Skip to main content

Full text of "The English historical review"

See other formats


Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2007 with funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 




{ II) ^ 














Centuriation in Roman Britain. By F. Haverfield, LL.D. . 289 

Centuriation in Middlesex. By Montagu SJiarpe . . . 489 
The Earliest Use of the Cycle of Dionysius. By Reginald 

L. Poole, LL.D 56, 210 

The Supremacy of the Mercian Kings. By F. M. Stenton . 433 
The Beginning of the Year in the Alfredian Chronicle 

(866-87). By Murray L. R. Beaven . . . .328 

King Edmund I and the Danes of York. By Murray L. R. 

Beaven .......... 1 

A Charter of Canute for Fecamp. By Charles H. Haskins, 

Litt.D 342 

The Hundred-Pennies. By Miss E. B. Demarest. . . 62 
The Office of Sheriff in the Early Norman Period. By 

W.A.Morris 145 

Sokemen and the Village Waste. By jP. M. Stenton . . 344 
Some Castle Officers in the Twelfth Century. By Gaillard 

Lapsley, Ph.D 348 

Leo Tuscus. By Charles H. Haskins, Litt.D 492 

Provincial Priors and Vicars of the English Dominicans. 

By the Rev. Walter Gumbley, O.P 243 

ByA.G. Little 496 

The Sources for the First Council of Lyons, 1245. By 

W. E. Lunt, Ph.D 72 

Cardinal Ottoboni and the Monastery of Stratford 

Langthorne. By Miss Rose Graham . . . .213 
The Early History of the Merchant Staplers. By Miss 

Grace Faulkner Ward ....... 297 

Friar Malachy OF Ireland. ByM.Esposito . . . 359 

Robert Bruce's Rebellion in 1306. By Charles Johnson . 366 

A Political Agreement of June 1318. By Edward Salisbury . 78 

' Barons ' and ' Peers '. By J. H. Round, LL.D. . . . 453 

The Annals of the Abbots of Oseney. By the Rev. H. E. 

Salter . . 498 



The Navy under Henry VII. By Captain C. S. Goldingham, 

R.M.L.1 472 

The Medici Archives. By E. Armstrong . . , .10 
Memoranda of Hugo de Assendelff and Others. By P. S. 

Allen ........ 225 

Philip Wolf of Seligenstadt. By Reginald L. Poole . . 500 
Some Sixteenth-century Travellers in Naples. By 

Malcolm Letts ...... 176 

Queen Mary's Chapel Royal. By W. H. Grattan Flood, Mus.D. 83 
Fines under the Elizabethan Act of Uniformity. By 

W. P. M. Kennedy. ^^1 

OsTEND IN 1587. By Miss V. F. Boyson . . . .528 

Roads in England and Wales in 1603. By Miss Gladys Scott 

Thomson ..... 004. 

Robert Hayman and the Plantation of Newfoundland. 

By G. C. Moore Smith, LL.D. . . . . .21 

William Morice and the Restoration of Charles II. By 

Miss Mary Coate 3g« 

The Secrecy of the Post. By Edward Raymond Turner, Ph.D. 320 
The Graves of Swift and Stella. By ^^e Rev. H. J. Lawlor, D.D. 89 
British Policy towards the American Indians in the South. 

By Clarence E. Carter 3-7 

A Letter on the State of Ireland in 1797. By Bernard C. 

Steiner, Ph.D 070 

Pasquale ViLLARi. By E. Armstrong I97 

Reviews OF Books 94,252,382,531 

Short Notices 135,277,417,557 

Index . 


The English 

Historical Review 


King Ed7mmd I and the Danes of York 

THE history of the reign of Edmund I (939-46) is the history 
of that monarch's relations with the Danish settlers in North- 
umbria and with the three viking princes, Anlaf Guthfrithson, 
Anlaf Sihtricson, and Ragnvald Guthfrithson, who successively 
occupied the throne of York. The difficulty of distinguishing 
between Anlaf Guthfrithson and Anlaf Sihtricson, and the 
impossibility of reconciling the conflicting dates supplied by the 
various manuscripts of the Chronicle, have combined to render 
this period, 939-46, one of the obscurest in our national annals. 
A factor which has contributed towards the same result has 
been the prevailing misconception as to the year in which 
Edmund's reign began. In a recent note in this Review ^ I called 
attention to the circumstance that the entry in the Chronicle 
recording the death of Athelstan and the accession of Edmund 
in 940 is one year post-dated, the true date of Athelstan's decease 
having been 27 October 939.^ My object in the present article 
is to show how the transference of the twelve months, October 
939-October 940, from the reign of Athelstan to that of his 
brother simplifies the chronological aspect of the problem and 
makes it possible to construct a relatively accurate narrative of 
the sequence of events in the north of England between the death 
of Athelstan and the murder of Edmund.^ 

I Ante, xxxii. 517-31 (1917). 

* Athelstan died on 6 Kal. November, i.e. '27 October' (Chron. s.a. 940). it 
can be deduced from the language of the manuscript Tiberius A. 'iii that his death 
took place between the hours of 4 p.m. and 4 a.m. of the night of 26-7 October, the 
Anglo-Saxon day being held to begin at Vespers of what we should call the previous 
evening. It is therefore probable that Athelstan may have died on 20 October ; but 
since the exact hour of his death is unknown, I have preferred to retain the accepted 
date (27 October) in the text. 

^ The best account of Edmund's reign is that supplied by Professor Oman in his 
Enqland, before the Norman Conquest, 524-9. Unluckily, the author's acceptance of 


* All rights reserved 


The closing months of Athelstan's life were marked by no 
events of domestic importance. The grand coalition of the 
Irish Danes, the Scots, and the Cumbrians, organized by Anlaf 
Guthfrithson, at that time king of the Danes of Dublin, with 
a view in the first place to the recovery of the throne of North- 
umbria, had collapsed after the crushing defeat inflicted upon 
the confederates at Brunanburh in 937. York, which had been 
in Athelstan's hands since the death of Anlaf's uncle Sihtric 
and the expulsion of his father Guthfrith in 927, remained a part 
of the West Saxon king's dominions. Anlaf himself withdrew 
to Dublin, where in the course of 938 he had to repel a deter- 
mined assault upon his stronghold by the native Irish.^ In the 
following year we find him ravaging the churches of Kildare.^ 
Ireland, however, offered too narrow a field for his ambitions ; 
whilst the death of Athelstan in the autumn of 939 encouraged 
him to attempt a renewal of the enterprise which had failed so 
disastrously two years before. It is possible that the knowledge 
that the victor of Brunanburh was on his deathbed and that his 
heir was a boy of eighteen may already have determined Guth- 
frithson to make a second bid for the throne of York ; certainly 
little time can have been lost in preparations after the news of 
Athelstan's death became known in Ireland, for we learn from 
the Annals of the Four Masters that the armament destined for 
the invasion of Northumbria had quitted Dublin before the 
close of the year.^ The expedition seems to have encountered 
no resistance. Symeon of Durham merely notes that ' rex Onlaf 
venit Eboracum ' ; ' whilst the language of manuscript D of 
the Chronicle, ' Here the Northumbrians were false to their 
pHghted troth and chose Anlaf from Ireland for their king ', 
would seem to indicate that the Danes of York received the 
intruder with open arms.^ 

the date 940 for Athelstan's death has thrown liis chronology out of gear and caused 
confusion between the acts of the two Anlafs, though less than is to be found in other 

* Annals of Ulster, s. a. ' 937 {alias 938) ' : 938 is, of course, the date intended. 

5 Ibid. s.a. ' 938 {alias 939) '. 

« ' The foreigners, i. e. Amhlaeibh mac Gothfrith, deserted Ath-cliath by the help 
of God and Mactail' : Annals oftheFour Masters (ed. J. O' Donovan), s. a. 937 (= 939). 
The chronology of the Four Masters, as can be shown by comparison with the Annals 
of Ulster, is here consistently two years in arrear. That the expedition left Dublin 
very late in the year is confirmed by the position of this entry, which appears at the 
end of a long annal. 

' Symeon of Durham, Historia Begum (ed. Arnold), ii. 93, s. a. 939. 

« Chronicle (D), 6-. a. 941. The incorrect dating of D, which supplies us with 
more detail than the other manuscripts of the Chronicle, has largely contributed to 
confuse the chronology of Edmund's reign. 'Anlaf from Ireland' is Anlaf 
Guthfrithson, king of Dublin. This is distinctly stated by the Four Masters, s. a. 937 
<- 939), and is imphed by Symeon of Durham; but Dr. Todd {War of the Gcedhill 
with the Gaill, appendix D, 280-4), Sir James Ramsay {Foundations of England, 295), 
and others, have taken him to be Anlaf Cuaran. 


The establishment of Anlaf Guthfrithson at York must have 
taken place in the last days of 939 or, more probably, early in 
940 ; ^ and Edmund thus saw his dominions curtailed at the 
very moment of his accession to the throne. Moreover, the 
warrior who had led the great adventure of 937 was not the 
man to rest content with the acquisition of Northumbria ; he 
aspired to recover the whole Danelaw, if not to anticipate the 
role of Knut by making himself master of all England. Some 
time in the course of 940 — probably in the late summer or early 
autumn, for it was the practice of the vikings of the ninth and 
tenth centuries to commence military operations at this season — 
Anlaf burst into the territory of the Five Boroughs and advanced 
as far south as Northampton before his progress was stayed. 
A sharp campaign now ensued in the eastern Midlands. Re- 
pulsed by the townsmen of Northampton, the king of York was 
more successful at Tamworth, where ^Ethelflaed's burh was 
carried by storm, and much slaughter was committed on either 
side. Here Guthfrithson's success stopped short. Edmund, 
whose inactivity during the preceding months may be accounted 
for by the unexpectedness of the Danish incursion into regions 
where no enemy had been seen for a generation, was at last in 
the field. Anlaf withdrew with his plunder to Leicester, ^^ where 
he was forthwith beset by the English fyrd. According to 
manuscript D the Danish king ' burst out of the burh by night ' ; 
this must be taken to mean that Anlaf cut his way through the 
besiegers with his army, possibly inflicting a serious blow upon 
Edmund in the process, for it is clear from the negotiations 
which followed that the Danes regarded themselves, and were 
regarded by the English, as having had by no means the 
worst of the campaign. Peace was now restored. The two 
archbishops, Oda of Canterbury and Wulfstan of York, united 
to mediate between the belligerents, and a treaty was concluded 
by which Guthfrithson's conquests were legalized. In the words 
of Symeon of Durham, to whom we are indebted for our fullest 
account of these occurrences, ' the boundary of each realm was 
to be Watling Street : Edmund retained the southern part, 
whilst Anlaf held to the northern kingdom '.^i 

^ Symeon of Durham, who has an annal for 941 but none for 940, records the 
death of Athelstan, the seizure of York, and the subsequent campaign in the Five 
Boroughs, all under the year 939. Since Athelstan died at the end of October, it is 
obvious that Symeon has here, as in other instances (e. g. the annal for 910), run the 
events of two years into one. 

^° Mr. Oman is clearly right in taking Symeon' s ' Legraceastre ' to be Leicester 
— not Chester, as held by Sir James Ramsay. The latter would render the strategy 
of the campaign and the subsequent treaty unintelligible. 

" Symeon of Durham, ii. 94, s.a. 939 ( = 939 plus 940 : supra, n. 9). Manuscript D, 
the only version of the Chronicle which records the Tamworth-Leicester operations, 
assigns them to 943, omitting, howevfer, all mention of the__mediation of the two 



The retrocession of the Watling Street frontier is one of 
those mysterious incidents which make the history of the West 
Saxon monarchy so exasperating and at the same time so fascinat- 
ing to the investigator. It is difficult to understand how Edmund, 
whose career proves him to have been a hard fighter and a stal- 
wart champion of the imperialist claims of his predecessors, can 
have brought himself to contemplate what amounted to the 
undoing of the work both of his father and of his brother. At 
the same time I cannot agree with Professor Oman that ' it is 
surely impossible to believe Symeon of Durham's statement that 
Anlaf was regarded as king not only of Northumbria, but of 
Mercia, as far as Watling Street '.-^^ Symeon's narrative is 
straightforward and consistent ; this section of his work is based 
upon some Northumbrian annals of apparently contemporary 
composition ; ^^ and it is impossible upon any other hypothesis 
than that the Five Boroughs, at least, were for a time under 
Anlaf s control to account for the jubilation with which the 
Chronicle records their recovery two years later. The entire 
Danelaw south of the Northumbrian frontier had been reduced 
by Edward the Elder in the great campaigns of 911-20. None 
of the territories thus regained had been surrendered by Athelstan, 
who, on the contrary, had extended West Saxon rule over the 
kingdom of York. Hence, if the Chronicle is accurate in stating 
that Edmund recovered the Five Boroughs in 942 — which there 
is no reason to doubt — it is plain that he must previously 
have lost them ; and the occasion of their cession can only have 
been, as Symeon says it was, the East Midland campaign of 940. 
On the other hand, there is no reason for supposing that Anlaf 's 
gains by the treaty of 940 extended further south than the 
Welland. Anlaf, as we have seen, had been repulsed from 

archbishops and of the treaty which followed. Modern writers, as a rule, have followed 
D, Symeon's version being rejected partly because his date, 939, ran counter to the 
accepted view that Athelstan died in 940, and partly because Archbishop Oda is 
generally held, upon the authority of Stubbs, to have become primate in 942. But 
D's annal for 943, like others in this manuscript, is of a highly composite character 
(see Plummer, Two Saxon Chronicles, ii, p. Ixxxi, note), showing obvious signs of 
having been pieced together from various sources ; whilst the evidence that Oda's 
predecessor, Wulfhelm, survived the year 940 rests upon certain charters of the year 
941 (Birch, Cartvlarium Saxonicum, nos. 766, 768, 770), in one of which Edwy is 
made to sign, though he cannot have been more than a year old. On the other hand, 
we find Oda witnessing as archbishop in 940 {ibid., no. 761) and again in 941 {ibid., 
no. 769), and there are two or three charters of 940 in which neither Wulfhelm nor 
Oda signs as primate, which would seem to suggest that there may have been a vacancy 
at Canterbury at this period. Since the majority of the charters for 940 are witnessed 
by Wulfhelm I conclude that Oda may have succeeded him fairly late in the year ; 
incidentally, this would bear out the view I have expressed in the text that the invasion 
of the Five Boroughs took place in the autumn. Unluckily, none of the charters cited 
are originals, and some of them are derived from suspicious sources. 

" England before the Norman Conquest, p. 526. 

** Symeon of Durham, ii, introduction, pp. xxiv-v. 


Northampton and forced to withdraw into the Five Boroughs. 
Peace would presumably have been arranged upon a basis of uti 
possidetis, and in accordance with that principle the East Anglian 
shires and the modern counties of Northampton, Huntingdon, 
Bedford, and Cambridge, which had formed part of the original 
Danelaw, would naturally have remained in English hands. ^* 

Whatever interpretation we may place upon this treaty, the 
arrangement it embodied was ephemeral. Anlaf Guthfrithson's 
ambition was insatiable ; no sooner had he concluded peace 
with the king of Wessex than he turned his arms against the 
territories of his northern neighbour, the lord of Bamborough. 
In 941 he made a descent upon the coast of Bernicia, and sacked 
the town of Tyningham on the southern shore of the Firth of 
Forth. His death took place in the same year.^^ He does not 
seem to have fallen in battle. The Annals of Clonmacnoise 
simply state that ' Awley m^Godfrey king of Danes died ' ; ^^ 
whilst the language of Symeon of Durham, ' Olilaf ^' vastata 
ecclesia Sancti Balteri et incensa Tyningaham mox periit ', 
would seem to suggest that his end was attributed to the wrath 
of the saint, in other words that it was due to natural causes. 
Whatever the circumstances, his death was a happy accident 
for Edmund, for the whole career of Anlaf Guthfrithson, both 
as king of Dublin and as king of York, shows him to have been 
the most capable and enterprising antagonist whom the West 
Saxon kings were called upon to withstand during the century 
between the departure of Hasting and the coming of Sweyn 

On the death of Anlaf Guthfrithson the Northumbrians 

^* The absence of any reference to East Anglia and the lands south of the Welland 
in the annal in which the Chronicle records Edmund's recovery of Derby, Nottingham, 
Leicester, Lincoln, and Stamford, makes it morally certain that Anlaf s gains were 
restricted to the Five Boroughs. 

^5 Symeon of Durham, ii. 94, s. a. 941 ; Chronicle (E, F), s. a. 942. Mr. Oman, who 
assigns the death of Athelstan to 940 and the Tamworth-Leicester campaign to 941, 
accepts the Chronicle's date. 

1^ Annals of Clonmacnoise (ed. D. Murphy), s. a. 934 (=941); so, too, the 
Chronicon Scotorum (ed. W. Hennessy), s. a. 940 (=941), ' Amhlaibh son of Goth- 
frith, king of the Finn-Gaill and Dubh-Gaill, mortuus est.' The Annals of Clon- 
macnoise, when their dating is corrected, furnish us with valuable material for the 
history of Edmund's reign. From ' 921 ' to ' 929' (= 926-34) the entries are five 
years antedated, a sixth year being dropped in ' 930' (= 935 plus 936), a seventh in 
' 933 ' ( = 939 plus 940), and an eighth in ' 937 ' ( = 944 plus 945). The absence of 
annals for ' 938 ', ' 939 ', and ' 940 ', reduces the error again to five years ; the entry 
for ' 941 ', ' Ettymon (i. e. Edmund) king of the Saxons was killed by his own familie', 
being equivalent to 946. 

" 'Olilaf is an obvious clerical error for 'Onlaf, the form which the name 
assumes in Symeon of Durham. The king referred to is certainly Anlaf Guthfrithson. 
Sir James Ramsay, however {Foundations of England, 295-6), takes Olilaf to be ' a 
third Olaf '. Since the writer also identifies Anlaf Guthfrithson with Anlaf Cuaran, 
the confusion which results is lamentable. 


chose as their king his cousin and namesake, Anlaf Sihtricson, 
better known by his cognomen of Cuaran.^^ The early history 
of Anlaf Sihtricson is obscure, and does not fall within the scope 
of this paper. He was probably much younger than his kins- 
man, ^^ as whose lieutenant he appears to have acted during the 
critical years, 937-41. In that capacity he seems to have been 
left behind in Dubhn when Guthfrithson sailed for Northumbria 
in 939 ; but late in 940 he arrived in England, apparently at 
Guthfrithson's invitation, for we are told that ' Awley Cuaran 
came to York, and Blackare m^Godfrey (i. e. Guthfrithson's 
brother) arrived in Dublin to govern the Danes '.^o gome re- 
arrangement of the viking kinglets may well have been rendered 
necessary by the expansion of Anlaf Guthfrithson's domain, 
which at the close of 940 extended over a large part of the British 
Isles, embracing, in addition to Northumbria and the Five 
Boroughs, the Hebrides, the Isle of Man, and the Norse settle- 
ments on the coasts of Scotland and Ireland. But the actual 
motive which had prompted Guthfrithson to recall his lieutenant 
from Dublin was, doubtless, the desire to reinforce himself from 
his Irish garrisons in view of the approaching campaign in the 
Midlands. However that may be, when Guthfrithson died in 
941, Anlaf Cuaran was on the spot, and thus succeeded to the 
dominions formerly held by his father Sihtric,^^ enlarged by the 
acquisition of the Five Boroughs. He was not long to enjoy 
them undisturbed. By the side of Anlaf Guthfrithson, Anlaf 
Cuaran, in spite of his long and romantic career,^^ impresses us 
as a mediocre genius. As an untried opponent,^^ Edmund may 

^^ ' Filius vero Sihtrici, nomine Onlaf, regnavit super Northanhymbros ' : Symeon 
of Durham, ii. 94, s. a. 941. 

^* Anlaf s father, Sihtric, is said to have died ' immatura aetate' in 927 {Annals 
of Ulster, s. a. 926 ' alias 927 ' ), and Sihtricson himself survived his cousin by forty 
years [infra, n. 22). Anlaf Guthfrithson appears in history as early as 919, when he 
seems to have been the ' Amhlaeibh ' who slew Niall Glundubh, High-king of Ireland, 
at the battle of Kilmashogue {Four Masters, s. a. 917). 

20 Annals of Clonmacnoise, s.a. 933 (= 939 plus 980); Four Masters, s.a. 938 
(=940), The circumstance that the entry recording Anlaf s coming to York is in 
each case one of the last in the annal suggests, though it does not prove, that the 
event took place late in 940. 

^^ Sihtric Caoch ('the One-eyed') was king of York from 921 to 927. He was 
the same Sihtric who had re- established the Danes in Dublin by his victories at 
Cennfuait (917) and Kilmashogue (919). 

22 After repeatedly occupying the thrones of York and Dublin, Anlaf Cuaran died 
at lona, whither he had gone on pilgrimage after the great defeat inflicted upon the 
Irish Danes by Malachy II at Tara, about the year 980. He has been supposed to 
be the prototjrpe of the hero of the medieval romance, Havelok the Dane, although 
there is little in his career, except his name, to justify the identification. 

2a I can find no evidence to support the usual view that Anlaf Sihtricson was one 
of the leaders, if not the actual ringleader, in the invasion of 937. The commander 
at Brunanburh was certainly Anlaf Guthfrithson. On the other hand, Sihtricson 
may well have been present at the battle in a subordinate capacity. 


have feared him less than his redoubtable predecessor ; in any 
case, in 942 the king of Wessex moved north with the fyrd, and, 
in the words of the Chronicle, ' overran Mercia up to where 
Dore, Whitewell's gate, and Humber's river form the boundary ' 
between Mercia and Northumbria.^^ The Five Boroughs were 
thus ' redeemed ' and resumed their former allegiance to the 
crown of Wessex. The joy of the English nation at this reversal 
of the humiliation of 940 finds expression in the triumphant 
paean of victory which here, as in 937, to the profit of the linguist 
but the loss of the historian, replaces the ordinarily sober annals 
of the Chronicle. 

The recovery of the Boroughs was apparently not the only 
military operation in which Edmund was engaged in 942. We 
learn from the Annals of Clonmacnoise that in this year ' Idvall 
m<^Anoroit prince of Brittons (i. e. Idwal ap Anarawd, king of 
Gwynedd) was killed by the Saxons ', from which we may infer 
that there was serious trouble with the Welsh. ^^ Meanwhile the 
reduction of the Five Boroughs was followed by the submission 
of Anlaf Cuaran, who, like his father Sihtric, seems generally to 
have favoured a policy of understanding with Wessex. ^^ Early 
in 943 he consented to undergo baptism, and we are told that 
he was received and ' royally gifted ' by the EngHsh king. The 
entry in the Chronicle which records this event runs as follows : 
' 943. Here King Edmund received King Anlaf at baptism ; 
and the same year, a good long time after, he received King 
Raegnold at the bishop's hands.' ^7 Who was this Ragnvald, 
and what was his status in Northumbria ? If the Chronicle is 

2* Manuscripts B, C, D, s.a. 942;' the Parker manuscript (whose original reading, 
however, was 942) gives 941. The patriotic compiler of the Northumbrian annals 
incorporated by Symeon of Durham omits all mention of the English recovery of the 
Five Boroughs, just as the Chronicle, doubtless from a similar motive, abstains from 
recording their conquest by Guthfrithson two years before. 

25 Annals oj Clonmacnoise, s.a. 935 (= 942). The Annates Gambriae record the 
death of Idwal and his brother Elised in battle with the Saxons under 943 ; but the 
dating of the Annales Gambriae, which place the death of Anlaf Guthfrithson in 942, 
the harrying of Cumberland in 946, and the murder of Edmund in 947, is here uniformly 
one year in advance of the true chronology. The circumstance that the baptism of 
Anlaf appears to have taken place early in 943 would seem to suggest that the Welsh 
campaign preceded the operations in the Five Boroughs, and that the latter must be 
placed late in the year. 

28 Anlaf seems to have been acting as Edred's vassal during his second reign in 
Northumbria (949-52). His father, Sihtric, had married Athelstan's sister in 926, 
and remained in alliance with Wessex till his death. 

2^ From 943 onwards the dates supplied by the Parker manuscript (A), which is 
here supported by B.and D, may be accepted as accurate. There is an annal for each 
of the years 943-6, and since that for 946, recording the death of Edmund, is correctly 
dated, there appears to be no room for any error. Mr. Oman, however, follows 
manuscript C in assigning the conversion of the kings to 942, making the event precede 
the death of Guthfrithson, which he places in that year {supra, n. 15). But this is to 
baptize the wrong Anlaf. 


correct in describing him in its next annal as ' Raegnold Gufch- 
frithson ', he must have been a brother of Anlaf Guthfrithson 
in which case it is not surprising that he should have regarded 
himself as having an equal right with Anlaf Cuaran to the throne 
of York. That he was reigning as Anlaf's rival— apparently his 
successful rival— and not as his colleague is made plain by the 
fact that Symeon of Durham, s. a. 943, states that ' the Northum- 
brians expelled their king Onlaf from the realm '. The solution 
would seem to be that some time in the summer of 943 the fickle 
Danes, perhaps irritated by Anlaf's loss of the Five Boroughs 
and his complaisance towards Wessex, transferred their allegiance 
to his cousin, and that Anlaf was driven from York, although it 
IS clear from what followed that he continued to hold a footing 
in the north of England. The expulsion of his protege must have 
brought Edmund a second time upon the scene. We read of no 
fighting : probably Ragnvald preferred not to abide the issue of 
a struggle. His baptism or confirmation late in 943 would be 
the outward and visible sign of his acceptance of West Saxon 

Down to the close of 943 Edmund's policy appears to have 
been to avoid driving the Danes to extremities. In the following 
year he adopted an attitude more consonant with his dignity as 
Basileus. What considerations dictated this change of policy 
we cannot say ; but it is probable that the spectacle of the 
civil war between Ragnvald and Anlaf may have determined 
him to put an end once for all to the anarchy of the north. 
The Chronicle tells us, s. a. 944, that ' King Edmund subdued all 
Northumbna under his sway and expelled two kings, Anlaf 
Sihtncson and Raegnold Guthfrithson '. The Annals of Clon- 
rmcnoue supply the additional detail that 'the king of the 
Danes was killed by the Saxons at Yorke '.^b „ t^is statement 
IS accurate-It is not corroborated by our other authorities- 
the king who was reigning at York in 944, and who thus met his 
end, must have been Ragnvald Guthfrithson, since Anlaf Sihtric- 
son survived his expulsion for forty years and, indeed, Hved to 
enjoy a second tenure of the precarious Northumbrian throne 2» 
.r.^T T T"" '°'*,T°dence was now at an end for a season, 
and the situation at York reverted to what it had been during 

over In 945, we are told by the Chronicle, 'King Edmund 
harried aU Cumberland and granted it all to Malcolm, Mng of 
Scots, on condition that he should be his fellow worker both 
ZtTi:fZ '^I'V T''^-Pl--«on of this rather baffling 
entry is doubtless that put forward by Mr. Oman, who suggests 

^^ Annals of Clonmacnoise, s. a. 937 (= 944 'dus q4'>^ 
" Supra, notes 22 and 26. '' 


that by ' Cumberland ' the chronicler intended to signify not, as 
it has sometimes been taken to mean, the Celtic kingdom of 
' Strathclyde ', which was already elBfectively under Scottish 
influence, but the obscure Scandinavian settlement on the shores 
of the Solway which had been planted by Norse colonists from 
Ireland between the years 890 and 920.^^ This viking ' no man's 
land ' may well have harboured Anlaf Cuaran after his flight 
from York in 943, and it is possible that its inhabitants had lent 
him aid in his struggle with Ragnvald Guthfrithson in that and 
the following year. If we may assume that Anlaf had again 
found refuge there after the debacle of 944, it is easy to under- 
stand why Edmund should have found it necessary to follow 
up his conquest of Northumbria by the ravaging of Cumberland. 
This hypothesis gains support from the circumstance that we 
have no record of Anlaf 's return to Ireland before 945, in which 
year we learn from the Annals of Clonmacnoise that ' Blacairey 
(i. e. Blakar Guthfrithson) was banished from Dublin and Awley 
(i. e. Anlaf Cuaran) succeeded him to the government.' ^^ 

By the opening of the year 946 the pacification of the north 
was complete. The reign of Edmund was now nearing its close. 
On 26 May 946 the young king — he was only twenty-five — was 
murdered by the outlaw Leofa at Pucklechurch. In spite of 
the momentary weakness of 940 and the apparent caution which 
characterized his early dealings with Anlaf Cuaran and Ragnvald 
Guthfrithson, Edmund had worthily upheld the imperial tradi- 
tions of Athelstan and Edward the Elder. His brother Edred, 
who succeeded him, was confronted with similar difficulties, and 
in his turn was obliged to lead several expeditions to York before 
Northumbria was finally reincorporated in the West Saxon 
realm. But the reign of Edred falls outside the limits of this 
article. Murray L. R. Beaven. 

30 England before the Norman Conquest, 527-8. 

31 Annals of Clonmacnoise, s.a. 937 (= 944 'plus 945); Four Masters, s.a. 943 
= 945). 

10 January 

The Medici Archives 

RARELY, if ever, can documents concerning a single family 
have come into the market which have such a range as 
A. D. 1084 to 1771 and are of such importance as the Medici 
archives which are to meet their fate at Christie's on 4 February 
and the three following days.i They form, needless to say, 
a collection of consummate interest for all students of ItaHan 
history. The name Medici first appears in the second document, 
dated 5 December 1240, which relates to the bankruptcy of 
Guido Guerra, whom Dante has immortahzed in canto xvi of 
the Inferno. In this Ugo and Galgano de' Medici appear among 
the creditors. The earHest Medici mentioned in the catalogue 
as holding pubHc office is Bonino, who as Gonfalonier of Justice 
grants a pardon, which is signed by Salvi Medici, notary pubHc. 
The Medici, however, had been before this a powerful and trouble- 
some family throughout the stormy times which preceded and 
followed Dante's exile. 

