Statistical Mechanics: Fourth Edition R.K.

Pathria pdf download

https://ebookmass.com/product/statistical-mechanics-fourth-
edition-r-k-pathria/

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookmass.com

We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebookmass.com
for more options!.

Statistical Mechanics: Fourth Edition. Instructor's Manual

R.K. Pathria

https://ebookmass.com/product/statistical-mechanics-fourth-edition-
instructors-manual-r-k-pathria/

Foundations of Statistical Mechanics Roman Frigg

https://ebookmass.com/product/foundations-of-statistical-mechanics-
roman-frigg/

Statistical mechanics : entropy, order parameters, and

complexity 2nd Edition Sethna

https://ebookmass.com/product/statistical-mechanics-entropy-order-
parameters-and-complexity-2nd-edition-sethna/

Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Molecular Simulation 2nd

Edition Mark E. Tuckerman

https://ebookmass.com/product/statistical-mechanics-theory-and-
molecular-simulation-2nd-edition-mark-e-tuckerman/
An Introduction to Statistical Mechanics and
Thermodynamics 2nd Edition Robert H. Swendsen

https://ebookmass.com/product/an-introduction-to-statistical-
mechanics-and-thermodynamics-2nd-edition-robert-h-swendsen/

Orbital Mechanics for Engineering Students Fourth Edition.

Edition Howard D. Curtis

https://ebookmass.com/product/orbital-mechanics-for-engineering-
students-fourth-edition-edition-howard-d-curtis/

Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, Fourth

Edition 4th Edition – Ebook PDF Version

https://ebookmass.com/product/fracture-mechanics-fundamentals-and-
applications-fourth-edition-4th-edition-ebook-pdf-version/

Lithium-Sulfur Batteries: Materials, Challengess and

Applications Gupta R.K.

https://ebookmass.com/product/lithium-sulfur-batteries-materials-
challengess-and-applications-gupta-r-k/

Riot: A Monster Rockstar Romance (Monsters of Metal Book

2) R.K. Pierce

https://ebookmass.com/product/riot-a-monster-rockstar-romance-
monsters-of-metal-book-2-r-k-pierce/
Statistical Mechanics
Statistical Mechanics
Fourth Edition
R.K. Pathria
Department of Physics
University of California San Diego
La Jolla, CA, United States

Paul D. Beale
Department of Physics
University of Colorado Boulder
Boulder, CO, United States
Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier
125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom
525 B Street, Suite 1650, San Diego, CA 92101, United States
50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Previous editions copyrighted 1972, 1996, 2011
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our
arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be
found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may
be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our
understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any
information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be
mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any
injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or
operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-08-102692-2

Cover: The image depicts a high-level wavefunction of a quantum Sinai billiard created using an algorithm by Kaufman et
al. (1999) and IDL software (Exelis Visual Information Solutions, Boulder, Colorado).

For information on all Academic Press publications

visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Katey Birtcher

Editorial Project Manager: Susan Ikeda
Publishing Services Manager: Deepthi Unni
Production Project Manager: Janish Paul
Designer: Ryan Cook
Typeset by VTeX
Contents

Preface to the fourth edition xiii

Preface to the third edition xv
Preface to the second edition xix
Preface to the first edition xxi
Historical introduction xxiii

1. The statistical basis of thermodynamics 1

1.1. The macroscopic and the microscopic states 1
1.2. Contact between statistics and thermodynamics:
physical significance of the number (N, V , E) 3
1.3. Further contact between statistics and thermodynamics 6
1.4. The classical ideal gas 9
1.5. The entropy of mixing and the Gibbs paradox 16
1.6. The “correct” enumeration of the microstates 20
Problems 22

2. Elements of ensemble theory 25

2.1. Phase space of a classical system 25
2.2. Liouville’s theorem and its consequences 27
2.3. The microcanonical ensemble 30
2.4. Examples 32
2.5. Quantum states and the phase space 35
Problems 37

3. The canonical ensemble 39

3.1. Equilibrium between a system and a heat reservoir 40
v
vi Contents

3.2. A system in the canonical ensemble 41

3.3. Physical significance of the various statistical quantities
in the canonical ensemble 50
3.4. Alternative expressions for the partition function 53
3.5. The classical systems 54
3.6. Energy fluctuations in the canonical ensemble:
correspondence with the microcanonical ensemble 58
3.7. Two theorems – the “equipartition” and the “virial” 62
3.8. A system of harmonic oscillators 65
3.9. The statistics of paramagnetism 70
3.10. Thermodynamics of magnetic systems:
negative temperatures 77
Problems 83

4. The grand canonical ensemble 93

4.1. Equilibrium between a system and a particle–energy
reservoir 93
4.2. A system in the grand canonical ensemble 95
4.3. Physical significance of the various statistical quantities 97
4.4. Examples 100
4.5. Density and energy fluctuations in the grand canonical
ensemble: correspondence with other ensembles 105
4.6. Thermodynamic phase diagrams 107
4.7. Phase equilibrium and the Clausius–Clapeyron equation 111
Problems 113

5. Formulation of quantum statistics 117

5.1. Quantum-mechanical ensemble theory:
the density matrix 118
5.2. Statistics of the various ensembles 122
5.3. Examples 126
5.4. Systems composed of indistinguishable particles 131
 Contents vii

5.5. The density matrix and the partition function of a

system of free particles 136
5.6. Eigenstate thermalization hypothesis 142
Problems 151

6. The theory of simple gases 155

6.1. An ideal gas in a quantum-mechanical
microcanonical ensemble 155
6.2. An ideal gas in other quantum-mechanical ensembles 160
6.3. Statistics of the occupation numbers 163
6.4. Kinetic considerations 166
6.5. Gaseous systems composed of molecules with
internal motion 169
6.6. Chemical equilibrium 184
Problems 187

7. Ideal Bose systems 195

7.1. Thermodynamic behavior of an ideal Bose gas 196
7.2. Bose–Einstein condensation in ultracold atomic gases 207
7.3. Thermodynamics of the blackbody radiation 216
7.4. The field of sound waves 221
7.5. Inertial density of the sound field 228
7.6. Elementary excitations in liquid helium II 231
Problems 239

8. Ideal Fermi systems 247

8.1. Thermodynamic behavior of an ideal Fermi gas 247
8.2. Magnetic behavior of an ideal Fermi gas 254
8.3. The electron gas in metals 263
8.4. Ultracold atomic Fermi gases 274
8.5. Statistical equilibrium of white dwarf stars 275
8.6. Statistical model of the atom 280
viii Contents

Problems 285

9. Thermodynamics of the early universe 291

9.1. Observational evidence of the Big Bang 291
9.2. Evolution of the temperature of the universe 296
9.3. Relativistic electrons, positrons, and neutrinos 298
9.4. Neutron fraction 301
9.5. Annihilation of the positrons and electrons 303
9.6. Neutrino temperature 305
9.7. Primordial nucleosynthesis 306
9.8. Recombination 309
9.9. Epilogue 311
Problems 312

10. Statistical mechanics of interacting systems:

the method of cluster expansions 315
10.1. Cluster expansion for a classical gas 315
10.2. Virial expansion of the equation of state 323
10.3. Evaluation of the virial coefficients 325
10.4. General remarks on cluster expansions 331
10.5. Exact treatment of the second virial coefficient 336
10.6. Cluster expansion for a quantum-mechanical system 341
10.7. Correlations and scattering 347
Problems 356

11. Statistical mechanics of interacting systems:

the method of quantized fields 361
11.1. The formalism of second quantization 361
11.2. Low-temperature behavior of an imperfect Bose gas 371
11.3. Low-lying states of an imperfect Bose gas 377
11.4. Energy spectrum of a Bose liquid 382
 Contents ix

11.5. States with quantized circulation 386

11.6. Quantized vortex rings and the breakdown
of superfluidity 392
11.7. Low-lying states of an imperfect Fermi gas 395
11.8. Energy spectrum of a Fermi liquid: Landau’s
phenomenological theory 401
11.9. Condensation in Fermi systems 408
Problems 410

12. Phase transitions: criticality, universality, and scaling 417

12.1. General remarks on the problem of condensation 418
12.2. Condensation of a van der Waals gas 423
12.3. A dynamical model of phase transitions 427
12.4. The lattice gas and the binary alloy 433
12.5. Ising model in the zeroth approximation 436
12.6. Ising model in the first approximation 443
12.7. The critical exponents 451
12.8. Thermodynamic inequalities 454
12.9. Landau’s phenomenological theory 458
12.10. Scaling hypothesis for thermodynamic functions 462
12.11. The role of correlations and fluctuations 465
12.12. The critical exponents ν and η 472
12.13. A final look at the mean field theory 476
Problems 479

13. Phase transitions: exact (or almost exact) results

for various models 487
13.1. One-dimensional fluid models 487
13.2. The Ising model in one dimension 492
13.3. The n-vector models in one dimension 498
13.4. The Ising model in two dimensions 504
x Contents

13.5. The spherical model in arbitrary dimensions 524

13.6. The ideal Bose gas in arbitrary dimensions 535
13.7. Other models 542
Problems 546

14. Phase transitions: the renormalization group approach 555

14.1. The conceptual basis of scaling 556
14.2. Some simple examples of renormalization 559
14.3. The renormalization group: general formulation 568
14.4. Applications of the renormalization group 575
14.5. Finite-size scaling 586
Problems 595

