The opening words of Sir William Dugdale’s account of Coventry assert that it is a city “remarkable for antiquity, charters, rights and privileges, and favours shown by monarchs.” Though this handbook is primarily concerned with a feature of the city he does not here mention its magnificent buildings the history of these is bound up with that of the city. The connection of its great parish churches with the everyday life of the people, though commonly on a narrower stage, is more intimate than is that of a cathedral or an abbey church, but it is to be remembered that without its Monastery Coventry might never have been more than a village or small market town.

We cannot expect the records of a parish church to be as full and complete as those of a cathedral, always in touch through its bishops with the political life of the country and enjoying the services of numerous officials; or as those of a monastery, with its leisured chroniclers ever patiently recording the annals of their house, the doings of its abbots, the dealings of their house with mother church and the outside world, and all its internal life and affairs. In the case of Coventry, the unusual fulness of its city archives, the accounts and records of its guilds and companies, and the close connection of these with the church supplies us with a larger body of information than is often at the disposal of the historian of a parish church. As therefore, in narrating the story of a cathedral some account of the Diocese and its Bishops has been given, so, before describing the churches of Coventry, we shall give in outline the history of the city which for 700 years gave its name to a bishop and of the great monastery whose church was for 400 years his seat.

Though Dugdale says that it is remarkable for antiquity, Coventry as a city has no early history comparable with that of such places as York, Canterbury, Exeter, or Colchester, while its modern history is mainly a record of fluctuating trade and the rise and decline of new industries. But through all its Mediaeval period, from the eleventh century down to the Reformation, with an expiring flicker of energy in the seventeenth, there is no lack of life and colour, and its story touches every side of the national life, political, religious, and domestic. The only evidence of extreme antiquity produced by Dugdale is the suffix of its name, for “tre is British, and signifieth the same that villa in Latin doth;” while the first part may be derived from the convent or from a supposed ancient name, Cune, for the Sherborne brook.

The first date we have is 1016, when Canute invaded Mercia, burning and laying waste its towns and settlements, including a house of nuns at Coventry founded by the Virgin St. Osburg in 670, and ruled over by her.

But there is no sure starting-point until the foundation of the monastery by Earl Leofric and the Countess Godiva, the church being dedicated by Edsi, Archbishop of Canterbury, in honour of God, the Virgin Mary, St. Peter, St. Osburg, and All Saints on 4th October, 1043. Leofwin, who was first abbot with twenty-four monks under his rule, ten years after became Bishop of Lichfield The original endowment by Leofric, consisted of a half of Coventry with fifteen lordships in Warwickshire and nine in other counties, making it (says Roger de Hoveden) the wealthiest monastery of the period Besides this the pious Godiva gave all the gold and silver which she had to make crosses, images, and other adornments for the church and its services. The well-known legend of her ride through Coventry first appears in the pages of Matthew of Westminster in the early fourteenth century. The Charter of Exemption from Tolls is not in existence, and the story of Peeping Tom is the embroidery of the prurient age (1678), in which the pageant was instituted In a window of Trinity Church figures of Leofric and Godiva were set up about the time of Richard II, the Earl holding in his right hand a Charter with these words written thereon:

I Luriche for the Love of thee
Doe make Coventre Toll-free.

Abbot Leofwin was succeeded in 1053 by Leofric, nephew of the great earl; and he by a second Leofwin, who died in 1095. The first Norman bishop of Lichfield had, in compliance with the decision of a Synod (1075) in London fixing bishops’ seats in large towns, removed his to St. John’s, Chester. But his successor, Robert de Lymesey whose greed appears to have been notable in a greedy age having the king’s permission to farm the monastic revenues until the appointment of a new abbot, held it for seven years, and then, in 1102, removed his stool to Coventry. Five of his successors were bishops of Coventry only, then the style changed to Coventry and Lichfield, and so remained till 1661, when (in consequence of the disloyalty of Coventry and the sufferings of Lichfield in the royal cause) the order was reversed!

In 1836 the archdeaconry of Coventry was annexed to Worcester and its name disappeared from the title, and now it is probable that Coventry will soon again give her name to a See without dividing the honour. For the joint episcopal history the reader must be referred to the handbook in this series on Lichfield Cathedral. In this place will only be given that of the Monastery as such, and specially in connection with its “appropriated” parish churches and the City in which it stood That history is not essentially different from that of other monasteries. Though its connection with the See and the rival claims and antagonisms of the respective Chapters produced a plentiful crop of serious quarrels, its relations with the townsfolk were free from such violent episodes as occurred at Bury St. Edmunds or St. Albans. The Chapter of Lichfield consisted of secular priests (Lymesey and his next successor were married men), while the Monastery, though freed by pope and king from any episcopal or justiciary power and with the right of electing its own abbot, was, like all monastic bodies, always jealous of the encroachments of bishops, and regarded secular priests as inferior in every respect. The opinion of the laity who saw both sides may be gathered from Chaucers picture of a poore Persoun of a toun. He knew well enough how the revenue, which should have gone to the parish, its parson and its poor, went to fill the coffers of rich abbeys, to build enormous churches and furnish them sumptuously, to provide retinues of lazy knights for the train of abbot or bishop, and to prosecute lawsuits in the papal courts.

