The Customs of Old England | Page 8

her civil rights, she devises estates, executes awards, and composes
family differences. This is quite in the spirit of St. Paul's words: "If any
widows have children or nephews, let them learn first to show piety at
home, and to requite their parents, for that is good and acceptable to
God."
Allusion has been made to the ring as the symbol of the spiritual
espousal. As such it was the object of peculiar reverence, and its
destination was frequently specified in the vowess's will. Thus in
"Testamenta Vetusta" we find the abstract of the will of Alice, widow

of Sir Thomas West, dated 1395, in which the lady bequeaths "the ring
with which I was spoused to God" to her son Sir Thomas. In like
manner Katherine Riplingham leaves a gold ring set with a
diamond--the ring with which she was sacred--to her daughter Alice
Saint John. To some vowesses the custody even of a son or daughter
appeared unworthy of so precious a relic; and thus we learn that Lady
Joan Danvers, by her will dated 1453, gave her spousal ring to the
image of the Crucifix near the north door of St. Paul's, while Lady
Margaret Davy presented hers to the image of Our Lady of
Walsingham.
In certain instances the formality of episcopal benediction was
dispensed with, a simple promise sufficing. As a case in point, John
Brackenbury, by his will dated 1487, bequeathed to his mother certain
real estate subject to the condition that she did not marry again--a
condition to which she assented before the parson and parish of
Thymmylbe. "If," says the testator, "she keep not that promise, I will
that she be content with that which was my father's will, which she had
every penny." But, in compacts or wills in which the married parties
themselves were interested, the vow seems to have been usually
exacted. Wives sometimes engaged with their husbands to make the
vow; and the will of William Herbert, Knight, Earl of Pembroke, dated
July 27, 1469, contains an affecting reminder of duty--"And, wife, that
you may remember your promise to take the order of widowhood, so
that you may be the better maistres of your owen, to perform my will,
and to help my children, as I love and trust you," etc.
Husbands left chattels to their wives provided that they took the vow of
chastity. The will of Sir Gilbert Denys, Knight, of Syston, dated 1422,
sets out: "If Margaret, my wife, will after my death vow a vow of
chastity, I give her all my moveable goods, she paying my debts and
providing for my children; and if she will not vow the vow of chastity,
I desire my goods may be divided and distributed in three equal parts."
On like terms wives were appointed executrices. William Edlington,
Esq., of Castle Carlton, in his will dated June 11, 1466, declares: "I
make Christian, my wife, my sole executor on this condition, that she
take the mantle soon after my decease; and in case she will not take the

mantle and the ring, I will that William my son [and other persons
named] be my executors, and she to have a third part of all my goods
moveable."
Such is the frailty of human nature that even when widows accepted the
obligation of faith and chastity in the most solemn manner, the vow
was occasionally broken. This will hardly excite surprise when we
consider the youth, or comparative youth, of some of the postulants.
Mary, the widow of Lewis, King of Hungary, was only twenty-three at
the time of her profession. Our English annals yield striking instances
of promises followed by repentance. Thus Eleanor, third daughter of
King John, "on the death of her first husband, the Earl of Pembroke,
1231, in the first transports of her grief, made in public a solemn vow
in the presence of Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, that she would
never again become a wife, but remain a true spouse of Christ, and
received a ring in confirmation, which she, however, broke, much to
the indignation of a strong party of the laity and clergy of England, on
her marriage with Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester." Another
delinquent was Lady Elizabeth Juliers, Countess of Kent. When her
first husband died, in 1354, she took a vow of chastity before William
de Edyndon, Archbishop of Canterbury. Six years later she was wedded
privately and without licence to Sir Eustace Dabridgecourt, Knight. As
the result, the Archbishop of Canterbury instituted proceedings against
her, and she was condemned to severe penance for the remainder of her
life. In the light of these examples it is unnecessary to observe that the
infraction of a vow so strict and stringent brought the utmost discredit
on any widow who might