15. Fluctuations and nonequilibrium statistical mechanics 599

15.1. Equilibrium thermodynamic fluctuations 600
15.2. The Einstein–Smoluchowski theory of the
Brownian motion 603
15.3. The Langevin theory of the Brownian motion 609
15.4. Approach to equilibrium: the Fokker–Planck equation 619
15.5. Spectral analysis of fluctuations:
the Wiener–Khintchine theorem 625
15.6. The fluctuation–dissipation theorem 633
15.7. The Onsager relations 642
15.8. Exact equilibrium free energy differences from
nonequilibrium measurements 648
Problems 653

16. Computer simulations 659

16.1. Introduction and statistics 659
16.2. Monte Carlo simulations 662
16.3. Molecular dynamics 665
16.4. Particle simulations 668
Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
 Contents xi

16.5. Computer simulation caveats 672

Problems 673
Appendices 675
A. Influence of boundary conditions on the
distribution of quantum states 675
B. Certain mathematical functions 677
C. “Volume” and “surface area” of an n-dimensional
sphere of radius R 684
D. On Bose–Einstein functions 686
E. On Fermi–Dirac functions 689
F. A rigorous analysis of the ideal Bose gas and
the onset of Bose–Einstein condensation 692
G. On Watson functions 697
H. Thermodynamic relationships 698
I. Pseudorandom numbers 706
Bibliography 711
Index 727
Preface to the fourth edition
The third edition of Statistical mechanics was published in 2011. The new material added
at that time focused on Bose–Einstein condensation and degenerate Fermi gas behavior
in ultracold atomic gases, finite-size scaling behavior of Bose–Einstein condensates, ther-
modynamics of the early universe, chemical equilibrium, Monte Carlo and molecular dy-
namics simulations, correlation functions and scattering, the fluctuation–dissipation the-
orem and the dynamical structure factor, phase equilibrium and the Clausius–Clapeyron
equation, exact solutions of one-dimensional fluid models, exact solution of the two-
dimensional Ising model on a finite lattice, pseudorandom number generators, dozens
of new homework problems, and a new appendix with a summary of thermodynamic as-
semblies and associated statistical ensembles.
The new topics added to this fourth edition are:
• Eigenstate thermalization hypothesis: Mark Srednicki, Joshua Deutsch, and others dis-
covered that it is possible for nonintegrable isolated macroscopic quantum many-body
systems to equilibrate. This overturned the decades-long presumption that equilib-
rium behavior of isolated many-body systems was precluded because of the unitary
time evolution of pure states. Even though an isolated system as a whole will not equi-
librate, most macroscopic many-body systems will display equilibrium behavior for
local observables, with the system as a whole serving as the reservoir for each subsys-
tem. This behavior is the quantum equivalent to ergodic behavior in classical systems.
The exceptions to this are integrable systems and strongly random systems that display
many-body localization.
• Exact equilibrium free energy differences from nonequilibrium measurements: Christo-
pher Jarzynski and Gavin Crooks showed that the average of the quantity exp(−βW )
along nonequilibrium paths, where W is the external work done on the system during
the transformation, depends only on equilibrium free energy differences, indepen-
dent of the nonequilibrium path chosen or how far out of equilibrium the system is
driven. This property is now used to measure equilibrium free energy differences using
nonequilibrium transformations in experiments on physical systems and in computer
simulations of model systems.
• We have rewritten Section 5.1 on the density matrix in coordinate-independent form
using Hilbert space vectors and Dirac bra–ket notation.
• We have expanded Appendix H to include both electric and magnetic free energies and
have rewritten equations involving magnetic fields throughout the text to express them
in SI units.
• We have ensured that all of the edits and corrections we made in the 2014 “second print-
ing” of the third edition were included in this edition.
xiii
xiv Preface to the fourth edition

• We have added over 30 new end-of-chapter problems.

• We have made minor edits and corrections throughout the text.
R.K.P. expressed his indebtedness to many people at the time of the publication of the
first and second editions so, at this time, he simply reiterates his gratitude to them.
P.D.B. would like to thank his friends and colleagues at the University of Colorado
Boulder for the many conversations he has had with them over the years about physics
research and pedagogy, many of whom assisted him with the third or fourth edition: Al-
lan Franklin, Noel Clark, Tom DeGrand, John Price, Chuck Rogers, Michael Dubson, Leo
Radzihovsky, Victor Gurarie, Michael Hermele, Rahul Nandkishore, Dan Dessau, Dmitry
Reznik, Minhyea Lee, Matthew Glaser, Joseph MacLennan, Kyle McElroy, Murray Holland,
Heather Lewandowski, John Cumalat, Shantha de Alwis, Alex Conley, Jamie Nagle, Paul
Romatschke, Noah Finkelstein, Kathy Perkins, John Blanco, Kevin Stenson, Loren Hough,
Meredith Betterton, Ivan Smalyukh, Colin West, Eleanor Hodby, and Eric Cornell. In ad-
dition to those, special thanks are also due to other colleagues who have read sections of
the third or fourth edition manuscript, or offered valuable suggestions: Edmond Meyer,
Matthew Grau, Andrew Sisler, Michael Foss-Feig, Peter Joot, Jeff Justice, Stephen H. White,
and Harvey Leff.
P.D.B. would like to express his special gratitude to Raj Kumar Pathria for the honor of
being asked to join him as coauthor at the time of publication of the third edition of his
highly regarded textbook. He and his wife Erika treasure the friendships they have devel-
oped with Raj and his lovely wife Raj Kumari Pathria.
P.D.B. dedicates this edition to Erika, for everything.

R.K.P.
P.D.B.
Preface to the third edition
The second edition of Statistical mechanics was published in 1996. The new material
added at that time focused on phase transitions, critical phenomena, and the renormal-
ization group – topics that had undergone vast transformations during the years following
the publication of the first edition in 1972. In 2009, R. K. Pathria (R.K.P.) and the publish-
ers agreed it was time for a third edition to incorporate the important changes that had
occurred in the field since the publication of the second edition and invited Paul D. Beale
(P.D.B.) to join as coauthor. The two authors agreed on the scope of the additions and
changes and P.D.B. wrote the first draft of the new sections except for Appendix F, which
was written by R.K.P. Both authors worked very closely together editing the drafts and fi-
nalizing this third edition.
The new topics added to this edition are:
• Bose–Einstein condensation and degenerate Fermi gas behavior in ultracold atomic
gases: Sections 7.2, 8.4, 11.2.A, and 11.9. The creation of Bose–Einstein condensates in
ultracold gases during the 1990s and in degenerate Fermi gases during the 2000s led
to a revolution in atomic, molecular, and optical physics, and provided a valuable link
to the quantum behavior of condensed matter systems. Several of P.D.B.’s friends and
colleagues in physics and JILA at the University of Colorado have been leaders in this
exciting new field.
• Finite-size scaling behavior of Bose–Einstein condensates: Appendix F. We develop an
analytical theory for the behavior of Bose–Einstein condensates in a finite system,
which provides a rigorous justification for singling out the ground state in the calcu-
lation of the properties of the Bose–Einstein condensate.
• Thermodynamics of the early universe: Chapter 9. The sequence of thermodynamic
transitions that the universe went through shortly after the Big Bang left behind mile-
posts that astrophysicists have exploited to look back into the universe’s earliest mo-
ments. Major advances in space-based astronomy beginning around 1990 have pro-
vided a vast body of observational data about the early evolution of the universe. These
include the Hubble Space Telescope’s deep space measurements of the expansion of
the universe, the Cosmic Background Explorer’s precise measurements of the temper-
ature of the cosmic microwave background, and the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe’s mapping of the angular variations in the cosmic microwave background. These
data sets have led to precise determinations of the age of the universe and its compo-
sition and early evolution. Coincidentally, P.D.B.’s faculty office is located in the tower
named after George Gamow, a member of the faculty at the University of Colorado in
the 1950s and 1960s and a leader in the theory of nucleosynthesis in the early universe.
xv
xvi Preface to the third edition

• Chemical equilibrium: Section 6.6. Chemical potentials determine the conditions nec-
essary for chemical equilibrium. This is an important topic in its own right, but also
plays a critical role in our discussion of the thermodynamics of the early universe in
Chapter 9.
• Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics simulations: Chapter 16. Computer simulations
have become an important tool in modern statistical mechanics. We provide here a
brief introduction to Monte Carlo and molecular dynamics techniques and algorithms.
• Correlation functions and scattering: Section 10.7. Correlation functions are central to
the understanding of thermodynamic phases, phase transitions, and critical phenom-
ena. The differences between thermodynamic phases are often most conspicuous in
the behavior of correlation functions and the closely related static structure factors. We
have collected discussions from the second edition into one place and added new ma-
terial.
• The fluctuation–dissipation theorem and the dynamical structure factor: Sections 15.3.A,
15.6.A, and 15.6.B. The fluctuation–dissipation theorem describes the relation be-
tween natural equilibrium thermodynamic fluctuations in a system and the response
of the system to small disturbances from equilibrium, and it is one of the corner-
stones of nonequilibrium statistical mechanics. We have expanded the discussion of
the fluctuation–dissipation theorem to include a derivation of the key results from lin-
ear response theory, a discussion of the dynamical structure factor, and analysis of the
Brownian motion of harmonic oscillators that provides useful practical examples.
• Phase equilibrium and the Clausius–Clapeyron equation: Sections 4.6 and 4.7. Much of
the text is devoted to using statistical mechanics methods to determine the properties
of thermodynamic phases and phase transitions. This brief overview of phase equilib-
rium and the structure of phase diagrams lays the groundwork for later discussions.
• Exact solutions of one-dimensional fluid models: Section 13.1. One-dimensional fluid
models with short-range interactions do not exhibit phase transitions but they do dis-
play short-range correlations and other behaviors typical of dense fluids.
• Exact solution of the two-dimensional Ising model on a finite lattice: Section 13.4.A. This
solution entails an exact counting of the microstates of the microcanonical ensemble
and provides analytical results for the energy distribution, internal energy, and heat
capacity of the system. This solution also describes the finite-size scaling behavior of
the Ising model near the transition point and provides an exact framework that can be
used to test Monte Carlo methods.
• Summary of thermodynamic assemblies and associated statistical ensembles: Appen-
dix H. We provide a summary of thermodynamic relations and their connections to
statistical mechanical ensembles. Most of this information can be found elsewhere in
the text, but we thought it would be helpful to provide a rundown of these important
connections in one place.
• Pseudorandom number generators: Appendix I. Pseudorandom number generators are
indispensable in computer simulations. We provide simple algorithms for generating
uniform and Gaussian pseudorandom numbers and discuss their properties.
• Dozens of new homework problems.
 Preface to the third edition xvii

The remainder of the text is largely unchanged.