But when bishop and abbot were one and the same, the monks still claimed the right of election, and so for generations the history of the diocese is a tale of strife and bickering, and how it was that pope, king or archbishop did not perceive that it was a case of hopeless incompatibility of temper, or, perceiving it, did not dissolve the union or get it dissolved is difficult to see. Probably the injury done to religion weighed but lightly against vested interests and the power of the purse. The Monastery was, however, as Dugdale says, “the chief occasion of all the succeeding wealth and honour that accrued to Coventry”; for though the original Nunnery may have been planted in an existing settlement, or have attracted one about it, the greater wealth of the Abbey, its right to hold markets, and all its own varied requirements would quickly increase and bring prosperity to such a township, as it did at Bury St. Edmunds, Burton-on-Trent and many another.

In the thirteenth century the priory was in financial straits, through being fined by Henry III for disobedience. Later, however, he granted further privileges to the monks, among them that of embodying the merchants in a Gild In 1340 Edward III granted this privilege to the City. From an early period the manufacture of cloth and caps and bonnets was the principal trade of Coventry, and though Leland says, “the town rose by making of cloth and caps, which now decaying, the glory of the City also decayeth,” it was only destroyed by the French wars of the seventeenth century. But in 1377, when only eighteen towns in the kingdom had more than 3,000 inhabitants, and York, the second city, had only 11,000, Coventry was fourth with 7,000. Just one hundred years later 3,000 died here of the plague, one of many visitations of that terrible scourge. At the Suppression it had risen to 15,000, and soon after fell to 3,000, through loss of trade for “want of such concourse of people that numerously resorted thither before that fatal Dissolution.”

But if the town grew apace so did the Monastery. Thus, when in 1244 Earl Hugh died childless his sisters divided his estates and Coventry fell to Cecily, wife of Roger de Montalt. Six years later the Monastery lent him a large sum to take him to the Holy Land, and received from him the lordship of Coventry (excepting the Manor House and Park of Cheylesmore) and the advowson of St. Michael’s and its dependent chapels, thus becoming the landlords of nearly the whole of Coventry.

Civic powers grew with the growth of trade. Before 1218 a fair of eight days had been granted to the Priory, and later another of six days, to be held in the earl’s half of the town about the Feast of Holy Trinity. In 1285 a patent from the king is addressed to the burgesses and true men to levy tolls for paving the town; one in 1328 for tolls for inclosing the city with walls and gates, while in 1344 the city was given a corporation, with mayor, bailiffs, a common seal, and a prison. As the municipal importance and the dignity of the city increased, the desire for their visible signs strengthened, and so, in 1355, work was begun on the walls, Newgate (on the London Road) being the first gate to be built. Such undertakings proceeded slowly, and nine years later the royal permission was obtained to levy a tax for their construction, “the lands and goods of all ecclesiastical persons excepted

Twice afterwards we hear of licence being granted by Richard II to dig stone in Cheylesmore Park, first for Grey Friars Gate, and later for Spon Gate, “near his Chapel of Babelake.” The walls so built were of imposing extent and dimensions, being three yards in breadth, two and a quarter miles in circumference, and having thirty-two towers and twelve gates. Nehemiah Wharton, a Parliamentary officer in 1642, reports of the city that it is:

Environed with a wall co-equal, if not exceedinge, that of London, for breadth and height; and with gates and battlements, magnificent churches and stately streets and abundant fountains of water; altogether a place very sweetly situate and where there is no stint of venison.

To return to the monastic history. We have seen how, in the mid-thirteenth century the Monastery had become the landlord of the city; shortly before this it had been so impoverished with ceaseless quarrels with the King and the Lichfield Chapter, involving costly appeals to Rome, that the Prior was reduced to asking the hospitality of the monks of Derley for some of the brethren. A period of prosperity followed and many benefactions flowed in, including the gift of various churches by the king. It was after twenty-six years of quarrelling that the Pope, in 1224, had appointed to the bishopric Walter de Stavenby, an able and learned man. During his episcopacy the friars made their appearance in England, and by him the Franciscans were introduced at Lichfield, while at Coventry Ranulph, Earl of Chester, gave them land in Cheylesmore on which to build their oratory and house.

