The complete works of John Gower, volume 4 — Edition Insights

A ‘hard collection’ it may be, but no harder than many others that have been made by biographers, and Leland’s ‘vir equestris ordinis[7]’ must certainly go the way of his other statements, being sufficiently refuted, as Stow remarks, by the ‘Armiger’ of Gower’s epitaph. Leland in calling him a knight was probably misled by the gilt collar of SS upon his recumbent effigy, and Fuller afterwards, on the strength of the same decoration, fancifully revives the old theory that he was a judge, and is copied of course by succeeding writers[8]. On the whole it may be doubted whether there is anything but guesswork in the statements made by Leland about our author, except so far as they are derived from his writings or from his tomb.

That John Gower the poet was of a Kentish family is proved by definite and positive evidence. The presumption raised by the fact that his English writings certainly have some traces of the Kentish dialect, is confirmed, first by the identity of the arms upon his tomb with those of Sir Robert Gower, who had a tomb in Brabourne Church in Kent, and with reference to whom Weever, writing in 1631, says, ‘From this family John Gower the poet was descended[9],’ secondly, by the fact that in the year 1382 a manor which we know to have been eventually in the possession of the poet was granted to John Gower, who is expressly called ‘Esquier de Kent,’ and thirdly, by the names of the executors of the poet’s will, who are of Kentish families. It may be added that several other persons of the name of Gower are mentioned in the records of the time in connexion with the county of Kent. Referring only to cases in which the Christian name also is the same as that of the poet, we may note a John Gower among those complained of by the Earl of Arundel in 1377, as having broken his closes at High Rothing and elsewhere, fished in his fishery and assaulted his servants[10]; John Gower mentioned in connexion with the parishes of Throwley and Stalesfield, Kent, in 1381-2[11]; John Gower who was killed by Elias Taillour, apparently in 1385[12]; John Gower who was appointed with others in 1386 to receive and distribute the stores at Dover Castle[13]; none of whom can reasonably be identified with the poet. Therefore it cannot be truly said, as it is said by Pauli, that the surname Gower, or even the combination John Gower, is a very uncommon one in the records of the county of Kent[14].

Before proceeding further, it may be well to set forth in order certain business transactions recorded in the reign of Edward III, in which a certain John Gower was concerned, who is identified by Nicolas with the poet[15].

They are as follows:--

39 Ed. III (1365). An inquiry whether it will be to the prejudice of the king to put John Gower in possession of half the manor of Aldyngton in Kent, acquired by him without licence of the king from William de Septvans, and if so, ‘ad quod damnum.’ This half of Aldyngton is held of the king by the service of paying fourteen shillings a year to the Warden of Rochester Castle on St. Andrew’s day[16].

Under date Feb. 15 of the same year it was reported that this would not be to the prejudice of the king, and accordingly on March 9 John Gower pays 53 shillings, which appears to be the annual value of the property, and is pardoned for the offence committed by acquiring it without licence[17].

39 Ed. III (June 23). William Sepvanus, son of William Sepvanus knight, grants to John Gower ten pounds rent from the manor of Wygebergh (Wigborough) in Essex and from other lands held by him in the county of Essex[18].

By another deed, acknowledged in Chancery on June 25 of the same year, the same William Sepvanus makes over to John Gower all his claims upon the manor of Aldyngton, and also a rent of 14_s._ 6_d._, with one cock, thirteen hens and 140 eggs from Maplecomb[19].

42 Ed. III (1368). Thomas Syward, pewterer and citizen of London, and Joanna his wife, daughter of Sir Robert Gower, grant to John Gower and his heirs the manor of Kentwell. Dated at Melford, Wednesday before the Nativity of St. John Baptist[20].

43 Ed. III. Fine between John Gower on the one hand, and John Spenythorn with Joan his wife on the other, by which they give up all right to the Manor of Kentwell, Suffolk, except £10 rent, John Gower paying 200 marks[21].

This was confirmed in the king’s court, 3 Ric. II.

