed. R. Horrox and S. Rees Jones (Cambridge, 2001), pp. 26- 42 at p. 26.
(2) Burton, ‘Chariot of Aminadab’, p. 27.
(3) C. Graves, ‘English Cistercian Nuns in Lincolnshire’ Speculum 54: 3 (1979), pp. 492-499 at pp. 495-7.
(4) Burton, ‘Chariot of Aminadab’, p. 27.
(5) For example, the current work of Dr Elizabeth Freeman of the University of Tasmania.
(6) Graves, ‘English Cistercian nuns’, p. 497.
(7) J. Burton, The Yorkshire Nunneries in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, Borthwick Papers 56 (York, 1979), p. 24
(8) Burton, Yorkshire Nunneries, p. 21; examples include Nun Appleton and Sinningthwaite. See C. Graves, ‘The organization of an English Cistercian nunnery in Lincolnshire’, Cîteaux 33 (1982), pp. 333-350, at pp. 348-350, for the twenty-three dowries that feature in the chartulary of Stixwould Priory. For examples at Esholt Priory, Airedale, see H. E. Bell, ‘Esholt Priory’, Yorkshire Arch. Journal 33 (1938), pp. 5-33, at p. 8.
(9) Bell, ‘Esholt Priory’, p. 10.
(10) Graves, ‘The organization of an English nunnery’, p. 341.
(11) Burton, Yorkshire Nunneries, p. 32; see VCH York III, pp. 170-171.
(12) J. Nichols, ‘The organisation of the English nunneries’, Cîteaux 30 (1979), pp. 23-40 at pp. 39-40.
(13) Nichols, ‘The organisation of English Cistercian nunneries’, p. 40.
(14) See D. Williams, Cistercians in the Early Middle Ages (Leominster, 1998), p. 405.
(15) The Register of William Greenfield, Lord Archbishop of York 1306-1315, III, ed. W. Brown and A. H. Thompson, Surtees Soc. 151, no. 1629 (p. 233). Similar warnings were issued to the nuns of Yedingham and Nunkeeling, see ibid., nos. 1327 and 1629 (pp. 85 and 231).
(16) Records of Visitations held by William Alnwick, Bishop of Lincoln 1436-1449, ed. A. H. Thompson, Publications of the Lincoln Record Society (1918-1919), II, p. 47.
(17) See Burton, ‘Chariot of Aminadab’, p. 34; for Meaux’s version of the event, see Chronica Monasterii de Melsa I ed. E. A. Bond (RS, 1868-88), pp. 354-357.