The completion of this task has left us indebted to many a friend and colleague. R.K.P.
has already expressed his indebtedness to a good number of people on two previous oc-
casions – in 1972 and in 1996 – so, at this time, he will simply reiterate the many words of
gratitude he has already written. In addition though, he would like to thank Paul Beale for
his willingness to be a partner in this project and for his diligence in carrying out the task
at hand both arduously and meticulously.
On his part, P.D.B. would like to thank his friends at the University of Colorado Boul-
der for the many conversations he has had with them over the years about research and
pedagogy of statistical mechanics, especially Noel Clark, Tom DeGrand, John Price, Chuck
Rogers, Mike Dubson, and Leo Radzihovsky. He would also like to thank the faculty of the
Department of Physics for according him the honor of serving as the chair of this outstand-
ing department.
Special thanks are also due to many friends and colleagues who have read sections of
the manuscript and have offered many valuable suggestions and corrections, especially
Tom DeGrand, Michael Shull, David Nesbitt, Jamie Nagle, Matt Glaser, Murray Holland,
Leo Radzihovsky, Victor Gurarie, Edmond Meyer, Matthew Grau, Andrew Sisler, Michael
Foss-Feig, Allan Franklin, Shantha deAlwis, Dmitri Reznik, and Eric Cornell.
P.D.B. would like to take this opportunity to extend his thanks and best wishes to
Professor Michael E. Fisher, whose graduate statistical mechanics course at Cornell intro-
duced him to this elegant field. He would also like to express his gratitude to Raj Pathria for
inviting him to be part of this project, and for the fun and engaging discussions they have
had during the preparation of this new edition. Raj’s thoughtful counsel always proved to
be valuable in improving the text.
P.D.B.’s greatest thanks go to Matthew, Melanie, and Erika for their love and support.

R.K.P.
P.D.B.
Preface to the second edition
The first edition of this book was prepared over the years 1966 to 1970, when the subject of
phase transitions was undergoing a complete overhaul. The concepts of scaling and uni-
versality had just taken root, but the renormalization group approach, which converted
these concepts into a calculational tool, was still obscure. Not surprisingly, my text of that
time could not do justice to these emerging developments. Over the intervening years I
have felt increasingly conscious of this rather serious deficiency in the text; so when the
time came to prepare a new edition, my major effort went toward correcting that defi-
ciency.
Despite the aforementioned shortcoming, the first edition of this book has continued
to be popular since its original publication in 1972. I, therefore, decided not to tinker with
it unnecessarily. Nevertheless, to make room for the new material, I had to remove some
sections from the present text, which, I felt, were not being used by the readers as much as
the rest of the book was. This may turn out to be a disappointment to some individuals but
I trust they will understand the logic behind it and, if need be, I will go back to a copy of the
first edition for reference. I, on my part, hope that a good majority of the users will not be
inconvenienced by these deletions. As for the material retained, I have confined myself to
making only editorial changes. The subject of phase transitions and critical phenomena,
which has been my main focus of revision, has been treated in three new chapters that
provide a respectable coverage of the subject and essentially bring the book up to date.
These chapters, along with a collection of more than 60 homework problems, will, I believe,
enhance the usefulness of the book for both students and instructors.
The completion of this task has left me indebted to many. First of all, as mentioned in
the preface to the first edition, I owe a considerable debt to those who have written on this
subject before and from whose writings I have benefited greatly. It is difficult to thank them
all individually; the bibliography at the end of the book is an obvious tribute to them. As for
definitive help, I am most grateful to Dr. Surjit Singh, who advised me expertly and assisted
me generously in the selection of the material that comprises Chapters 11 to 13 of the new
text; without his help, the final product might not have been as coherent as it now appears
to be. On the technical side, I am very thankful to Mrs. Debbie Guenther, who typed the
manuscript with exceptional skill and proofread it with extreme care; her task was clearly
an arduous one but she performed it with good cheer – for which I admire her greatly.
Finally, I wish to express my heartfelt appreciation for my wife, who let me devote
myself fully to this task over a rather long period of time and waited for its completion
ungrudgingly.

R.K.P.

xix
Preface to the first edition
This book has arisen out of the notes of lectures that I gave to the graduate students at
McMaster University (1964–1965), the University of Alberta (1965–1967), the University of
Waterloo (1969–1971), and the University of Windsor (1970–1971). While the subject mat-
ter, in its finer details, has changed considerably during the preparation of the manuscript,
the style of presentation remains the same as followed in these lectures.
Statistical mechanics is an indispensable tool for studying physical properties of
matter “in bulk” on the basis of the dynamical behavior of its “microscopic” constituents.
Founded on the well-laid principles of mathematical statistics on the one hand and Hamil-
tonian mechanics on the other, the formalism of statistical mechanics has proved to be of
immense value to the physics of the last 100 years. In view of the universality of its appeal,
a basic knowledge of this subject is considered essential for every student of physics, ir-
respective of the area(s) in which he/she may be planning to specialize. To provide this
knowledge, in a manner that brings out the essence of the subject with due rigor but with-
out undue pain, is the main purpose of this work.
The fact that the dynamics of a physical system is represented by a set of quantum states
and the assertion that the thermodynamics of the system is determined by the multiplicity
of these states constitute the basis of our treatment. The fundamental connection between
the microscopic and the macroscopic descriptions of a system is uncovered by investi-
gating the conditions for equilibrium between two physical systems in thermodynamic
contact. This is best accomplished by working in the spirit of the quantum theory right
from the beginning; the entropy and other thermodynamic variables of the system then
follow in a most natural manner. After the formalism is developed, one may (if the situa-
tion permits) go over to the limit of the classical statistics. This message may not be new,
but here I have tried to follow it as far as is reasonably possible in a textbook. In doing so, an
attempt has been made to keep the level of presentation fairly uniform so that the reader
does not encounter fluctuations of too wild a character.
This text is confined to the study of the equilibrium states of physical systems and is
intended to be used for a graduate course in statistical mechanics. Within these bounds,
the coverage is fairly wide and provides enough material for tailoring a good two-semester
course. The final choice always rests with the individual instructor; I, for one, regard Chap-
ters 1 to 9 (minus a few sections from these chapters plus a few sections from Chapter 13)
as the “essential part” of such a course. The contents of Chapters 10 to 12 are relatively
advanced (not necessarily difficult); the choice of material out of these chapters will de-
pend entirely on the taste of the instructor. To facilitate the understanding of the subject,
the text has been illustrated with a large number of graphs; to assess the understanding, a
large number of problems have been included. I hope these features are found useful.
xxi
xxii Preface to the first edition

I feel that one of the most essential aspects of teaching is to arouse the curiosity of the
students in their subject, and one of the most effective ways of doing this is to discuss with
them (in a reasonable measure, of course) the circumstances that led to the emergence
of the subject. One would, therefore, like to stop occasionally to reflect upon the manner
in which the various developments really came about; at the same time, one may not like
the flow of the text to be hampered by the discontinuities arising from an intermittent
addition of historical material. Accordingly, I decided to include in this account a historical
introduction to the subject which stands separate from the main text. I trust the readers,
especially the instructors, will find it of interest.
For those who wish to continue their study of statistical mechanics beyond the confines
of this book, a fairly extensive bibliography is included. It contains a variety of references
– old as well as new, experimental as well as theoretical, technical as well as pedagogical. I
hope that this will make the book useful for a wider readership.
The completion of this task has left me indebted to many. Like most authors, I owe con-
siderable debt to those who have written on the subject before. The bibliography at the
end of the book is the most obvious tribute to them; nevertheless, I would like to mention,
in particular, the works of the Ehrenfests, Fowler, Guggenheim, Schrödinger, Rushbrooke,
ter Haar, Hill, Landau and Lifshitz, Huang, and Kubo, who have been my constant refer-
ence for several years and have influenced my understanding of the subject in a variety of
ways. As for the preparation of the text, I am indebted to Robert Teshima, who drew most
of the graphs and checked most of the problems, to Ravindar Bansal, Vishwa Mittar, and
Surjit Singh, who went through the entire manuscript and made several suggestions that
helped me unkink the exposition at a number of points, to Mary Annetts, who typed the
manuscript with exceptional patience, diligence, and care, and to Fred Hetzel, Jim Briante,
and Larry Kry, who provided technical help during the preparation of the final version.
As this work progressed I felt increasingly gratified toward Professors F. C. Auluck and
D. S. Kothari of the University of Delhi, with whom I started my career and who initiated
me into the study of this subject, and toward Professor R. C. Majumdar, who took keen
interest in my work on this and every other project that I have undertaken from time to
time. I am grateful to Dr. D. ter Haar, of the University of Oxford, who, as the general editor
of this series, gave valuable advice on various aspects of the preparation of the manuscript
and made several useful suggestions toward the improvement of the text. I am thankful to
Professors J. W. Leech, J. Grindlay, and A. D. Singh Nagi of the University of Waterloo for
their interest and hospitality that went a long way in making this task a pleasant one.
The final tribute must go to my wife, whose cooperation and understanding, at all
stages of this project and against all odds, have been simply overwhelming.