The first section of the documents is mainly concerned with 
deeds of gift and sale, marriage contracts, wills, receipts, powers 
of attorney, legal opinions, presentations to benefices, papal 
briefs, patents of naturalization and nobiHty. An illustration 
is given of one of two briefs by Leo X, written and signed in the 
beautiful handwriting of Bembo. 

From an historical and biographical point of view the chief 
value of the collection consists in Lorenzo's letters, of which 166 
are holograph, and which, together with other political documents, 
form the second and third sections of the catalogue. Most of 
the letters were written to Pietro Alamanni, Florentine ambas- 
sador first at Milan and then at Rome, beginning with 11 May 
1489 and ending with 20 March 1492, very shortly before Lorenzo's 
death. With these are many dispatches from the Otto di Pratica, 
a committee for affairs of state, and some from the official govern- 
ment, the Signoria. There is, however, a gap from October 
1489, the close of Alamanni's embassy to Milan, until his arrival 
at Rome early in 1491. This correspondence was, as was cus-^^ 

'^^t^jogue of the Medici Archives, the propeTty of the Marquis Cosimo de' Medici 
and the Marquis Averardo de' Medici (1917). 


tomary until long afterwards, the property of the ambassador. 
The present owners are the descendants of Giovenco, second 
son of Averardo, who died in 1314, from whom Cosimo and 
Ills brother Lorenzo, ancestor of the grand-ducal Hne, were de- 
rived in the fourth degree of the elder line. Raffaello de' Medici 
(1543-1628) married Costanza Alamanni, who in all probability 
brought these documents to the junior branch of Medici. A few 
other letters of interest are also comprised in the second section, 
notably one from the good-natured Leonello d'Este to Lorenzo's 
grandfather Cosimo, begging him to have no reserve, but to 
' open his bag ' as he would to a son, and several from Ludovico 
il Moro. Illustrations of the caligraphy of these notabilities are 
printed, as is one of a letter from Caterina Sforza. Charles VIII 
of France also figures among Lorenzo's correspondents. 

Pietro Alamanni was Lorenzo's intimate friend. He was 
knighted by Ludovico il Moro before leaving his post at Milan, 
and was intended to act as ambassador at Naples. On reaching 
Rome, however, he was detained by Lorenzo's orders, and was 
here ' coached ' by Pier Fihppo Pandolfini, who had represented 
Florence at the Vatican since Lanfredini's death. Alamanni was 
apparently modest as to his ability to cope with a group of 
clever and experienced cardinals belonging to different political 
factions. He wrote, however, that he had visited most of them 
with Pandolfini, and found them much like ordinary men : when 
young he had to please several ladies at the same time, and 
often with success, but Lorenzo knew that he had failed one 
St. Lucy's eve, and, with all his goodwill, this might happen 
with one of the cardinals. Lorenzo replied on 15 January 1491 
that he knew that as a young man Alamanni had to keep two 
or three ladies amused together, and that the cardinals would 
give him no greater trouble : all that was needful was to be 
discreet, to say nothing that could displease any one who con- 
fided in him, to try and gain with everybody, and lose with 
no one. This was the ideal of diplomacy which Lorenzo impressed 
upon his envoys. These letters of Lorenzo have never appa- 
rently been utiUzed. Fabronius has printed several addressed to 
Alamanni's predecessor at Rome, Lanfredini, and B. Buser 
in Lorenzo als Staatsmann gives one addressed to Alamanni on 
17 May 1491, but this does not exactly correspond with any 
analysed in the catalogue. As is often the case, the reader is 
tantaHzed by only getting one side of the correspondence, but, 
if Alamanni's books of minutes for his letters should fall to the 
same purchaser, they would to some extent fill the gap. 

Lorenzo's chief task was to prevent a renewal of the recent 
war between Innocent VIII and Ferrante of Naples. The king 
still held captive some of his barons, whom Innocent thought 


secured by the treaty of peace, and whose release he, as suzerain 
of Naples, peremptorily ordered. Ferrante also refused to pay 
the customary tribute, which had indeed been waived by SixtusIV. 
The quarrel was accentuated by the revolt of Ascoli, the pic- 
turesque city on the Tronto, often a bone of contention between 
the papacy and Naples ; the citizens had added to this iniquity 
by raiding the little papal town of Offida. Ferrante marched 
troops up to his frontier under Virginio Orsini, a near relation 
of Lorenzo's wife, who had left Florentine service for the pur- 
pose. Thus was trailed a coat on which the passionate pope 
was only too much inclined to tread. Lorenzo's plan was that 
the two neutral members of the long triple alliance between 
Milan, Florence, and Naples should combine in effecting a re- 
conciliation. He was sincerely anxious to protect the pope, 
whose son Franceschetto Cib5 had married his daughter. Innocent 
was not a comfortable client for a would-be mediator. Lanfredini 
had described him on 21 October 1489 as a perfect simpleton, 
whose passion was such that if Lorenzo alone gave him any 
encouragement, he would do violence to his own instincts, both 
in the matter of spending money, and in seeking adherents 
outside Italy .^ Innocent threatened Ferrante with deprivation 
and interdict, and Virginio Orsini with excommunication, an 
operazione diahoUca, as Lorenzo called it. He had thoughts 
of retiring to Avignon, which his mentor told him would do no 
good at all. On the other hand, Lorenzo's professed partner in 
the mediation was a most untrustworthy ally. Ludovico il Moro 
mistook complexity for cleverness : he was never content with 
one combination at a time. Lorenzo beheved that he did not 
himself know what he wanted, that he would finally act as his 
mood dictated, and end of his own accord by giving himself 
away cheap. This is precisely what was to happen in later 
years. Ludovico 's natural inclination would have been towards 
Ferrante, who had helped him to the government of Milan, and 
whose grand- daughter had married the young duke, Ludovico's 
nephew and ward. The marriage, however, was not a success ; 
several of Lorenzo's letters relate to a project of Ludovico for 
engineering a divorce between the young couple and marrying 
the wife himself. This, thought Lorenzo, might satisfy Ferrante ; 
but the scheme came to nothing, and Ludovico married Beatrice 
d'Este, the prime cause of the rupture with Naples and of the 
troubles of Italy throughout coming centuries. Between the 
pope's ill humour towards himself and Ludovico's bad manners 
towards the pope, Lorenzo confessed that he did not know where 
he stood. 

Alamanno was, after all, right in his original nervousness as 

2 Buser, Die Beziehungen der Mediceer zu Frankreich, 14S4-94, p. 522. 


to dealing with cardinals. Never had faction run so high in the 
college as among the wealthy, high-born cardinals whom the 
old pope, at once weak, obstinate, and passionate, was quite 
unable to control. Lorenzo's letters constantly refer to il Malm- 
cense&sheingthe evil geniusatRome. This worthy is not identified 
in the catalogue; he was Federigo da San Severino, son of 
Innocent's late captain-general, Roberto, count of Caiazzo, who, 
when bishop-elect of Maillezaix (a suffragan see of Bordeaux), 
had been nominated cardinal with Giovanni de' Medici. Lorenzo 
was anxious to keep his son from contact with him, and it may 
be noted that long after his death the Cardinal Medici and the 
Cardinal San Severino respectively represented Pope JuHus II 
and the schismatic council of Pisa in the battle of Ravenna. 
This pope, as Cardinal GiuHano della Rovere, was also suspected 
by Lorenzo, but, as he was a rival of il Maleacense, Alamanni 
was instructed to be civil to him. Lorenzo's chief rehance was 
on the Genoese cardinal of Santa Anastasia, whose favour he 
thought cheaply bought by the reversion of a Florentine benefice 
of 200 ducats, the occupant of which, his own natural brother, 
was in excellent health at the time of writing. 

It was clear that a conflict between Rome and Naples could 
not be locahzed ; it could not even be confined to Italy. The 
northern, western, and eastern powers were all on the look out. 
The pope was alarmed at the news that Matthias Corvinus had 
occupied Ancona and was intriguing with the lords of Camerino 
and Pesaro. As the king's second wife was the daughter of Ferrante 
it looked as if there were a combination between Hungary, 
Naples, and the papal feudatories of Romagna and the March. 
Ludovico's action was also even pecuharly ambiguous. Matthias, 
however, convinced Innocent that his action was directed against 
Venice, who had robbed the Hungarian crown of the Dalmatian 
coast. Matthias had an interest in cajoling Innocent with a view 
to the transfer to himself of Prince Djem, whom he wished to 
utihze in his intended campaign against Bajazet. Lorenzo had 
hinted at an alKance between Florence, Venice, and the pope, 
if pressure upon the last became serious. He dissuaded Innocent 
from surrendering the custody of Djem, who had been entrusted 
to his care under special conditions by the king of France, the 
breach of which might cause grave offence. 

The death of Matthias removed one danger to promote another. 
It is interesting to find that from this time Maximihan was 
feared in Italy. On 27 January 1492 Lorenzo advised Innocent 
to keep on good terms with him as he would probably be emperor— 
* It seems to me that he may serve the pope as a stick for all the 
dogs, for every man in Italy is afraid of him.' On 6 February he 
adds that Venice in fear of Maximihan wants a general Itahan 


league : the pope should decline, for Maximilian thinks that Italy 
is hostile, and if the pope joined the league he might be thought 
to share those feelings ; there was time enough to join the league 
when MaximiHan threatened Italy. On the other hand. Innocent 
was warned not to alienate Maximilian's enemies. Thus, when 
the news arrived of Charles VIII 's intended marriage with Anne 
of Brittany, already married by proxy to Maximilian, the pope 
was in a quandary. Lorenzo could only advise that, on Charles's 
request for a dispensation. Innocent should procrastinate by the 
usual resource of a committee. His penultimate letter before 
his death recommends the dispensation, mainly it would appear 
to stop some scandal about himself. The diplomatist who is often 
mentioned as well fitted to negotiate between MaximiHan and 
Charles VIII is Raymond Perault, archdeacon of Aulnis in 
Saintonge, and afterwards one of Maximilian's chief counsellors. 
He is represented as being a good man and popular both in France 
and Germany. Yet another danger to Italy, as Lorenzo thought, 
was threatened by the intervention of Ferdinand and Isabella 
in the dispute between the pope and Naples. Their purpose was 
ambiguous : either they might be backing their relation in more 
drastic action against the pope, or, yet more perilous, they might 
be currying favour with the latter with a view to the replace- 
ment of the illegitimate line at Naples by the legitimate branch 
of Aragon. Lorenzo could never rest until their envoys had left 
Rome ; Granada from henceforth occupied all their energies. 

Rome and Naples finally made peace behind Lorenzo's back. 
He professed to be greatly pleased, but his letters prove that the 
neglect had nettled him. He advised Alamanni to keep clear of 
the negotiations for fear of alienating Charles VIII, who would 
not like them ; he stated that the peace was unpopular throughout 
Italy, and expressed a somewhat scornful opinion on the likelihood 
of its permanence. In the later stage of negotiations Ludovico 
il Moro had almost dropped out of the picture. His marriage 
with Beatrice d'Este and the rivalry between her and her cousin 
the duchess had made him unacceptable to Ferrante as a mediator. 
Lorenzo, too, had a poor opinion of his diplomatic ability ; 
Ludovico was, indeed, too subtle to be sound. 

It may be confessed that these papers relate to the least 
eventful period of Lorenzo's career, because his fortunes and those 
of Florence were not directly involved in the dispute between the 
pope and Naples, though, of course, in the delicate balance of 
power, and under the covetous eyes of three great ultramontane 
or ultramarine states, the slightest shock might bring ruin upon all 
Italy. The value of the letters consists mainly in their admirable 
illustration of Lorenzo's diplomatic methods, and even of his char- 
acter, now that years and ill health had tempered the more adven- 


turous impulses of his youth. At this crisis he was all against 
adventure ; his aim was compromise which should leave neither 
pope nor king the stronger. Yet compromise must not be too 
rapid, or he would lose the strong position which his mediation 
gave. There was probably, too, a very human element of jealousy ; 
he must be the universal homme necessaire, must know everything, 
influence everybody, and decide everything. As he was not 
technically ruler of the state he frequently acted through inde- 
pendent agencies. Sometimes he employed a private envoy 
side by side with the official embassy, or the agents of the Medici 
bank, for instance the Sassetti and Spinelli of Lyons, to whom 
there are several references in these letters. In this case, however, 
he is acting through the regular ambassador. Yet the reader 
will see at once that Alamanni's correspondence with Lorenzo 
was far more intimate and important than was that with the 
Eight and the Signoria by whom he was formally accredited. 
The practical authority of the Signoria had for generations been 
shadowy, but the Eight were the committee for state affairs, 
which had formed an essential part of Lorenzo's constitutional 
experiments of 1480 ; they were selected for their experience, 
and not by the haphazard method which determined the personnel 
of the more dignified Signoria. Nevertheless, the Eight were 
left very much out in the cold, so much so that Lorenzo's secretary, 
Bibbiena, thought it prudent to warn Alamanni to write more 
often and more fully to the Eight, who had been heard to complain 
of the dryness of his dispatches ; of course he need not let them 
into affairs which should remain secret between him and Lorenzo, 
but verbum sap. Not even much secretarial confidence is to be 
traced in Lorenzo's correspondence. All important letters are 
written in his own clear and careful hand, whether in cipher or 
not ; he even copies himself the documents which he encloses, 
adding in one an imitation of Ferrante's elderly but florid auto- 
graph. His industry must have been portentous ; in one letter 
he complains that he had been writing all day and was tired. 

After full allowance for an element of vanity or self-interest 
the letters prove that Lorenzo had a genuine love for the peace 
of Italy and a horror of foreign intervention. Not only does he 
strive for peace between Rome and Naples, and the avoidance of 
all oflence to Charles VIII and Maximilian, but he does his ut- 
most to quench every spark which issues from the inflammable 
and explosive material in the little states which lie to east and 
south of Florence. Romagna had recently been disturbed by 
the murder of Girolamo Riario at Forli and that of Astorre 
Manfredi at Faenza. It was Lorenzo's task to support Riario's 
widow, Caterina Sforza, against the assassins, and to consolidate 
the government of Manfredi 's heir. In several letters he urges 


the pope to be on more friendly terms with Caterina, if only for 
the sake of papal security. He persuades Innocent to recognize 
the prevaihng families of Baglioni and Vitelli in Perugia and Citta 
di Castello, and so put an end to generations of faction. The 
exiles of one small state could always take refuge in another, 
and make it the basis of attack on the victorious government. 
Again and again Innocent is implored to encourage an alliance 
between Siena and Perugia and Urbino, and so put an end to 
the chronic restlessness. Through Lorenzo's agency much was 
really effected. If he finally had no part in the actual terms 
arranged between Innocent and Ferrante, it is certain that but 
for him pope and king would long ago have been at war. It is 
the highest testimony to his pacific influence that the terrible 
Italian tragedy that was to follow was attributed to his untimely 

The letters of Lorenzo, the Eight, and the Signoria contain 
many references to Florentine affairs unconnected with foreign 
politics. Alamanni was instructed to obtain the pope's per- 
mission for the settlement of Jews at Florence. The agreement 
with the moneylenders was renewed from time to time. On each 
renewal, urged the Eight, the city suffered, but a great city 
must have Jews : if usury were wrong, the Jews were the 
sinners, and the church had no concern with their souls, while 
the Christian borrowers were punished by having to pay an 
exorbitant rate of interest ; if men had no Jews from whom to 
borrow money, they were driven to cheat and steal in order to 
get it. It may be mentioned that three years before this petition 
Fra Bernardino of Feltre was expelled from Florence after 
preaching in favour of a state pawnbroking institution. Such 
sermons frequently led to attacks upon resident Jews. Alamanni 
also had to beg the pope to allow the assessors of taxes to examine 
the real ownership of property purporting to belong to persons 
in holy orders. Families were in the habit of fraudulently 
transferring all their property to one clerical member in order 
to escape taxation, although the other members actually remained 
in possession. This caused a grievous loss to the revenue, 
especially at a time when men seemed less willing to make any 
sacrifice for the state than they ever were before. It appears 
also that young Florentines of position were disinclined to 
sacrifice their celibate freedom. Lorenzo and his secretary Piero 
da Bibbiena had done their best to persuade Alfonso Strozzi to 
marry Alamanni's daughter, but he had been evasive, though 
protesting that he would not marry against Lorenzo's orders. 
Many other Florentine gentlemen were also vainly trying to 
marry off their daughters, if that were any consolation to Ala- 
manni. It is notorious that Lorenzo laid great stress on his 


command of the matrimonial market ; it was his resource against 
dangerous family cliques. 

Church scandals form the subject of a good many letters. 
The Eight kept protesting against the interdict laid on three 
Florentine churches at the instance of Arnolfo de' Bardi on 
account of certain payments due to him. The priors of Assisi 
beg Lorenzo to implore the pope no longer to neglect the dis- 
orderly life of the nuns of Santa Chiara, which dishonoured the 
house where the saint's body was preserved. The men of Pieve 
San Stefano complained that they had built a convent for the 
Franciscan friars, who were now living in a disorderly manner. 
The Florentine Signoria pressed the pope to abolish the reserva- 
tion of Florentine benefices for cardinals' nominees, and to keep 
them for Florentine clergy ; the nominees were in many cases 
men of a vile and unworthy description, and God's service was 
gravely prejudiced. The general of the Camaldunenses peti- 
tioned the cardinal of Siena for leave to reform the convent of 
San Benedetto, which badly needed it. Lorenzo writes that 
there was an outcry in Florence against an attempt of the Strozzi 
to eject the incumbent of Pieve di Ripoli, a very old man and 
yet more poor than old ; Lorenzo had been moved by the old 
man's tears, and, though the whole Strozzi family would be at 
him, begged the pope to let him stay. The hunt for benefices 
was of course fast and furious throughout the church, and 
Lorenzo certainly led the pack. It would be tedious to enumerate 
the endowments for his son Giovanni which he begged of the 
pope through the agency of Alamanni. He would rather have 
ten benefices in Tuscany than thirty abroad, but the boy, not 
yet proclaimed cardinal, possessed them in the Milanese and the 
kingdom of Naples. Hints were made for the great abbey of 
Farfa, if the Orsini abbot were to die, and his family should 
quarrel over the succession. Alamanni was to watch for any 
benefice that fell vacant, for those in the Papal States were 
bestowed by the pope before the news reached Florence, and so 
too the French ones by the king in France. Charles VIII himself 
made Lorenzo his broker, begging him to obtain a cardinalate 
for Pierre de Laval, archbishop of Rheims, protesting against 
the bestowal of Tournai on the cardinal of Santa Anastasia instead 
of on his faithful councillor, Louis Pot, and threatening, if the 
pope did not treat him fairly, to have recourse to means which 
he would be sorry to use. Alamanni was empowered to offer the 
notorious Cardinal Balue a tip (beveraggio) if he would facilitate 
negotiations. Balue 's death offered a splendid opportunity, for 
it was said that his benefices were to be divided at once ; Lorenzo 
. as, indeed, touting for the bishopric of Angers for Giovanni while 
the cardinal was on his sick bed. 



Innocent's very catholic taste for wine was a valuable asset 
for Lorenzo. No reasonable man would regard a present of a 
few dozens as a tip or bribe. Lorenzo wished to wheedle bene- 
fices, to shorten the three years during which Giovanni's car- 
dinalate was not to be published, and to soften the pope's heart 
towards Ascoli or the king of Naples. Couriers were consequently 
laden with all the bottles which they could carry of Vernaccia, 
which went as well with the ortolans which Innocent loved as 
with the eels so dear to Martin IV, or else with Casentino vermiglio 
or brusco, with the still excellent Montepulciano, or the vino greco 
which was sometimes hard to find in Florence or S. Gimignano. 
Alamanni in a letter of 19 April 1491 (not here printed) wrote 
that the pope asked for several bottles by letter post of wine 
that should be full flavoured, and not sweet but strong. Wine 
was supplemented by breadths of cloth, white, black, or pink, 
and the choicest damask. The donor's greatest wish, he wrote, 
was to keep him merry and cheerful. Lorenzo was indeed the 
most obHging of men; at the request of the Venetian ambas- 
sador at Rome he makes and forwards a collection of the songs 
both sweet and serious of the Bohemian composer, Heinrich 
Isaak ; at another time he gives much thought to a tomb for 
the great Francesco Sforza, but cannot think of a sufficiently 
worthy artist. In these years his health was failing fast. He 
had an idea in October 1491 of a visit to Rome to exercise his 
personal influence on the pope, as formerly, at the great crisis 
of his life, on Ferrante of Naples. But his journeys now were 
from one sanatorium to another. In February 1492 his son 
Piero wrote to Alamanni that the gouty humours were spreading 
from the feet and hands all over his body, under the skin and in 
the joints and muscles ; there was little fever, and Pier Leoni 
said there was no danger ; he was strong and robust but very 
restless, and could not attend to any sort of business. Pier 
Leoni 's diagnosis of the malady and analysis of the qualities of 
the several medicinal waters may still be read with interest by 
those of gouty temperament in Fabroni's Vita Laurentii Medicis 
Magnifici, ii. 391. The doctor, by the way, had, the patient 
tells Alamanni, given him a fright, because it was rumoured that 
he had fled from Padua owing to threatened persecution for 
practising the black arts. In March Lorenzo was unable to talk 
over Milanese affairs with his close friend, Pier Fihppo Pandolfini, 
who was on his way from Milan to Rome. A week later, on 
10 March, Giovanni made his formal entrance into Florence as 
cardinal, and thus the great wish of his father's later years was 
gratified. His last letter is dated 20 March ; on the night of 
8 April he died. 

The earHer part of the fourth section of the catalogue has 


not the same importance or continuous interest as those which 
precede it. The letters comprised in it are of a somewhat miscel- 
laneous character, and their main value often consists in the 
autograph. But Francesco di Giuliano de' Medici held important 
offices in the state, and was in constant touch with his cousins 
of the elder line and their intimate associates. Thus we find 
a letter from Giovanni, afterwards Leo X, written when a boy 
of nine, and, as the illustration proves, far better than those 
of most modern boys of three times his age. There are many 
from his good-natured brother Giuliano, and one from his sister 
Lucrezia Salviati. Others are from the hand of Pohziano, Pietro 
Ardinghelli, Federigo and Filippo Strozzi, and the latter's wife, 
daughter of the luckless Piero de' Medici. Among the most 
interesting documents is an apologia written to Francesco di 
Giuliano's son Francesco by Lorenzino, the assassin of Duke 
Alessandro ; of this a full copy is given. Francesco's son and 
great-grandson, both named Raffaello, were constantly in high 
employment under the ducal and grand-ducal lines. Thus all 
members of this second house of Medici are well represented 
from 1541 to 1601. There are many letters of Cosimo I, one of 
his wife Eleanor of Toledo, many from the notorious Bianca 
Cappello and her husband Francesco I, and so forth down to 
Fernando I and his wife Christine of Lorraine. In Fernando's 
correspondence there are frequent allusions to the rebellion of 
the audacious Alfonso Piccolomini, which might have proved 
serious owing to the connexion of his family with Siena, which 
had none too willingly accepted the personal rule of the Florentine 
despots. Raffaello 's manuscript book with cipher key contain- 
ing copies of his dispatches during his embassy at Ferrara in 
1589 and 1590 must be a valuable source for the politics of a 
critical time. Another document contains the instructions 
given to him by Christine of Lorraine on his mission to the court 
of Nancy. Raffaello was to suggest to her father, Charles II of 
Lorraine, that her husband should effect a reconciliation between 
him and Henry IV : good catholics, indeed, ought to have no 
dealings with Henry, but the catholic league had done nothing 
for the duke, and the war was only causing grievous suffering to 
Lorraine. In later pages are notes on letters from Cosimo II, 
Fernando II, Tilly, Richelieu, Louis XIII, and Louis XIV, 
followed by a list of grand-ducal proclamations and of Ordinances 
on trades and professions. 

The catalogue concludes with documents which are necessarily 
briefly mentioned, but which will certainly prove to be of the 
highest value for economic history. They consist of ledgers, 
account-books, and letter-books, mainly of the fifteenth and 
sixteenth centuries, and cover the whole ground of agricultural, 

C 2 


manufacturing, and commercial life. On one document is 
a precious note in the handwriting of Cosimo, jpater patriae. 
Many give prices of wine, agricultural produce, and stock down 
or up to donkeys. There are payments of taxes, purchases and 
sales of government stock, termed Monte Comune, sales and leases 
of houses and shops in Florence. The Art of Wool occupies the 
longest place ; here we have the prices of cloth and rate of wages 
throughout long years, the imports of raw^ wool from Spain, 
the export of cloths to Adrianople to be finished, the costs of 
transit from Florence to Ancona and thence to the Levant, or 
from Florence to Leghorn and forward to Lyons. Dealers and 
agents are found among Turks and Jews at Constantinople, 
Adrianople, Pera, Brusa, and Gallipoli, which seems to have been 
a centre for Syrian and Levantine trade. Other consignments 
pass to Ravenna, Ragusa, Rome, Messina, and Palermo. Closely 
connected with the woollen trade is the Art of Dyeing, and for 
that especially important is the supply of alum. In an earlier 
section Lorenzo solicits briefs from the pope to facilitate the 
recovery of alum purchased by Henry VII. Alum leads us to 
soap, and soap is a usual companion to spices and sugar. The 
Art of Silk and that of the Jewellers find ample illustration ; the 
luxuries extend to velvets, belts, purses, knives and forks of silver 
and gold, and all kinds of personal ornaments. Those who have 
ultimately to explore this mine of economic information are 
greatly to be envied. 

The catalogue itself with its excellent introduction by Mr. 
Royall Tyler, its full genealogies and beautiful reproductions of 
documents, is a book of high permanent value .^ It is impossible 
not to feel deep regret at the prospect of the breaking-up of this 
unique collection, even though portions of it may be made more 
available for students of history than in the past. It is sincerely 
to be hoped that at least the correspondence of the years 1489 
to 1492 may escape disruption, and in like manner the collection 
of economic documents. The ideal would be the restoration of 
the whole to Florence, and a permanent home in the Laurentian 
Library in preference to the somewhat dingy Arc hi vio, to which 
scientifically they would belong. E. Armstrong. 

3 A few misprints may be noticed : Vienna for Vienne, p. 62 ; Auluis for Aulnis, 
and Anfidia for Aufidia (Offida), pp. 98, 99. On p. 112, lot 429, which is a letter of 
Lorenzo to Alamanni when ambassador to Milan, dated 19 October 1489, is misplaced 
among the documents of October 1491. 

1918 21 

Robert Hayman and the Plantation of 

THE main purpose of this paper is to put into print a remark- 
able appeal to King Charles I which has hitherto remained 
in manuscript, but it may be permissible also to give an account 
of the author, partly because a fuller account can be given than 
has yet seen the light ,^ and partly because Robert Hayman had 
such a single-minded and unquenchable enthusiasm for the 
cause of British colonization that he deserves to be more than 
the shadow of a name to later generations who have entered 
into the fruit of his labours. 

Robert Hayman was baptized at Wolborough, Devon (near 
Newton Abbot), on 14 August 1575, as the son of Nicholas 
Hayman. Nicholas was the eldest son of Robert Hayman, who 
was apparently a substantial yeoman there and had a number of 
other sons who mostly married and remained in the parish of 
Wolborough. Not so Nicholas. He had married Amis, an 
illegitimate daughter (apparently) of John Raleigh of Ford, 
Newton Abbot, elder half-brother of Sir Walter Raleigh. Four 
children were baptized at Wolborough, between September 1574 
and March 1578. After this Nicholas removed from Newton 
Abbot to Totnes, where he became secretary of the Merchants' 
Company. Five more children were born to him and his wife 
at Totnes, the baptism of the last being followed a month later 
by the death of its mother, Amis Hayman (buried 15 May 1586).^ 

^ The life of Robert Hayman in the 1908 reprint of the Dictionary of National 
Biography contained additional matter taken from a communication made by me to 
Notes and Queries, 10th ser., x. 23-4. Mr. W. P. Courtney supplied a missing link, 
11th ser., ii. 206, and a further communication from me appeared on p. 270. Lately, 
by help of wills and registers, I have cleared up further points in Hayman' s family 
history. My friend Mr. J. H. Sleeman, late Fellow of Sidney Sussex College, Cam- 
bridge, kindly consulted the Wolborough registers for me. 