By documents of previous date[22] it may be shown that the manor of Kentwell had been held by Sir Rob. Gower, doubtless the same who is buried in Brabourne Church, who died apparently in 1349; that it was ultimately divided, with other property, between his heirs, two daughters named Katherine and Joanna, of whom one, Katherine, died in 1366. Her moiety was then combined with the other in the possession of her sister Joanna, ‘23 years old and upwards,’ then married to William Neve of Wetyng, but apparently soon afterwards to Thomas Syward. As to the transaction between John Gower and John Spenythorn with Joanna his wife, we must be content to remain rather in the dark. John Gower had in the year before acquired Kentwell in full possession for himself and his heirs, and he must in the mean time have alienated it, and now apparently acquired it again. It is hardly likely that the Joan who is here mentioned is the same as Joan daughter of Sir Robert Gower, who was married successively to William Neve and Thomas Syward. On the other hand it must be regarded as probable that the John Gower of this document is identical with the John Gower who acquired Kentwell from Thomas Syward and his wife in 1368. The confirmation in the king’s court, 3 Ric. II, was perhaps by way of verifying the title before the grant of Kentwell by Sir J. Cobham to Sir T. Clopton, 4 Ric. II.

47 Ed. III (1373). John Gower grants his manor of Kentwell in Suffolk to Sir John Cobham and his heirs; a deed executed at Otford in Kent, Thurs. Sept. 29[23].

48 Ed. III (1374). Payment of 12 marks by Sir J. Cobham on acquisition of Kentwell and half of Aldyngton from John Gower[24].

By this last document it seems pretty certain that the John Gower from whom Sir J. Cobham received Kentwell was the same person as the John Gower who acquired Aldyngton from William Septvans; and he is proved to be a relation of the poet, as well as of Sir Robert Gower, by the fact that the arms on the seal of John Gower, attached to the deed by which Kentwell was alienated, are apparently the same as those which were placed upon Sir Rob. Gower’s tomb at Brabourne, and those which we see on the poet’s tomb in Southwark[25]. These persons, then, belonged to the same family, so far as we can judge; but evidently it is not proved merely by this fact that the John Gower mentioned in the above document was identical with the poet. We have seen already that the name was not uncommon in Kent, and there are some further considerations which may lead us to hesitate before we identify John Gower the poet with the John Gower who acquired land from William Septvans. This latter transaction in fact had another side, to which attention has not hitherto been called, though Sir H. Nicolas must have been to some extent aware of it, since he has given a reference to the Rolls of Parliament, where the affair is recorded.

It must be noted then in connexion with the deeds of 39 Ed. III, by which John Gower acquired Aldyngton from William Septvans, son of Sir William Septvans, that in the next year, 40 Ed. III, there is record of a commission issued to Sir J. Cobham and others to inquire into the circumstances of this alienation, it having been alleged that William Septvans was not yet of age, and that he had obtained release of his father’s property from the king’s hands by fraudulent misrepresentation. The commission, having sat at Canterbury on the Tuesday before St. George’s day, 1366, reported that this was so, that William Septvans was in fact under twenty years old, and would not attain the age of twenty till the feast of St. Augustine the Doctor next to come (i.e. Aug. 28); that the alienations to John Gower and others had been improperly made by means of a fraudulent proof of age, and that his property ought to be reseized into the king’s hands till he was of age. Moreover the report stated that John Gower had given 24 marks only for property worth £12 a year, with a wood of the value of £100, that after his enfeoffment the said John Gower was in the company of William Septvans at Canterbury and elsewhere, until Sept. 29, inducing him to part with land and other property to various persons[26].

The property remained in the king’s hands till the year 1369, when an order was issued to the escheator of the county of Essex to put William Septvans in possession of his father’s lands, which had been confiscated to the Crown, ‘since two years and more have elapsed from the festival of St. Augustine, when he was twenty years old’ (Westm. 21 Feb.)[27]. Presumably John Gower then entered into possession of the property which he had irregularly acquired in 1365, and possibly with this may be connected a payment by John Gower of £20 at Michaelmas in the year 1368 to Richard de Ravensere[28], who seems to have been keeper of the hanaper in Chancery.

It is impossible without further proof to assume that the villainous misleader of youth who is described to us in the report of the above commission, as encouraging a young man to defraud the Crown by means of perjury, in order that he may purchase his lands from him at a nominal price, can be identical with the grave moralist of the _Speculum Hominis_ and the _Vox Clamantis_. Gower humbly confesses that he has been a great sinner, but he does not speak in the tone of a converted libertine: we cannot reconcile our idea of him with the proceedings of the disreputable character who for his own ends encouraged the young William Septvans in his dishonesty and extravagance. The two men apparently bore the same arms, and therefore they belonged to the same family, but beyond this we cannot go. It may be observed moreover that the picture suggested to Prof. Morley by the deed of 1373, executed at Otford, of the poet’s residence in the pleasant valley of the Darent, which he describes at some length[29], must in any case be dismissed as baseless. Otford was a manor held by Sir John Cobham[30], and whether the John Gower of this deed be the poet or no, it is pretty clear that the deed in question was executed there principally for this reason, and not because it was the residence of John Gower.