R.K.P.
Historical introduction
Statistical mechanics is a formalism that aims at explaining the physical properties of mat-
ter in bulk on the basis of the dynamical behavior of its microscopic constituents. The
scope of the formalism is almost as unlimited as the very range of the natural phenomena,
for in principle it is applicable to matter in any state whatsoever. It has, in fact, been ap-
plied, with considerable success, to the study of matter in the solid state, the liquid state, or
the gaseous state, matter composed of several phases and/or several components, matter
under extreme conditions of density and temperature, matter in equilibrium with radia-
tion (as, for example, in astrophysics), matter in the form of a biological specimen, and
so on. Furthermore, the formalism of statistical mechanics enables us to investigate the
nonequilibrium states of matter as well as the equilibrium states; indeed, these investiga-
tions help us to understand the manner in which a physical system that happens to be “out
of equilibrium” at a given time t approaches a “state of equilibrium” as time passes.
In contrast with the present status of its development, the success of its applications,
and the breadth of its scope, the beginnings of statistical mechanics were rather modest.
Barring certain primitive references, such as those of Gassendi, Hooke, and so on, the real
work on this subject started with the contemplations of Bernoulli (1738), Herapath (1821),
and Joule (1851), who, in their own individual ways, attempted to lay a foundation for the
so-called kinetic theory of gases – a discipline that finally turned out to be the forerunner
of statistical mechanics. The pioneering work of these investigators established the fact
that the pressure of a gas arose from the motion of its molecules and could, therefore, be
computed by considering the dynamical influence of the molecular bombardment on the
walls of the container. Thus, Bernoulli and Herapath could show that, if the temperature
remained constant, the pressure P of an ordinary gas was inversely proportional to the vol-
ume V of the container (Boyle’s law), and that it was essentially independent of the shape
of the container. This, of course, involved the explicit assumption that, at a given tempera-
ture T , the (mean) speed of the molecules was independent of both pressure and volume.
Bernoulli even attempted to determine the (first-order) correction to this law, arising from
the finite size of the molecules, and showed that the volume V appearing in the statement
of the law should be replaced by (V − b), where b is the “actual” volume of the molecules.1
Joule was the first to show that the pressure P was directly proportional to the square
of the molecular speed c, which he had initially assumed to be the same for all molecules.
Krönig (1856) went a step further. Introducing the “quasistatistical” assumption that, at
any time t, one-sixth of the molecules could be assumed to be flying in each of the six

1
As is well known, this “correction” was correctly evaluated, much later, by van der Waals (1873), who showed
that, for large V , b is four times the “actual” volume of the molecules; see Problem 1.4.

xxiii
Visit https://ebookmass.com today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
from Cluny. Fifty years later three Cluniac monks were sent over to
set forth the claims of the Mother House. The brethren stated their
case, but could not get any attention paid to their arguments. One
of them died in this country, the other two went home having
accomplished nothing. A piteous letter to the Abbot of St. Albans
explains their position:—
“For the rest, be it known to you, my Lord, that after having spent
four months and a half on our journey, and following our Right with
the most serene Lord the King and his Privy Council, we have
obtained nothing: nay, we are sent back very disconsolate, deprived
of our Manors, our Pensions alienated, and what is still worse, we
are denied the obedience of all our Monasteries which are 38 in
number: nor did our Legal Deeds, nor the Testimonies of your
Chronicles avail us anything, and at length, after all our pleading and
expenses, we return home moneyless, for in truth, after paying for
what we have eaten and drunk, we have but five crowns left, to go
back about 260 leagues. But what then? We will sell what we have;
we will go on; and God will provide. Nothing else occurs to write to
your Paternity: but that as we entered England with joy, so we
depart thence with sorrow; having buried one of our Companions—
viz. the Archdeacon, the youngest of our company. May he rest in
Peace! Amen.”
 THE ARMS AND SEALS OF THE PRIOR AND CONVENT OF ST. SAVIOUR
AT BERMONDSEY
W. B. Grove.