^ The children baptized at Wolborough were Mary, 12 September 'l574, Robert, 
14 August 1575, Anna, 5 September 1576, Richard, 28 March 1578 ; those baptized 
at Totnes, Margaret, 6 November 1579, Richard, 21 November 1580, Amis, 7 August 
1582, Jenni, 18 September 1583, and a daughter unnamed, 16 April 1586. The name 
of Hayman' s wife is given only in the Totnes register, but the children followed each 
other so closely that there can be little doubt that Amis was mother of them all. 
If so, she was a daughter of John Raleigh of Ford. For Robert Hayman, Nicholas's 
father, by his will (at Somerset House, 12 Daughtry) made 21 January 1576/7 (proved 


Nicholas Hayman was an active and influential man at Totnes. 
He was one of a deputation of Totnes merchants who went to 
confer with the merchants of Exeter on 11 June 1583, and on 
25 April 1586 we find him contributing £25 towards the defences 
of the country. He represented Totnes in the parliament of 
October 1586-March 1587, and was mayor in 1589. He sub- 
sequently removed to Dartmouth, and represented Dartmouth, 
Clifton, and Hardness in the parHament of February-April 1593. 
He died at Dartmouth between January and May 1606.^ 

He may have provided for his elder son, Robert, some time 
before. When he made his will, 3 January 1605/6,* he makes 
only these references to him : 

I give and bequeath unto Eobert Hayman my sonne my sea-chest 
wherein my writinges are and all writinges therein which unto him shalbe 
appertaininge and also all my bookes. Item I give and bequeath unto the 
said Kobert Hayman two guilte gobletts and a guilte Salter hertofore given 
unto him by his grandfather Rawleigh and his grandfather Hayman by theire 
Wills. Item I give and bequeath unto the said Eobert Hayman my best 
guilte goblet having a picture engraven in him, and also my signett of gold. 

Robert Hayman was to be one of three overseers of the will, the 
others being Mr. Thomas Holland of Dartmouth and WilHam Niel, 
the town clerk. 

\We get some impression of Nicholas Hayman from the facts 
recorded of him. He belonged to the new merchant class sprung 
of yeoman ancestry. He could not write himself ' armigero \ 
but he possessed land and carried on different businesses ; he 
had been a mayor and twice a member of parliament, and he 
had sent his son to Oxford. Above all, he was a Devonshire man 
of the age of the Armada, closely connected with the Raleighs and 
Gilberts, and one who could call Sir Francis Drake his friend. i 

4 April 1577), divided his landed property among his sons, leaving the residue to 
his son Nicholas. He left further ' To Robert Hayman the sonne of Nicholas Hayman 
[then eighteen months old], my best Goblett gilte and my best silver Salte gilte'. 
John Raleigh of Ford, by will (54 Rutland) of 28 October 1585 (proved 1 August 
1588), bequeathed ' unto Robert Hayman the sonne of Nicholas Hayman one goblett 
of silver which I bought of Robert Hayman deceased'. Finally, Nicholas Hayman, by 
will (now in the Probate Registry, Exeter) made 3 January 1605/6 and proved 28 May 
1606, bequeathed to his son Robert 'two guilte gobletts and a guilte Salter hertofore 
given unto him by his grandfather Rawleigh and his grandfather Hayman by theire 

^ By his will he left 405. to the poor people of Newton Abbot, Dartmouth, and 
Totnes respectively, and to his daughter Amice ' the shopp sellar and courteladge 
over against my house wherein I now dwell in Dartemouth w'^'^ I have and hold of 
the Ffeoffees of Dartemouth for a certaine tearme of yeeres not yet expired', and 
' all my timber in the salteseller by the Guildhale of Dartmouth and all my sealinge 
timber in the farther shopp in the house where I dwell '. To his son Richard he left 
a tenement called Staplehill in the parish of Hieweeke (Highweek) and three tenements 
in Newton Abbot which he had purchased of his brother Roger [and which had formerly 
belonged to their father]. His residuary legatee was his second wife, Joyce. 

* Proved 28 May 1606. 


Robert Hay man's boyhood was spent at Totnes. He was 
a lad of 13 at the great victory of 1588. He was himself half 
a Raleigh. It is easy to understand that the spirit of those 
stirring times, the spirit of the great Devonshire navigators and 
adventurers, entered into his blood and remained there to the 
end. In the most charming lines he ever wrote he tells how, 
as a child, he had seen and been kissed by Sir Francis Drake : 

Of the Great and Famous, euer to hee honoured Knight, Sir Francis Drake, 
and of my little-little selfe. 

The Dragon, that our Seas did raise his Crest, 

And brought back heapes of gold vnto his nest, 

Vnto his Foes more terrible then Thunder, 

Glory of his age. After-ages wonder. 

Excelling all those that excell'd before ; 

It 's fear'd we shall haue none such any more ; 

Effecting all, he sole did vndertake. 

Valiant, iust, wise, milde, honest, godly Drake. 

This man when I was little, I did meete, 

As he was walking vp Totnes long Street, 

He ask'd me whose I was ? I answer'd him. 

He ask'd me if his good friend were within ? 

A faire red Orange in his hand he had. 

He gaue it me, whereof I was right glad, 

Takes and kist me, and prayes, God hlesse my hoy : 

Which I record with comfort to this day. 

Could he on me haue breathed with his breath, 

His gifts Elias-like, after his death. 

Then had I beene enabled for to doe 

Many braue things I haue a heart vnto. 

I haue as great desire, as e're had hee 

To ioy ; annoy ; friends ; foes ; but 'twill not be.^ 

In 1586, as we have seen, Robert and his brother and sisters 
lost their mother. On 15 October 1590 he was matriculated 
from Exeter College, Oxford, the college which was the special 
resort of Devonshire men. The university records give his age 
at this time as ' 11 ', but he was in fact 15. He took his B.A. 
degree on 11 July 1596, so that he remained for more than five 
years at the university. His disposition was modest, generous, 
and affectionate, and he made friends at Oxford whom he was 
proud to remember afterwards, among them George Hakewill, 
author of An Apologie of the Power and Providence of God, William 
Noy, afterwards attorney-general, Charles FitzGeffrey, the 
young poet from Cornwall, Thomas Winniffe, afterwards bishop 
of Lincoln, Robert Vilvaine, who became a famous Exeter 
physician, a benefactor of his city and college, as well as a very 

^ Quodlibets, book iv, no. 7. 


quaint writer ; there is even among them ' Father Taylor, 
Jesuite, sometimes my familiar friend in Oxford '. 

In his application for the B.A. degree, Robert stated that 
he was going abroad, and in a letter written by his father to 
Sir Robert Cecil in 1600, it was mentioned that Robert, besides 
being a bachelor of Oxford, had studied at Poitiers. If he pro- 
ceeded to Poitiers in July 1596, after taking his degree, he can 
only have stayed there a very short time, as on 16 October 
of the same year, 1596, he was admitted as a law-student of 
Lincoln's Inn. Here he had among his contemporaries the famous 
John Donne, WiUiam Noy, his friend of Exeter College, William 
Hakewill, brother of the theologian, and destined to be a great 
legal antiquary, and Nicholas Duck,^ afterwards recorder of 
Exeter. Hayman was perhaps not a plodding student : his 
name never occurs in the records of Lincoln's Inn after his 
admission. But it is clear that he spent some years about London 
(' I knew the Court well in the old Queen's days,' he says) — 
perhaps varied by a sojourn at the university of Poitiers. It is 
doubtful if he actually knew Jonson, but, now or later, he became 
a friend of Drayton, and he knew John Owen, whose epigrams 
he was to translate, and another Devonshire law-student of 
a literary turn, Edward Sharpham. Sharpham, in 1606, dedi- 
cated his play, Cupid's Whirligig, to ' his much beloved, respected, 
and judicial friend Master Robert Hayman ', and wrote, ' Since 
our travailes I have been pregnant with desire to bring forth 
something whereto you may be witness '. Unless then the word 
* travailes ' merely means ' common labours ', at some time or 
other Sharpham and Hayman had travelled together. 

Hayman's disposition probably tended more towards travel 
and adventure than to the pursuit of the law. Hence his father's 
letter of 1 July 1600, in which he solicited from Sir Robert Cecil 
public employment for him. He was now nearly twenty-five. It 
may be gathered that there was itD response to Nicholas Hayman's 
appeal, and Robert determined to become a merchant. Already 
probably he had connexions in Bristol, the great port and trading 
centre of the west. A few years later one of his sisters became 
the wife of John Barker, one of Bristol's most active and rising 
citizens, and a poem of Hayman's, addressed to ' my honest 
bedfellow Master Edward Payne Merchant of Bristol ', suggests 
that Hayman had found employment at Bristol while still 
a bachelor. However, on 21 May 1604 he was married at 
St. Petrock's, Exeter, to Grace, daughter of Mr. Thomas Spicer, 
whose family was of importance in that city, and who had died 
nearly four years before. She had been born about October 

• Duck was Hayman's first cousin. Duck's mother being Joan, Nicholas Hayman's 
only sister. 


1579, and was therefore more than four years younger than her 
husband. She seems to have died in the early years of wedlock. 
We hear nothing of her or of any children in Hayman's later 
writings or in his will, the only exception being a few words in 
the dedication of liis translated epigrams to the Beauties of 
England — ' the grace and love which I received sometime from 
one of your sex '. But he remained attached to his wife's family, 
and addressed poems to various members of it. 

Hayman's association with Bristol must have rekindled the 
spirit of mercantile adventure which had been lighted within 
him in Devonshire. The consequence was his co-operation 
in a Bristol scheme for the colonization of Newfoundland. Sir 
Humphrey Gilbert had claimed Newfoundland for the English 
crown in 1583, and in 1606 the foundation of two colonies in 
' Virginia ' having been authorized by royal charter, a ship was 
equipped and a careful survey of a line of coast was made by the 
navigator Pring."^ In 1607 two more ships sailed from Bristol 
to estabUsh a settlement, but the emigrants returned to England 
in the following year. However, in 1610 a number of London 
and Bristol merchant-adventurers, along with a few courtiers, 
including Sir Francis Bacon, obtained a patent for the plantation 
of a settlement in Newfoundland. John Guy, a young and able 
Bristol man, who had made the two previous voyages, was 
appointed governor of the incorporation, and turned to his task 
with energy. Three ships having been equipped with provisions, 
live cattle, poultry, &c., the governor, with his brother Philip, 
his brother-in-law William Colston, and thirty-nine emigrants, 
set sail from Kingroad in May 1610, and reached the island in 
twenty- three days. The party forthwith set about the erection 
of a fort and stockade, dwellings, and storehouses, and Guy 
built himself a residence called Sea Forest House. He returned 
to England in 1611 on the business of the colony, but set out 
again in 1612 with a minister of religion, Erasmus Stourton, and 
more emigrants. When, after this visit, Guy finally returned 
to Bristol, William Colston became deputy-governor for two 
years. In 1615 a new governor was found in Captain John Mason 
of Magdalen College, Oxford, but this strong and able ruler was 
lost to the colony in 1621 on being appointed treasurer to the 
royal navy. Meanwhile, another local effort had been made. 
A note in one of the books of the Society of Merchant Venturers 
of Bristol states that during the mastership of Alderman Barker, 
Hayman's brother-in-law, in 1617-18, ' divers merchants of this 
Society did forward the plantation of land in Newfoundland 
called Bristol Hope ', a district acquired from the adventurers 

' For the following facts, see John Latimer, History oj the Society of Merchant 
Venturers of Bristol (1903), p. 148, &c. 


of whom Guy was governor. It consisted of the promontory 
running north-east between Trinity Bay and Conception Bay, 
its chief settlement being at Harbour Grace. 

Perhaps Robert Hayman, now a childless widower, was 
from the first, i. e. from 1617, governor of this plantation.^ At 
any rate he was governor for a series of years till 1628. On first 
going out he stayed fifteen months in the country, afterwards 
he seems to have spent only the summers there. In the earlier 
years good progress was made. Captain R. Whitbourne, in 
A Discourse of Newfoundland (1622), writes : 

Divers Worshipful Citizens of the City of Bristol have undertaken to 
plant a large Circuit of that Country, and they have maintained a Colony 
of his Majesties subjects there any time these five years who have builded 
there faire houses, and done many other good services, who live there 
very pleasantly, and they are well pleased to entertaine upon fit con- 
ditions such as wilbe Adventurers with them. 

And he includes in his book a letter from Captain Wynne of 
17 August 1622 : 

At the Bristow Plantation there is as goodly Rye now growing as 
can be in any part of England ; they are also well furnished with Swine, 
and a large breed of Goates, fairer by fafre then those that were sent 
over at the first. 

But our main source of information about Bristol's Hope is 
the collection of little poems or epigrams which Hayman wrote 
in his exile and published when he was in London in 1628. The 
book, which is now extraordinarily rare, is a quarto, thus en- 
titled : 


Lately Come Over From New Britaniola, 

Old Newfound-Land. 

Epigrams and other small parcels, both Morall and Divine. 

The first foure Bookes being the Authors owne : the rest translated out 

of that Excellent Epigrammatist, Mr. John Owen and other rare Authors. 

With two Epistles of that excellently wittie Doctor, 

Francis Rablais : Translated out of his French at large. 

All of them 

Composed and done at Harbor-Grace in Britaniola, 

anciently called Newfound-Land. 

By R. H. 

Sometimes Gouernour of the Plantation there. 


Printed by Elizabeth All-de, for Roger 

Michell, dwelling in Pauls Church-yard, 

at the signe of the Bulls-head. 1628. 

* There were a number of other ventures for the colonization of Newfoundland ; 


Hayman, in many epigrams, commemorates the relatives and 
friends with whom he had been associated at Exeter, Oxford, 
London, and Bristol. Many of these, while he had been labour- 
ing across the ocean, had risen to great positions — but he will 
not repine : 

A little of my vnworthy Selfe. 
Many of these were my familiars, 
Much good, and goods hath fal'n vnto their shares, 
They haue gone fairely on in their affaires : 

Good God, why haue I not so much good lent ? 
It is thy will, I am obedient : 
What thou hast, what thou wilt, I am content. 
Only this breeds in me much heauines, 
My loue to this Land I cannot expresse. 
Lord grant me power vnto my willingnesse.^ 

He refused to flatter the great : all his praises were reserved 
for colonizers : 

I knew the Court well in the old Queenes dayes, 
I then knew Worthies worthy of great praise : 
But now I am thei;e such a stranger growne. 
That none doe know me there, there I know none. 
Those few 1 here observe with commendation 
Are Famous Starves in our New Constellation}^ 

All the great promoters of North American colonization receive 
a tribute from him : John Slany, treasurer to the Newfoundland 
company. Sir George Calvert, Lord Baltimore, Dr. Vaughan, 
Sir Richard Whitborne, Lord Falkland, Sir William Alexander, 
* the prime planter in New Scotland ', and many more. He 
is unwearied in proclaiming the advantages offered by the new 
colony : 

To the Worshiffull Captaine John Mason, who did wisely and worthily 
gouerne there diuers yeeres. 

The Aire in Newfound-land is wholesome, good ; 
The Fire, as sweet as any made of wood ; 
The Waters, very rich, both salt and fresh ; 
The Earth more rich, you know it is no lesse. 
Where all are good, Fire, Water, Earth, and Aire, 
What man made of these foure would not Hue there ? ^^ 

that of the eccentric Welshman, Dr. William Vaughan (who had been Hayman'e 
contemporary at Oxford) ; that of Viscount Falkland (father of Lucius Lord Falkland, 
who fell at Newbury) ; and that of Sir G. Calvert, Lord Baltimore, who is praised 
by Hayman for having personally visited his colony in 1627. All these seem to have 
purchased parts of the island from the original company. 

» Book i, no. 116. " Book ii, no. 106. 

" Book ii, no. 79. 


To all those wortJiy Women, who haue any desire to Hue in Newfound- Land, 
specially to the modest dh discreet Gentlewoman Mistris Mason, wife to 
Captaine Mason, who liued there diuers yeeres. 

Sweet Creatures, did you truely vnderstand 

The pleasant life you'd Hue in Newfound-land, 

You would with teares desire to be brought thither : 

I wish you, when you goe, faire wind, faire weather : 

For if you with the passage can dispence,^^ 

When you are there, I know you'll ne'r come thence.^^ 

To a worthy Friend, who often obiects the coldnesse of the Winter in New- 
found-Land, and may seruefor all those that haue the like conceit. 
You say that you would Hue in Newfound-land, 
Did not this one thing your conceit withstand ; 
You feare the Winters cold, sharp, piercing ayre. 
They loue it best, that haue once winterd there. 
Winter is there, short, wholesome, constant, cleare, 
Not thicke, vnwholesome, shuffling, as 'tis here.^* 

[Of the Newfound-Land Company.] 

Diuers well-minded men, wise, rich, and able, 

Did vndertake a plot inestimable. 

The hopefull'st, easiest, healthi'st, iust plantation, 

That ere was vndertaken by our Nation. 

When they had wisely, worthily begunne, 

For a few errors that athwart did runne, 

(As euery action first is full of errors) 

They fell off flat, retir'd at the first terrors. 

As it is lamentably strange to me : 

In the next age incredible 't will be.^^ 

A SJceltonicall continued ryme, in praise of my New-found-Land. 
Although in cloaths, company, buildings faire. 
With England, New-found-land cannot compare : 
Did some know what contentment I found there, 
Alwayes enough, most times somewhat to spare. 
With little paines, lesse toyle, and lesser care. 
Exempt from taxings, ill newes, Lawing, feare. 
If cleane, and warme, no matter what you weare, 
Healthy, and wealthy, if men carefull are. 
With much — much more, then I will now declare, 
(I say) if some wise men knew what this were, 
(I doe beleeue) they'd Hue no other where.^^ 

To the first Planters of Newfound-land. 

What ay me you at in your Plantation ? 
Sought you the Honour of our Nation ? 
Or did you hope to raise your owne renowne ? 
Or else to adde a Kingdome to a Crowne ? 

" i. e. ' put up '. 13 Book ii, no. 80. " Book ii, no. 81. 

*5 Book ii, no. 83. i« Book i, no. 117. 


Or Christs true Doctrine for to propagate ? 
Or drawe Saluages to a blessed state ? 
Or our o're peopled Kingdome to relieve ? 
Or shew 'poore men where they may richly Hue ? 
Or poore mens children godly to maintaine ? 
Or aym'd you at your owne sweete priuate gaine ? 
All these you had atchiu'd before this day, 
And all these you haue balk't by your delay .^^ 

To some discreet people, who thinke any body good enough for a Plantation, 

When you doe see an idle, lewd, young man, 
You say hee's fit for our Plantation. 
Knowing your selfe to be riche, sober, wise 
You set your owne worth at an higher price. 
I say, such men as you are, were more fit. 
And most conuenient for first peopling it : 
Such men as you would quickly profit here : 
Lewd, lazy Lubbers, want wit, grace, and care.^^ 

To the famous, wise and learned Sisters, the two Vniuersities of Englandj 
Oxford and Cambridge. 

Send forth your sons vnto our New Plantation ; 
Yet send such as are Holy, wise, and ableP 

Hayman dedicated his Quodlihets to King Charles I in terms 
which showed that to him England was already Greater Britain, 
and the king of England required a wider title : 

To the Kings Most Excellent Maiestie, Charles, by Gods especiall mercy 

King of Great-Britaine, France, and Ireland &c., Emperour of South, 

and North Virginia, King of Britaniola, or Newfound-land, and the 

lies adjacent. Father, Fauourer, and Furtherer of all his loyall Subjects 

right Honourable and worthie Plantations. 

May it please your most Excellent Maiestie, this last right worthy 

attribute of yours (no way insinuated, but iustly affixed to your more 

ancient stile) perswades these vnworthy papers to presume (with your 

gracious leaue and permission) to take the hardines to kisse your sacred 

hands ; hoping of the like successe, that some vnripe eares of corn, brought 

by me from the cold Country of Newfound-land, receiued from some honest, 

well-minded louers of that action, when they saw them : who with much- 

afEected ioy often beholding them, took much comfort in what they 

saw : but more, when they suppos'd it might be better'd, by industry, 

care and honestie. These few bad vnripe Rimes of mine (comming from 

thence) are in all humility presented with the like intendiment to your 

Maiestie, to testifie that the Aire there is not so dull, or maleuolent, but 

that if better wits were transplanted thither, neither the Summers heat 

would dilate them, nor the Winters cold benumme them, but that they 

might in full vigour flourish to good purpose. For if I now growne dull 

and aged,2o could doe some what, what will not sharper, younger, freer 

" Book ii, no. 101. " Book ii, no. 104. 

" Book ii, no. 105. *» He was fifty-three. 


inuentions performe there ? . . . I suppose it not fit at this time (but 
attending the successe of this presumption) in some larger manner to 
make knowne vnto your Maiestie, the inestimable riches of the Seas 
circuling that Hand : The hopefull improuements of the maine Land 
thereof : The more then probable, vnualuable hidden treasures therein : 
The infinite aboundance of combustible fierie materials fit for such an 
imployment. . . . 

[Of his poems] Meane and vnworthy though they are, yet because 
some of them were borne, and the rest did first speake English in that 
Land . . . and being the first fruits of this kind, that euer visited this 
Land, out of that Dominion of yours : I thought it my duty, to present 
and to prostrate these with my selfe at your Koyall feete, . . . vnfeinedly 
beseeching God to blesse your Maiesty with aboundance of all Earthly 
and Heauenly blessings. And that you may see an happy successe of 
all your Forraigne Plantations, especially of that of Newfound-land, 

I remaine 
Your Maiesties well meaning and loyall Subiect 

Robert Hayman. 

A manuscript in the British Museum ^^ shows that Hayman 
when in England in 1628 made one more bold effort through the 
duke of Buckingham to induce Charles to take an active hand 
in the colonization of Newfoundland. 

To the Duhe of Buckingham his Graxie. 

May it please your Grace, 

As I owe the best part of my endeavours to my Soueraigne, and the 
Countrie wherein I was borne : So haue I allwaies endeauored to expresse 
it in that station wherein God hath at seuerall tymes seated me. I humblie 
beseech your Grace therefore to afford me your fauour, and to giue me 
Leave to make knowne vnto your Grace : That haueing bene imployed 
for seuerall yeares in A Newe Plantation I haue seryously studyed which 
way that yet imperfect busines might be improued to his maiesties and 
his subiectes best advantage. After seuerall serious ruminations, I haue 
at last digested somewhat, and I haue an humble desire, an holy hunger 
to acquaint his maiestie with it : But knowing how much his maiestie is 
repleated with such kind of propositions, I dare not presume to present 
myne, without his espetiall Leave, protection and Commaund. Besides 
the grace, and place you worthily hold vnder his maiestie vindicates in 
discretion thus much from me, That I first acquaint your Grace with it. 
It is A Maryne busynes of great Consequence : And therefore as it is 
within your peculyar, see your Wisdome will supply it, wherein it is 
defectiue. As it is (if your Grace will be pleased to read it, and in your 
wisdome gratiously to weighe it) you shall finde it A busines honorable, 
profitable, feasable, facill, and oportune ; of great aduantage to his 
Maiestie, and all his Loyall subiectes, and disaduantagious to those his 

'* Egerton MS. 2541, fo. 163. The manuscript was originally endorsed ' pro- 
posicon ... A'* 1630 Cone'. Newfoundland ', and it is accordingly indexed as of 1630. 
As Buckingham was assassinated on 23 August 1628, Hayman' s appeal must be of 
that year at latest. My attention was called to the paper by a reference to it in Prowse's 
History of NewfoutuUand. The ' Proposition ' in the original document is not broken 
into paragraphs. 


neighbours, who are nowe his enymies, A meane to crye quittance with 
both of them at once, and to be done with Litle Charge, with the certainety 
of a large returne. I could easily enlarge my selfe heerevpon. But knowe- 
ing your wisdome, goodnes and honorable desires for your Countries 
good, I forbeare, being ready at your Graces commaund copiously, and 
humbly to dilate, what by you shalbe required, And in the meane space, 
and at all tymes I will in all humillitye rest 

Your Graces humblie deuoted 

Egbert Hayman. 

A Proposition of Profitt and Honor Proposed to my Dread, and Gratious 
Soueraigne Lord, King Charles, By his humble suhiect Robert Hayman, 

Most Gratious and Dread Soueraigne ! 

When wise, blessed, happie Columbus proposed the proiect of his 
supposed Westerne Neweland to the Princes, and States of his tyme. He 
deliuered them Plattes to demonstrate, and proue his supposition. In 
like sort (with your Gratious Leaue, and fauour) doe I heere present vnto 
your sacred viewe A Piatt of all your Kingdomes, both possest, pretended, 
and intended. To shewe your maiestie ho we conueniently they are 
seated by God, for the mutuall supportation each of other ; haueing noe 
impediment ; but an easie Nauigable sea interposed. But amongest the 
many seuerall parcells, which God in his mercy hath made you Lord ouer, 
I recommend to your maiesties spetiall viewe, and consideration, A Land 
of yours, first found by your wise Ancestor Henrie the seauenthes direc- 
tion, and charge. A worke reserued for you to finish, and to furnish with 
Millions of your subiectes to theire good, and your honor. It is the Hand 
called by vs your subiectes N ewe found land. /In this Hand at one tyme 
I Lined fifteene Monethes together, and since 1 haue spent allmost euery 
sommer in it : Where haueing onely had the ouerseeing others hard 
Labour to distract me, I had tyme to see, to confer, to enquire, to obserue, 
and to discouer ; by this meanes furnisheing my selfe, with something 
more then many that haue bene oftner their, and fully knoweinge howe 
beneficiall the knoweledge thereof would be, to all your Loyall subiectes, 
I haue had a longe longing intendiment to write somewhat, for their 
benifitt, and this Countries good : But seeing to my greife the poore 
successe of diners of these well meant generall treatises, redd ouer by 
many, liked by some, deryded by others, neglected in their practize by 
allmost all, and those fewe that haue endeauored to doe somewhat, 
either they haue insufficiently begunne, or haue bene deluded or wronged 
by those they haue imployed, or mistaken their good meaning, or haue 
not been able to proceede, or out of hart with poore short vnexpected 
returnes, or demaundes of newe supplies : That, vnlesse your maiestie 
suddainely assist, this worthie busines is like to vanishe Lamentablely and 

My longe acquaintance hereof bredd A knowledge in me of the 
goodnes, and greatnes of it, My certaine knoweledge a zealous, and 
holy Loue therevnto, and my Loue drewe me, to a sadd, and serious 
studie how it could be, that soe many seuerall endeauours, by discreet 
and able vndertakers, should bee to soe little purpose, where theire was 



matter in aboundance to make it otherwise. Your famous, and wise 
father granted A Pattent of this Hand to certaine Noblemen, gentlemen, 
and Marchantes ; These Noblemen were but onely named, or aduentured 
very little : These gentlemen were soone made weary : These Marchantes 
acquainted with more speedie gaine, first falling out amonge themselues, 
by reason whereof the principall vndertaker, A Man of their quallitie 
wise, yet vnconstant, falling of, they concluded to deuyde the Land into 
seuerall shares, since when, some haue done a little to noe purpose, and the 
most nothing. I confesse since that time, diuers noble gentlemen haue 
endeauored somewhat in this Land. First Sir Parcivall Willoughhie, then 
Doctor Vaughan, and haue bene wronged by vnhonest, idle, vnfitt men 
their imployed by them, and my Lord of Falkeland worse. Onely my 
Lord of Baltamore hath after much iniurie done him, aduentured happily 
thither himselfe, where seeing howe to mend it, and the goodnes of the 
Action, resolues wisely to see his busines done himselfe, and Doctor Vaughan 
(as he tells me) intendes to followe his course. 

But experience both of former, and these tymes, makes me iealous ^ of 

their successe, vnlesse your maiestie wilbe pleased to stepp in, to backe 

them, and by your royall example drawe on others ; For if wee looke 

backe into former tymes, wee shall perceiue that Wales aduentured first 

vpon (by chance, by one allmost of both my names ^^) with some valliant 

followers, had bene their Confusion, if the kinges of England themselues, 

had not taken the busines vpon them. Our next Conquest, and Plantation 

Ireland, was to noe purpose, vntill our kinges of those tymes did mannage 

it themselues. And I belieue the West Indies (howsoeuer aboundinge with 

rich returnes) had not soe easily, or soe speedily bene possest, but that 

they might haue bene preuented, had not the kinges of Spaine vnder- 

taken it themselues. I humblie beseech your Maiestie not to conceiue 

amisse of my insinuation herein, but to respitt your iudgment, vntill 

I haue shewed you all my honest meaninge. As I haue reason to beleiue 

that this Plantation will neuer proceed to purpose, but be subiect to 

interruption, dispossession, disgrace, and losse, vnlesse your maiestie 

doe particularly mannage some busines theire. Soe I doubt not to proue 

that it wilbe an action worthie of soe highe a Maiestie, infinitely gainefuU 

to your selfe, and heires, and to your subiectes, such, soe t asie, and soe 

great an aduantage, that the whole earth affordes not the like, fl confesse 

that the Commodities as yett brought from thence are in their particulers 

base, and meane : yet they honestly imploye many people, and make 

more seamen, then all our sea-trades els, mainetained the one halfe of 

the yeare, with halfe the allowance, which either they should haue at home, 

or in other voyages. And I darr averr, and proue, that this trade hath 

furnished England for these many yeares, with more money, then all 

our forraigne trades els, and it hath brought from Spaine, siluer, itnd 

gold, more cheapely, and conueniently, then the Spaniards haue had it, 

from their Indies. _^Yet doe wee hitherto possesse, not a third of that 

busines, and might easily haue all. If this Land were peopled I darr 

proue vnto your Maiestie that A thowsand good shippes, might easily 

be imployed in the businesse about that land, for that one Comoditie of 

" i. e. doubtful, suspicious. 

*' Robert Fitz Hamon, earl of Gloucester, c. 1080. 


fishe, and many other for other businesses, that would by that Plantation 
folio we. 