Dismissing all the above records as of doubtful relevancy to our subject[31], we proceed to take note of some which seem actually to refer to the poet. Of these none are earlier than the reign of Richard II. They are as follows:

1 Ric. II. (May, 1378). A record that Geoffrey Chaucer has given general power of attorney to John Gower and Richard Forester, to be used during his absence abroad by licence of the king.[32] Considering that Chaucer and Gower are known to have been personally acquainted with one another, we may fairly suppose that this appointment relates to John Gower the poet.[33]

6 Ric. II (Aug. 1382). Grant of the manors of Feltwell in Norfolk and Multon in Suffolk to John Gower, Esquire, of Kent, and to his heirs, by Guy de Rouclyf, clerk (Aug. 1), and release of warranty on the above (Aug. 3)[34].

6 Ric. II (Aug. 1382). Grant of the manors of Feltwell and Multon by John Gower to Thomas Blakelake, parson of St. Nicholas, Feltwell, and others, for his life, at a rent of £40, to be paid quarterly in the Abbey Church of Westminster[35]. This grant was repeated 7 Ric. II (Feb. 1384)[36].

The mention of Multon in the will of John Gower the poet makes it practically certain that the above documents have to do with him.

17 Ric. II (1393). Henry of Lancaster presented John Gower, Esquire, with a collar. This was mentioned by Nicolas as communicated to him by Mr. G. F. Beltz from a record in the Duchy of Lancaster Office. No further reference was given, and I have had some difficulty in finding the record. It is, however, among the accounts of the wardrobe of Henry of Lancaster for the year mentioned[37], and though not dated, it probably belongs to some time in the autumn of 1393, the neighbouring documents in the same bundle being dated October or November. It proves to be in fact an order, directed no doubt to William Loveney, clerk of the Wardrobe to the earl of Derby, for delivery of 26s. 8d. to one Richard Dancaster, for a collar, on account of another collar given by the earl of Derby to ‘an Esquire John Gower’[38]. So elsewhere in the household accounts of the earl of Derby we find a charge of 56_s._ 8_d._ for a silver collar for John Payne, butler, ‘because my lord had given his collar to another esquire beyond sea’[39]. This particular collar given to John Gower was a comparatively cheap one, worth apparently only 26_s._ 8_d._, while the silver collar to be given to John Payne is valued at 56_s._ 8_d._, and a gold collar of SS for Henry himself costs no less than £26 8_s._ 11_d._ The fact that Gower wears a collar of SS on his tomb makes it probable enough that he is the esquire mentioned in this document. It will afterwards be seen that we cannot base any argument upon the fact that the collar upon the effigy is now gilt, and apparently was so also in Leland’s time.

25 Jan. 1397-8. A licence from the bishop of Winchester for solemnizing the marriage between John Gower and Agnes Groundolf, both parishioners of St. Mary Magdalene, Southwark, without further publication of banns and in a place outside their parish church, that is to say, in the oratory of the said John Gower, within his lodging in the Priory of Saint Mary Overey in Southwark. Dated at Highclere, 25 Jan. 1397[40]. At this time then Gower was living in the Priory of St. Mary Overey, and no doubt he continued to do so until his death.

Finally, Aug. 15, 1408, the Will of John Gower, which was proved Oct. 24 of the same year[41]. His death therefore may be presumed to have taken place in October, 1408.

This will has been printed more than once, in Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments, by Todd in his _Illustrations of Gower and Chaucer_ and in the _Retrospective Review_.