They were not generally welcomed by the monks. A Benedictine laments their first appearance thus Oh shame! oh worse than shame! oh barbarous pestilence! the Minor Brethren are come into England! and at Bury they were obliged to build outside a mile radius from the Abbey. The parish priests also soon found out that they were undersold in the exercise of their spiritual offices and although no doubt many badly needed awakening they were not, on that account, the more likely to welcome the intruders.

Another innovation, affecting the fortunes of the parish priest, had its beginning under the rule of Bishop Stavenby though its greatest development occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This was the foundation of Chantries designed primarily for the maintenance of a priest or priests to say mass daily or otherwise for the soul’s health of the founder, his family and forbears. The earliest we hear of are one at Lincoln, and one at Hatherton in Coventry Archdeaconry while the Bishop himself endowed one in Lichfield Cathedral. Many were perpetual endowments (L5 per annum being the average stipend), others were temporary, according to the means of those who paid for the masses for a term of years or for a fixed number of masses. Although chantry priests were often required to give regular help in the church services or taught such scholars as came to them or served outlying chapelries, the system permitted a great number to live on occasional engagements and was doubtless productive of abuses. Chaucer tells us that his poor parson was not such an one as

... left his sheep encumbered in the mire,
And ran unto London, unto Saint Poul’s,
To seeke him a chantery for souls.

The number of chantries in the different cathedrals varied very greatly, Lichfield had eighty-seven, St. Paul’s thirty-seven, York only three. Monks’ churches had few or none while in town churches they were numerous, London having one hundred and eighty, York forty-two, Coventry at least fifteen besides the twelve gild priests of the chapel of Babelake. Most were founded in connection with an existing altar, some had a special altar, at Winchester, Tewkesbury and elsewhere they were enclosed in screens between the pillars of the nave, or a special chapel was added to the church.

It was in the thirteenth century also (1267) that the monastery obtained the grant of a Merchants’ Gild; with all the privileges thereto belonging, the earliest of those which contributed so much to the renown of Coventry. These were Benefit Societies, insuring help to the “Brethren and sistren” in old age, sickness or poverty, securing to them the services of the church after death and in all cases established on a strictly religious basis and placed under the protection of a Saint, or of the Holy Trinity. The regulation and protection of trade interests, generally aiming at monopoly and the exclusion of outsiders, were later developments. But without doubt they were public-spirited bodies according to their lights, maintaining schools (as at Stratford-on-Avon) hospitals and almshouses, and giving freely on all occasions of public importance. By pageants too, they contributed to the happiness and amusement of the people as well as by the presentation of Mysteries and Moralities, to their instruction and edification. But in the eyes of the Reformers, or of grasping courtiers, all this went for nothing when weighed against the heinous offence of supporting chaplains to pray for deceased members and so (6 Edward VI) they were suppressed along with the chantries, and their property confiscated, “the very meanest and most inexcusable of the plunderings which threw discredit on the Reformation.”

Here, the city bought back everything which had belonged to the Trinity and Corpus Christi Gilds, with various almshouses and the possessions of the majority of the Chantries; while previously at the Dissolution it had bought the abbey-orchard, and mill, and the house and church of the Grey Friars.

In 1340 Edward III granted Licence to the Coventry men to form a Merchants’ Gild with leave “to make chantries, bestow alms, do other works of piety and constitute ordinances touching the same.” This was St. Mary’s Gild Two years later that of St. John Baptist was formed and a year later that of St. Katherine, the three being united into the Trinity Gild before 1359. Of the chapel (now St. John’s church) begun in 1344 by the St. John’s Gild and the “fair and stately structure for their feasts and meetings called St Mary Hall” built in 1394 by the united Gilds more will be said later. The end of the fourteenth century and the fifteenth brought to Coventry a full share in the events and movements of the time. In 1396 the duel between Hereford and Norfolk was to have taken place on Gosford Green (adjoining the city) and Richard II made the fatal mistake of banishing both combatants. At the Priory in 1404 Henry IV held his Parliament known, from the fact that no lawyers were summoned to it, as the “Parliamentum Indoctorum.” Setting itself in opposition to ecclesiastics, it proposed to supply the King’s needs by taxing church-property. As in the matter of the city walls, the church contrived to avoid bearing its share of the public burdens and the chronicler ends thus: “Much ado there was; but to conclude, the worthy Archbishop (viz. Tho Arundell) standing stoutly for the good of the Church, preserved it at that time from the storm impending.” One branch of his argument is noteworthy, that as the confiscation of the alien priories had not enriched the King by half a mark (courtiers having extorted or begged them out of his hands), so it would be were he to confiscate the temporalities of the monasteries. Henry VIII had reason to acknowledge the fulfilment of the prophecy.