But it may be thought, that as nowe wee stand with France, and 
Spaine,^* this great quantatie of fishe, will haue small vent. And I 
knowe that the Mallawyns ^^ haue promissed their king, and the BisJcan^ 
theirs, to furnishe them with this Commoditie, wherevpon they haue not 
onely proclaimed forfeiture of importation thereof taken by vs, but 
I heare in Spaine HamhurgJiers were this yeare denounced for doeing it. 
But your maiestie might easily amend this, in preuenting theirs, and 
forceing them to be gladd of ours, for without this Commoditie, theire 
people cannot conueniently subsist. Hunger (they say) will breake 
stone walles, and it will easily enforce the alteration of inconuenient 
Lawes. And experience in the raigne of famous Queene Elizabeth teacheth 
me soe much, when they were willing to haue it from vs, and brought 
vnto them, by their veryest enimies the Hollanders. [l^darr not for feare 
of offendinge your Maiestie enlarge my selfe, herevpon omitting many 
particulers, at your Commaund to be related : As those other knowne 
Comodities of tarr, and pitch, mastes, and other timber, furres and many 
others, fitt for your home kingdomes, and nowe brought at hard rates- 
from other partes. The temperature of the ayre, the wholesomenes of 
hearbes, and simples, and the more then probable hidden treasures of 
rich mettalles, and other myenes : For all which I could giue manifest 
reasons, that this Land is richely worth the possessing, whereof your 
maiestie neuer had a more fitter oportunitie, then nowe, for these reasons ; 
There is a rich fisheing very neere this land called the Banke, where there 
doe yearely fishe at least 400 French shipps, and from whence your sub- 
iectes haue neuer reaped any Commoditie. Your maiestie may nowe be 
maister, both of the greatest part of those shipps, and absolutely Dispossesse 
them thereof Jl 

I And if your maiestie would be pleased, to yeild to an humble 
reqttest of myne, I should intreate that your Maiestie would build, or 
beginn at least A Cittie in that part of this Hand, where I haue placed 
your Carolinople, and to priuiledge that towne, with that fisheing : j'our 
maiestie might likewise make it A Mart, or free Markett for fishe ; 
It hath two goodly harbours, one in the one bay, and another in the 
other, being but three myles distant one from the other ; It would quickely 
growe stronge, populous and riche, and be the Emporium of this newe 
kingdome, and yeild your maiestie a great Reuenue, which if your maiestie 
would like, I would humblie pray that this Hand might be called BritanioUy 
being in her forme much like your Britania^ 1 haue before touched 
a second reason of the present oportunitie. The French and Biskans doe 
yearely in great numbers fishe at the Mayne, and in harbours ; These 
your maiestie may likewise possesse yourselfe of, and quickely make 
them wearie, and preuent those feared daingers, of either hindringe our 
shipps, in their fisheing, or our selues and markettes at their homes. 
These thinges being both feazable, and conuenient, I hope your maiestie 

2* There was war with Spain from 1G24 to 1G29, with France from 1627 to 1629. 
The latter fact helps to date this document. 
25 The Bretons of St. Malo. 

VOL. XXXIII. — :so. cxxix. i> 


will not onely consider it, but effect it. These thinges I doe but point 
at, knoweing the inconueniencie of tediousnes, to a Judgement wise, and 
Angelicall, yet I humblie beseech your maiestie that I may annex this : 
That vnlesse your maiestie spedily preuent it, the French, and Biskans 
are likely to doe the like to vs, and vtterly to dispossesse vs, of that rich 

There is one thinge more I desire to make knowne to your maiestie, 
And I humblie intreate you to weighe it seriously ; Salt is both at this 
tyme very deare, and is like to be soe, vntill your enimies shall doe your 
maiestie right. And when Peace shall heareafter be requested at your 
handes, yet your fisheing kingdomes of Britaniola, Newe England, and 
Newe Scotland with your home kingdomes, may be prouided from A land 
which nowe may easily be your maiesties. There are certaine Hands, 
called the Hands of Cape de Verd, whereof the Isles of May, and Sal are 
either not peopled, or meanely possest. If your maiestie would be pleased 
to send people to take it, and possesse it, it would not onely yeild your 
kingdomes an abundant plentie of salt, but May would be made A con- 
uenient Mart, for the rich trade of that part of Africa, to the quicke 
enricheing of our inhabitantes theire, and your maiesties invaluable gaine, 
both by salt, and that other rich trade. And by peopleing of these Hands, 
those others their neighebours (seuerall tymes allreadie taken) may the 
easier be possest by vs, and the better kept, your maiestie shall likewise 
thereby preuent the Indian fleetes refreshing themselues, in the outgoeing, 
and cutt them offe from their fisheing at Cape de Verd, and possesse 
your subiectes thereof likewise. I doe but dictate ^^ this neither, because 
Circumstances, and obiections, may better be dilated, and answered, by 
discourse then writinge. Of N ewefoundland the personall present profitt 
thereof, you may easily in your wisdome collect it heerehence. And time 
hereafter will [giue] fitt oportunitie of larger improuement. 

There is but one thinge more conuenient to be thought on, Shipps, 
Money and Men, to doe this worthie busines. As theire shall not neede 
many shipps, Soe God be blessed your Maiestie is well prouided of your 
owne, and of your subiectes, and men there are enoughe, and if your 
maiestie be pleased to like the rest, I doubt not but money maye quickely 
be had for such a busines, honorablely, religiously, and Conueniently. 
vjhe willing helpe you shall haue from your subiectes, The easie Conuenient 
and cheape transporting thither of people, and all other necessaries, with 
lesse then halfe the charge, to any other Plantation, the rectiefying of 
present disorders in that trade, your maiesties priuate, your subiectes 
publique vnexpressible profitt, the LawfuUnes, the necessitie of this 
oportune Action, the Inconueniences, and daingers if omitted, I omitt for 
feare of offending]^ And if my breuitie hath heerein caused any obscuritie, 
I am readie at your Maiesties Commaund at all tymes to expresse my 
meaning. Referring all to your maiesties wise determination, with this 
humble request ; That as Alcyhiades tooke the space of repeating the 
fower, and twentie Letters for his ordinarie answers : So your maiestie 
would be pleased to lett the like number of houres respett^^ your 

2« So manuscript ; perhaps for ' I doe not dilate '. 
*' i. e. respite. 


determination herevnto. And thus beseeching God to blesse your maiestie 
with the blessinges of this world, and in the world to come, I will euer 

Your Maiesties 

Well meaning though the meanest 
of all your Loyall subiectes 

Robert Hayman. 

Neither of Hay man's appeals had any success. Charles was 
occupied in quarrels with his parliaments and at his wit's end 
to raise money for ordinary purposes, and on 23 August 1628 
Buckingham was assassinated in the house of that Captain 
John Mason whose government of Newfoundland had been so 
highly praised by Hayman. Apparently Hayman now realized 
that there was no hope at present for Newfoundland, and as 
a matter of fact about this time all the colonizing enterprises 
there were abandoned. 

But Hayman was a Ulysses who could not rest in Ithaca, 
and he at once entered on a new quest. In 1620 James I had 
granted by letters patent to a company of adventurers, headed 
by the duke of Buckingham, the territory of Guiana and the 
royal river of Amazon. It was to Guiana that Hayman now 
turned his eyes. He formed a little company with a capital 
consisting of twenty-six shares, of which he held twelve, and he 
made preparations to take out a new batch of colonists to help 
to found an England in South America. Before he started he 
made his will.^s It was dated 17 November 1628. 

In the name of God Amen. I Robert Hayman being by Gods mercy 
in perfect health both of bodie and minde, doe make this my last will 
and Testament in maner and forme following being bound by Gods leave 
to Guiane in Ameryca to setle a plantation there Imprimis my Soule I be- 
queath to God my Creator and Redeemer, My bodie to be buried as it shall 
please those who shalbe with mee at the tyme of my decease, whatsoever 
I have to give of any worldly wealth whether it be in England or where- 
soever beyond the seas I give and bequeath and leave wholly and totallie to 
my loving Cosin and Nephew Thomas Muchell of Longaston in the Countie 
of Somersett whom I make my whole and onelie Executor of this my 
last will and Testament And whereas I have left in the hands of Doctor 
Ducke Chauncellor of London two pollicies of insurance the one of one 
hundred pounds for the safe arivall of our Shipp in Guiana which is in 
mine owne name, if wee miscarry by the waie (which God forbid) I bequeath 
the advantage thereof to my said Cosin Thomas Muchell and make him 
my whole assigne for recovery thereof to his owne proper vse Item 
whereas there is an other insurance of one hundred pounds assured by 
the said Doctor Arthur Ducke on my life for one yeare if I chance to die 
within that tyme I entreat the said doctor Ducke to make it over to the 

^* At Somerset House, 1 Russell 


36 ROBERT HAY MAN Januarj^ 

said Thomas Muchell his kinsman and to help him in the recovery thereof 
if need require Item Whereas there is a Charter party betwixt me Robert 
Hayman and one Francis Core Mathew Brett Robert Hunt and divers 
for continuing a plantation in Guiana in America aforesaid and wherein 
of all partes it is conditioned that the whole provenence and profitt thereof 
shalbe devided into Twentie sixe partes whereof twelve partes thereof 
are to be to me Robert Hayman my executours Administratours and 
assignes as by the deed Indented more plainely maie appeare being like 
wise left in trust in the hands of the aforesaid doctor Arthure Ducke 
I whoUie bequeath it to my said Cosen Thomas Muchell and make him 
my Executor administrator and assigne thereof to take thereof what 
profitt soever shalbe made thereby to his owne vse he havinge adventured 
sixty pounds of the said money with mee in this voyage yet my will is 
and I desire him to see it performed that those other of my friends who 
hath likewise adventured severall sommes of money as he well knowes 
be there out paid three tymes theire adventure according to agreement 
which he likewise knowes Thus prayinge God to blesse both him and 
mee beseeching the divine providence to send vs a ioyfuU meetinge in 
this world or in the world to come I ratifie and coniirme this as my last 
will & testament having written this with mine owne hand and sealed 
it with my scale and signed it, the seaventeenth daie of November One 
thousand sixe hundred twentie eight being the fowerth yeare of the 
Raigne of Kinge Charles By me Robart Hayman 

In the witnes of theis vnderwritten 

William Heme John luxe 

Vicesimo quarto die mensis lanuarij Anno domini . . . Millesimo sexceu- 
tesimo tricesimo secundo emat.^^ Comissio Richardo Peter vni Creditorum 
dicti defuncti Ad administranda bona iura et credita dicti defuncti iuxta 
tenorem et effectum Testamenti huiusmodi eo quod Thoma[s] Muchell 
Executor . . . mortem obijt ante testatorem. . . . 

What befell Hayman and his fellow colonists in Guiana, we 
know not. The records of that country, so far as I have seen 
them, are ignorant of his name. All we do know is that his will 
was proved on 24 January 1632/3. Some months before this, 
we must suppose, the brave single-hearted pioneer of British 
empire had fallen a victim to a deadly climate or treacherous 
savages, and had found his last rest under the shade of the 
tropical forest. G. C. Moore Smith. 

2» Apparently for ' emanavit '. 

1918 37 

British Policy towards the American 
Indians in the South, 1763-8 

FROM the seventeenth century Great Britain was interested in 
the development of the Indian trade in the southern colonies 
of North America, and throughout the first half of the eighteenth 
there are numerous illustrations of the attractiveness of this 
branch of commerce, its extent, value, and political importance.^ 
Even before the establishment of the colony of Georgia, Carolina 
and Virginia traders had engrossed a large amount of the trade 
with the Cherokee and were rapidly extending their activities to 
the neighbouring nations on the south and west. Adair, in his 
History of the American Indians, published in London in 1776, 
vividly portrayed some aspects of this trade, in which he himself 
had taken part for forty years. Hence, when in 1763 British 
sovereignty was acknowledged over the region in which French 
and Spanish influence had hitherto in varying degrees predomi- 
nated, this interest was already planted in certain sections of 
the Indian country. In some quarters there was strong Indian 
opposition to the British, based upon a fear of territorial aggran- 
dizement, a fear which was fomented in some instances by the 
French. Nevertheless the British had already laid the basis for 
a working arrangement with the Indians through their trading 
interests. But their relations still required definite adjustment. 
The attractiveness of the lands tempted English settlers, and the 
latter's aggressions had to be checked in order to preserve peace 
with the nations and to render their trade secure. It is with this 
problem of adjustment that the present inquiry is concerned. 

Before the news of the conspiracy of Pontiac was known in 
London, the earl of Egremont, secretary of state for the southern 
department, sent a communication to the governors of the four 
provinces constituting the southern Indian district in North 
America, and to John Stuart, superintendent of Indian affairs in 
the same department, directing them to summon the Indian 
nations of that region for a general congress.^ The purpose of 

"■ Cf. C. H. Mcllwain, WmxalVs Abridgement of the New York Indian Records, 
1751-1768, pp. xxxii-xxxiv. 

^ Egremont to Dobbs, 16 March 1763, North Carolina Colonial Records, vi. 974 f. 
This was a circular letter sent to the governors and to the superintendent. 


this congress was to apprise the Indians of the reasons for the 
transfer of the land from the French and Spanish to the English, 
which had been effected by the treaty of Paris in 1763 ; and to 
establish peace and confidence between those nations and their 
new ruler by the assurance that ' the English feel a particular 
Satisfaction in the Opportunity which their Successes afford them, 
of giving the Indians the most incontestable & substantial Proofs 
of their good Intentions & cordial Desire to maintain a sincere 
& friendly Correspondence with them '.^ Immediately after the 
receipt of this instruction the Indians of the south were invited 
to the congress. It was due to the action thus fortunately 
suggested by the British government and so promptly executed 
by Stuart and his colleagues that the ramifications of Pontiac's 
conspiracy did not extend into the south.^ 

After considerable delay in fixing upon a meeting-place, the 
congress assembled at Augusta, Georgia, on 3 November 1763.^ 
Here Stuart addressed an assembly including the governors of 
Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia, with whom he 
was co-operating, and representatives from the southern nations — 
Creeks, Choctaw, Cherokee, and Chickasaw — numbering in all 
about seven hundred. During the following days the Indians 
presented their grievances ; ^ they complained of the excessive 
number of traders in their country and the encroachments of the 
British on their lands. The definitive acts of the congress ' con- 

3 Egremont to Dobbs, 16 March 1763, North Carolina Colonial Records, vi. 974 f. 

* So far as I am aware no similar effort was made by the government to conciliate 
the northern Indians. 

^ This place was originally suggested by Egremont on 16 March. The governors, 
however, consulting their own convenience and also desiring to assemble the Indians 
at a place where they would be under a greater check than in the sparsely settled 
frontier region about Augusta, proposed to hold the congress at Dorchester, about 
thirty miles west of Charleston. But the Creeks, residing immediately west and south 
of Georgia, and the Chickasaw, living in the region of the Mississippi River, refused to 
proceed further into the settlement than Augusta. See ' Journal of the Proceedings of 
the Southern Congress at Augusta, 1 October-21 November 1763', North Caroli^ia 
Colonial Records, xi. 156-79 ; and communications from Governor Wright of Georgia, 
11 October 1763, Colonial Records of Georgia, ix. 97 f. The interpreter to the Chicka- 
saw and Choctaw began to negotiate with those nations about the middle of July : 
North Carolina Colonial Records, xi. 176 f. In May 1763 the governor of Georgia 
informed the Creeks of a general meeting in the autumn : Colonial Records of Georgia, 
ix. 70 f . 

« The Chickasaw complained that many traders caused disturbances in their 
country while on their way to the territory of the Choctaw. They were answered by 
the assurance that henceforth traders would proceed from Pensacola and Mobile, since 
these ports now belonged to the British. As to the boundary of the territory about 
these settlements, and also about St. Augustine, nothing could be determined until 
the arrival of the governors of East and West Florida. It was understood, however, 
that the English would not push further inland than the flowing of the tide. The 
Cherokee requested that no settlements should remain west of the Holstens River in 
Virginia and Long Canes in South Carolina. See the journal of the congress, as above. 

' Journal, as above, pp. 156 ff. 


sjsted in the granting of a reservation to the Catawbas and in 
( letermining a boundary between the settlements in Georgia and 
rhe Indian hunting lands. In addition, assurances were given on 
the one side that the Indians should be given opportunities for 
trade, and on the other that the traders would be secured against 
Littack.^ This congress, the only one ever held at which all the 
nations of the south were assembled, set the example for several 
similar meetings during the next five years. 

The subjects of discussion at the congress of Augusta illustrate 
the problems of Indian management which became especially 
perplexing in the period following 1763. When sovereignty over 
the land east of the Mississippi River was transferred to the English 
crown in that year, not only a vast territory but thousands of 
natives as well came under its dominion. Now the problem of 
disposing of the lands would have been simple had not the Indians 
been loath to accept the political and commercial security offered 
by a power which was already crowding them on their eastern 
borders. Under the rule of France they had retained undisturbed 
possession of their lands. French settlers were rare indeed, and 
the traders asked for no permanent land grants. They had, more- 
over, no boundary line. Their plan of administration consisted in 
leaving the forests open to the Indians for hunting and in estab- 
lishing posts where merchant and Indian could meet for the 
purpose of trading. Under this arrangement the country was 
divided into districts recognized by the Indians, within which 
the trader was licensed to carry on his trade, but beyond whose 
confines he was forbidden, under severe penalties, to sell his 
goods. ^ The trade was carried on ' by means of numerous well 
chosen posts and forts, sufficient as well to overawe as to supply 
all the Indians '.^^ The character of the French trader generally 
ingratiated him with the natives ; for, besides possessing a 
suave, tactful manner, which pleased them, he was able to adapt 
himself easily to their life and manners. His influence wa& 
strengthened by the consideration and respect he showed towards^ 
them and by the large gifts he distributed among them.^^ By 
their ' dextrous culture of the Indians, under the great disadvan- 
tage of inability to supply their wants ', the French 'were possessed 
of their affections in a much greater degree than the English. The 
System they adopted for governing them was suggested by 

** Ibid. The treaty was signed 10 November 1763. There is nothing said about 
licensing the traders by the royal government, 8,8 stated by Hamilton, Colonial 
Mobile, p. 240. The individual colonies still controlled their trade, as the proclamatioQ 
of 7 October 1763 had not yet been received. 

^ Carter, Great Britain and the Illinois Country y 1763-74, p. 83. 

^» Shortt and Doughty, Documents relating to the Constitutional History of Canada^ 
p. 100. 

" Winsor, The Mississippi Basin, p. 408, 


observation of their disposition and customs '.^^ One of the most 
striking phases of French control was the fact that the governors 
of Canada and Louisiana, which included all the French posses- 
sions in North America, were each superintendent in his depart- 
ment, and as there were no other governors, there was no competi- 
tion or clashing of jurisdiction and authority. ^^ 

In contrast to the French policy of centralization of govern- 
ment was the decentralized policy of the British, according to 
which each colony managed its own trade, and each strove for 
the largest share. Commercial relations with the Indian country 
were carried on by traders from the different colonial jurisdictions, 
who bartered such necessaries as the Indians required for half- 
dressed deer-skins, beaver and other furs. The traders from the 
different provinces were under very different regulations. This 
is well illustrated in the exploitation of the trade with the Cherokee 
nation, which was contiguous alike to Virginia, North and South 
Carohna, and Georgia. All who desired might go into the nation 
with goods from Virginia and North Carolina without being 
licensed, laid under any regulations, or giving any security for 
their good behaviour. i* In South Carolina Indian trade was 
carried on under very different conditions. In 1762 a law was 
passed under the title of ' An Act to regulate the Trade with the 
Cherokee Indians, by taking the same into the Hands of the 
Pubhck of this Province ', the declared object of which was to 
prevent disorderly and worthless people going among the Indians 
as traders and pack-horse men — a course which had led to great 
confusion and mischief — and to supply the necessities of the 
Indians upon equitable and moderate terms.^^ Neither of these 
objects, however, was achieved, because the law did not operate 
beyond the limits of the province and consequently did not affect 
people trading from any of the other three provinces. In Georgia 
likewise trade was regulated by a provincial law. But all such 
laws were virtually nullified by the lack of co-operation between 
the provinces. A trader from one province did not consider 
himself subject to the regulations made in any of the other 
three, and was responsible for his actions to that government 
only from which he had received his licence or from which he 
traded. Hence competition between the provinces often arose. 
Under this system great numbers of traders, unscrupulous in 
their methods, entered the Indian territory. They won trade by 
underselling their stores, a poHcy which in the end proved ruinous. 
Parties were frequently formed by the different traders among 
the Indians which resulted in confusion and disorder. Another 

" Stuart to Lords of Trade, 9 March 1764, Colonial Office, 323. 17. Cf. Mcllwain, 

" Stuart, ubi supra, »« Ibid. ^^ Ibid. 


injurious practice was the sale, in the region further west, of English 
goods to the French, who were thus doubly benefited by the 
peltry trade. The Indians, moreover, had a serious grievance 
in the extensive traffic in rum, under the influence of which they 
were cheated in business, defrauded of their lands, and physically 
and morally corrupted.^^ 

This general condition obtained until the opening of the French 
and Indian war. Perceiving the need of supervision of Indian 
affairs, the Board of Trade, in 1755, appointed Sir WilUam 
Johnson as superintendent in the district north of Virginia,^' 
and Edmund Atkin in the southern district, including the pro- 
vinces of Virginia, North Carolina, South CaroHna, and Georgia. 
Atkin died, however, in 1762, and was succeeded by Captain 
John Stuart.i^ In 1761 the purchase of Indian lands was taken 
out of the hands of the colonies and placed under the authority 
of the home government. It had been the poUcy of the British 
government, whenever it claimed and maintained sovereignty 
over a territory, to extinguish the Indian title through treaty 
and purchase in order that there might be no barrier to the com- 
plete exploitation of the land.^^ In the older colonies the frontier 
was in this manner extended further to the west as the number 
of colonists increased. The Indians supported this poHcy only 
in so far as it formally recognized their claims to the lands. ^o 
They might sell these possessions voluntarily ; or, as happened 
quite as often, the pressure of a neighbouring settlement and the 
offer of a few desirable trinkets, which captivated their fancy, 
might induce them to relinquish their title. In the latter case, 
the material considerations very soon wore out or were forgotten. 
And again, close upon their hunting grounds, were the British 
settlements. The French policy was more generally favoured, 
then, because it left the Indians in apparently undisputed 
dominion over their hunting grounds. 

In view of these conditions, conflict between the British and 
French influences in the wilderness was inevitable. Even after 
France formally transferred the territory to Great Britain in 
1763, the French trader continued his activity in spite of the fact 
that British traders now possessed the sole right to sell goods 
west of the Appalachian Mountains. Immediately the dire 
predictions of the coureurs de hois, concerning encroachments by 
the British and the confusion to trade resulting from, an over- 
whelming number of traders, began to be realized. This unfor- 

" Ibid. 

" Alvord, ' Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763 ', in Michigan Pioneer and Historical 
Collections, xxxvi. 12. 

" Smith, South Carolina as a Royal Province» p. 224. 

^' Winsor, Mississippi Basin, p. 323. ^" Ihid. 


tunate situation led to the great Indian conspiracy which 
emanated from the shrewd mind of Pontiac and was aimed at the 
crushing of British power in North America.^i tj^^ possibiUties 
threatened by the outbreak of this widespread rising made 
immediate action necessary. A general policy was, therefore, 
hastily conceived and announced in a royal proclamation on 
October 7, 1763. It provided, among other things, for the erection 
of three new provinces on the continent, Quebec, East Florida, 
and West Florida.22 According to its terms, the Indians were 
not to be molested or disturbed in their possession of such lands 
as ' not having been ceded to or purchased by us are reserved to 
them, as their Hunting Grounds ' ; land grants beyond the bounds 
of the new colonies were forbidden without royal consent ; and 
a temporary provision was made, ' until our further Pleasure be 
known', that in the other colonies no settlements were to be 
formed beyond the heads of any of the rivers which fall into the 
Atlantic Ocean. Definite grants must henceforth be made by 
treaty or purchase between the last frontiers and the crest of the 
mountains ; for the present the vast region west of the mountains 
and beyond the limits of the new colonies was to remain undis- 
turbed Indian territory. In this way the Indians' fears of 
extensive encroachments were calmed. Provision was made, 
moreover, that trade within this Indian preserve should be free 
and open to all English subjects. It required 

every Person who may incline to Trade with the said Indians to take out 
a License for carrying on such Trade, from the Grovernor or the Commander 
in Chief of any of our Colonies respectively where such Person shall reside ; 
and also give Security to observe such Kegulations as We shall at any Time 
think fit, by ourselves or by our Commissaries to be appointed for this 
purpose, to direct and appoint for the Benefit of the said Trade.^^ 

It further obliged the governors 

to grant such Licenses without Fee or Reward, taking especial Care to 
insert therein a Condition, that such License shall be void, and the Security 
forfeited in case the Person to whom the same is granted shall refuse or 
neglect to observe such Regulations as We shall think proper to prescribe 
as aforesaid. 

Before the trade provisions thus summarized were known to 
all American officials, especially in the interior of the country, 
a policy somewhat similar in purpose had been announced by the 
military authorities. In March 1764 Colonel James Robertson, 

2^ It was Stuart's opinion that Alabama Mingo, of the Choctaw, and the Mortar, 
of the Creeks, were associated with Pontiac, but that the former had refused to join 
forces actively with that leader until actual settlements by the English should be 
attempted. See letter from Johnstone and Stuart, 12 June 1765, Mississippi Provincial 
Archives, i. 184 f. 

23 Shortt and Doughty, pp. 119 f. 23 j^i^. 


\\ horn General Gage had placed in charge of the southern military 
district, issued orders forbidding the exaction of duties at the 
ports of Pensacola and Mobile, and announcing that the trade 
with the Indians should be free and open to all. Information 
of this order was at the same time transmitted to Stuart.^* 

The home government intended that a general plan for the 
political and commercial control of the Indians should soon be 
devised. In the following year, accordingly, the ministry, after 
consulting anumberof persons familiar with American conditions — 
particularly Sir William Johnson, and his deputy George Croghan, 
and Captain John Stuart — ^framed a scheme for the management 
of Indian affairs. This plan ^^ proposed to continue the two 
departments into which the Indian territory had been divided, 
each under the control of a superintendent who was to possess 
full authority in all Indian affairs independent of the civil au- 
thorities. ^^ The trade was to be open to all British subjects, 
so long as they obtained licences. It was provided that 

all persons intending to trade with the Indians shall take out licenses for 
that purpose, under the hand or seal of the Governor or Commander in 
Chief of the Colony from which they intend to carry on such Trade, for 
every which License, no more shall be demanded than two Shillings. . . .All 
persons taking out Licenses shall be under bond ... for the due Observance 
of the regulations prescribed for Indian Trade. 

According to the scheme, no private person, society, corporation, 
6r colony might purchase or obtain by treaty any lands from the 
Indians except within the limits of the colony : as for the area 
between the lands open for settlement and Indian territory, 
measures were to ' be taken with the consent and concurrence 
of the Indians to ascertain and define the precise and exact 
boundary and the limits of the lands ' ; and the purchase of the 

2* Colonial Office, 5. 85. 

'" See New York Colonial Documents, vii. 637 f. ; Alvord and Carter, ' The Critical 
Period ', Illinois Historical Collections, x. 273 f. ; Shortt and Doughty, pp. 433 f. The 
ideas of Stuart, as set forth in detail in his comprehensive report of 9 March 1764, are 
closely followed. 

2^ The status of the superintendents in relation to the civil and military depart- 
ments was not defined. But the government always regarded them as independent 
of the civil power and subordinate to the military. They acted directly under the 
authority of the commander-in-chief of the British army in America. The following 
extract from a letter of Shelburne to Stuart, under date of 11 December 1766, makes 
clear the relation of the Indian and military departments : ' You are therefore to take 
the Orders of the Commander in Chief on all interesting occasions, who being settled 
in the center of the Colonies, will carry on the Correspondence with the Governors on 
all such Points as are out of the Course of Business, and as he will be very particularly 
instructed by Administration, you are to look upon him as a proper medium of material 
Intelligence either to, or from England, or the Colonies. At the same time you are to 
convey every sort of material Intelligence directly to me, and to correspond with the 
Governors of the different Provinces in your District, as occasion offers or may require '.: 
Lansdowne MS. 53, fo. 295. 


land from the crown or proprietor bej^ond that already belonging 
to the colony was only to be made at general meetings in the 
presence of the representatives of the tribes to whom the lands 
belonged. After the grant had been made it must be accurately 
surveyed by EngHsh surveyors and by a representative of the 
tribe concerned. ^'^ 

This general scheme, which required the sanction of parlia- 
ment because it involved raising a tax to bring it into operation, 
never became law. It was sent, however, to the superintendents 
of the northern and southern districts with the suggestion that 
it should be acted upon so far as was practicable. ^^ Sir William 
Johnson delayed to make use of it until 1766, but John Stuart, 
of the southern department, began immediately to take steps 
for carrying out the principle contained in it.^^ The task was 
beset with many serious difficulties. At this time the trade, 
which was normally confined to the towns of the nation,^^ was in 
an even more disorganized state than before the announcement 
of the proclamation of 1763 which had made trade free and open 
to the public at large. Each of the six provinces continued to 
presume to regulate its own tariff. Although the traders were 
bound to observe any general regulations which might be drawn 
up by the representatives of the crown, in no other respect were 
they limited. 31 The licences issued in accordance with the 
proclamation of 1763 had ' filled all the nations with people that 
could not or would not choose to reside in any Society subjected 
to Laws ' and who, by their licences, ' are not subjected to pay 
any obedience to the superintendent or his officers ', and who 

*' The importance of this provision in the judgement of the ministry is illustrated 
by the terms of the proclamation of 1763 and the plan of 1764. While the Indians were 
conciliated by the restriction of British settlement on the west, the trade was so regu- 
lated as to give England the monopoly. This attitude was not changed even by 1772, 
when the lords of trade declared that the purpose of colonizing America had been to 
extend the commerce of the kingdom. The Indians judged the policy of the British 
government by the acts of the colonists, who were greedy for land and unscrupulous 
in trade. 