Meetings of the Council were held at Bermondsey from time to

time: in the reign of Henry the Third many of the nobility who had
taken the Cross met here in deliberation. In 1213 the then Prior,
Richard, founded the almonry in Southwark, which afterwards
developed into St. Thomas’s Hospital.
 In 1276 there was a dispute between the Bishop of Winchester,
who claimed an annual procuration, an entertainment of one day
during his Visitation, and the House.
In 1309, by a breach in the River Wall, the lands of the House
were so much damaged that the brethren were exempted from the
purveyance of hay and corn.
In 1324 Edward the Second issued letters patent for the arrest of
the prior, John de Causancia, and certain monks for harbouring
rebels. These were probably the adherents of Thomas, Earl of
Lancaster, who, after his defeat at Boroughbridge, took sanctuary in
the Abbey. In 1337 the Bishop of Ely excommunicated certain
persons for stealing a hawk belonging to him from the cloisters of
the Abbey. Many other associations gather round this House.
Marmion, Lord of Fontenay, was a benefactor to Bermondsey; the
monks sold their lands in Southwark in the reign of Richard the
Second to Robert of Paris, from whom the place was called Paris
Gardens; Cardinal Beaufort visited the Abbey, and was received in
procession by the monks. The Prior Henry, afterwards Abbot of
Glastonbury, took an active part in the release of King Richard.
In 1323 the greater church of St. Saviour of Bermondsey and the
great altar were dedicated in honour of St. Saviour and the Blessed
Virgin and All Saints. On the same day were dedicated three other
altars in the church—one of the Cross, one in honour of the Virgin
and St. Thomas the Martyr, and one in honour of St. Andrew and St.
James and all the Apostles.
Among those buried here were Leofstan, Portreeve of London in
1115; William of Mortain, or Mortaigne, Earl of Cornwall; Mary,
daughter of Malcolm the Third of Scotland, and sister to Queen
Maud, who died April 18, 1115. The following is the inscription on
her tomb:—
 “Nobilis hic tumulata jacet Comitissa Maria:
Actebus hæc nituit: larga benigna fuit.
Regum sanguis erat: morum probitate vigebat,
Compatiens in opi: vivit in arce Poli.”
Also Matilda, daughter of Guy, Earl of Warwick, who died in 1368;
Margaret de la Pole; Anne, widow of Lord Audley, and the murdered
Duke of Gloucester, before the removal of his body to Westminster.
But the most illustrious residents of the House were the two
Queens who died within its walls.
The first of them was Katherine of Valois, widow of Henry the
Fifth, who married secretly Owen Tudor, and was the grandmother of
Henry the Seventh. The marriage was not found out for some years.
The Queen must have been most faithfully and loyally served,
because children cannot be born without observation. Owen Tudor
must have conducted matters with a discretion beyond all praise. No
doubt the ordinary members of the household knew nothing, and
suspected nothing, because several years passed before any
suspicion was awakened. Three sons and one daughter, in all, were
born. The eldest, Edmund of Hadham, was so called because he was
born there; the second, Jasper, was of Hatfield; the third, Owen, of
Westminster; the youngest, Margaret, died in infancy.
Suspicions were aroused about the time of the birth of Owen,
which took place apparently before it was expected, and without all
the precautions necessary, in the King’s House at Westminster. The
infant was taken as soon as born to the monastery of St. Peter’s
secretly. It is not likely that the Abbot received the child without full
knowledge of his parents. He did take the child, however; and here
little Owen remained, growing up in a monastery, and taking vows in
due time. Here he lived and here he died, a Benedictine of
Westminster.
It would seem as if Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, heard some
whisper or rumour concerning this birth, or was told something
about the true nature of the Queen’s illness, for he issued a very
singular proclamation, warning the world, generally, against
marrying Queen-dowagers, as if these ladies grew on every hedge.
When, however, a year or so afterwards, the fourth child, Margaret,
was born, Humphrey learned the whole truth: the degradation, as he
thought it, of the Queen, who had stooped to such an alliance with a
man of humble rank, and the audacity of the Welshman. He took
steps promptly. He sent Katherine with some of her ladies to
Bermondsey Abbey, there to remain in honourable confinement: he
arrested Owen Tudor, also a priest—probably the priest who had
performed the marriage—and his servant, and sent all three to
Newgate.
All three succeeded in breaking prison and escaping. At this point
the story gets mixed. The King himself, we are told, then a lad of
fifteen, sent to Owen commanding his attendance before the
Council. Why did they not arrest him again? Owen, however, refused
to trust himself to the Council—was not Humphrey, Duke of
Gloucester, one of them? He asked for a safe-conduct. They
promised him one by a verbal message. Where was he, then, that all
these messages should be sent backwards and forwards? I think he
must have been in Sanctuary. He refused a verbal message, and
demanded a written safe-conduct. This was granted him, and he
returned to London. But he mistrusted even the written promise; he
would not face the Council; he took refuge in the Sanctuary of
Westminster, where they were afraid to seize him. And here for a
while he remained. It is said that they tried to draw him out by
sending old friends, who invited him to the taverns outside the
Abbey Precinct. But Owen would not be so drawn. He knew that
Duke Humphrey would make an end of him if he could. He therefore
remained where he was. I think that he must have had some secret
understanding with the King; for one day, learning that Henry
himself was with the Council, he suddenly presented himself and
pleaded his own cause. The mild young King, tender on account of
his mother, would not allow the case to be pursued, but bade him go
free.
 He departed, and made all haste to get out of such unwholesome
air; he made for Wales. Here the hostility of Duke Humphrey
pursued him still; he was once more arrested, taken to Wallingford,
and placed in the Castle there a prisoner. From Wallingford he was
transferred again to Newgate, he and his priest and his servant.
Once more they all three broke prison, “foully” wounding a warder in
the achievement of liberty, and got back to Wales, choosing for their
residence the mountainous parts, into which the English garrisons
never penetrated.
When the King came of age, Owen Tudor was allowed to return,
and was presented with a pension of £40 a year. It is remarkable,
however, that he received no promotion or rank; that he was never
knighted; and that the title of Esquire was the only one by which he
was known. It certainly seems as if the claim of Owen Tudor to be
called a gentleman was not recognised by the King or the heralds.
Perhaps Welsh gentility was as little understood by these Normans
as Irish royalty—yet, so far as length of pedigree goes, both Welsh
and Irish were very superior to Normans.
The two sons, Edmund and Jasper, were placed under the charge
of Katherine de la Pole, Abbess of Barking, and sister of the Earl of
Suffolk. When the King came of age, he remembered his half-
brothers; Edmund was made Earl of Richmond, Jasper, Earl of
Pembroke; both ranked before all other English Earls. Edmund was
afterwards married to Margaret Beaufort, who, as Countess of
Richmond, was the foundress of Christ’s and St. John’s Colleges,
Cambridge. Her son, as everybody knows, was Henry the Seventh.
As for Owen Tudor, that gallant adventurer, who began so well on
the field of battle, ended as well, fighting, as he should, for his
stepson and King, under the badge of the Red Rose. When the Civil
Wars began, he joined the King’s forces, though he was then nearer
seventy than sixty. He fought at Wakefield; he pursued the Yorkists
to Mortimer’s Cross, where another fight took place. The
Lancastrians were defeated. Owen was taken prisoner, and was
cruelly beheaded on the field. It was right and just that he should so
fight and should so die. He survived his Queen twenty-four years.
Katherine lived no more than a year after her imprisonment. She
made a will shortly before her death, in which there is not one word
about her second husband or her children by Owen Tudor. She says
in the preamble: “I trustfully,” addressing her son the King, “and am
quite sure, that among all creatures earthly ye best may and will
best tender and favour my will, in ordaining for my soul and body, in
seeing that my debts be paid and my servants guerdoned, and in
tender and favourable fulfilment of mine intent.”
The second Queen, who died at Bermondsey Abbey, was Elizabeth
Woodville. Her imprisonment in the Abbey was regarded with great
surprise. It was in the year 1486, when the insurrection broke out in
Ireland in favour of the pretended Earl of Warwick, son of the Duke
of Clarence: a council was held, after which, without any cause
assigned, or the bringing of any charge, the widowed Queen was
carried to Bermondsey, where she remained for the rest of her life.
The reason commonly accepted was that she knew Edward
Plantagenet, and so could prompt and instruct the Pretender in his
personation of the prince. Bacon says, “That which is most probable
out of the precedent and subsequent acts is that it was the Queen
Dowager from whom this action had had the principal source and
motive; certain it is she was a busy, negotiating woman, and in her
withdrawing chamber had the fortunate conspiracy of the King
against Richard the Third been hatched, which the King knew and
remembered but too well; and she was at the time extremely
discontent with the King, thinking her daughter, as the King handled
the matter, not advanced but depressed.”
 BERMONDSEY ABBEY

It is not easy to find much sympathy with this unfortunate

woman, yet there are few scenes in history more full of pathos and
mournfulness than that in which her boy Richard was torn from her
arms; and she knew—all knew—even the Archbishops, when they
gave their consent, knew—that the boy was to be done to death.
When one talks of Queens and their misfortunes, it may be
remembered that few Queens have suffered more than Elizabeth
Woodville. In misfortune she sits apart from other Queens, her only
companions being Mary Queen of Scots and Marie Antoinette. Her
record is full of woe. But in that long war it seems impossible to find
one single character, man or woman—unless it is King Henry—who is
true and loyal. All—all are perjured, treacherous, cruel, self-seeking.
All are as proud as Lucifer. Murder is the friend and companion of
the noblest lord, perjury walks on the other side of him, treachery
stalks behind him, all are his henchmen. Elizabeth met perjury and
treachery with intrigue and plot and counter-plot; she was the
daughter of her time. She was accused of being privy to the plots of
Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck; she was more Yorkist than her
husband; she hated the Red Rose long after the Red and the White
were united in her daughter and Henry the Seventh. That she was
suspected of these intrigues shows the character she bore. We must
make allowance; she was always in a false position; Edward ought
not to have married her; she was hated by her own party; she was
compelled, in the interests of her children, to be always on the
defensive; and in her conduct of defence she was the daughter of
her age. These things, however, deprive her, somewhat, of the pity
which we ought to feel for so many misfortunes.
She, too, had to retire to the seclusion of Bermondsey, where she
could sit and watch the ships go up and down, and so feel that the
world, with which she had no more concern, still continued. It has
been suggested that she retired voluntarily to the Abbey. Such a
retreat was not in the character of Elizabeth Woodville, so long as
there was a daughter or a kinsman left to fight for. Like Katherine of
Valois, she made an end not without dignity. Witness the following
clauses in her will:—

“Item, I bequeath my body to be buried with the body of my

lord at Windsor, according to the will of my said lord and mine,
without pomps entering or costly expenses done thereabout.
Item, whereas I have no worldly goods to do the Queen’s
Grace, my dearest daughter a pleasure with, neither to reward
any of my children, according to my heart and mind, I beseech
Almighty God to bless her Grace, with all her noble issue: and
with as good a heart and mind as is to me possible, I give her
Grace my blessing, and all aforesaid, my children. Item, I will
that such small stuff and goods that I have be disposed truly in
the contentation of my debts and for the health of my soul as
far as they will extend. Item, if any of my blood will any of the
said stuff or goods to me pertaining, I will that they have the
preferment before any other.”
 Drawn by C. J. M. Whichello. Engraved by B. Howlett.
A GENERAL VIEW OF THE REMAINS OF BERMONDSEY ABBEY, SURREY
As it appeared in the year 1805, with the adjacent country. Taken from
the steeple of the Church of St. Mary Magdalen.