Soon after this, in 1423, Coventry showed its sympathy for Lollardry when John Grace an anchorite friar came out of his cell and preached for five days in the “lyttell parke.” He was opposed by the prior of St. Mary’s and by a Grey Friar who however were attacked and nearly killed by the mob.

The royal visits which earned for Coventry the title which it still bears as its motto ‘Camera principis’ were frequent in this century. In 1436 we hear of Henry VI being there, and in 1450 he was the guest of the monastery and after hearing mass at St. Michael’s Church presented to it for an altar-hanging the robe of gold tissue he was wearing. The record in the Corporation Leet book is interesting enough to quote:

The King, then abydeng stille in the seide Priory, upon Mich’as even sent the clerke of his closet to the Churche of Sent Michel to make redy ther hys clossette, seying that the Kynge on Mich’as day wolde go on p’cession and also her ther hygh masse. The Meyre and his counsell, remembreng him in this mater, specially avysed hem to pray the Byshoppe of Wynchester to say hygh masse afore the Kynge. The Byshoppe so to do agreed withe alle hys herte; and, agayne the Kynges comeng to Sent Michel Churche, the Meyre and his Peres, cladde in skarlet gowns, wenton unto the Kynges Chambar durre, ther abydeng the Kynges comeng. The Meyre then and his pères, doeng to the Kyng due obeysaunse ... toke his mase and bere it afore the Kynge all his said bredurn goeng afore the Meyre til he com to Sent Michels and brought the Kynge to his closette. Then the seyde Byshoppe, in his pontificals arayde, with all the prestes and clerkes of the seyde Churche and of Bablake, withe copes apareld, wenton in p’cession abowte the churchyarde; the Kynge devowtely, with many odur lordes, followed the seyd p’cession bare-hedded, cladde in a gowne of gold tissu, furred with a furre of marturn sabull; the Meyre bereng the mase afore the Kynge as he didde afore, tille he com agayne to his closette. Att the whyche masse when the Kyng had offered and his lordes also, he sende the lorde Bemond, his chamburlen, to the Meyre, seying to him, “hit is the Kynges wille that ye and your bredurn com and offer;” and so they didde; and when masse was don, the Meyre and his pères brought on the Kynge to his chambur in lyke wyse as they fet hym, save only that the Meyre with his mase went afore the Kynge till he com withe in his chambur, his seyd bredurn abydeng atte the chambur durre till the Meyre cam ageyne. And at evensong tyme the same day, the Kyng, ... sende the seyde gowne and furre that he were when he went in p’cession, and gaf hit frely to God and to Sent Michell, insomuch that non of the that broughte the gowne wolde take no reward in no wyse.

In 1451 he made the city with the villages and hamlets within its liberties into a county “distinct and altogether separate from the county of Warwick for ever,” and in 1453 the King and Queen again visited the Priory. Perhaps out of gratitude for all this royal favour, Coventry adhered to the Lancastrian cause and in 1459 was chosen as the meeting place for the “Parliamentum Diabolicum,” so called from the number of attainders passed against the Yorkists. The year 1467 however saw Edward IV and his Queen keeping their Christmas here, while less than two years later her father and brother were beheaded on Gosford Green (Aug 1469).

After the king’s landing at Holderness in 1471 the king-maker, declining a contest, occupied the town for the Lancastrians, and Edward passing on to London soon after turned and defeated the earl at Barnet. After Tewkesbury Edward paid the city another visit, and in return for its disloyalty seized its liberties and franchises, and only restored them for a fine of 500 marks. Royal visits still continued Richard III came in 1483 to see the plays at the Feast of Corpus Christi; in 1485 Henry VII stayed at the mayor’s house after his victory at Bosworth Field; and in 1487 kept St. George’s Day at the Monastery, when the Prior at the service cursed, by “bell, book, and candle,” all who should question the king’s right to the throne. The importance of the Gilds is shown by the king and queen being made a brother and sister of the Trinity Gild; and the part that pageantry played in the lives of all men is seen in the many occasions on which kings and princes came hither to be entertained, not only with the plays “acted by the Grey Friars” but those in which the “hard-handed men” of, for instance, the Gild of the Sheremen and Tailors, “toil’d their unbreathed memories” in setting forth such subjects as the Birth of Christ and the Murder of the Innocents. But although Henry VIII himself was received in 1511 with pageantry and stayed at the Priory, royal favours and monastic hospitality availed neither men nor buildings when the Dissolution came. On 15th January, 1539, Thomas Camswell, the last Prior of St. Mary’s, surrendered “The Prior,” reported Dr. London, the king’s commissioner, “is a sad, honest priest as his neighbours do report him, and is a Bachelor of Divinity. He gave his house unto the king’s grace willingly and so in like manner did all his brethren.” The Doctor asks for good pensions for the dispossessed, not on the plea of justice but so that “others perceiving that these men be liberally handled will with better will not only surrender their houses, but also leave the same in the better state to the King’s use.”