^* ' Representation of the Lords of Trade on the State of Indian Affairs, 7 March 
1768 ', New York Colonial Documents, viii. 24 f. 

*» Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765, Shelburne MS. Ix. 

3" 'Plan for the future management of Indian affairs.' There were fewer nations 
in this district than in the northern, but they consisted of greater numbers of men, 
*live more compactly and contiguous to our Provinces & more in community with 
each other than the northern tribes ' : Stuart to Pownall, 8 August 1766, Colonial 
Office, 5. 67. Although, as Governor Grant of East Florida suggested, ' carrying on 
Trade with the Indians at established Posts is by much the more eligible Method, 
& it would be to the advantage of the government if that Plan could likewise be extended 
to the Southern Provinces ', nevertheless ' to avoid giving Umbrage to any of the 
Towns, It will certainly be advisable to open a Trade to each of them, which is likewise 
necessary on account of the Distance there is between the Several Towns of the 
same Tribe ' : Grant to Board of Trade, 1 December 1764, Colonial Office, 323. 19, 20. 

" Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765, North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 108 f. 


' are entirely removed from every Jurisdiction or Authority by 
which they may be kept in order & their Enormities punished '.^2 
Moreover, there grew up the abuse of the employment of a large 
number of * under-traders ' by licensed traders. These men 
crowded the Indian country. In the whole Choctaw nation 
there were only three regularly licensed traders, and in the small 
nation of the Chickasaw of three hundred and fifty gunmen 
there were seventy-two traders of the lower class. ^^ This condition 
of things undoubtedly augmented the bad impression of the 
English which the French had left on the minds of the Indians. 

Thus the prevaihng tendency was discouraging and fraught 
with grave danger to British interests . It was, therefore, extremely 
opportune that Superintendent Stuart called a general congress 
at Pensacola in May and June 1765, with representatives of the 
Creeks, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and the small nations on the Missis- 
sippi, in fulfilment of the promise given at Augusta to summon 
the Creeks and Choctaw to a congress as soon as the governors 
of East and West Florida should arrive. ^^ It was attended also 
by the royal officials from the province of West Florida and 
by representatives of the traders. The Indians were restive on 
account of the laxity in trade regulations, and were increasingly 
jealous lest they should be deprived of their vested rights by 
territorial encroachments on the part of EngHsh settlers. Stuart's 
task, therefore, a delicate and dangerous one, was that of guaran- 
teeing to the Indians peace and security, and justice in their 
commercial relations, and at the same time extending the boundary 
so as to give the English more room for development. His work 
was rendered extremely difficult and tedious by many concurring 
circumstances — such as the season of the year, the scarcity of 
provisions, party differences among the Indians, their suspicions 
of English motives, and the divisions and competition for trade 
and lack of government among the traders and pack-horse men 
represented at the congress. ^^ Nevertheless he was relatively 
successful in surmounting these various obstacles. One of the 
two most important achievements was the cession of land by 
the Creeks and Choctaw to satisfy the needs of the English. 
The Creeks promised to increase this cession at the close of four 
years should the British show the sincerity of their professions. 
At the same time the Choctaw ceded a strip of land as far west 
* as they had a right to grant '. A second important step in the 
process of adjustment was the promulgation of a definite body of 
rules designed to eradicate some of the more obvious evils ia 

=^2 Stuart to Gage, 8 August 1766, Colonial Office, 5. 67. 

^' Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765, as above. 

^* A full account of the congress is found in Mississippi Provincial Archives, i. 184 f. 

3^ Stuart to Governor Bull, 10 August 1765, Colonial Office, 323. 23. 


Indian commerce, and to set up some sort of police among the 
Indians and government among traders and pack-horse men. 

According to Stuart's interpretation of the Indian problem 
the extension of British trade was not the sole end to be sought. 
It was rather ' the preservation of peace with and introducing 
good order among the Indians ' that was the chief desidera- 
tum.^^ To accomplish this he proposed a set of regulations ^' 
designed to limit the number of traders and to fix the prices of 
Indian goods by a tariff, and also to lessen the number of whites 
among the nations by laying down strict rules relative to the 
pack-horse men employed by the licensed traders and by for- 
bidding traders to harbour persons wandering among the Indians. 
A uniform tariff was prescribed, and trade was to be carried on 
solely within the Indian towns. There were provisions also 
regulating the sale of rum and forbidding the sale of guns or shot. 
In addition traders were expected to report all disturbances to 
the commissaries or deputies who were to be stationed within the 
respective towns. In general these regulations had the object of 
further centralizing the control of the Indian trade under the 
superintendent. They were drawn up in accordance with the 
spirit of the proclamation of 1763 and of the plan of 1764, and 
tended, along with those measures, to draw a line between the 
powers of the different governors and those of the superintendent. 
This, in Stuart's opinion, was absolutely essential to success in 
dealing with the Indian problem. The regulations were accepted 
by the assembled nations,^^ although the Creeks were not wholly 
satisfied with them and still complained of the high tariff of 
goods in comparison with that of the Cherokee. The Choctaw and 
Chickasaw, however, returned to their homes well pleased.^^ 
Governor Johnstone and the council in West Florida, and the 
representatives of the merchants, likewise accepted the arrange- 
ment and promised to co-operate in enforcing it.*° 

3« ' Observations on the Plan for the Future Management of Indian Affairs by 
John Stuart,' 1 December 1764, edited by C. E. Carter in American Historical Review, 
XX. 815 f. Governor Johnstone of West Florida also regarded the regulation of 
Indian trade in the light of establishing ' peace. Stability and Security in the Cultiva- 
tion. Propagation and Improvement of our Colonies and the promoting of the happiness 
of the Indians '. See ' Sentiments of Governor George Johnstone of West Florida on 
the Plan for the Future Management of Indian Affairs', 2 January 1765, Colonial 
Office, 323. 20. This was also the view of the council and assembly of West Florida, 
as set forth in a joint representation to the Board of Trade, 22 November 1766, ihid. 
5. 84. 

" ' Copy of Regulations of Trade with the Indians,' enclosed in Stuart's letter of 
24 August 1765, ihid. 323. 23. 

3» Stuart to Bull, 10 August 1765, ihid. 323. 23 ; Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765, 
ihid, 323. 23. 

" Letter of Johnstone and Stuart, 12 June 1765, Mississippi Provincial Archives. 
i. 184 f. 

" Stuart to Bull, 10 August 1765. 


Although Stuart was thus successful in his initial efforts in 
West Florida, he met with failure elsewhere. Governor Grant of 
East Florida, indeed, agreed to assist in the introduction of tlie 
regulations into that province.^^ But the governor and council 
of Georgia were unAvilling so to restrict their traders to the Creek 
nation, which, previously to 1763, had been under several good 
regulations, so far as colonial laws could operate ; and the same 
had been true of South Carolina.*^ Both provinces, after 1763, 
lowered the prices of goods so much that many merchants 
were driven into bankruptcy. Virginia, without consulting the 
superintendent, sent messengers into the Cherokee country to 
negotiate ' some matters relative to trade to be carried on in 
that Nation by a Company erected by a Provincial Law with 
a Fund of £30,000 true money ' : ^^ it proposed to sell goods at 
cost price. That this policy could be pursued for a time by 
both Virginia and South Carolina with the Indians immediately 
adjoining them was admitted by Stuart, but he asserted that the 
Creeks, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and the smaller nations on the Missis- 
sippi remote from both Virginia and South Carolina, would be dis- 
satisfied if they had not trade upon the same terms, which would 
be impossible unless some parliamentary enactment were passed.** 

Not only was the situation impossible because these colonies 
would not co-operate with the Indian department, but the pro- 
blem was further complicated by the conflicting interests of the 
trade. Two groups were now interested in Indian commerce — the 
large merchants who had held a monopoly before the trade was 
thrown open to the public, and the small traders, whose licences, 
signed by the governor, permitted them to trade where they 
pleased without oversight by any authority sufficiently powerful 
to regulate their actions. The former of these were apparently 
anxious for the British government to abandon the system of 
free trade. In 1767 the merchants of Augusta, in Georgia, drew 
up a memorial to Stuart *^ in which they complained of the 
great number of traders in the Creek nation in comparison with 
the number engaged in the traffic before the declaration of the 
trade policy in 1763. In the earlier period the provincial law of 

" Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765. 

« Stuart to Board of Trade, 9 March 1764, Colonial Office, 323. 17 ; Stuart to 
Pownall, 24 August 1765, North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 108 f. No mention 
is made, during the years 1763-8, of traders from North Carolina. Stuart, in his 
reply to the Cherokee relative to trade regulations at the congress of 'Augusta in 
1763, said, ' In North Carolina there are no Indian Traders at all either to your 
Nation or any other ' : North Carolina Colonial Records, xi. 196. 

" Stuart to Lords of Trade, 10 July 1766, North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 
232 f . 

" Ibid. ; Stuart to Gage, 8 August 1766, Colonial Office, 5. 67 ; Stuart to Fauquier, 
24 November 1766, North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 267 f. 

*^ Colonial Office, 5. 85. 


Georgia had carefully regulated the Creek trade. It appears 
that, to some extent at least, the Creeks were not over-supplied 
with goods and the prices were fairly stable. But, the merchants 
asserted, since the trade had been thrown open to all persons 
the * new ' traders had entered into keen competition with the 
old, and this pointed inevitably to the ruin of all the trade and 
to the dissatisfaction of the Indians. The practice, common to 
the new traders, of selling goods greatly under their value had 
resulted in changing a hitherto favourable balance of trade into 
an unfavourable one. Unless this was rectified, it was urged, 
unless a tariff was imposed which would give the Indian a just 
value for his purchases and the merchants a moderate profit, 
the latter would have to withdraw altogether. As, however, he 
possessed no ultimate authority to compel the execution of his 
instructions, Stuart now perceived the futility of attempting 
to bring order into the department unless he was granted such 
authority, and unless the governors were required to support him. 
In the autumn of 1766, owing to the frequency of the reports 
as to the confusion of the trade in the southern district, especially 
from Stuart and the Indian commissaries, Lord Shelburne, 
secretary of state for the southern department, gave the super- 
intendent full power to introduce any measures consistent with 
the proclamation of 1763, for the purpose of further restraining 
the traders and remedying the abuses which had resulted from 
the system of general licensing by the provincial governors.*® 
He also informed Stuart that a plan for the regulation of Indian 
affairs was under consideration.*'^ At this same time Shelburne *^ 
urgently advised the governors of the provinces to adhere closely 
to the proclamation of 1763 in matters of trade and boundaries.*® 
As a result of the authority thus given him, Stuart urged the 
governors ^^ to subject the traders 

to the observation of such Regulations as shall be proposed by me through 
the Commissarys residing in such Nations, and order such as already Trade 

** Shelburne to Stuart, 13 September 1766, Shelburne MS. liii, in the collection 
of the Marquess of Lansdowne ; ' Journal of the Superintendent's Proceedings,' in 
Stuart's letter of 3 October 1767, Colonial Office, 323. 24. 

*' ' Journal of the Superintendent's Proceedings.' 

** Stuart's plan for the management of Indian trade was considered by the ministry, 
but Shelburne stated that the expense involved was not one of the least objections ; 
many of the articles seemed of so dubious a nature that the plan could not be carried 
out in its entirety : Shelburne to Stuart, 11 December 1766, Shelburne MS. Hi. 

*» Shelburne to Tryon, 13 September 1766, North Carolina Colonial Records, 
vii. 254-5 ; abstract of dispatches from Lieutenant-Governor Browne, 22 January 
1767, Shelburne MS. lii. 

5» Stuart to Johnstone, 17 December 1766, Canadian Archives, B. 11, p. 147; 
Stuart to Taylor, 1 April 1767, Shelburne MS. li ; abstract of dispatches from Stuart, 
28 July 1767, Shelburne MS. li ; Stuart to Fauquier, 24 November 1766, North Carolina 
Colonial Records, vii. 267 f. 


under License from you strictly to observe them agreeable to His Majesty's 
Proclamation referred to in the said Letter. I purpose summoning the 
Traders to meet me in Augusta in March next, in order to Regulate the 
Trade which I hope your Excellency will by all means in your power 
facilitate. In the meantime I have directed the commissaries to require 
the compliance of the Traders with the Regulations agreed upon in West 
Florida with certain Alterations.^^ 

These amended regulations ^- went further than former ones 
in dealing with the kind of men who were to be employed by 
licensed traders, the sale of goods at prices other than those 
specified under the tariff, and the holding of meetings without 
the consent of the superintendent. All hunting on Indian grounds 
was forbidden. There was a new provision by which all traders 
had to show their licences to the commissaries before trading ; 
and the rate at which goods were to be sold was attached to the 
licences. ^"^ A public notice, moreover, was printed in the Gazette 
(a North Carolina newspaper), that ' after the 3rd of October 
next, no License shall be considered as valid by Stuart or his 
Deputies excepting such as shall be granted agreeable to said 
Proclamation '.^* 

Confident of creating good order through his regulations, 
now that he had the permission of the ministry to enforce and the 
promise on the part of the governors of South Carolina and 
Georgia ^^ to co-operate in the execution of the plan through the 
cancelling of general licences and restricting traders to certain 
districts, Stuart held conferences with the traders to the Creeks ^^ 
at Augusta and with those to the Cherokee at Hard Labor. ^^ 
The traders to both nations signified their satisfaction upon hear- 
ing that the ministry was considering a definite plan for the man- 
agement of trade, and assisted Stuart in rendering his measures 
effective. Although the prices among the Cherokee had been 

''^ Stuart to Johnstone, 17 December 1700, Canadian Archives, B. 11, p. 147. 
These regulations were altered after consulting the different governors : abstract of 
dispatch from Stuart, 28 July 1707, Shelburne MS. li ; ' Regulations for the better 
carrying on the Trade with the Indian Tribes in the Southern District,' in Stuart's 
letter of 28 July 1707, Colonial Office, 323. 25, 20. 

" Stuart sent printed copies of the regulations ' to the different Governors and 
Commissaries residing in the different Nations, with Orders to the latter to require 
Observation of them from the Traders' : Stuart to Taylor, 1 April 1707, Shelburne 
MS. li. 

" ' Regulations for the better carrying on the Trade with the Indian Tribes in 
the Southern District,' as above. 

"* Abstract of dispatch from Stuart, 28 July 1707, Shelburne MS. li. 

" 11 April 1707, ihid. 

^•* The congress met on 5 May 1707. See 'Journal of the Superintendent's pro- 
ceedings' enclosed in Stuart's letter of 3 October 1707, Colonial Office, 323. 24, and 
abstract of dispatch from Stuart, 24 August 1707, Shelburne MS. li. 

" This conference began on 18 May 1707: ibid. See abstract of dispatch from 
Stuart. 28 July 1707, ihid. ; abstract of disiaatch from Gage, 24 August 1707, ihid. 



so low as to admit of no abatement, it is worth notice that the 
traders to the Creeks lowered the prices on twenty- three important 
articles.^^ The Indians, particularly the Creeks, were extremely 
well pleased with the tariff agreed upon between them and the 
traders . ^^ Stuart immediately communicated with Charles Stuart, 
his deputy to the Choctaw and Chickasaw, ordering him to bring 
the altered regulations into operation among the traders to those 
nations. He was also to summon them to a congress for the 
purpose of establishing a tariff upon the same footing as that of 
the Creeks. ^0 Lieutenant-Governor Browne, of West Florida, 
assembled the traders at Pensacola, where he renewed their licences 
upon their giving proper security, and gave each of them printed 
copies of the regulations. ^^ Stuart desired Governor Fauquier 
of Virginia to unite with him in directing the traders not to sell 
goods to the Cherokee for less than the fixed prices and in requiring 
them, under bond, to conform to the superintendent's regulations.^^ 
Fauquier replied, however, that he could not subject the traders 
from his province to any regulations, as he knew nothing of any 
proclamation or instruction on that head.^^ 

With the exception of Virginia, then, the governors, as well 
as the traders, of all the provinces were now attempting to secure 
better order among the Indians in the southern department. 
In the late spring of 1768, however, came an order from the Board 
of Trade entrusting the entire management of the Indian trade 
to the colonies themselves.^* It was alleged, in support of this 
move, that no general policy could be applicable to all the different 
nations ; that the confining of trade to fixed places seemed a 
doubtful poHcy ; and that the expense connected with the 
extensive operation of the plan proved too great. ^^ The news of 
the adoption of this policy was transmitted within a month to 
the governors and superintendents. Stuart immediately notified 

^« In almost every case the number of pounds of leather paid for the English 
commodity was two pounds less than formerly : ' Journal of Superintendent's Pro- 
ceedings,' as above. 

" Stuart to Haldimand, 25 June 1767, Canadian Archives, B. 11. 

*" Ihid. ; also 16 January 1767, ihid. 

^ Abstract of dispatch from Lieutenant-Governor Browne, 6 August 1767, 
Shelburne MS. li. 

«2 Stuart to Fauquier, 24 November 1 766, North Carolina Colonial Record^ vii . 267 f , 

*' Abstract of dispatch from Stuart, 28 July 1767, Shelburne MS. li. 

" ' Representation of the Lords of Trade, 7 March 1768,' in Xeiv York Colonial 
Document, viii. 24 ; Hillsborough to the governors in America, 15 April 1768, ibid., 
vii. 55-6; ffillsborough to Tryon, 15 April 1768, North Carolina Colonial Records, 
vii. 707 f. ; Hillsborough to Haldimand, 15 April 1768, Canadian Archives, B. 13. 

«5 The opinion in England seemed to be, as Shelburne wrote to Governor Johnstone, 
that greater inconveniences arose from the misbehaviour of Indian traders in the 
southern department than in the northern: Shelburne to Johnstone, 11 December 
1766, Shelburne MS. Ivii. See also Hillsborough's dispatches cited in the preceding 


all the commissaries and other officers employed by him in the 
management of the trade that their salaries would cease on 
1 December 1768.^^ General confusion ensued. The powers of 
the six different governors and the unlimited right of all British 
subjects to trade everywhere, as authorized by the proclamation 
of 1763, rendered it impossible for any province to frame proper 
regulations with success. Such laws could operate only within 
the jurisdiction of the province enacting them. And as Stuart 
pointed out, the 

best Laws will prove ineffectual without proper Persons to carry these 
^nto Execution ; Commissaries by every and all the Provinces would 
create horrid Confusion and the Commissaries from any Province can 
only Govern the Traders from the said Province. These difficulties have 
hitherto prevented any Law being passed by any Assembly in the Southern 
Indian Department.^^ 

The Indians, moreover, complained that their countries were 
again filled with vagabonds and traders who had returned to 
their former abuses and disturbances. ^^ 

Co-existent with the trade problem, and intimately associated 
with it, was the equally troublesome and delicate question of 
the adjustment of the Indian boundary. At every congress with 
the Indians these two principal causes of discontent obtruded 
themselves, the latter usually occupying as much of the attention 
of the delegates as the former. In order to illustrate the serious- 
ness of the boundary problem and the manner in which it was 
solved, it will be necessary to pass in review, briefly, the various 
steps in the determination of the lines of demarcation. Stuart 
deemed it expedient to negotiate a boundary line behind each 
province in order to guarantee peace within the district.^® 
Although he did not possess full power to negotiate and fix the 
boundary line, he succeeded, nevertheless, in effecting an amicable 
settlement between the southern colonies and the Indian tribes, 
and in many cases he had surveyed the line by 1768. 

The congress of Augusta, in 1763, had brought about a mutual 
understanding as to the boundary. The Chickasaw, in the north- 
western corner of the district, were not at all, and the Choctaw 
not specially, concerned with English encroachments from the 
south or east. The Creeks, on the other hand, were in great 
fear of an invasion of their country by the English from both 

«" Gage to Hillsborough, 9 October 1768, Colonial Office, 5. 86 ; Stuart to Haldi- 
iiiand, 24 April 1769, Canadian Archives, B. 4. 

" Stuart to Haldimand, 24 April 1769, as above ; Stuart to Durnford, 4 January 
1770, Colonial Office, 5. 87. 

** Stuart to Haldimand, 24 April 1769, as above ; Stuart to Durnford, 4 January 
1770, Colonial Office, 6. 87. 

«9 Stuart to Pownall, 24 August 1765, Shelburne MS. Ix. 



directions. In like manner the Cherokee complained of the rapid 
extension westward of the Virginia frontier. The Catawba, 
a small nation between the Creeks and Cherokee, demanded a 
reservation, which they received at Augusta. The Creeks made 
a formal cession to Georgia, and left the congress with the under- 
standing that in South Carolina settlements would be made no 
further west than those already at Long Canes, and that the 
representatives of the Creek nation would negotiate a boundary 
behind the newly acquired territory,'^^ later called East Florida 
and West Florida, as soon as the governors should arrive. In 
Virginia there was to be no settlement on Cherokee territory 
west of New River. According to Stuart's explanation, however, 
there had never been any encroachments on Indian territory 
except on the part of a few adventurous persons acting without 
authority from the government. "^^ The boundary of West Florida 
was definitely settled ^^ at the congresses of Mobile and Pensacola 
in 1765. In pursuance of an agreement made at Pensacola, the 
Lower Creeks met the governor of East Florida at Picolata, about 
twenty miles from St. Augustine, on 15 November 1765, and three 
days later signed a treaty granting ' a very extensive Territory to 
His Majesty, Which in all probability would be sufficient for 
the Settlements of this Province for many Years '.'^ The line, 
although definitely described, was not surveyed behind these two 

'" They warned the English, nevertheless, against attempting any settlements 
in the meantime, west of St. John's River in the peninsula of Florida, or north 
of a line ascertained by the ebb and flow of the tide in the rivers emptying into 
the Gulf. 

'^ ' Journal of the Proceedings of the Southern Congress at Augusta, 1 October- 
21 November 1763,' North Carolina Colonial Records, xi. 156 f. ; of. p. 197. 

" The boundary behind West Florida was a definite, continuous line. There has 
been some discussion as to a break in its extension westward from Appalachicola 
River to Mobile Bay: see Farrand, ' The Indian Boundary Line' , in American Historical 
Review, x. 782 f . Hamilton states. Colonial Mobile, p. 246, that ' the treaty [June 
1765] seems to indicate that the line was on the eastern side of Pensacola Bay to be 
defined by high-water mark, and reference is made to what was settled at Augusta ; 
but this must have been settled outside the formal treaty at Augusta'. As we have 
seen (above, p. 38, n. 6) it was understood at Augusta in 1763 that no settlement 
should be made north of the flowing of the tide. The treaty of Pensacola was signed 
by both Upper and Lower Creeks. The Upper Creeks granted the land round the 
eastern coast of Pensacola Bay where their claims ceased at the path leading to the 
Lower Creek nation. The eastern portion of the line bounding the cession made by 
the Lower Creeks was ' to be determined by the flowing of the Sea in the Bays as was 
settled at Augusta'. It extended from the trading path to the Appalachicola River 
where it joined the line of East Florida, which, in the west, was also marked by the 
flowing of the tide. That Stuart understood the line thus is shown by the way in which 
he set out his information on the map accompanying the ' Report & Representation 
of the Board of Trade, dated 7 March 1768', New York Colonial Documents, viii. 31, 
and on his own map sent to Dartmouth, secretary of state for the colonies, in 1772. 
See also his dispatch to Durnford, 4 January 1770, Colonial Office, 5. 87. 

" Letter from Grant and Stuart, 9 December 1765, Mississippi Provincial Archives, 
i. 174f. See also ' Representation of the Lords of Trade, 7 March 1768', New York 
Colonial Documents, viii. 32. 


provinces because of the conflict between the Choctaw and the 

There remained now to be adjusted the boundary between 
the Creeks and Georgia. Although the line had been agreed 
upon at Augusta, it had never been surveyed ; and at the con- 
gress of Picolata the Creeks modified the cession. This grant 
remained permanent.'^ In June 1767 the survey was extended 
as far as the Ogeechee River, where work was discontinued for 
more than a year.'^ At a congress summoned by the governors at 
Savannah, 3 September 1768, the grievances urged by the Indians 
were redressed and provisions were made for the continuance 
of the survey. Within a year, therefore, the boundary was com- 
pleted to the satisfaction of the Indians and the British. '^ 

The settlement of the boundary line with the Cherokee proved 
to be a more complex problem, and was accomplished only as 
the result of patient negotiations. "^^ In the latter part of 1764 
the Cherokee complained of a violation of the understanding 
they had had when they had left the congress of Augusta.''^ 
Lieutenant-Governor Bull, of South Carolina, proposed a line in 

'* Johnstone and Stuart to Lords of Trade, 12 June 1765, Mississippi Provincial 
.Archives, i. 212-13. 

'^ For the text of the treaty see New York Colonial Documents, viii. 32. Captain 
Alleck, of the Creeks, ratified this new line with the governor of Georgia at Savannah, 
10 January 1766 : Jones, History of Georgia, ii. 81 f. 

^* On 24 May 1767 Stuart met the traders and about a hundred and eighty 
men of the Creek nation at Augusta. At this meeting, provision was made for the 
return of Creek deputies before the end of September for the purpose of marking out 
a definite boundary line behind East Florida and Georgia, which had been determined 
upon at Picolata. The proposed meeting, however, was deferred because a number 
of the inhabitants of East Florida were killed : Stuart to Haldimand, 7 and 25 June 
1767, Canadian Archives. 

" Stuart to Durnford, 4 January 1770, Colonial Office, 5. 87 ; Jones, History of 
Georgia, ii. 81 f. 

" The necessity of a settlement of the boundary lines between the Creeks and 
Cherokee and the English was urgent, as these nations were very jealous of their 
lands and were suspicious of the English because of the impression made by the 
insinuations of the French. The killing of several Cherokees in the back settlements 
of Virginia was known to all the nations and was thought an example of British policy. 
The Creeks offered their neighbours several hundred men, if they wished to take revenge. 
Therefore if this, one of the causes of complaint — an unsettled boundary — were re- 
moved, a war with the Cherokee might be averted : Stuart to Try on, 28 May 1766, 
North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 213-14. 

'» At the congress of Augusta in 1763, the last assembly in which the Cherokee had 
been represented, they declared themselves a tribe of hunters and requested that there 
should be no settlements further to the west than those already made. However, in 
a treaty previously made with Lieutenant-Governor Bull, settlements were permitted 
west of Long Canes. The Cherokee expected that no further encroachments would 
be made, but this was not acceded to. South Carolina granted large tracts beyond 
what was settled at that time ; North Carolina made grants behind the mountains 
which included the lower Cherokee towns. These acts confirmed the impression left 
by the French of the English determination to secure extensive land grants : Stuart 
to Pownall, 24 August 1765, Shelburne MS. Ix ; Stuart to Tryon, 26 May, 1766, 
North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 213-14. 


1765, which, however, the Indians only approved upon Stuart's 
advice and after a series of negotiations which were begun on 
19 October 1765.^0 The boundary was surveyed in April 1766, 
by Alexander Cameron, Stuart's deputy, and was ratified to the 
satisfaction of the Indians on 10 May.^^ They also requested the 
settlement of the boundary behind North CaroHna and Virginia, 
concerning which Stuart wrote to the governors of those two 
provinces. ^2 Stuart received an immediate reply from Governor 
Tryon of North Carolina,^^ declaring that the boundary between 
the Cherokee and that colony was to have been completed in the 
spring of 1766, but that negotiations had been retarded.^^ Accord- 
ingly, in the latter part of April 1767, Stuart met the traders and 
the principal chiefs of the Cherokee nation at Hard Labor, on the 
frontier of South Carolina.^^ Arrangements were made for the 
settlement of trade, and at the conclusion of the congress a 
number of principal men set out with Cameron, on 21 May, 
for the frontier of North CaroUna, where they were to meet the 
commissioners from that colony to ' run out the Boundary Line 
behind North Carolina ', and afterwards that behind Virginia. ^^ 
The line agreed upon at this time ^' was surveyed before the end 
of July.^^ By the governor's proclamation, no English were to 
settle west of the line thus estabUshed, and those already residing 
beyond it were to remove immediately to the east.^^ In 1766, 
when the Cherokee desired a settlement of the boundary behind 
Virginia, Governor Fauquier concurred in Stuart's proposal for 
the undertaking. ^0 He made no advances, however, and the 
Cherokee grew uneasy and repeated their demands for a definite 
agreement. ^^ Eventually, in a later communication, Fauquier 

80 Stuart to Pownall, 8 August 1766, Colonial Office, 5. 67 ; see New York Colonial 
Documents, viii. 33. 

81 Stuart to Lords of Trade, 10 July 1766, Colonial Office, 5. 67 ; Stuart to Pownall, 
8 August 1766, ibid. ; Stuart to Gage, 30 August 1766, Shelburne MS. li ; Congress 
of the Cherokee at Hard Labor, 14 October 1768, North CaroUna Colonial Records, 
vii. 851 f. 

82 Stuart to Lords of Trade, 10 July 1766. 

83 Ibid. 

8* Abstract of dispatches from Stuart, 1 April 1767, Shelburne MS. li. Several 
Virginians had been killed by men of that nation. 