The position of Bermondsey Abbey would at first appear to have

been exactly similar to that of Westminster: both Abbeys stood upon
islets slightly raised above high-water mark; all round the islet of
each stretched marshes, with other tiny islets here and there, as at
Chelsea and Battersea. But there was this difference. In front of
Thorney was a ford; at the back of Thorney was a ford; beyond the
ford on the south was the high road to Dover; beyond the ford on
the north was the high road to the heart of the country. Bermondsey
was near the river, but the river here was broad and deep even at
low tide; Bermondsey was not situated on the high road of
commerce; the high road to Dover was near the Abbey, certainly, but
not running right through it, so to speak, as the road ran at
Westminster. The Abbey lay quiet and remote, even from Southwark;
and after the building of the river wall on the south, whenever that
was done, the marshes became low-lying meadows, dotted with
ponds and with trees, where cows lay asleep in the sun. The Abbey
stood alone, removed from houses, among gardens and orchards; it
might almost have been in the country, so quiet and peaceful were
the surroundings. But from the river there was heard the yeo-heave-
ho of the sailors; the masts and sails could be seen above the river
wall; there was heard every day the hymn of praise with which the
sailors celebrated their safe arrival in port; and the sound of the
multitudinous bells of London was wafted across the river to this
peaceful spot.
The Abbey possessed a miraculous Rood, to which people paid
pilgrimage. It was one of the many shrines round London which
were convenient for a day’s pleasant journey into the country. In the
Paston Letters, John Paston writes, “I pray you visit the Rood of
Saint Saviour in Bermondsey while ye abide in London, and let my
sister Margery go with you to pray to them that she shall have a
good husband or she come home again.”
This holy Rood was found in the Thames in 1117, and began
almost immediately to work miracles. In 1118 William, Earl of
Morton, was “miraculously liberated from the Tower of London
through the power of this holy Cross.”
Twenty-two years later, the same William, Earl of Morton, entered
the Abbey and took the vows. The Rood was taken down on the
same day that the Rood of Grace of Kent was destroyed by the
Bishop of Rochester at Paul’s Cross.
One of the last acts of Henry the Seventh was to found an
“anniversary” in this House to pray for the good and prosperous
estate of the King during his life, for the prosperity of the realm, for
the soul of his late Queen Elizabeth—not Elizabeth Woodville, of
whom no mention is made, for the soul of Edmund, Earl of
Richmond, the King’s father, and of Margaret, Countess of Richmond,
his mother; and for the souls of his children.
 At the Dissolution, the revenues of the House were valued at
£548: 2: 5-1/2. The Abbot, who was made Bishop of St. Asaph,
received a pension of 500 marks, or £333: 6: 8 a year. Fifteen years
later, in 1553, there were still seven or eight annuitants surviving,
viz. one at 15 marks a year; three at 9; two at 8; and smaller
annuities amounting to 11 marks a year.
The House and Manor were granted to Sir Robert Southwell,
Master of the Rolls. He sold it to Sir Thomas Pope, founder of Trinity
College, Oxford. Sir Thomas pulled down many of the monastic
buildings, and erected a stately house with the materials. The house
with the gardens he sold to Sir Robert Southwell, from whom he had
bought it; the Manor he sold to Robert Trapps, citizen and goldsmith.
In 1583 the Earl of Sussex, Lord Chamberlain to Queen Elizabeth,
died in the House.
The parish church of St. Mary Magdalen was built by the monks
for their tenants. The Earl of Sussex had to rebuild it when it was
reported to be falling into a ruinous condition.
Among the various benefits conferred upon the country by the
monastic houses, that of hospitality was by no means the least. But
it is evident that hospitality could only be practised when the House
stood near to a highway. As Bermondsey Abbey was removed from
any roads or highways, the monks could only carry out their duties
towards the poor by placing their almonry on the High Street of
Southwark. But the Abbey possessed a school of great repute.
Leland, in his Cantu Cygni, written a few years before the
Dissolution, says:
“And hail thou, too, O House of Charity, the nurse
Of many students helped by Gifford’s purse.
Thou happy, snowy swan, hast thy serene abode,
Where Burmsey of her well-known isles is proud—
Well-known, indeed, for there is seen the shrine
Where her priests labour in the work Divine.”
 CHAPTER XIII
ST. MARY OVERIES
The Priory of St. Mary Overies, or Overy, was one of the most
ancient Houses in London. It stood beside the ferry, the south end of
which was the long and narrow dock still to be seen, close to the
present church. The other end of the ferry may be also still existing
in what is now called Dowgate Dock; it is true that this is not
opposite, but it may be surmised that Allhallows Lane led to the
north end of the ferry. This ferry existed long before London Bridge
was built, and continued long after. Indeed, if we consider the
narrowness of the old bridge, the tolls, crowded vehicles blocking
the way, and the long delays that must have occurred in getting
across the bridge, we may very well understand that it might be
more expeditious and cheaper to cross by the ferry than the bridge.
Here, at all events, was the ferry, and at the south end was a small
convent of nuns engaged in praying for the safety of the travellers.
At every starting-point or returning-point for the mediæval traveller,
there was some religious foundation to pray for his safety or to offer
praises for his return; at four of the London gates, there were
churches dedicated to St. Botolph, the chosen saint of travellers.
Outside Cripplegate was the Church of St. Giles. Outside Newgate
was the Church of St. Sepulchre. Within Ludgate was the Church of
St. Martin. Over Fleet Bridge was the Church of St. Bride. When the
first stone bridge was erected over the Thames, a double chapel was
built in the midst of it; while it was only a wooden bridge, there was
a chapel at either end—the south chapel, singularly, dedicated to a
Danish saint. So that I am inclined to believe that the small nunnery
on the south of the ferry may possibly have had its sister nunnery or
church on the north; if a nunnery, its existence has been clean
forgotten; if a church, then All Hallows the Great may have been
that church.
This figure of a Knight Templar; This Monument is placed on
carved in wood, & painted, was the ground under the North
taken up to make room for window in the Spiritual Court,
Lockyer’s Monument; and was & is traditionally said to be in
afterwards placed upright, memory of Old Overie, father
against the North wall, near the of Mary Overie, foundress of
Vestry door. the Priory.
 From the Grangerised edition of London and Middlesex in Guildhall
Library.

The story of the first foundation is entirely legendary; one Mary,

daughter of Awdry, ferryman, is said to have founded on the site a
small House for nuns before the Conquest. It was converted,
according to tradition, by one Swithina into a College of Priests. It
was, however, refounded in 1106 by two Norman knights, William
Pont de l’Arche, who had a mansion in Dowgate, and William
Dauncey, as a House for Canons Regular. William Gifford, Bishop of
Winchester, joined in the foundation, and built the nave of the
church. Henry the First, another benefactor, gave to the House the
Church of St. Margaret in Southwark; King Stephen gave the Canons
the House of their founder, Pont de l’Arche. In 1212 the Priory was
destroyed by fire. Then Peter de Rupibus took the foundation, still
very poor, in hand, and rebuilt the church; he also founded the
chapel of St. Mary Magdalen, afterwards made into a Parish Church.
A hundred years later the unhappy monks sent a petition to Edward
the First, stating that the House had fallen into the deepest poverty;
that they had not enough to provide the barest necessaries, but
were dependent on charity; that their church was ruinous, but that
they could not rebuild it; and that they had even suffered the
embankment to be carried away, and were in daily terror of an
inundation. They managed, however, to get along somehow during
the fourteenth century. Early in the fifteenth the House found two
more benefactors—Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester, and Gower
the poet. The latter was buried in the church after residing for some
years in the House. His monument may still be seen. A list of the
Priors from 1130 to 1540 has been preserved. The House, on the
Dissolution, was valued at £624: 6: 8. The Prior received, on the
surrender, a pension of £100 a year.
 GOWER’S MONUMENT, ST. MARY OVERIES

The position of the Priory, close to the Palace of the Bishop of

Winchester, made it convenient for many functions. In this church
were married, in 1406, Edward Holland, Earl of Kent, and Lucia,
daughter of the Lord of Milan. Here also, in 1424, was married
James the First, King of Scotland, a poet and scholar, of whom
Drummond of Hawthornden wrote that “of former kings it might be
said that the nation made the kings, but of this king, that he made
the people a nation.” His bride was Joan, daughter of the Earl of
Somerset, and niece to Cardinal Beaufort.
“The fairest and the freshest yonge flower
That e’er I saw, methought, before that hour.”
In 1539 the House was suppressed and given to Sir Anthony
Brown, whose son became Lord Montague, giving his name to the
ancient cloister of the Monastery. In the following year the church
was made parochial, including the Church of St. Mary Magdalen,
which stood beside it, as St. Gregory stood beside St. Paul’s, or St.
Margaret by Westminster Abbey, or St. Peter-le-Poor beside the
Church of the Austin Friars.
A great many monuments are in the church: the chancel,
transepts, and tower, with the Lady Chapel, still remain, forming the
finest of the old churches in the whole of London.
Here lie buried, according to tradition, Mary, the foundress; the
two benefactors, Pont de l’Arche and Dauncey—a wooden figure may
represent one of them; John Gower, on whose monument may still
be read the words which he wrote for it:—
“En toy qui es Filz de Dieu le Père,
Sauvé soit qui gist sous cest pierre.
Lancelot Andrewes, Bishop of Winchester, is buried in the Lady
Chapel; Dyer the poet, who died 1607; Edmund Shakespeare,
brother of the poet, somewhere in the church; Laurence Fletcher,
one of the shareholders in the Globe, who died 1608; Philip
Henslow, who died 1616; John Fletcher, who died 1625; Philip
Massinger, who died 1639. On the tomb of Richard Humble, who lies
with his two wives and his children, are the lines:—
 “Like to the damask rose you see,
Or like the blossom on the tree,
Or like the dainty flower of May,
Or like the morning of the day,
Or like the sun, or like the shade,
Or like the gourd which Jonas had,
Even so is Man; Man’s thread is spun,
Drawn out, and cut, and so is done.
The rose withers, the blossom blasteth;
The flower fades, the morning hasteth;
The sun sets, the shadow flies,
The gourd consumes, and Man he dies.”
In the Lady Chapel of this church were held many of the trials of
the martyrs under the Marian persecution: those, for instance, of
Bishop Hooper, John Rogers, Bradford, Crome, Saunders, Ferrar, and
Taylor. The death of Gardiner, the persecutor, seemed, to the
common people, by the hand of God, in punishment of his cruelties.
He was given, however, a magnificent funeral, beginning at this
church. Machyn describes it:—
“The xxiiij day of Feybruary was the obsequies of the most
reverentt father in God, Sthevyn Gardener, docthur and bysshope of
Wynchastur, prelett of the gartter, and latte chansseler of England,
and on of the preve consell unto Kyng Henry the viij and unto quen
Mare, tyll he ded; and so the after-none be-gane the knyll at Sant
Mare Overes with ryngyng, and after be-gane the durge; with a palle
of cloth of gold, and with ij whytt branchys, and ij dosen of stayffe-
torchys bornyng, and iiij grett tapurs; and my lord Montyguw the
cheyffe mornar, and my lord bysshope of Lynkolne and ser Robart
Rochaster, comtroller, and with dyvers odur in blake, and mony blake
gownes and cotes; and the morow masse of requeem and offeryng
done, be-gane the sarmon; and so masse done, and so to dener to
my lord Montyguw (’s); and at ys gatt the corse was putt in-to a
wagon with iiij welles all covered with blake, and ower the corsse ys
pyctur mad with ys myter on ys hed, with ys armes, and v gentyll
men bayryng ys v baners in gownes and hods, then ij harolds in
their cote armur, master Garter and Ruge-crosse; then cam the men
rydyng, carehyng of torchys a lx bornyng, at bowt the corsse all the
way; and then sam the mornars in gownes and cotes, to the nombur
unto ij C. a-for and be-hynd, and so at sant Gorges cam prestes and
clarkes with crosse and sensyng, and ther they had a grett torche
gyffynt them, and so to ever parryche tyll they cam to Wunchaster,
and had money as many as cam to mett them, and durge and
masse at evere logyng.” Wilkinson, who gives several views of the
church and the buildings around it, has preserved one taken from
the north-east, which shows the whole north side of the church, with
the Little Chapel, the Lady Chapel, and the church itself, in the year
1813 (see p. 307). Montague Close, where the view was taken, was
very shortly after covered with buildings, which prevented a
repetition of a drawing from this point; but in 1825 he procured a
sketch of the Little Chapel and part of the Lady Chapel.
 BISHOP ANDREWES’ TOMB, ST. MARY OVERIES