The yearly revenue had been certified in the valuation at L731 19s 5d Deducting a Fee-Ferme rent to the Crown, reserved by Roger de Montalt, and other annual payments, the clear remainder was L499 7s 4d Bishop Rowland Lee, writing to “my singular good Lord Cromwell,” implies that he had a promise from him to spare the church. “My good Lord,” he says, “help me and the City both in this and that the church may stand, whereby I may keep my name, and the City have commodity and ease to their desire, which shall follow if by your goodness it might be brought to a collegiate church, as Lichfield, and so that fair City shall have a perpetual comfort of the same, as knoweth the Holy Trinity, who preserve your Lordship in honour to your heart’s comfort.”

But his entreaties, and those of the mayor and corporation, were all in vain, the church and monastic buildings were dismantled and destroyed piecemeal, and like so many other magnificent structures became a mere quarry for mean buildings and the mending of roads.

The site having been granted by Henry VIII to two gentlemen named Combes and Stansfield, passed soon into the hands of John Hales, the founder of the Free School, and in Elizabeth’s reign was purchased by the Corporation.

The changes in religious opinion of the successive sovereigns were felt here by many poor victims. Seven persons were burnt in 1519 for having in their possession the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the Creed in English, and for refusing to obey the Pope or his agents, opinions and acts that would have been counted meritorious twenty years later. In 1555 Queen Mary burnt three Protestants in the old quarry in Little Park Laurence Saunders, a well-known preacher, Robert Glover, M.A., and Cornelius Bongey.

Ten years after this Queen Elizabeth’s visit was the occasion of much pageantry and performing of plays by the Tanners’, Drapers’, Smiths’, and Weavers’ Companies, and in 1575 the men of Coventry gave their play of “Hock Tuesday” before her at Kenilworth Castle. In 1566 Queen Mary of Scots was in ward here, in the mayoress’ parlour, and in 1569 at the Bull Inn.

Coming down to the opening of the Civil War we find that a few days before the raising of his standard at Nottingham Charles summoned the city to admit him with three hundred cavaliers, and received for answer that it was quite ready to receive his Majesty with no more than two hundred Whereupon he retired in displeasure, and reappeared some days later with the threat to lay the city in ruins if it should persist in its disloyalty. The townsfolk being in no mind to receive a garrison, the King planted cannon against Newgate and broke down the gates but was met with a fierce musquetry fire from the walls, followed up by a vigorous sally, in which the citizens did much execution and took two cannon.

To prevent the like happening again, the walls were in 1662 breached in many places and made incapable of defence. Just one hundred years later New-gate was taken down, and others followed from time to time, until now there are left only the remains of two of the lesser ones Cook Street Gate, a crumbling shell , and the adjacent Swanswell or Priory Gate, blocked up and used as a dwelling.

In 1771 was finally destroyed the famous Cross which had been built, 1541-3, by Sir William Hollis, once Lord Mayor of London, who came of a Coventry family. It was described by Dugdale as “one of the chief things wherein this City most glories, which for workmanship and beauty is inferior to none in England” A few relics of it exist in St. Mary Hall, a statue of Henry VI, and, in the oriel, two smaller figures. So too does the very interesting contract for its building, which shows how much was left to the craftsman’s pride in his work and how little he was trammelled by conditions, save that the work was to be “finished in all points, as well in imagery work, pictures, and finials, according to the due form and proportion of the Cross at Abingdon.”

Another building, which was destroyed in 1820, was the Pilgrims’ Rest, a fine timbered house of three storeys, “supposed,” as the inscription upon it records, “to have been the hostel or inn for the maintenance and entertainment of the palmers and other visitors to the Priory.” Some pieces of carved work were patched together in the windows of the inn built on its site and there remain.

The modern history of Coventry, consisting of the ordinary events and vicissitudes of civic life and the changes and fluctuations in its trades, apart from that of its parish churches which is elsewhere given, does not come within the scope of this handbook.