The testator bequeathes his soul to the Creator, and his body to be buried in the church of the Canons of St. Mary Overes, in the place specially appointed for this purpose (‘in loco ad hoc specialiter deputato’). To the Prior of the said church he bequeathes 40_s._, to the subprior 20_s._, to each Canon who is a priest 13_s._ 4_d._, and to each of the other Canons 6_s._ 8_d._, that they may all severally pray for him the more devoutly at his funeral. To the servants of the Priory 2_s._ or 1_s._ each according to their position; to the church of St. Mary Magdalene 40_s._ for lights and ornaments, to the parish priest of that church 10_s._, ‘vt oret et orari faciat pro me’; to the chief clerk of the same church 3_s._ and to the sub-clerk 2_s._ To the following four parish churches of Southwark, viz. St. Margaret’s, St. George’s, St. Olave’s, and St. Mary Magdalene’s near Bermondsey, 13_s._ 4_d._ each for ornaments and lights, and to each parish priest or rector in charge of those churches 6_s._ 8_d._, ‘vt orent et orari pro me in suis parochiis faciant et procurent.’ To the master of the hospital of St. Thomas in Southwark 40_s._, to each priest serving there 6_s._ 8_d._ for their prayers; to each sister professed in the said hospital 3_s._ 4_d._, to each attendant on the sick 20_d._, and to each sick person in the hospital 12_d._, and the same to the sisters (where there are sisters), nurses and patients in the hospitals of St. Anthony, Elsingspitell, Bedlem without Bishopsgate, and St. Maryspitell near Westminster; to every house for lepers in the suburbs of London 10_s._, to be distributed amongst the lepers, for their prayers: to the Prior of Elsingspitell 40s., and to each Canon priest there 6_s._ 8_d._

For the service of the altar in the chapel of St. John the Baptist, ‘in qua corpus meum sepeliendum est,’ two vestments of silk, one of blue and white baudkin and the other of white silk, also a large new missal and a new chalice, all which are to be kept for ever for the service of the said altar. Moreover to the Prior and Convent the testator leaves a large book, ‘sumptibus meis nouiter compositum,’ called _Martilogium_, on the understanding that the testator shall have a special mention of himself recorded in it every day (‘sic quod in eodem specialem memoriam scriptam secundum eorum promissa cotidie habere debeo,’ not ‘debes,’ as printed).

He leaves to his wife Agnes, £100 of lawful money, also three cups, one ‘cooperculum,’ two salt-cellars and twelve spoons of silver, all the testator’s beds and chests, with the furniture of hall, pantry and kitchen and all their vessels and utensils. One chalice and one vestment are left to the altar of the oratory belonging to his apartments (‘pro altare quod est infra oratorium hospicii mei’). He desires also that his wife Agnes, if she survive him, shall have all rents due for his manors of Southwell in the county of Northampton (?) and of Multoun in the county of Suffolk, as he has more fully determined in certain other writings given under his seal.

The executors of this will are to be as follows:--Agnes his wife, Arnold Savage, knight, Roger, esquire, William Denne, Canon of the king’s chapel, and John Burton, clerk. Dated in the Priory of St. Mary Overes in Southwark, on the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin, Mccccviii.

The will was proved, Oct. 24, 1408, at Lambeth before the Archbishop of Canterbury (because the testator had property in more than one diocese of the province of Canterbury), by Agnes the testator’s wife, and administration of the property was granted to her on Nov. 7 of the same year.

It may be observed with reference to this will that the testator evidently stands already in the position of a considerable benefactor to the Priory of St. Mary Overey, in virtue of which position he has his apartments in the Priory and a place of honour assigned for his tomb in the church. He must also have established by previous arrangement the daily mass and the yearly obituary service which Berthelette speaks of as still celebrated in his time. It is evident that his benefactions were made chiefly in his life-time. There is some slight difficulty as regards the manors which are mentioned in the will. Multon in Suffolk we know already to have been in the poet’s possession; but what is this ‘Southwell’? Certainly not the well-known Southwell in Nottinghamshire, which cannot possibly have been in the possession of a private person, belonging, as it did, to the archiepiscopal see of York. Moreover, though ‘in Comitatu Nott.’ has been hitherto printed as the reading of the will, the manuscript has not this, but either ‘Notth.’ or ‘North.,’ more probably the latter. There were apparently other manors of Southwell or Suthwell in the county of Nottingham, and a manor of Suwell in Northamptonshire, but there seems to be no connexion with the name of Gower in the case of any of these. It is possible, but not very readily to be assumed, that the scribe who made the copy of the will in the register carelessly wrote ‘Southwell in Com. North.’ (or ‘Com. Notth.’) for ‘Feltwell in Com. Norff.,’ the name which is found coupled with Multon in the other records[42].