The existence of the Little Chapel is nearly forgotten; yet it will be

seen, in considering the church as a whole, that it forms a natural
part. In the year 1626 this chapel was selected as a fitting place for
the tomb and monument of Lancelot Andrewes, now in the Lady
Chapel. From this monument the place was generally called the
Bishop’s Chapel.
It is by the greatest good fortune this beautiful church has been
preserved. It would most certainly have been taken down, like the
exquisite church of the Holy Trinity Priory, like those of Eastminster,
Whitefriars, and Blackfriars, but for the interference of Stephen
Gardiner, who supported—and doubtless instigated—the parishioners
of St. Margaret’s and St. Mary Magdalene, in a petition to the King
praying for the church of the Priory as their parish church. The
petition was granted, and the church was saved.
Not, certainly, in the life of Stephen Gardiner, but after his death,
in the time of Queen Elizabeth, though the church was safe, the
Lady Chapel, and, of course, the Little Chapel with it, was
desecrated. In Anthony Munday’s edition of Stow, 1633, he tells us
to what base uses this noble chapel was put:—

“It is now called, The new Chappell; and indeed, though very
old, it now may be cal’d a new one, because newly redeemed
from such use and imployment, as in respect of that it was built
to, Divine and Religious duties, may very well be branded, with
the stile of wretched, base, and unworthy, for that before this
abuse, was (and is now) a faire & beautifull Chappell, by those
that were then the Corporation (which is a body consisting of
30. Vestry men, sixe of those thirty, Churchwardens) was leased
and let out, and this House of God made a Bake-house.
Two very faire doores, that from the two side Iles of the
Chancell of this Church, and two that throw the head of the
Chancell (as at this day they doe againe) went into it, were
lath’t, daub’d, and dam’d up: the faire Pillars were ordinary
posts, against which they piled Billets and Bavens; in this place
they had their Ovens, in that a Bolting-place, in that their
Kneading-trough, in another (I have heard) a Hogs-trough; for
the words that were given mee were these, This place have I
knowne a Hog-stie, in another a Store-house, to store up their
hoorded Meale: and in all of it, something of this sordid kind &
condition.
It was first let by the Corporation afore named, to one Wyat,
after him to one Peacocke, after him to one Cleybrooke, and last
to one Wilson, all Bakers, and this Chappell still imployed in the
way of their Trade, a Bake-house, though some part of this
Bake-house was sometime turned into a Starch-house.
The time of the continuance of it in this kind, from the first
letting of it to Wyat, to the restoring of it againe to the Church;
was threescore and some odde yeeres, in the yeere of our Lord
God 1624, for in this yeere the ruines and blasted estate that
the old Corporation sold it to, were by the Corporation of this
time repaired, renewed, well, and very worthily beautified; the
charge of it for that yeere, with many things done to it since,
arising to two hundred pounds.
This, as all the former Repaires, being the sole cost and
charge of the Parishioners.
One Ile in this Chappel, was paved at the onely cost of one
Master John Hayman, Taylor, and Merchantaylor, in the yeere
1625.”
 GATEWAY OF ST. MARY’S PRIORY, SOUTHWARK
Londina Illustrata, vol. i.

It was, therefore, immediately after this restoration that the

remains of Bishop Andrewes were deposited in the Little Chapel.
May there not have been some thought of preventing further
desecration by the monument of this learned Divine?
The Chapel was taken down in 1830. The monument of the Bishop
took up nearly the whole of the east end; a marble canopy originally
stood over it, but this was broken in 1676 when the roof of the
Chapel fell in; there was no altar and there were no services held in
the Chapel; there was one other monument of a citizen named
Hayman, buried here in the same year as the Bishop. Another
monument, erected in 1807, was that of Abraham Newland, chief
cashier of the Bank of England. Two stone coffins were preserved in
this Chapel; and here were stone steps leading down into the vaults;
the Chapel is said to have been quite plain, “with a groined roof,
strong ribs, and a stone seat on both sides and at the east end.”
The removal of the Chapel formed part of the restoration work of
1830. At this time the church was in a most dangerous condition,
the roof of the nave being so dilapidated that it was impossible to
hold service there. Consequently the pews, organ, and monuments
were removed to the chancel and transepts; the roof was taken
down and the materials sold; and the walls and aisles were simply
left exposed to the weather.
Wilkinson thus describes what followed:—
“The roof thus destroyed was a fine specimen of the architecture
of the thirteenth century, and possessed the striking peculiarity of
having the corbels, whence the ribs of the arches sprang, placed
perpendicularly over the columns. Those columns had been already
banded with iron, and the walls were green and dark with apparent
decay, though it is said that some of the ancient timbers were still in
a fine state of preservation; but in pursuance of the above order, the
organ was removed to form a temporary termination to the choir,
and the nave was uncovered and exposed; in which lamentable state
it still continues, August 1834, not unlike the half-ruined edifice of
the Cathedral of Llandaff.

ANCIENT CRYPT, SOUTHWARK

 The very laudable, zealous, and preserving efforts made for the
preservation of the Lady Chapel at the eastern end of the Church,
were, however, completely successful; though it was for some time
earnestly debated whether it should be destroyed or restored. But
even in the vestry the design of demolition was opposed, and on
January 28th, 1832, a numerous general meeting for the
preservation of the structure took place at the Freemasons’ Tavern,
at which a series of Resolutions was passed to that effect. The
principal of them were, That the few remaining reliques of Gothic, or
Early English Pointed style of architecture in this kingdom, are
replete with interest: That the Chapel of Our Lady in St. Saviour’s
Church is a splendid specimen of that style of architecture: That as
the Parish of St. Saviour has expended £30,000 in the repair of this
Church, of which a debt of £8000 is unpaid, it is expedient that a
public subscription be commenced to enable the Parish to restore
the Lady Chapel; and that a Committee be appointed to promote the
restoration by soliciting public subscriptions. Notwithstanding the
very great expense, which the rebuilding of St. Saviour’s Church had
already proved to the Parish, it was evident, by some of the
speeches at this meeting, that the design of demolishing the Lady
Chapel was not by any means even partially sanctioned in
Southwark, but only that the assistance of the public was required
for so costly an undertaking; but it was perhaps almost entirely
owing to the unwearied and meritorious exertions of Mr. Thomas
Saunders, that so general and lively an interest was excited on the
subject. The estimated amount of the restoration was £2500, and by
February nearly £1400 had been raised; but the sentiments of the
parishioners were most equivocally displayed at the general poll
which had been demanded by Mr. Saunders of all the parochial rate-
payers, and which took place on February 9th and 10th; the
conclusion being a majority of 240 for the restoration of the building.
The subscriptions were subsequently continued with great zeal, and
were also extended to the restoration of the ancient altar-screen in
the choir; for the effecting of all which they were aided by a
performance of Sacred Music in the Church, on Thursday, June 21st,
1832, and the delivery of some scientific lectures. The
superintendence of the Restoration was gratuitously undertaken by
Mr. Gwilt, Mr. Hartley was the contractor for the building, and the
first stone of the new works was laid July 28th, 1832. The two
annexed modern Exterior Views of this Church will convey an
accurate notion of the appearance of the outside of the Lady Chapel
before this restoration; excepting that it then showed four
dilapidated and tiled gables, and that the part from which the
Bishop’s Chapel had been removed was white, whilst the remainder
was defaced and discoloured stone, coarsely repaired with brick. In
taking down the arch which led into the Bishop’s Chapel was
discovered part of the fabric of the lancet-window originally in that
place; which became a most valuable model for the restoration of
the others. In the present perfected state of this edifice, the eastern
end of it exhibits the four original gables, each surmounted by a rich
cross, and containing in the point a small triple lancet window, with
carved corbelheads and columnated-mullions; with a large window
of the same description below. The form of the glazing in the latter
consists of large intersected circles and lozenges; with some armorial
ensigns, etc., in stained glass. The roofs of the Chapel are covered
with lead, and the walls are of flints like those of the other restored
parts of the Church, with stone mouldings and quoins; the four
buttresses, and the north-east turret containing the staircase are
also restored in a similar manner; the latter having loopholes and a
low cap of stone. On each side of the building also the peculiar
windows have been likewise carefully copied. Within, the Lady
Chapel is 42 feet in length, and has the roof divided into nine
groined arches, supported by six octangular columns, with circular
shafts at their angles. When this place was formerly used for the
Consistorial Court of the Bishop of Winchester, and the Visitations of
the Deanery of Southwark, the north-east corner was parted off in
the manner of a pew, and contained a desk, table, and elevated
seat; but the remainder of the space was abandoned to the
reception of lumber.
Whilst the restoration of the Chapel was in agitation, a further
difficulty appeared in the very narrow frontage to be allowed for it
on the south approach forming to the New London Bridge. So early
as November 1830, the Wardens of St. Saviour’s addressed a
memorial to the Bridge-Committee, soliciting a sufficient space for
the exhibition of the structure, and suggesting an opening of 130
feet. On April 19th, 1831, it was resolved by the vestry that the
width of 60 feet, offered by the Committee, was altogether
inadequate, added to which it was made a condition of that grant
that the Lady Chapel should be taken down; and, therefore, in the
following October the Wardens memorialised the Lords of the
Treasury. In an interview between them, the latter appeared to be in
favour of a greater opening, but on January 24th, 1832, the
Wardens were informed that not more than 70 feet would be
allowed, and that space only on condition of removing the Chapel, if
the consent of the Bishop of Winchester could be procured. In a
letter on the subject, however, the Bishop declined giving his
consent to the London Bridge Company; stating that it could not be
alleged that the removal of the Consistorial Court was required for
public accommodation, which he viewed as the only justifiable
reason for the demolition of a Church, or any part of one. It was
then resolved to petition the Committee of the House of Commons
appointed on the Bill for Improving the Approaches to the New
London Bridge; by which it was decided, on February 29th, 1832,
after four days’ deliberation, and by a majority of 17 to 3, that the
opening to St. Saviour’s Church should be 130 feet instead of 70, as
proposed by the original framers of the Bill. The houses on the west
side of Wellington Street opposite the Lady Chapel, are therefore
terminated so as to form the sides of a handsome approach to it.
From hence at a future time a flight of steps may be formed to the
building beneath, and an appropriate rail also erected round the
church, but at present the structure is defended on the east only by
a high circular enclosure of boards.
 ST. SAVIOUR’S CHURCH.
north east view of consistory court and
T
chapel of S . JOHN
Taken from Montague Close, Southwark.
Londina Illustrata, published 1813 by Robert Wilkinson, No. 58
Cornhill.