85 Stuart to Haldimand, 7 and 25 June 1767, Canadian Archives. 

8' Stuart to Gage, 7 June 1767, ibid. 

8' Agreement between Governor Tryon and the Indians in regard to the western 
boundary. North Carolina Colonial Records, vii. 853 ; Congress of the Cherokee at 
Hard Labor, 14 October 1768, ibid. 

88 Stuart to Haldimand, 22 July 1767, Canadian Archives ; abstract of a dispatch 
from Stuart, 28 July 1767, Shelburne MS. li. 

8» Proclamation in Council Journal, 11 July 1767, North Carolina Colonial Records, 
vii. 501. 

»" Enclosure in abstract of dispatch from Stuart, 11 April 1767, Shelburne MS. li. 

" Stuart to Lords of Trade, 2 December 1766, North Carolina Colonial Records, 
vii. 279. 


declared himself unable to mark any boundary lines between 
Virginia and the Indians without the express orders of the 
government at home.^^ 

In accordance with the proposed plan for Indian control, 
the superintendents in both departments had entered into 
negotiations in regard to the boundary Une,^^ and in the southern 
department Stuart, although not formally authorized to do so, 
had the line actually marked out behind North and South 
CaroUna. These negotiations were reported to Lord Shelburne 
by the end of 1767,^* and he recommended that the treaties thus 
made with the Indians should be ratified in order to bring about 
peace and quiet, as had been done in North and South CaroUna.^^ 
In 1768, in connexion with the new poHcy of trade, Lord Shelburne 
communicated to the superintendents the king's desire that 
' the Boundary Line between the Indians and the Settlements of 
his Majesty's Subjects (everywhere negotiated upon and in many 
parts settled and ascertained) shall be finally ratified and con- 
firmed '.^^ Accordingly, on 14 October 1768, Stuart again met 
the Cherokee Indians at Hard Labor, ratified the treaties of 
North and South Carolina, as before described, and estabhshed 
the line behind Virginia.^^ On 12 November 1768 the Lower 
Creeks met the superintendent at St. Augustine to ratify the 
boundary between their nation and Georgia, East Florida, and 
West Florida. ^s The line of East and West Florida was clearly 
ascertained, and all that remained was the completion of the 
survey. The king had given his consent to this, but owing to 
the war between the Creeks and Choctaw it had been postponed 
to a more favourable time.^^ The boundary line at the end of the 
year 1768 was therefore continuous from the Ohio River behind 

»2 Abstract of dispatch from Stuart to Shelburne, 28 July 1767, Shelburne MS. li. 

»3 Sir William Johnson, superintendent of the northern district, broached the 
subject of a boundary line to the Indians in 1765, but took no steps towards its execution 
other than to propose laying it before the king. On 5 November 1768 a line was 
decided upon at Fort Stanwix between the Six Nations and their confederates, and the 
English. There was a conflict, however, with reference to the location of this line 
south of the Ohio River, where it did not conform to the line agreed upon by Stuart 
and the Cherokee : Lords of Trade to the king, 25 April 1769, New York Colonial 
Documents, viii. 158 f . See Farrand, ' The Indian Boundary Line ', American Historical 
Review, x. 742 f. 

9* Lords of Trade to Shelburne, 23 December 1767, New York Colonial Documents, 
vii. 1004-5. 

8^ ' Representation of the Lords of Trade on the State of Indian Affairs, 17 March 
1768,' New York Colonial Documents, viii. 19 f. 

»« Hillsborough to the governors in America, 15 April 1768, New York Colonial 
Documents, viii. 55-6. 

" Congress of the Cherokee at Hard Labor, 14 October 1768, North Carolina 
Colonial Records, vii. 851 f. ; Lords of Trade to the king, 25 April 1769, New York 
Colonial Documents, Ariii. 151 f. 

»» Ibid., p. 158 f. 

99 Stuart to Durnford, 4 January 1770, Colonial Office, 5. 87. 


the eastern and southern colonies as far west as the small tribes 
of the Mississippi River. 

Thus the projection of the final solution of that perplexing 
problem of the colonial regime — the adjustment of Indian 
relations — a problem which was more forcibly presented at this 
time by reason of the extension of British sovereignty over the 
tracts beyond the AUeghanies, was only partially successful. 
The problem itself, and the shape which its solution finally 
assumed, is not unUke that which prevailed in the earlier colonial 
period. The regulation of commercial relations, the first phase 
of the twofold problem which we have described, went back to 
colonial management, after much shifting and vacillating on the 
part of the ministry and much misunderstanding between home 
and provincial authorities. The government was most interested 
in the reorganization of the American possessions, and the subject 
of the regulation of Indian affairs was, unfortunately, inextricably 
bound up with the larger problem, so that it was not finally 
determined on its merits. The transfer of responsibility for the 
management and support of the trade back to the colonies was 
merely one device for relieving the British government of expense. 
The superintendent of Indian affairs, however, retained general 
political oversight, including the supervision of territorial adjust- 
ments with the Indians. In the southern department it was due 
to the efforts of Superintendent John Stuart, with the co-operation 
of the provincial governors, that the line of demarcation between 
the British and the Indians was fixed, as it was thought, once for 
all. The handling of this second phase of the Indian problem 
appears, then, to have been relatively successful. In view of the 
tremendous pressure which English settlers were exerting all along 
the line, it is exceedingly unlikely that the boundary of 1768-9, 
with the few subsequent modifications, would have retained any 
degree of permanency, even had the revolt of the colonies not 
intervened. At best it would probably soon have had to yield 
to various modifications in order to satisfy the hunger of land 
speculators and settlers. Nevertheless the fixing of the line at 
this time is a fact of great importance. Although the southern 
Indians had never assumed so threatening an attitude as those 
in the region towards the Ohio and the northern lakes, they were 
restless and suspicious of British designs. But they appear to 
have been generally satisfied with the promises of the British 
that there would be no encroachments beyond the line settled in 
the manner we have described. Clarence E. Carter. 

1918 57 

Notes and Documents 

The Earliest Use of the Easter Cycle of Dionysius 

The question which I propose to examine is the earliest date at 
which the Easter cycle of Dionysius Exiguus can be proved to 
have been in use. This cycle, it is well known, was a continua- 
tion of that attributed to Cyril of Alexandria, and was drawn up 
in A.D. 525, for a period of five lunar cycles or ninety-five years. 
But whereas Cyril accompanied his Easter tables with a con- 
secutive series of years beginning with the Emperor Diocletian, 
Dionysius, as he says, preferred to date his years not from the 
rule of a persecutor of the Christians but with the Incarnation 
of our Lord. There is no hint that he intended to establish 
an era for ordinary historical purposes ; he only gave the years 
for reference, in order to identify the dates assigned to Easter. 

The chief competitor of the system which Dionysius intro- 
duced into the West was that constructed in the fifth century by 
Victorius of Aquitaine, which held its ground in Gaul for nearly 
three hundred years. Both were based on the lunar cycle of 
nineteen years, but they differed in four points : the earliest 
permissible date of the vernal new moon, the earliest day after 
this on which Easter could be kept, the latest day on which 
Easter could fall, and the place in each cycle in which the lunar 
year should be shortened by one day (the saltus lunae). For 
my present inquiry it is only necessary to speak of the second 
of these points of difference. If we read that Easter might be 
observed on the day after the full moon, on the fifteenth moon 
as it was called, this was imderstood to mean the oriental 
reckoning adopted by Dionysius ; if on the other hand we are 
told that Easter must not be kept until the sixteenth moon, then 
the cycle is definitely not that of Dionysius.^ An older practice 
of permitting Easter Sunday to fall as early as the fourteenth 
moon — the discussion of which played a great part in contro- 

^ Though Victorius in his letter [Chronica minora, ed. Mommsen, i. 679 f., 1892) 
admits both the alternatives, his rule seems to have been interpreted as excluding 
luTiui XV, and thus maintaining the definition which had previously prevailed at Rome. 
Cf. L. Ideler, Handbuch der mathem. und techn. Chronologie, ii. (1826) 283 ; F. K. 
Ginzel, Handbuch der mathem. und techn. Chronologie, iii. (1914) 245. 



versy with the Celtic churches of the British Isles — does not 
concern us. We have only to do with the question as between 
luna quintadecima and luna sextadecima. 

Now, although Dionysius composed his cycle in 525, there 
is no trace of its having been immediately adopted by any one. 
Cassiodorus, indeed, who was personally acquainted with him, 
knew of the cycle and recommended its study ; ^ but there is 
no sign that he himself made use of it. Nor do any Roman 
inscriptions of the sixth century supply evidence of its employ- 
ment.^ In the discussion concerning the right date of Easter 
in 550, Bishop Victor of Capua opposed the system of Victorius ; 
but Dr. Bruno Krusch, a most accomplished computist, has 
shown that he based his arguments not on Dionysius but directly 
upon his Greek authorities, and he has also made it probable that 
the cycle inscribed on the great monument in the sacristy of the 
cathedral at Ravenna is in like manner derived immediately 
from the East.^ It has indeed been supposed that a table of 
Easter days written in the last quarter of the sixth century gives 
evidence not only of the use of the cycle of Dionysius but also 
of its employment for historical purposes, for the insertion of 
annalistic notices. This is a mistake. The table contains the 
cycle of Victorius, and the years are reckoned, as Victorius reckoned 
them, not from the Incarnation but from the Passion. It is 
now distinguished as the Paschale Campanum, because it was 
written in the region of Naples.^ While, however, Dr. Krusch is 
persuaded that there is no trace of the use of the Dionysian 
reckoning until the very end of the sixth century, he contends 
that under Gregory the Great it was the accepted system at 
Rome. It is true, he says, that this cannot be discovered from 
the Roman sources, but it follows without doubt from the history 
of the conversion of Britain by Augustine.^ This conclusion 
appears to me to be unproved. 

Before turning to the English evidence it should be noticed 
that St. Columbanus in a letter to Pope Gregory, written between 
595 and 600, looks on the Easter controversy as one between 
the Celtic practice and the rule of Victorius ; of Dionysius he 
says not a word, and he ' can hardly believe ' that Gregory 

^ ' Deinde Pinacem Dionysii discite breviter comprehensum, ut quod auribus in 
supradicto libro [sc. Marcellini] percipitis pene oculis intuentibus videre possitis ' : 
De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum, xv, in Migne's Patrol. Lat. Ixx. 1140. 

^ G. B. de Rossi, Inscr. Christ. Urbis Romae, i (1857-61), proleg., p. xcvi. 

* Die Einfilhrung des griechischen Paschalritus im Abendlande, in Neues Archiv 
der GeseUschaft fiir cUtere Deutsche Geschichtskunde, ix. (1884) 111-14. For the inscrip- 
tion formerly at Perigueux (Gruter, Inscr. Antiq., p. 1161, no. 5, 1707) see ibid., 
pp. 129 £f. 

^ It is printed by Mommsen, Chronica minora, i. 744 f. ; see the description of the 
manuscript on pp. 371 f. 

* Uhi supra, p. 114. 


approves the cycle of Victorius."^ For the facts of the mission 
of St. Augustine and its results we are almost entirely dependent 
upon Bede ; and it is remarkable that in all the earlier part of 
his History, while he is precise in defining the limits within 
which the Celts allowed the observance of Easter, he never, 
except on one single occasion, states what the cathoUc rule 
was. This may be of course because it was obvious and well 
known, and there was no reason to explain it. But there may be 
another reason, namely that the Roman church still adhered 
to the reckoning of Victorius. The following considerations lead 
me to think that this was the truth. Honorius I, who was pope 
from 625 to 638, wrote to the Irish warning them not to persist 
in a practice which cut them off from the rest of Christendom.^ 
The sequel is told in a long letter by Cummian, an Irishman 
who had abandoned the Celtic rule about Easter.^ From this 
we learn that the cycle introduced into Ireland in consequence 
of the pope's advice was a cycle of 532 years, and this can only 
be that of Victorius. ^^ In the following year, probably in 638, ^^ 
a synod was held near TuUamore, at which the southern Irish 
yielded to the pope's directions. But some resisted, and it was 
agreed to send a mission to Rome to obtain a definitive ruHng.^^ 
The answer is recorded by Bede in the one instance in which he 
defines the Roman practice. Poj^e John IV, he says, sent a letter 
full of authority and learning to correct the Irish error, evidenter 
astruens quia dominicum paschae diem a xv^^ luna usque ad xxi'^^ 
. . . oportet inquiri. This looks like Bede's own explanation of 
what he presumed the letter to direct : for when he sets out the 
text of the letter, which was written in the names of the chief 
officers of the Roman church, the pope having not yet been 
consecrated, he gives only the beginning as far as the statement 
of the Irish practice, and then summarizes, exposita autem ratione 
paschalis obscrvantiae ; after which he gives the rest of the letter, 
dealing with the Pelagian heresy, in fuU.^^ There are three 
possibilities : Bede may have had an incomplete copy of the 
letter before him ; or he may have omitted the definition of the 
correct limits of Easter, because he had already mentioned that 
the letter dealt with it ; or he may have found that it disagreed 
with what he had laid down, and in fact prescribed not luna xv but 
luna xvi. This last suggestion is confirmed by what Cummian 

' Epist. i, in Epist. Mewwingici Aevi, i. (1892) 156-8 ' Vix credere pOssum dum 
ilium \sc. Galliae errorem] constat a te non f uisse emendatum, a te esse probatum ' , 
p. 157. 

« Bede, Hist. Ecd. ii. 19. 

^ Printed in Ussher's Veterum Epistolarum Hihernicarum Sylloge (1632), pp. 25-35. 

^' Cf. Krusch, uhi supra, pp. 150 f. 

" See ibid. J p. 149. 12 Cummian, iibi supra, p. 34. 

" Hist. Ecd. ii. 19. 


says ; for besides referring, as we have seen, to the cycle of 
Victorius, he accepts luna xvi as the earliest day of the resur- 

Dr. Krusch, believing that the Dionysian reckoning was at 
that time adopted at Rome, thinks that the Irish emissaries 
may have picked up a Victorian calculus in Gaul on their way 
home.^^ But it is hardly conceivable that people should go to 
Rome in order to obtain a decision on a contested point, and then 
bring back to Ireland a calculus which differed from it. The 
natural inference from Cummian's letter is that Rome still 
adhered to the system of Victorius. It should be noticed that 
though the difference between this and the oriental system 
assumed importance when it was attempted to bring the date of 
Easter into harmony with the historical events recorded in the 
Gospels, yet as a matter of fact it did not often lead to actual 
disagreement as to the day on which Easter should be observed : 
in the seventh century the only absolute discrepancy occurred 
in 672 ; but it is true that in 645, 665, 685, and 689, and possibly 
in four other years, alternative dates were also admitted. Prob- 
ably, therefore, the two systems were not generally distinguished.^^ 

It is at the synod of Whitby in 664 that we first find the 
Dionysian calculus formally brought forward by Wilfrid. His 
biographer Eddius,^^ or Stephen, says that at that council 

De paschaU ratione conquirebant, quid esset rectissimum, utrum 
more Bryttonum et Scottorum omnisque aquilonalis partis a xiiii luna, 
dominica die veniente, usque ad xxii [5^c] pascha agendum, an melius sit 
ratione sedis apostolicae a xv luna ^^ usque in xxi paschalem dominicam 

He states the arguments shortly and gives the Northumbrian 
king's decision. Bede has a much fuller narrative of the pro- 
ceedings and agrees on the essential point. ^^ The details do not 
concern us ; all that we need to know is that the Dionysian 

" JJhi supra, p. 27 ; cf. Krusch, pp. 150 f. is p, 152. 

^* It has been generally held that a continuation of the Dionysian cycle is found 
in the Etymologiae of Isidore of Seville, vi. 17 ; but Dr. Krusch has proved (pp. 117 ff.) 
that this is in fact a continuation of the Alexandrian table of Cyril, and is calculated 
for the ninety -five years from 532, not from 627 ; only the Easters (but not the lunae) 
have been altered in the first nineteen years. Mr. W. M. Lindsay in his edition of the 
Etymologiae (1911) gives no various readings for the Paschal table, but simply reprints 
Arevalo's text. 

" Vita Wilfridi, x, in J. Raine's Historians of the Church of York, i. (1879) 14 ; 
also in Script. Rerum Merovingicarum, vi. (1913) 203, ed. W. Levison. 

*• The Fell MS. 3 (formerly 1 ) in the Bodleian Library, by an obvious homoeo- 
teleuton, omits the words from the first usque to xv luna. It may be well to state that 
there is absolutely no doubt that this manuscript is in fact the Salisbury manuscript, 
as to the identification of which the editors express different opinions : see Raine, 
pref., p. xxxviii ; Levison, pp. 184 f. Cf. W. D. Macray, Annals of the Bodleian 
Library (2nd ed., 1890), p. 155. 

" Hist. Eccl. iii. 25. 


computation was definitely advocated and accepted at Whitby 
in 664. 

It may be observed that the name of Dionysius is not men- 
tioned ; it was the ' Roman ' or ' catholic ' use of which Wilfrid 
was the champion. ^o By this time indeed the actual table 
of Dionysius had long expired, for his ninety-five years ran 
from 532 to 626. Ten years before it ended a continuation 
was drawn up for the years 627 to 721. This was the work of 
a writer who is called in the manuscripts Felix ahhas Cyrillitanus, 
Chyllitanus, or Ghyllitanus.^^ These variants show that the 
scribes from whom these texts proceed had difficulty in reading 
the name, and modern scholars have been content to repeat 
it without explanation. But it can hardly be doubted the word 
w^hich the scribe had in his exemplar was Scyllitanus, which is 
found in a letter of St. Gregory the Great as the adjective from 
Squillace.22 No other name of a monastery at all resembUng 
that given in the manuscripts has been discovered ; and no place 
more probable than this for the construction of this cycle can 
be suggested. 

We have seen that Cassiodorus had recommended the study of 
the cycle of Dionysius to his monks in the Monasterium Vivariense 
at Squillace. We have found no trace of its use until 664, when 
that cycle had been continued by an abbot, as I suggest, of the 
same house. The monastery appears to have been destroyed 
or abandoned not many years after 634, and its books were* 
dispersed throughout Italy. I venture to claim the manuscript 
containing this cycle as one of the books which had belonged to 
the library of Cassiodorus as increased by his successors, of which 
the recovery of the scattered reHques is one of the most striking 
achievements of recent palaeographical study. Whether it was 
brought back to England by Benedict Biscop on his return 
from his first Italian visit, which began in 653, or whether Wilfrid 
learned its contents during the time that he spent at Rome in 
the study of catholic observances, must be left undetermined. 
I should like to add that I had arrived at this conclusion as to 
the source from which the manuscript was derived before I hit 
upon the identification of Felix of Squillace. 

20 When Colman includes Dionysius in a confused list of authorities, genuine and 
spurious, for the Easter cycle, he no doubt refers to Dionysius of Alexandria, whose 
cycle is mentioned by Eusebius, Hist. Ecd. vii. 20. 

21 The preface and prologue to this table are printed from a Bobbio manuscript, 
cod. H. 150 (formerly S. 70) in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, by Muratori, Anecdota, 
iii. (1713) 168 f., and by Krusch, Der 84jdhrige Ostercydus und seine Qudlen (1880), 
pp. 207 f. In a manuscript of St. Remigius at Rheims, no. 298, the name is given as 
Gillitanus : see J. G. Janus, Hist. Cydi Dionys. (1718), p. 51. 

22 Reg. viii. 32, ed. L. M. Hartmann, 1893. Various readings are Scillitanns and 
Sillitanus. On the forms assumed by Scylaceum {^/(vWtjtiou) or Scolacium see 
Mommsen's note in Corp. Inscr. Lai. x. i. (1883) 12. 


So soon as the cycle of Dionysius gained currency, it was not 
unnatural that the series of years reckoned from the era of the 
Incarnation which accompanied it should be made use of for 
the indication of historical dates. There is indeed evidence that 
this era was known in Spain as early as 672 ; ^3 hut it is not 
until the production of the Church History of Bede that we find 
an historical work in which it is inserted. It has commonly 
been held that it was brought into use by Bede's treatise de 
Temporum Eatione, which was written in 725, and consequently 
not a few Anglo-Saxon charters which contain the date from the 
Incarnation have been condemned as spurious or corrupt. There 
seems, however, to be no reason to suppose that the adoption 
of this era was originated by the treatise of Bede. It is much 
more likely that it was derived from the Easter tables. We 
have seen that late in the sixth century the cycle of Victorius 
was used, in a continuation, at Naples for the insertion of annaUstic 
notices ; ^4 and in like manner the era of the Incarnation may 
have been adopted at any time after the middle of the seventh 
century, that is to say, at any time after the Dionysian cycle in 
its extended form became diffused. It was Easter tables that 
formed the basis of the numerous Frankish Annals, the model 
of which certainly came from England ; ^s and the employment 
of them for this purpose was maintained until the tenth and 
eleventh centuries and even later. ^^ Reginald L. Poole. 

The Hundred-Pennies 

A CUSTOM of paying to the king ' hundredespeni ', pennies from 
the hundred, the local division of the shire or county and the 
seat of local administration, survived in England as late as the 
end of the thirteenth century. This payment, lost in tradition, 
has remained obscure and inadequately explained, though its 
continued existence can be traced back from the thirteenth 
century to the time of Edward the Confessor. According to one 
theory these pennies were a recompense to the reeve of the 
hundred for his labour in the king's interests there, just as 
the sheriff drew an aid, ' auxilium vicecomitis ', from the shire 

^^ ' Ab incarnatione domini nostri lesu Christi usque in praesentem primum 
gloriosi principis Bambani, qui est era 740, sunt anni 672 ' : Krusch, p. 121. The 
manuscript, Madrid T. 10, is a modem copy, and the Spanish era is wrongly written 
740 instead of 710. Cf. Pertz's Archiv, viii. 121. 24 Above, p. 58. 

2"* The earliest example known to be preserved is the beginning of the Annals of 
Fulda, which have been proved to have been written between 741 and 759 : see 
Sickel, in Forschungen zur Deutschen Geschichte, iv. (1864) 457. The era is mentioned 
in a Frankish manual of 737 : see Krusch, in Melanges Chatdain (1910), pp. 232-42. 

26 I have to thank my friend Dr. J. K. Fotheringham for mach expert advice and 
criticism, but he must not be taken to be responsible for my statements of facts 
or for the conclusions at which I have arrived in this paper. 


to requite him.^ This deduction seems to rest upon the fact 
that the hundred-pennies commonly passed through the hands 
of the reeve or the hundredor. But there is no evidence that 
they were not then paid to the king. Another theory holds 
that they were the sheriff's aid itself, but this again has no 
apparent proof. ^ The hundred-pennies have resisted explana- 
tion because the references to them are too brief to be illus- 
trative. But besides this, sufficient attention has not, I think, 
been paid to the traces of them in Domesday Book. This survey 
records the customs and dues to which WilHam the Conqueror 
had a right, whether they arose from Saxon custom or were 
introduced by the Normans. Now since the hundred-pennies 
existed just before the Conquest, and since they continue to be 
mentioned in royal charters of the twelfth and thirteenth cen- 
turies, we must presume that they were collected in 1085-6, 
when the survey was made. In the present paper, therefore, 
I purpose giving briefly the results of an investigation of the 
Domesday evidence after first indicating what we know of the 
hundred-pennies from other sources. 

References to the hundred-pennies in the Hundred Rolls and 
Quo Warranto Proceedings, though brief, are frequent and 
typical of those found elsewhere : 

The King . . . claims 10s. annual render from Thomas de Helgetona 
for hundredscot. . . . And William de Gyselham says that King Henry, 
father of the present king, was in seisin of the aforesaid render through 
his bailiff in the hundred of Lodnes until the time when the aforesaid 
Thomas discontinued the aforesaid render twenty-four years ago. . . . 
And Thomas comes and cannot show why the king should not have the 
aforesaid render. Therefore it is decided that the king should have seisin 
of the aforesaid render and arrears, namely £12.^ 

The king claims from the Abbot of Bekhalwyne [Bec-Hellouin] 2s. 
annually rendered the hundred of Happinges from the manor of Lesyng- 
ham. . . . The abbot comes and says that his lord King Henry, grand- 
father of the present king, granted his house above-mentioned and the 
monks there serving God that they be free of hundred-penny.* 

Commonly it is merely stated that a certain person withholds 
the due : 

Philip Burnel retains the scot which he should give the hundred 
from that land.^ 

^ Miss Neilson, Customary Rents, pp. 129 ff. 

2 Cf. Rotuli Hundredorum, ii. 629 ' Dat annuatim xii denarios et auxilium vice- 
comitis et hundred! quos abbas de Rameseia percipere consuevit per regalitatem 
quam habet de rege' ; cf. ii. 114 'II hidae gildabiles et reddunt de auxilio vice- 
coraitis ii solidos et de francoplegio ii solidos et de auxilio hundredi et de av' viii 
denarios'. In both cases a distinction is made between the sherijff's aid and the hundred- 
aid which I take to be the hundred-pennies. 

» Placita de Quo Warranto, p. 481. * Ibid., p. 498. ^ Rot. Hundr. i. 470. 



Geoffrey Wace retains ^d. from the hundred-scot.* 
Richard de Winberton has withdrawn Zd. from the hundred-scot for 
three years.' 

Occasionally it is the leet which makes the payment : 

- Thomas de Heleweton holds a leet in Heleweton which the king was 
accustomed to have ; and that leet used to render yearly to the king 
10s. for hundred-scot.^ 

The lord, William de Montecaniso, takes William de Wallingford of 
Thurtune and his tenants to his leet, who should be in the leet of the 
king, by which 16(^. is withdrawn from the hundred-scot yearly.^ 

From such notices we infer that the hundred-pennies were 
a public due made to the king from certain lands in the hundred ; 
that they were a tax on the land, and might be granted by the 
king to other lords or might be usurped by them. Assuming 
that the ' auxiUum hundred! ' in Staffordshire represents the 
hundred-pennies, it seems that they were levied at a regular rate 
on the hide : 

two gelding hides render for the sheriff's aid . . .2s. 

„ frank-pledge . . . .25. 

„ the hundred aid . . . M. 

three gelding hides render to the sheriff for his aid . . 3s. 

for frank -pledge . . . .3s. 

„ the hundred . . . 12d. 

one gelding hide renders for the sheriff's aid ... 12c^. 

„ „ view of frank-pledge . . 12c^. 

and from the hundred . . . 4^.io 

This hundred-aid, and sheriff's aid, and the fine for the sheriff's 
view of the tithings were all apparently levied at regular rates 
on the hide : twelvepence for the sheriff's aid, twelvepence for 
the view of frank-pledge, fourpence for the hundred-aid.^^ 

The hundred-pennies are sharply distinguished from a fine 
customarily paid in lieu of suit at the hundred-court with which 
they might otherwise be confused. The king demanded from 
the two sons of William of Taverham in Norfolk \2d. yearly 
for hundred-scot. They defended themselves, saying they had 

« Rot. Hundr. i. 470. ' Ihid. i. 510. « Ihid. i. 541. 

9 Ihid. i. 469. 

1" Ihid. ii. 114. In one instance the word hundred' is followed by et av' [= aver''\. 

" Once in Huntingdonshire the hundred-pennies seem to be referred to as ' hun- 
dredesgeld ', suggesting a levy at a regular rate : ' Item dicunt quod abbas Ramesiae 
capit hundredesgeld de omnibus feodis suis infra hundredum,' ihid. ii. 605. This 
hundred-geld is comparable with the hundred-aid {supra, p. 63, n. 2) which the abbot of 
Ramsey had as a royal bounty {Rot. Hundr. ii. 629). Cf. Cartularium Mon. de Rameseia, 
iii. 322 ' Eodem die recepimus de praeposito de Walda de hundredigelda 9s. 5d. 
ob. q.' ; ihid. ii. 244 (anno 1279-80) ' Habebunt etiam omnes proventus ipsius villae 
praeter talliagia nostra et praeter auxilium vicecomitis, hundredi et praeter ward- 
penys ' ; ihid. i. 105, 364, 369, 491. 


formerly paid \2d. to be quit of suit at court, but that since 
then they had given suit in person, and that the king cannot 
demand both scot and suit. But it was replied conclusively by 
the counsel for the king : 

The aforesaid WilHam and Thomas always gave the aforesaid l^d. 
for hundred-scot and not for quittance of the aforesaid suit.^^ 

Beyond this we may multiply references to the hundred-pennies 
in these thirteenth-century sources, and gain no more definite 

In charters of the twelfth as of the thirteenth century the 
hundred-pennies are rehearsed with a number of other burdens : 

Ipsi et omnes homines sui liberi sint ab omni scotto et geldo et omnibus 
auxiliis regum et vicecomitum et omnium ministralium eorum et hidagio 
et carrucagio et danegeldo et horngeldis et exercitibus et wapentaco et 
scutagio et taillagio et lestagio et stallagio, et sciiis et hundredis, et placitis 
et querelis, et warda et wardpeni, et averpeni et hundredespeni, et boren- 
halpeni et thethingpeni, et de operibus castellorum, parcorum, et pontium 
clausuris, et omni careio et summagio et navigio et domuum regalium 
edificacione et operacione.^* 

Quare volumus et firmiter praecipimus quod praedicta Abbatia et 
monachi eiusdem loci omnes praedictas possessiones ... teneant quietas 
de sciris et hundredis, placitis et querelis, tallagiis, murdris, et wapen- 
tachiis et temanetale, scutagiis, geldis, danegeldis, hidagiis, assisis, essartis, 
de operatione castellorum et pontium et parcharum, et wardepeni et de 
averpeni et caragio et de hundredepeni et de thidingepeni, et de exer- 
citibus et de summonitionibus et auxiliis Vicecomitum et servientium 
suorum, et omnibus auxiliis et misericordia Comitatus et de franco plegio, 
et quietas de omni teloneo et passagio et pontagio et pedagio et stallagio 
et lestagio et de omni saeculari servitio et opere servili, et sicut gloriosus 
rex Henricus avus patris mei et ipse pater mens illis concesserunt et 
cartis suis confirmaverunt.^^ 

They tell no word of the real history of the hundred-pennies 
other than that the kings of England were frequently granting 
them away with other immunities at least from the time of 
Henry I.^^ 

1- Plac. de Quo Warr., p. 495. 