The last meritorious work of restoration in St. Saviour’s Church

was that of the ancient Altar Screen given in the commencement of
the sixteenth century by Richard Fox, Bishop of Winchester; a
subscription for which was ultimately united with that commenced
for the Lady Chapel. To the latter of these funds the present Bishop
of Winchester gave £300, and £100 to the Screen; and other large
sums were speedily and liberally contributed. Previously to Mr.
Gwilt’s restoration of the choir, the eastern wall of the Church was
covered with a composition of wood and plaster, ascribed by
tradition to Sir Christopher Wren, though apparently without any
authority. Above this Screen appeared the mutilated and inelegant
broad window of the sixteenth century, the arch of which was
sculptured in relievo, in panels; that in the centre having an angel
holding a shield, and those at the side, a pelican feeding her young,
the emblem of Christ, and the device of Bishop Fox. There was also
a carved facia, on which the pelican was repeated, with the holy
lamb and oak leaves, the style of all which entirely disagreed with
that of the altar-piece below. On the removal of the modern screen,
a series of small tabernacle-niches was discovered on the partition
behind, the canopies of which had been cut down to almost a level
surface; though they still possessed so much beauty as to cause the
restoration of the whole to become a circumstance of the greatest
interest. This was completed in the commencement of 1834, by Mr.
Robert Wallace, the Architect of the Church, Mr. Firth, the Contractor,
and Mr. Purdy, the principal Carver; the contract amounting to only
the sum of £700. The ancient material of this Screen was Firestone
and the stone of Caen; and the restoration has been executed in
stone from Painswick, in Gloucestershire, which agrees well with the
former. Wherever it was practicable the original work has been
retained, but nearly the whole of the ornamental carvings have been
wrought from moulds and replaced in the precise situations of the
ancient sculpture whence they were taken. The whole screen is lofty,
and the general composition of it is divided into three stories in
height and as many partitions in breadth. In the centre of the lowest
story is a space for the altar, with three tall tablets and canopies
above; and on each side is a door with a depressed pointed arch. On
each side of the doorways is a niche rising from the ground, flanked
by slender buttresses and covered with a triangular tabernacle of
two canopied arches, with the angular point in front. In each niche is
a tall pedestal with a richly carved head; and above the doors are
short double canopies of a similar style, though rising above those
on the sides, and breaking the line of a broad frieze of demi-angels,
above which is a narrow line of carved pelicans, holy lambs, and
scrolls. These terminate the first story; and the above second and
third are composed of a large niche in the centre, with a semi-
hexagonal canopy, placed between five niches on each side, with
pedestals and canopies like those below; whilst a second frieze of
angels, etc., parts the two stories. As the story finished the remains
of the ancient screen, Mr. Wallace has designed a termination of an
entablature of angels supporting shields, with a crown-like cornice
above; something similar to which most probably surmounted the
original design.” (Londina Illustrata, vol. i.)
 CHAPTER XIV
ST. THOMAS’S HOSPITAL
The commonly received opinion as to the Foundation of this
Hospital is that it sprang out of an Almonry belonging to
Bermondsey Abbey, founded in 1213 by Richard, Prior of that House.
This statement was made by Stow, and has been followed by Strype,
Maitland, and others; Wilkinson, however, does not agree with it.
According to Tanner and Dugdale, the Almonry of the Abbey,
consisting of an almshouse for converts and a school for poor boys,
was attached to the walls of the House, was dedicated to St.
Thomas of Canterbury, and was under the government of the
Monastery Almoner. This Almonry perished with the Abbey in the
Dissolution, and had nothing to do with the Hospital of St. Thomas.
It is stated by Tanner that after the Fire of 1212, which destroyed
the church of St. Mary Overies together with their Hospital or
Almonry, the Prior and brethren erected a Hospital near their ruins in
which they established their church for a time. When their own
House was rebuilt, Peter de Rupibus, Bishop of Winchester,
transferred the Hospital to the other side of the causeway for some
supposed advantages of air. It was built on ground belonging to
Amicius, Archdeacon of Surrey, and dedicated to St. Thomas the
Martyr. It was always in the patronage of the Bishop of Winchester. A
list of the Masters is preserved.
Stow, however, says that the Hospital was held of the Abbey of
Bermondsey, and that in the year 1428 Thetford, then the Abbot,
sold to the Master of the Hospital the right to keep all the lands
belonging to the Abbey and then held by the Hospital at a small
rent.
It is impossible to reconcile these statements unless we suppose
that the Hospital itself, always separate from, and independent of,
the Abbey, was occupying lands of the Abbey of which it desired to
keep the control.
On the Dissolution, the House was valued at a yearly income of
£309: 1: 11 clear; it had a Master, Brethren, three lay sisters, and
made up forty aids for the sick with food and firing.
In 1552 the City bought the House of Edward the Sixth and
opened it again as a Hospital.
The place has little history. The brethren had at their gates the
right of market for corn and other commodities. The Archdeacon of
Surrey, in 1238, had a hall, a chapel, a stable, and a residence in the
Hospital. The Bishops of Winchester claimed the right of visitation,
which was exercised on more than one occasion.
The old buildings continued until the close of the seventeenth
century, when they were taken down and the Hospital was erected
in their place. This House remained until it became necessary to
destroy it, in order to make way for the railway station and extension
on its site. The demolition of old St. Thomas’s is one of the few acts
of destruction which one can regard with satisfaction. For the
removal of the Hospital to the crowded streets of Lambeth, leaving
Guy’s for the eastern part of South London, was unquestionably a
great gain to the former, and no loss to the latter, which is fully
served by Guy’s.
 CHAPTER XV
ST. GILES-IN-THE-FIELDS
The Hospital known as St. Giles-in-the-Fields was founded by
Maud, Queen of Henry the First, about the year 1117. It was a large
foundation, designed for forty lepers, the Master, Chaplains,
Matrons, and servants.
The original endowment was only £3 a year, which, even in the
twelfth century, would not go far towards the support of forty lepers.
It appears, however, as if the custom of lepers going about begging
with a bowl and a clapper was considered the right thing, because it
is said that the Proctor of the House went begging for the lepers.
Probably those who could crawl were allowed at the outset to beg
for themselves.
But other benefactions fell in. The lepers obtained rents and lands
at Isleworth, St. Clement Danes, and round their own house; they
also obtained the manor of Feltham in Middlesex; Henry the Second
gave them lands at Heston; people left them houses in London; the
House became wealthy.
There were many dissensions and disputes as to the rule and
management of this House. They were finally terminated by Edward
the Third, who placed it under the authority of the House of Burton
Lazars, the central Leper Hospital of England.
The area covered by the ground of the Hospital consisted of eight
acres, which was afterwards largely increased. The Hospital
buildings were situated near to the present church on the west of it;
they were surrounded by a triangular wall running along Crown
Street (formerly Hog Lane), High Street, and Monmouth Street. At
the lower end of what is now the Tottenham Court Road on the west
side of it was the Pound: when the gallows was removed from the
Elms at Smithfield, it was set up at the north end of the Hospital
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookmasss.com