13 Cf. Malmeshury Register, i. 245-50, 331. Miss Bateson has commented on 
the render of 'hundred-silver' here (ante, xxi. 719 ff.), and suggested that hun- 
dred-silver may be the Saxon ' wall-sceatt ' levied on vills in repair of the borough 

1* Rotuli Chartarum, i. 2. 

1^ Chartidary of Rievaidx, 1 Richard I, p. 127. 

i" A charter in the Coucher Book of Selhy, ii. 19, purports to record a gift of land 
in the time of William the Conqueror, including among other dues the hundred- 
pennies : ' . . . sint quieti in civitatibus, burgis, foris et nundinis per totam Angliam 
de quolibet theolonio, tallagio, passagio, pedagio, lastagio, haydagio, wardagio et 
omnibus geldis, fengeld', horngeld', forgeld', penigeld', tendpenig', hunderpeniges, 
miskemelig et omni terreno servieio et saeculari exaccioni.' 



In a document describing conditions in Taunton in the time 
of Edward the Confessor they are as briefly recorded : 

Here follows in this writing what dues belonged to Tantone in the 
time when King Edward was quick and dead. That is first, from the 
land at Nine Hides he should render to Tantone churchscots and borough- 
rights, hearthpennies and hundred-pennies and the tithing of every hide 
eight pennies ; housebreaking, forestalling, peacebreaking, thieves, oath, 
ordeal, fyrd-wite ; and as often as he was bidden he should come to the 
moot after he was bidden. Dunna was the bishop's man at the time 
King Edward was quick and dead for the land at Aeon and for Taalande 
and for the two Cadenons ; and he gave as dues five churchscots and 
hearthpennies and hundred-pennies, housebreaking, forestalling, peace- 
breaking, and thieves, oath, and ordeal, and three suits at the moot in 
twelve months ; and the same dues from Eadforda.^' 

Though the fact is not explicitly stated, we must believe that 
the bishop of Winchester collected these hundred-pennies in his 
manor of Taunton by right of some royal charter or by virtue 
of a usurpation of a royal privilege. This record shows that before 
the time of the Domesday Survey there existed this royal render 
from the hundred. 

Since the Conqueror intended the Survey to be a record of 
his fiscal rights, we should expect that he would keep account 
of these hundred-pennies, to see to what extent they had been 
granted away, how far they had been usurped by Saxon thegns 
or Norman lords, or how far they were being still collected by 
his reeves ; just as Edward I did in the Hundred Rolls. It is 
therefore puzzling to find only one specific record of them through- 
out the whole of Domesday Book, and this but a parallel version 
of the customs due from Taunton. Taunton is described as 
a manor in Somerset belonging to the bishop of Winchester, 
rendering him 

£154 \M. with all its dependent lands and their customs 

enumerated with unusual detail. 

These customs belong to Tantone : burgeristh [borough-right], 
latrones, pacis infractio, hamfare, denarii de hundret, denarii sancti 
Petri, circieti. Three times a year the pleas of the bishop to be held 
without special summons ; service in the army with the men of the 

These above-mentioned customs are rendered to Tantune by the 
following lands : Talanda, Acha, Holeforde, Ubcedene, Succedene, 
Maidenobroche, Laford, Hilla and Hela, Nichehede, Nortone, Bradeford, 
Haifa, Hafella, Scobindare and Stocha.^^ 

At the first glance it would seem then that Taunton was the 
only manor in Domesday which collected hundred-pennies from 

" Kemble, Codex Diplom., no. 897. " D. B. 87 b. 


tributary lands. The extreme improbability of this would lead 
to a closer scrutiny of the Survey, even if the later records of 
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries were not at hand to give 
proof of the more general persistence of this render through the 
eleventh century to this later time. We are led therefore to 
conclude that the hundred-pennies are recorded in Domesday 
under some synonymous designation or as included in some 
larger or more comprehensive render. That they may disappear 
into a larger render we could indeed surmise from Taunton 
itself ; for without this very special and unusual description 
of its tributary lands and customs, customs including the 
hundred-pennies, we should only have known that Taunton 
' rendered £50 when Bishop WalcheUn received it, now £154 13fZ. 
with all its dependent lands and their customs '. We should 
have had no inkling that these customs (consuetudines) included 
hundred-pennies. We are therefore forewarned by this manor 
of possible omissions in the Domesday record, and these ellipses 
may be brought to light by a study of the Taunton customs as 
there given. 

The significant characteristic of Taunton is that it was the 
capital manor of Taunton hundred, ^^ and for this reason without 
doubt continued to collect the hundred-pennies, a public tax.-^ 
Now it is to be observed that Somerset and Devon abound in 
manors which were similarly the centres of their hundreds and 
commonly collected ' curious customary dues ' ^^ from dependent 
lands. ' Churi ', ' Carentone ', ' Sudpetret ', in Somerset, for 
instance, were the centres of ' Churi ', ' Carentone ', ' Sudpetret ' 
hundreds. 22 Likewise ' Tavetona ', ' Alseministra ', ' Ermentone ' 
in Devon were the centres of '' Tavetona ', ' Alseministra ', 
' Ermentone ' hundreds. To such hundred centres payments 
like the following were due from their tributaries : 

This manor [Brede] should render as custom {consuetudo) in Curi, 
a manor of the king, one sheep and a lamb.^^ 

This manor [Bredene] owed Chori, a manor of the king, two sheep 
with their lambs as custom every year, but after Drogo received it from 
the Count of Mortain this custom was not rendered.^* 

To this manor [Doniet], have been added the lands of two thegns 
which they held in parage. . . . These manors rendered as custom in Chori, 

^» Exon Domesday 58. 

^o The only other public function recorded among these customs is the holding 
of the pleas of the hundred ' latrones, pacis infractio, hamfare'. These are not the 
same simple tax upon the hundred as are hundred-pennies. The other customs are 
ecclesiastical dues, Peter's pence and church -scot, and an undefined ' burgeristh', 
which may be borough -rights or the dues of ' geburs ', a dependent class of the manor. 

2^ Round, Victoria County History of Somerset, p. 428. 

^2 Exon Domesday 58. " D. B. 92. 

" Exon Domesday 249 ; D. B. 92. 

F 2 


a manor of the king, five sheep with their lambs on that day when King 
Edward was quick and dead, but since Drogo received the land from the 
Count this custom has not been rendered.^^ 

This manor [Bichehalde] rendered as custom in the time of King 
Edward to Chori, a manor of the king, five sheep and their lambs and 
every freeman a bloom of iron, but after William received the land from 
the Count this custom was not rendered.^ 

The Count has a manor called Bachia which Godric held that day on 
which King Edward was quick and dead. To this have been added two 
manors which two thegns held in parage in the time of King Edward. 
Godwin had two hides of them, and Bollo one hide, and they rendered 
geld for three hides and one virgate. . . . That hide which Bollo held 
rendered as custom to Chori, a manor of the king, one sheep with its lamb. 
After R. received the land it was not rendered.^' 

Other lords in Somerset, besides the count of Mortain, usurped 
this custom of the king, and other manors besides Curry were 
the losers thereby. 

Edric held Are in jthe time of King |Edward and it gelded for one hide. 
. . . This manor rendered as custom twelve sheep in Carentone, a manor of 
the king, every year. Ralf withholds this custom.^ 

Edric held Alresford in the time of King Edward and it gelded for 
one hide. . . , This manor rendered twelve sheep in Carentone, a manor of 
the king, as custom every year. Ealf has withheld this custom until now.^® 

Ralf de Limesi has two manors called Bosintona and Alrefort, which 
rendered as custom every year to a manor of the king called Carentona 
twenty-four sheep or five shillings, and after Ralf had this land the king 
had jnot this custom therefrom.^ 

In Devon the same tale was repeated. 

Godric held [Tavelande] in the time of King Edward and it gelded 
for one virgate of land. It owes as custom in Taveton, a manor of the 
king, either one ox or thirty pence.^^ 

Osborne de Salciet has a manor called Patforda, which a thegn held 
in parage on that day when King Edward was quick and dead, and ren- 
dered to the King's demesne manor Tavetona either one ox or thirty 
pence yearly as custom, and after Osbern held this land the king did 
not have his custom.^^ 

Girold the chaplain has a manor called Escapeleia, which a thegn held 
in parage on the day King Edward was quick and dead, but he neverthe- 
less rendered the demesne manor of the king called Tavetona ten shillings 
yearly as custom, and after Ceroid held this manor the king did not have 
his custom from it.^^ 

The Count of Mortain has a manor called Honetona, which rendered 

25 Exon Domesday 250 ; D. B. 92. ^6 Exoii Domesday 250 ; D. B. 92. 

" Exon Domesday 478, 251. ^s jy B. 96 b. 

2» D. B. 97. ' =^» Exon Domesday 473. 

31 D. B. 117 b ; Exon Domesday 458. 

^' Exon Domesday 458 ; D. B. 116 b. s^ Exon Domesday 458. 


as custom to tlie manor of the king called Axeministra 30d. yearly on the 
day King Edward was quick and dead ; but after the Count obtained this 
land and Drogo from him, [this custom] was not rendered to the king's 

Ralf de Pomaria has a manor called Esmaurige, which in the time 
of King Edward rendered yearly as custom 30^. in the ferm of Axeministra.^ 

William Capra has a manor called Ma nberia, which in the time of King 
Edward rendered as custom in Axeministra, a manor of the king, 30c^. ; 
but for twelve years William has withheld this custom.^^ 

The Canons of Rouen have a manor called Roverige, which rendered 
to a manor of the king called Axeministra 30d. as custom in the time of 
King Edward ; but for a long time the canons have withheld this custom.^' 

To this manor [Ermentone] these customs belong : from Ferdendel 
thirty pence and the customs of the hundred. Similarly from Dunitone, 
and a second Dunitone. Likewise from Bradeford, and Ludebroch. 
These lands men of the Count of Mortain hold and they retain the customs 
of the king, that is thirty pence from every vill and the customs of the 

From this manor [Ferdendella] the hundredmen and reeve of the king 
claim thirty pence and the customs of the pleas toward the ferm of Ermen- 
tone, a manor of the king.^^ 

The Count of Mortain has a manor called Ferdendel, which Godfrey 
holds of him, which in the time of King Edward rendered as custom thirty 
pence to Hermentona, a manor of the king, and the other customs which 
belong to the hundred ; but since King William held England these 
customs have been taken away from the king's manor.'*^ 

It is apparent from these and similar records that these 
payments to the capital manor of the hundred had often been 
rudely interfered with, especially by Norman lords enfeoffed by 
the Conqueror. But for this stoppage or other disturbance of 
the king's revenues, it seems, we should never have known of 
such payments at all, for it is only when some accident has 
occurred to change the revenue of the capital manor, either the 
loss or increase of its tributaries, that a record was made of the 
ancient customs due from these tributaries. We may conclude 
that where they continued as of old to be regularly paid no 
specific reference to them was deemed necessary, but that they 
were tacitly included in the larger render of the capital manor 
to which these customs were due. Just as it is owing to the 
unique insertion of the customs, including hundred-pennies, 
which form part of the revenue of Taunton that that r.ender of 
£154 I3d. becomes explicit, so in the case of Curry, and North 
and South Petherton, it is only through such cross-references 
as have been quoted above that we know at least one of the 

" Exon Domesday 467 ; D. B. 100. ^s Exon Domesday 467 ; D. B. 100. 

" Exon Domesday 467 ; D. B, 100. " ^xon Domesday 467 ; D. B. 100. 

=■« D. B. 100. 39 Exon Domesday 198. *° Exon Domesday 467. 


customs comprised in the general render of the ' ferm of a night 
with its customs ' which these manors gave King Edward. ^^ 
Similarly with other capital manors of these counties, the ferm they 
rendered the king would have been given but passing notice had 
not these curious renders of 30c?., I6d., sheep and lambs, oxen, and 
blooms of iron making up the full ferm been in arrears. 

These renders, as it seems to me, are in fact the hundred- 
pennies which Taunton likewise collected from a fringe of tribu- 
taries. Here in Domesday, as in the Hundred Rolls of Edward I, 
the king claims them at the hands of his usurping barons. He 
continues to claim an old regahty, a tax connecting outlying 
lands of the hundred with the capital manor. Thegns holding 
in parage, and occasionally freemen connected with the estate 
of the more prominent thegn, are responsible, and pay these 
pennies not as a manorial rent, a sign of their dependence, but as 
their share of a public tax on the hundred. For this reason it 
seems the Conqueror could still claim them from the lands which 
the count of Mortain and other lords held and had granted out 
to their followers as manors. It was a loss to the king that an old 
public due should degenerate into a manorial rent for others' 
benefit : to recoup himself he must either sue the usurper (wit- 
ness the Hundred Rolls and Quo Warranto Proceedings) for 
resumption of the payment, or he must forestall the lord's 
manorializing tendency by adding these thegns and freemen 
to his own estates, perchance reducing their freedom thereby 
and turning the appearance of the hundred-pennies from a tax 
to a demesne rent. 

We come upon the same customary renders again in East 
Anglia, where indeed we should naturally expect to find them, 
for in the time of the Hundred Rolls they occur more frequently 
in these counties than in any others. There were still many 
freemen there in 1086, groups of them scattered about through 
the hundred, commonly appurtenant to some manor, but not 
infrequently continuing to hold their land independent of any 
immediate estate. From the record of invasions ^^ made upon 
such independent freemen by greedy lords, it would appear that 
their anomalous position was insecure. Such detached and 
independent freemen seem to be referred to under the rubric, 
' These are the freemen belonging to no estate in the time of 
King Edward whom Almar guarded. They have been added 
to an estate in the time of King William.' *^ They seem to be 

*^ D. B. 86. Cf. Taunton, ' now it renders £154 13rf. with all its tributaries and 
their customs '. Even the phraseology of the render is similar in both cases. 

« D. B. ii. 273 b, 447 b. 

« D. B. ii. 272. Cf. ii. 447 : ' These are the free men of Suffolk who remain in 
the hand of the King.' 



freemen of the king guarded by his local officer. One such 
freeman, I take it, Ulnoth by name, held a land called ' Cambas ' 
under King Edward.^^ On his land there were sixty-two free- 
men in the time of King Edward. Cambas was worth at that 
time £10, and the freemen even more, but the interesting thing 
is that since Count Brien has taken Cambas a certain customary 
due (consuetudo) which it used to pay the hundred has been 

Ulnoth a freeman held Cambas under King Edward for two carucates 
of land. Then and always twelve villains and eight bordarii, then and 
afterwards six serfs, now two. . . . There are fifty freemen of this same 
Ulnoth and they have a mill. ... In the time of King Edward there were 
sixty-two freemen. Then and afterwards the manor of Cambas was worth 
ten pounds sterling ; now it renders sixteen pounds sterling, but it can 
hardly bear this render. And these fifty freemen then and later were 
worth sixteen pounds sterling; now thhty-one, but they cannot suffer 
this without being undone. After Count Brien the ancestor of Count Robert 
had this manor it rendered no custom to the hundred. 

One Withmer probably belonged to the same class : 

Withmer held Anuhus under King Edward for one carucate of land. 
. . . The whole [manor] was always worth twenty shillings and was in the 
jurisdiction of the king. After Brien had it he rendered no custom in the 

We may compare an instance in ' Bichesle '.*^ 

In Bichesle there was a freeman with a man half-free commended to 
Anslec in the time of King Edward holding seventeen acres. This man 
Roger Bigot [the sheriff] guarded as he says, and he renders his census 
to the hundred.*^ 

What is this hundred census or consuetudo which such free- 
men rendered, except the hundred-pennies ? Earl Brien seems 
just as eager to appropriate this payment as were his peers in 
Somerset and Devon to withhold the pennies due to the hundred 
manor, and as the lords of Edward I's day were to annex the 
hundred-pennies. This hundred census, the hundred-pennies,, 
though so infrequently mentioned under this name in these counties, 
must nevertheless be lying hid here, probably obscured under the 
general term consuetudo. It may be surmised that when other 
freemen in these counties were being added to a certain estate for 
the sake of their ' customary render ', this C(mswe^we?o is really the 
customary render of the hundred, thus deflected to a private 

'' D. B. ii. 291. *^ Ibid. " D. B. ii. 277 b. 

" Cf. D. B. ii. 120 : ' There is a villain in Acra with half a carucate of land and 
one plough and he is in the census of the hundred.' This is the only instance of one 
lower in status than a freeman paying the hundred census that I have found. It is 
interesting that he seems to be a villain attached to no estate. 


estate.*^ Whether we shall be able to pierce this crust of custom 
and follow the hundred-pennies further, remains to be seen. At 
any rate we have found that they exist in Domesday and reach 
backwards beyond it. They are a public tax, and they are 
obscurely connected with some Saxon fiscal system whereby the 
hundred was assessed, and freemen, it would appear, were liable 
for payment. The trail leading through Domesday to this 
older system is not wholly lost. The hundred-pennies, as 
I venture to call them, in Somerset and Devon were part of the 
king's ferm collected in a royal manor ; and this ferm of King 
Edward was the ' ferm of a day ' or the ' ferm of a night ' (the 
amount of provisions necessary to feed the king and his follow- 
ing for that length of time), an archaic institution reaching back 
indefinitely into Saxon tradition. There are reasons for believ- 
ing that this ferm was once generally assessed upon the kingdom.*^ 
If we follow out these indications, it seems possible that through 
the hundred-pennies in Domesday the way may be open to a 
clearer view of the history of the royal ferm. 

E. B. Demarest. 

The Sources for the First Council of Lyons, 124J 

In the long struggle between the empire and the papacy the 
deposition of the Emperor Frederick II on 17 July 1245 marks 
a cUmax which has given exceptional interest to the council 
responsible for the sentence. A subject at once so important 
and so dramatic has naturally attracted many historians, and its 
literature has steadily grown in bulk. Our knowledge has also 
increased, but not in proportion. Progress has been made almost 
entirely by the more careful criticism of already well-known 
contemporary accounts ; and A. Folz, who wrote the latest 
monograph on the council,^ used no important evidence not known 
to Karajan, who in 1849 made the first serious attempt to handle 
the sources critically. ^ Both overlooked an account printed so 
long ago as 1844, which was written probably not more than 
thirty-five years after 1245 and most likely based on the docu- 

** D. B. ii. 138 b : 'In Dentune there are twelve socmen. Stigand had jurisdic- 
tion over them in Ersam, and they had sixty acres. And St. Edmund had jurisdic- 
tion over four and they had forty acres which they could not dispose of by gift or 
sale outside this church, but Roger Bigot added them to Ersam for the sake of their 
custom because jurisdiction was already in the hundred.' 

** Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 237. 

^ Kaiser Friedrich II. und Papst Innocenz IV. ; ihr Kampf in den Jahren 1244 und 
1245, Strassburg, 1905. 

2 ' Zur Geschichte des Concil* von Lyon 1245,' in Denkschriften der kaiserlichen 
Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Classe, ii. G7-118 (Vienna, 


mentary evidence of eyewitnesses.^ Since the contemporary 
materials hitherto examined conflict at several points, it may 
not be out of place to attempt an estimate of the nature and 
value of this neglected source. 

The record is the first entry on a roll which bears the title : 
Articuli et Petitiones Praelatorum Angliae, et Responsiones Regis 
ad ipsos factae. Et alii diversi Articuli in concilio generali Lug- 
dunensi et alibi, cum Supplicationihus factis Domino Papae pro 
regno Angliae — temporibus Henrici tertii et Edwardi filii eiusdem. 
The editor, Sir Henry Cole, tells us that the roll was deposited 
in Cur. Rem. Scaccarii and that the membranes composing the 
roll were ' attached according to the Chancery mode ',* from 
which it may be inferred that the document was written in the 
royal chancery for official purposes. He further dates the roll 
vaguely ' 29 Hen. Ill and Ed. I ', and says that the title is 
contemporary. I have had no opportunity to examine the manu- 
script, but a more definite date may be established by considera- 
tion of the internal evidence. The paragraph about the council 
of Lyons is followed by several other entries which deal with the 
powers in dispute between the king and the pope or between 
the king and the English clergy.^ All are copies of documents 
issued in 1245 ^ or in 1274,"^ except three. The first of these is 
a series of articles concerning the respective jurisdictions of the 
lay and ecclesiastical courts,^ without indication of date. The 
second is a set of decrees enacted by a legatine assembly in the 
time of King John. The position of this item near the end of the 
roll indicates that the entries were not made on the roll at the same 
time with the events which they describe. The third, which is 
the last on the roll, is a list of Umitations on the jurisdiction of 
the ecclesiastical courts. It concludes with suggested amendments 

' Documents illustrative of English History in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Cen- 
turies, selected from the Records of the Department of the Queen's Remembrancer of the 
Exchequer, p. 351. * Ibid., p. 351, note ; p. xxxix. ^ Ibid., pp. 351-62. 

® Their nature may be indicated briefly : (1) a letter sent to the cardinals at the 
first council of Lyons by the English baronage. It is the same, mutatis mutandis, 
as the letter addressed to the pope on the same occasion by magnates et universitas 
regni Angliae, which is preserved by Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. Luard, iv. 
441-4. (2) A list of further grievances presented to the pope at the same time. This 
is identical with a list given by Matthew (pp. 527, 528) : he says, however, that the 
pope would not promise remedy (p. 478), which is contrary to the statement made in 
the roll (p. 353). (3) Two papal letters dated 7 April and 11 June 1245. Other copies 
of these are printed by Rymer, Foedera, i. 255, 261. (4) Six letters patent issued by 
Henry III between 19 April and 11 June 1245. Duplicate copies of these appear in 
Cal. of Patent Rolls, 1282-47, pp. 454, 455, 463. 

^ These are : (1) An account of the selection of nuncios to be sent to the second 
council of Lyons held in 1274 ; while there can be no doubt about the date (see 
ante, xxx. 401, n. 21), it is not certain that this entry is the copy of a document : 
(2) the instructions given to the nuncios. 

* These articles are similar in form and content to the statutes Circumspecte agatis 
and Articuli cleri : Statutes of the Realm, i. 101, 171 -4. 


de novo statuto per vos edito domine Rex illustris super terris ad 
manum mortuam, which fixes the date after Michaelmas 1279.^ 

This roll was connected by Cole ^^ with two others which he 
edited. 11 One contains the constitutions of Archbishop Peckham 
adopted at the provincial council of Reading on 30 July 1279.12 
The other preserves five documents, which, with one exception, 
relate to questions of ecclesiastical jurisdiction raised by the acts 
of that council. The fifth is a complaint of papal oppression. 
All appear to have been written in 1279, or soon after, and one 
is dated 24 October 1279. The entries on all three rolls deal with 
the rights contested between church and state, and many of them 
find in the council of Reading the reason for their existence. It 
seems highly probable, therefore, that all three rolls were drawn 
up to serve Edward I as a memorandum in the quarrel which he 
had with Archbishop Peckham in 1279 as a result of the claims 
made at Reading in behaK of the ecclesiastical authority.i^ 

This conclusion may appear at first glance to deprive the de- 
scription of the first council of Lyons of all value as an historical 
source. Before such an inference is accepted, however, it should 
be determined whether the narrative was reproduced in 1279 
from memory, or was the copy or summary of a document written 
originally in 1245. About one portion of it there can be no doubt. 
The appeal made by Thaddeus of Suessa, the imperial proctor, 
against the decision of the council is stated in his own words. 
They are the same as those found in an independent copy of the 
speech.i* It would be wellnigh impossible for any one to retain 
the exact words of a speech in his memory for thirty -four years. 
About the remainder there can be no such certainty, but a high 
degree of probability may be established. It is evident that all 
the remaining entries on the roll are copies of documents with 
one possible exception.i^ It is probable, furthermore, that Henry 
III received a written report in 1245 from the nuncios whom he 
sent to the council,i^ and this the writer of the roll in 1279 might 
have had at his disposal. The account, therefore, although not 
entered on this particular roll until 1279, may be presumed to 
be based on records written at the time of the council. 

In order to explain the contribution made to our knowledge 

• The Statute of Mortmain was enacted at the Michaelmas parliament of 1279 : 
Stubbs, Select Charters, 8th ed., pp. 457, 458 ; Col. of Patent Rolls, 1272-81, p. 335. 

" p. 351, note. u pp^ 362-70. 

" These are printed from another manuscript by Wilkins, Concilia, ii. 33-6. 

" Cf. Stubbs, Constitutional History, 4th ed., ii. 116, 117 ; Select Charters, p. 458. 

" Edited in Monum. Germ., Constit. ii. no. 399, and by Huillard-BrehoUes, Historia 
Diplomatica Frederici Secundi, vi. 318. There are slight differences, such as might be 
due to the errors of a copyist, but they are few and unimportant. ^^ Above, n. 7. 

^* The nuncios on their return from Lyons went to Wales to report to Henry : 
Ann. Cestrienses, Lancashire and Cheshire Record Soc, p. 64. 


by Cole's document it is necessary to survey briefly the sources 
previously used by historians. These may be divided into four 
classes : (1) a poem called Pavo ^^ which teUs the story of the 
council in the form of a parable about an assembly of birds : 
its historical value is small, since it is a satire written with evident 
prejudice and since neither the author nor the date of composi- 
tion is known with certainty ; ^^ (2) three fugitive pieces written 
to win popular support for the papal party against Frederick,^^ 
which may perhaps throw some Hght on the poHtics of the council, 
but they were written shortly before the council met;^^ (3) 
a protest by Frederick against the decree of deposition setting 
forth his view of the action taken by the council ; ^i (4) contempo- 
rary narratives. 22 Nearly all of these mention the deposition of 
the emperor,23 a few touch briefly on other acts of the council, 
several have a word about the attendance,^* but only two deal 
with the proceedings of the council as they occurred session by 
session. One was written by Matthew Paris ; ^s the other, which 
is known as the Brevis nota eorum quae in primo concilio 
Lugdunensi generali gesta sunt, by an anonymous author. ^^ These 
two are by far the most important sources. 

The Brevis Nota is a brief dry narrative. There is no indication 
of the personality of the writer, but his detailed description of 
the ceremonial parts of the procedure led Karajan to the conclu- 
sion that he was an eye witness. ^^ Because this portion of the 
otherwise short account is so full, and because the Brevis Nota 
is found along with the Liber Cancellariae and the Consuetudines 
Cancellariae in a manuscript written about 1280, Dr. Tangl 
conjectured that the record was made bj' a papal notary chiefly 
for the purpose of preserving a precedent for concihar procedure.^^ 
The reader who turns from the Brevis Nota to Matthew Paris 

1' First edited by Karajan, ubi supra, pp. 93-117 ; also printed from another 
manuscript by Roth in Romanische Forschungen, vi. 46-54, 

^^ See Mulder, ' Zur Kritik der Schriften des Jordanus von Osnabruck ', Mitteilun- 
gen des Institiitsfur osterreichische GescMchtsforschung, xxx. 101-19 and the works there 

^^ The best texts of all three are given by Winkelmann, Acta Im'pern iiiedita, 
i. 568-70 ; ii. 709-21. 

2" Graefe, Die Puhlizistik in der letzten E'poche Kaiser Friedrichs II., pp. 114, 119, 
125-8, 155-63, 171-9. Compare Hampe, ' Uber die Flugschriften zum Lyoner Konzil 
von 1245% Historische Vierteljahrschrift, xi. 297-313, and Folz, pp. 51, 52. 

21 Monum. Germ., Constit. ii. 360-6. 

^* Most of these are enumerated by Karajan and Folz. 

-^ Only four fail to speak of the sentence, and two of these are Sicilian chronicles. 

2* See Karajan, pp. 76-81 ; Berger, Saint Louis et Innocent IV, pp. 119-28 ; 
Folz, pp. 55-64. 

-5 Chronica Maiora, iv. 410-15, 419, 420, 430-79. 

-^ The best edition is that in Monum. Germ., Constit. ii. 513-16. -' p. 83. 

2® ' Die sogenannte Brevis nota iiber das Lyoner Concil von 1245,' Mittheilwngen 
des Instituts fur osterreichische GescMchtsforschung, xii. 247-9. * ' 


experiences much the same feeling as one who reads Macaulay 
after perusing the Statesman's Year Book. Matthew is here at 
his best. He rambles in his usual discursive fashion, but he makes 
an exceptionally good story and a much more circumstantial 
one. Schirrmacher's assumption that Matthew was present at 
the council ^^ may be rejected,^^ but, as Kington- OKphant long 
ago pointed out,^^ he doubtless heard the story first-hand from 
members of the English clergy who attended.^^ Dr. Tangl's 
hypothesis that the English chronicler may have used the Brevis 
Nota ^^ is untenable,^* and Matthew should be regarded as an 
independent authority who had ample opportunity to secure his 
information from trustworthy sources. On the other hand, he 
quotes at such great length from speeches made at the council, 
that he has been accused of sacrificing historical accuracy to 
rhetorical effect ; ^^ a temptation to which he sometimes yielded. ^^ 
It is difficult then to evaluate rightly these two principal 
sources. The one was probably, but not certainly, written by 
an eyewitness; the other probably rests on credible testimony, 
but it may be coloured to suit the author's fancy. When the two 
agree, there is no difficulty ; but when they differ, which is to be 
accepted ? The less important sources hitherto utiHzed contribute 
little towards a solution, and modern historians have answered 
the question in different ways. Since the pubhcation of Karajan's 
study (1851), and more especially since Dr. Tangl made known his 
conclusions (1891), the general tendency has been to give superior 
credence to the Brevis Nota,^"' but the practice has not been uni- 
form.^s Here Cole's document is of prime importance. It adds 

'^* Kaiser Friedrick der Zweite, iv. 388. 

-» Folz, pp. 42, 43 ; Tangl, p. 247, n. 4. 

^^ History of Frederick the Second, ii. 360. 

^^ For the English who went to the council see Matthew Paris, iv. 413, 414, 419, 
430, 555 ; Cole, p. 351 ; Col. of Patent Bolls, 12S2-47, pp. 454, 463 ; Notices et Extraits 
des Manuscrits, xxi, part ii, 271. ^^ p. 247, n. 4. 

^* Folz (pp. 44, 45) seems to settle the point conclusively, and much more evidence 
might be offered. 

3^ Tangl, p. 247, n. 4 ; Folz, pp. 44, 45 ; Hampe, in a review of Folz's monograph, 
Historiscke Zeitschrift, ci. 372. 

3« Liebermann, introd. to Chron. Mai., Monmn. Germ., Script, xxviii. 92. 

^' Schirrmacher's treatment is an exception, since he believed Matthew to have 
been present. Some other accounts are by authors who make no attempt to handle 
the sources critically (e.g. Kington- Oliphant, ii. 356-69; Gerdes, Gesckichte der 
Hohenstaufen, iii. 356-63). Cardinal Gasquet {Henry III and the Church, p. 240) 
says that ' most of the information we now possess about the Council of Lyons is 
derived from his (i. e. Matthew's) chronicle', and Mr. A. L. Smith {Church and State 
in the Middle Ages, p. 169) asserts that Matthew's is ' the only contemporary descrip- 
tion ' of the council. 

'* Take, for example, the divergence on the five topics which Innocent put before 
the council for discussion on 28 June (see below). Karajan (p. 84) follows Matthew, 
while Schirrmacher (iv. 127) accepts the Brevis Nota. Hefele {ConciliengeschicUe, 
2nd ed., v. 1109), Berger (pp. 129, 130), and Folz (p. 71) also prefer the latter. 


few new facts, but it supplies a third and an independent narration 
of the business transacted at the council, and makes it possible 
to test the accuracy of Matthew and the Brevis Nota at several 
points of conflict. 

The two disagree notably over the date of the first session. 
Matthew places it on 26 June with the second two days later.^^ 
The Brevis Nota has the council open on 2 8 June. ^^ Since the events 
ascribed to 28 June are substantially the same in both, it has 
usually been assumed that Matthew's description of a session 
on 26 June applies to a preliminary meeting held for the purpose 
of arranging business and not to an official session.*^ Cole's 
document, like the Brevis Nota, speaks of only three sessions and 
places the first on 28 June. Indirectly it gives reason to dis- 
trust Matthew's report of the prehminary session. Matthew states 
that the EngHsh envoys were then present,*^ while the document 
says the}- did not attend on 28 June. As they probably failed to 
arrive in time,*^ their presence on 26 June must be regarded as 
doubtful. On 28 June Innocent IV announced the programme of 
business under five heads. The Brevis Nota and Matthew agree on 
four, but where the former mentions the depravity of the clergy,** 
the latter gives the new heresies : *^ Cole's document with its 
' ordinances and constitutions of the whole general church ' does 
not necessarily contradict either of the other statements, but the 
canons enacted by the council ^^ deal largely with the disciphne of 
the clergy and not at all with heresy.*^ The most controverted 
question of all is the date when the pope, at the request of the 
imperial representative, authorized a prorogation of the council 
in order to allow time for the emperor to appear in person. Mat- 
thew says that the pope granted a delay of two weeks on 29 June 
at the instance of the proctors of the kings of France and England, 
after he had refused the same favour to Thaddeus, the imperial 

38 pp. 431, 434. " p. 513. 

" Karajan, pp. 81-3 ; Kington- Oliphant, ii. 357 ; Schirrmacher, iv. 391 ; Hefele, 
V. 1106 ; Borger, p. 128 ; Folz, pp. 65-7. " p. 431. 

*' The last of their instructions were not issued at Westminster until 11 June 
(CcU. of Patent Bolls, 1282-47, pp. 454, 463), and it would have required very rapid 
travelling for them to have arrived at Lyons by 28 June. In 1306 a messenger spent 
sixteen days in England and thirty-two across the Channel in going from Winchester 
to Lyons and return (Public Record Office, Exch. K. R. Accounts, 369/11). Sixteen 
days from Wissant (near Calais) to Lyons is probably a reasonable time for a fast 
journey. A medieval itinerary {Eegistrum Malmesburiense, ed. Martin, ii. 421, 422) 
allows nine days from Paris to Lyons. At the same rate of speed (i. e, about 35 miles 
a day) it would take from five to six days to go from Wissant to Paris. The journey 
from London to Wissant would occupy three or four days under favourable con- 
ditions (Public Record Office, Exch. K. R. Accounts, 309/12). If the nuncios left 
London on the morning of the 11th and accomplished their journey in remarkably 
good time, they would hardly have reached Lyons until the evening of the 27th. 

*' p. 514. *5 p, 434, 

" Matthew Paris, iv. 462-72 ; Hefele, v. 1114-23. 

*' See Folz, p. 70, n. 1. 


proctor, the day before.^^ According to the Brevis Nota Thaddeus 
made his appeal at the session of 5 July and the pope immediately 
appointed the next session for 17 July.*^ Cole's document does 
not treat the subject directly, but it throws light on one aspect 
of the problem . Those who believe Matthew's statement and those 
who maintain the correctness of the Brevis Nota rely on the 
same evidence. Frederick in his letter of 31 July asserts that the 
pope should have awaited the return of Walter of Ocra, who had 
been sent from the council to the emperor in Italy, for a period 
stated in some copies of the letter at twenty days, and in one copy 
at twelve. ^<^ From this it is inferred that Walter had been sent 
to announce the adjournment to the emperor ; and those who 
prefer the reading twenty days maintain that Walter left Lyons 
on 30 June and thus support Matthew, ^^ while those who prefer 
twelve days uphold the Brevis Nota.^^ Cole's document states that 
Walter was present at the second session, and thus disposes of 
the attempt to prove Matthew's veracity by an inference drawn 
from Frederick's declaration. 

None of these points is in itself of great significance, but the 
cumulative result of the whole comparison places the two principal 
sources in a much clearer light. Wherever Cole's document 
throws light on the divergences between Matthew Paris and the 
Brevis Nota, it is the former which suffers from the illumination. 
The reasons for the belief that Matthew's account must be used 
with great caution are increased, while the prevailing opinion 
that the Brevis Nota is the more trustworthy of the two sources 
receives fresh confirmation. W. E. Lunt. 

A Political Agreement of June ijiS 

When engaged recently in arranging a series of papers described 
as ' State Papers Supplementary ', which are very miscellaneous 
in character though largely akin to the series of state papers 
already known and printed, I came across one bundle consisting 
wholly of papers relating to Scotland. The origin of these papers 
it is difficult to recognize with certainty, though the following 
suggestions are probably correct. 

The documents cover a period of a century or more, viz. from 
1546 to 1653. It is a well-known fact that few state papers 
relating to Scotland exist in the Public Record Office for the period 
1603 to 1688, the reason doubtless being that the records of legal 

«« pp. 436, 437. 49 p. 515. 

^^ Monum. Germ.^ Constit. ii. 364. 

" Schirrmacher, iv. 128-30, 396-8 ; Hampe in Historische Zeitsehrift, ci. 373-8 

" Berger, pp. 130, 131 ; Folz, pp. 84-8, 156-8. 


and other processes relating primarily to Scotland after the union 
of the crowns under James I were preserved in Scotland as before ; 
while diplomatic matters relating to Scotland would no longer 
be treated apart as though they concerned a foreign country. 
The documents in this bundle are in Scottish, and consist almost 
entirely of writs and other Scottish law proceedings, very varied 
in character but relating to transactions between well-known 
Scottish famihes. This may give us a clue to their being where 
they are. After the battle of Worcester Cromwell ordered the 
Scottish legal records to be removed to London, which was done ; 
but their withdrawal from Scotland was found so inconvenient 
to the proper conduct of business there that in September 1653 
the council of state ordered the Scottish legal records to be sent 
back, that is ' such registers as concern private persons' rights, 
their warrants and all processes of plea ' ; while ' such as are 
of public concernment and for the benefit of the commonwealth ' 
were to be kept here.^ Nothing was done, however, till the order 
in council of 23 July 1657, referring the matter to a committee, 
who reported on 28 September following ; and the council's 
order for return of such records, together with the inventory of 
them, is printed by Ayloffe.^ This bundle then appears to consist 
of some of the documents not returned to Scotland. They are 
all on paper and lie between the dates mentioned above, except 
two. These two are on parchment and much earlier in date. 
The earlier of them is dated 25 June 1294, and is an Inspeximus 
by Edward I of the grant by John, king of Scotland, to Anthony 
Bek of land in Wark. This was seen by Mr. Joseph Bain, the 
editor of Documents relating to Scotland, for he has made a pencil 
note on it, but he prints the contents (vol. ii, no. 691) from the 
enrolment on the Charter Roll. 

The other parchment document is the one printed below. 
From some faint pencil notes made upon it by Mr. Bain, it would 
appear that he saw this also, but for some reason rejected it. 
Possibly its then condition made it difficult to decipher, or its 
bearing on Scottish history may have seemed insignificant in 
comparison with its importance for EngHsh affairs. It has 
now been carefully repaired and every letter that remains is 

The document, however, is a draft and has many alterations 
in it, while the lacunae are still more numerous and existed before 
it was repaired. But most happily they do not really obscure 
the real purport of the document, which is pretty evident in spite 
of the gaps. To account for these two early parchments in a 
bundle of paper documents of much later date is not easy. They 

1 Calendar of State Papers, Dom., 1653-4, pp. 138, 139, &c. 

2 Cartae Antiquae, lix, Ix, and p. 352 et seq. 


both seem to have come from the English chancery, in which 
indeed there were a certain number of loose documents concern- 
ing Scotland ; ^ and their only connexion with the rest of the 
bundle is that they relate to the same country. Having strayed 
from their proper series they were probably found by some one 
aware of this Scottish collection and put there as an appropriate 
home. They have now been classified among chancery docu- 

Little need be said as to the contents of the document, which 
speak for themselves. The number of alterations and the occa- 
sional repetition of a word indicate that it was drawn up in a 
hurry. In the crisis caused by the invasion of England by the 
Scots, who in June 1318 had penetrated as far as Yorkshire,^ which 
was accentuated by the disloyalty of the earl of Lancaster, the 
prelates and peers in London met hastily to consult what was 
to be done ; and here we have the result of their deliberations, 
and the agreement that was reached. The attitude of the earl 
of Lancaster to the court, the mixing up of his personal and domes- 
tic with political grievances owing to the neglect to observe the 
ordinances of 1311, is curious and presents a vivid picture of 
the times. The actual day of June given in the document has 
disappeared in one of the gaps ; but the following evidence seems 
to prove conclusively that it was 8 June 1318. Under that date 
the Annates Paulini ^ have the following notice : 

Eodem anno vj*o Idus lunii, dominus rex et archiepiscopus et episcopi, 
comites et barones, venerunt apud Sanctum Paiilum Londoniis et in 
pulpito, iuxta magnum crucem in navi Ecclesiae, episcopus Norwicensis 
pronuntiavit quod dominus rex vellet omnino adhaerere et coaptare se 
consilio et auxilio comitum et baronum suorum. 

On the same day also, 8 June, was issued a revocation of the 
summons to the barons to attend a parliament to be holden 
at Lincoln on the morrow of Holy Trinity next, since the king is 
unable to hold such parliament as he is going to York to repel 
the invasion of the Scottish rebels.' On 10 June another writ 
was issued to the earl to be at York on the morrow of St. James 
(i. e. on 26 July) prepared to set out with the king against the 
Scottish rebels.^ Similar writs were directed to other earls, barons , 
prelates, &c., on each occasion. 

' As for instance, Chanc. Miscellanea, Bdle, 12 (9-11). 

* Viz. Chancery Miscellanea, 22/12 (48), and Parliamentary Proceedings (Chancery), 
4/11 (26). 

^ Cf. Patent Roll 11 Edw. II, pt. 2, m. 8 (printed in Palgrave's Parliamtntary 
Writs, II. i. 501). 

« Chron. of Edw. I and Edw. II (Rolls Series), i. 282. 

' Close Roll, U Edw. II, m. 3 d {Pari. Writs, ii. i. 181) 

' Close Roll, 11 Edw. II, m. 2 d {ibid., p. 501). 


I am much indebted to my colleague, Mr. Charles Johnson, 
for his kind help in preparing the transcript of the document 
and in the notes. Edward Salisbury. 

Public Record Office, Chancery, Parliamentary Proceedings, file 4 (26) 

N.B. — Words or portions of words within square brackets are likely or possible 
emendations supplied to fill some of the gaps in the original. 

The dots represent gaps which cannot be filled in ; the spaces they cover have 
been carefully measured to represent accurately such gaps. 

Words in italics are in the original underlined for deletion ; the emendations over 
them, when there are any, are printed within angular brackets. 

Fait a remembrer qe come les honm*ables piers en dieu par la grace 
de dieu Wauter Erc[evesqe de Caunterbiri primat] de tout Engleterre, 
Alisandre Ercevesqe de Dyvelyn etc. et les nobles hommes monsieur 
[Aymer de Valence counte de] Pembrok, monsieur Humfrai de Bohun 
counte de Hereford et Dessex, monsieur Hugh le Desp[enser e autres grandz 
du roiaume le] . . . jour de Juyn Lan du regne nostre seignur le 
Roi Edward f [iuz le Roi Edward] unzime feur[ent assembles ouesque le] 
conseil le Roi a Westmouster al petit Escheqer pur conseiller [e aider] nostre 
seignur le Roi [pur la] salvacion de son roiaume contre la malice et 
maveste de ses [rebelles Descoce, qi fu]rent entrez la terre [Dangleterre] 
as grantz ostz josqes en le counte Deuerwyk en destruant seint esglise 

et de grant te [r . . . e gastanz] 

. lane' iloeqes de [jour en autre] e tieux maux fesantz. Et pur 

hastif conseil e avisement iement du 

Roiaume .... poer, se anvirent e e joigndrent de bone foi (sans 
fraude ou feintise a ceo) par promesses acorderent sur les choses [qe ches- 
cun de eux] . . [desous d]itz [qe sensuit] aprez Cestassav[er] . 
primerement qe touz ensemblent (jointement) e chescun de eux par li a son 

poer bon choses al honur e 

ben du Roi e droit e (e a droit port de li mesmes e deu) grement de son 

poeple commun profit [du roiaume] et singuler 

profit et de bone loiaument a lour poer de commun assent sans feintise 

mettre a li touchent, et tout 

le bon qil porront que choses noundues si nules soient et al honur e profit 

ses busoignes destre duement menees. Dautre 

part pur ceo qe les ditz maux e au e es 

terres nostre seignur le Roi, et plus grantdz font a douter si remede ne 
soit mise de ceo qe le Co[unte] de [Lancastre se] est sustreit e ne se est 
pas done a conseiller ne aider a nostre seignur le Roi en ses busoignes 
come [li appent] e de ceo qe avant tele sustrete il vint as parlementz e 
assembletz le Roi a force e armes e outrageuse pre . . [e plusers] 
foitz a fait assemblees de gentz darmes en afiroi du poeple, par quoi 
commune fame e voiz del poeple e . . . . est qe par les dites 
enchesons les ditz maux sont avenuz, et le dit Counte de Lancastre en 
excusant [les ditz assembletz] de gentz et darmes dit qe il le fait en aucun 
cas pur les ordinances nadgueres a commun profit du roiaume faites [et 
par les] grandz du Roiaume jurees maintenir et en aucun cas pur sei 
garder des aucuns grandz qi sont pres du Roi e qe mal li [conseillerent] 


et entente homme qe par celes encliesons e pur ceo qe sa femme nad- 
guerres fu esloigne hors de sa garde par [le maundement] du conseil le Koi, 
e par assent des autres qe ceo abbetterent et auxint ont procure le Roi 
davoir corn sus le dit [Counte de] Lancastre, a ceo qe mesmes le Counte 
les surmette; Les prelatz e autres grandz susnometz regardantz le 
deshonur de nostre se[ignur] le Roi e le dammage de li e de son poeple, 
e la grant destruccion del poeple e du Roiaume qe ore est a douter par 
les [gentz] Descoce, e la hastive remede qe y covendreit mettre par unie 
force des grandz du Roiaume aviserent .... la gref . . cele 
malevoillance entre les grandz du Roiaume remede covenable ne y porra 
estre mise si hastivement come mestier serroit [par] le Roi e son roiaume, 
e nomement si tieux grefs se deussent trier selom lei de terre ; pur lonur 
de dieu e sauvete de sainte esglise . . e del poeple e pur ben e la 
grant necessite de pees e acord entre les grandz du roiaume e nomement 

a ore ; ces le dit Counte de Lancastre se sont acordez 

en la forme qe sensuit; Primerement pur ceo qe les dites orde[nances 
. aus]siben as prelatz e grandz susnometz e par eus furent 

jurees come le dit Counte de Lancastre ; qe 

de celes ordenances maintenir ne face assembles des gentz darmes, ne force 

usera plus qe un par commun assente 

des prelatz e grants susnomes, e de li ou de la greigneur partie de eus ; 
et qe es parleme[nts et assembletz] . . . . le Roi il seit come 
pier du roiaume, sanz sovereinete a li accrocber vers les autres . . [en 
temps ave]nir. Et quant al esmener e laloignance de sa femme, qe si ceux qe 

le dit Counte de Lancastre ent ad suspectes qe le 

Counte resceive le . . . . e qe laquitance de eels qil auera suspect 
del fait seit se duzime des gentz dignes [de foi, e de eels qil aver]a suspect 
del assent e conseil en mesme le fait seit se sisme desjgentz dignes de foi, 
e qe ceux qe le dit Counte avera de eel fait suspects ^=qi ae se volent acqiter 
facent amendes al dit Counte, e lamende de li qi ne se vodra acqiter 
de eel fait, seit tiel, et de celi qi ne se vodra acqiter del assent et conseil 
seit tiel santz attendre reddur ou durete de lei en tiel cas, et ceo pur le 

grant ben e necessite qi aore est mue. Et si 

par aventure le dit Counte de Lancastre, sanz aver regarde al bon e profit 

qe furrent deli e de ceux ou as maux qe sont 

avenuz e avenent dejour en jour par descorde de eux, [ne vodra telles amend]es 
accepter ne aggreer, mes demorer a ceo qe reddur de lei lei (sic) durreit 

e en descorde e gross eur et le Counte de Lancastre 

[. . . me]smes ceux par serment e (ou) en autre manere al avisement 

des prelatz e [grandz susn]ometz, qe le privement 

a ne mal fra ne procura estre fait pur ceo fait ne pur autre, si noun 
par la lei e solonc la lei. Et [si le dit] Counte ne les vodra . 
. . . Roiaume e les grandz susnometz vivement empreignent les 
busoignes nostre seignur [le Roi] e du roiaume al [honur et profit de 
seinte eg]lise, e du Roi e la sauvaucion du poeple e de lestat le Roi sanz 
attendre ou regard a[uoir Counte] de Lan- 
castre, et ne seoffront tant come en eus est qe le dit Counte face as autres 

[nule] chose fors qe par la lei dit Counte 

€n leur reson. Estre ceo si par aventure les ditz Countes e autres [grandz 


du roiaume qi] . . . . se sont ajoint as prelatz pur le bien du Eoi 

e de Roiaume ou des ditz prelatz ou aucun de eux 

Counte de Lancastre pur ceste busoigne, qe touz les 

autres e chescun de eux a com qe serra 

encuru tieu maugre^ desicome il se joignent en cestes choses pur le 
commun [profit du roiaulme e non] par autre encheson. Et volent les ditz 
prelatz e grandz qe cest acord e joingndre vers chescun deux . 

. nt solonc les pointz susescritz, et qe si nul de eus venist 
lencontre qe deu defende qe les autres ne cest acord. 

Queen Mary's Chapel Royal 

The English Chapel Royal as a musical institution may be said 
to date from 1348, when Edward III organized it on continental 
models ; it was confirmed by letters patent on 26 October 1351, 
and was granted privileges by Clement VI and by Innocent VI 
(1354). Its history, however, from the fourteenth to the sixteenth 
century has yet to be written. It has been said that a trained 
musical staff was not added ' till 1420 ', as * there has not been 
found, up to the present, any mention of the children of the 
chapel before Henry V's reign ' ; i but the Patent Rolls record 
a grant to John Tilbury, ' one of the boys of the King's Chapel ', 
on 12 November 1405.^ It is well known that Henry V had his 
chapel singers on the campaign of Agincourt (October 1415) 
and at Rouen (January 1419). Again, it has been asserted that 
the first instance of ' impressing ' suitable choir-boys for the 
Chapel Royal occurred under King Richard III, on 16 September 
1484; in fact, a royal commission was issued to John Pyamour 
for this purpose as early as 14 January 1420.^ Twenty years 
later, a similar commission was granted to John Croucher, dean 
of the chapel, on 12 July 1440, ' to take throughout England 
such and so many boys as he or his deputies shall see to be fit 
and able to serve God and the King in the said royal chapel '.* 
Under John Plummer (1440-62) and Henry Abyngdon, Mus.B. 
(1462-78), successively Masters of the Children, the services of 
the Chapel Royal compelled the admiration of distinguished 
foreign visitors. Leo von Rozmital, brother-in-law of the king 
of Bohemia, in his account of Edward I V's Chapel Royal, in 1466, 
says, ' We heard in no country more agreeable and sweeter 
musicians than these ' ; and he adds, ' I believe there are no 
better singers in the world '.^ Gilbert Banaster (1478-86), 

• ? for manere. 

^ G. E. P. Arkwright, in Proceedings of the Musical Association, 1914, p. 121. 

2 Cal. of Pat. Rolls, Hen. IV, iii, 1405-8, p. 96. 

3 Ibid. Hen. V, ii, 1416-22, p. 272. * Ibid. Hen. VI, iii, 1436-41, p. 452. 
' Terry, Catholic Church Music, p. 180. 



Laurence Squire (1486-93), and William Newark (1493-1509) 
carried on the good tradition, while, during the rule of Master 
William Cornish (1509-23), the Venetian ambassadors, on 6 June 
1515, chronicle the charming singing of the choristers in the 
Chapel Royal. Cornish wrote the interlude of the Four Elements, 
published by Rastell in 1517, which contains one of the earliest 
specimens of English dramatic music. He also composed ' By 
a bank as I lay ', and two of Skelton's songs, ' Manerly Margery 
Milk and Ale ' and ' Wofully Afraid '. With ten of the chapel 
choristers he attended Henry VIII to the Field of the Cloth of 
Gold (1520), and he died on 25 March 1523, being succeeded by 
William Crane (1523-45). 

As a child the Princess Mary was brought up in a musical 
atmosphere. From the age of four she had been taught music 
by Dionysius Memo, a priest-musician from Brescia, organist of 
St. Mark's, Venice, whose organ recitals gave much pleasure to 
Henry VIII and his court.® She was also instructed in the 
virginals by John Heywood and PhiHp van Welder. Writing 
in August 1525, Lorenzo Orio says that the princess ' is a rare 
person, and singularly accomplished, most particularly in music, 
playing on every instrument, especially on the Lute and the 
Virginals '.' This statement is corroborated by Mario Savagnano 
in 1531.^ By patent of 12 May 1526, the number of boys of the 
chapel was increased from ten to twelve, and the salary of the 
master, William Crane, increased from 40 marks to £40.^ The 
religious changes during the latter part of the reign of Henry VIII 
did not seriously affect the musical services in the Chapel Royal, 
but it is well to note that the ancient catholic rite was observed 
with high mass at the coronation of King Edward VI in 1547. 
Even the drastic liturgical changes in 1549 and 1550 did not 
apply to the Chapel Royal, and thus, in 1554, the gentlemen and 
choristers were practically the same as those under Edward VI. 
It should be noted to their credit that the English musicians of 
the period 1530-70, almost to a man, stood by the old religion, 
including the organists of St. Paul's Cathedral and of Westminster 
Abbey. We need only name Tallis, Byrd, Redford, Westcott, 
Bower, Wayte, Heywood, Pigott, Perry, Edwards, Shepherd, 
Causton, Taverner, Tye, Whyte, Parsons, Munday, and Farrant. 

Under Queen Mary, three distinguished foreign musicians 
came to England and spent some months in London — a fact 
which is little known. These were Felix Antonio de Cabezon 

• Cat. of State Papers, Venice, ii. 780 ; Letters and Papers, Hen. VIII, ii. 2401 » 

' Sanuto, Diarii, xxxix. 356. 
« Venet. Cal. iv. 682. 

• Wallace, Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars (1908). 


(1510-66), the marvellous blind organist, who was chamber 
musician to King Philip ; Philippe de Monte (1522-1603), the 
Belgian composer, who became chapel-master at Vienna in 
1568 ; and Orlando de Lassus (1530-94), one of the glories of 
the Flemish school. De Cabezon and de Monte were attached 
to the household of Philip of Spain, the husband of Queen Mary, 
while de Lassus is said to have come over in the train of Cardinal 
Pole, the papal legate, who landed at Dover on 20th November 
1554.10 j)e Monte, while in England, was on terms of friendship 
with William Byrd, with whom — according to a pleasant custom 
that might well be revived — he exchanged compositions. De 
Lassus composed the motet ' Te spectant, Reginalde Pole ' for 
the cardinal, and it was sung on 2 December 1554 in St. Paul's 
Cathedral, when high mass was sung (the choir being under 
the direction of Sebastian Westcott), with Bishop Gardiner as 
preacher. The motet is included in de Lassus's volume of motets, 
published at Antwerp in 1566. This great composer's visit to 
England lasted only three months, as he was in Antwerp in 
February 1555. It may be added that, as pointed out by Mr. 
J. F. R. Stainer,!! one of his songs, which is in a manuscript in 
the collection of the Music School of Oxford, now in the Bodleian 
Library,^^ is set to English words, ' Monsieur Mingo ', the con- 
cluding line of which, ' God Bacchus do me right ', &c., is quoted 
by Shakespeare in Henry IV. 

In 1550, and again in June 1552, commissions were issued 
for ' impressing ' children for the Chapel Royal — the former 
directed to Philip van Welder, and the latter to Richard Bowyer. 
Comparing the list of the chapel at the close of the reign of 
Edward VI in 1552 with that of Queen Mary in 1554, there is 
scarcely any difference. While, however, there were twenty- 
eight suits of mourning given out for the gentlemen of the chapel 
at the funeral of Edward VI in 1553,^^ there were thirty-one 
suits of livery ordered on 17 September for the coronation of 
Queen Mary : thirty-one new liveries were in fact given out, and 
presumably worn, on that occasion on 1 October. 

The following is the official list of the Chapel Royal in 1554, 
copied by Mrs. C. C. Stopes from the Exchequer Rolls (427 
(5) 10), and published by her in 1905 : ^^ 

'• De Lassus's oldest biographer, Van Quickelberg, who was a contemporary, 
distinctly says that the great composer ' visited England and France ' in 1554, ' with 
Julius Caesar Brancaccio ' ; see Pantaleon's Heroum Prosopogmphia, 1565. 

" Musical Times, 1902, pp. 100-1. 

12 There is a bust portrait of de Lassus in the Oxford Music School : see Mrs. 
R. L. Poole's 'The Oxford Music School' in the Musical Antiquary, iv. 145, April 

" Archaeologia, vol. xii, p. 372. 

'* The Athenaeum, 9 September 1905. 



The Chapel 

The Bishop of Norwich ^^ 
Emery Tuckfield 
Nicholas Archibald 
William Walker 
Eobert Chamberlain 
William Gravesend 
John Angell 
Mr, John Singer 
Richard Bowyer ^® 
William Huchins i' 
Robert Richemont ^^ 
Thomas Wayte ^® 
Thomas Byrde 20 
Robert Perry ^^ 
William Barbour ^^ 
Thomas Tallis 23 
Nicholas Mellowe 2* 
Thomas Wright 25 
John Bendebow 26 
Robert Stone 2? 
John Shepherd 2^ 
William Mauperly 29 
Richard Edwards 30 
Robert Morecock 
William Hunnis ^i 
Richard Aleworth 
Thomas Palfreyman ^2 
Roger Kenton 
Lucas Caustell^^ 
Richard Farrant^ 
Edward Adams ^^ 

Dean of the Chapel 


Gospeller Priest. 
Master of the Children. 

Gentlemen of the Chapel, 
each of them 7J<^. a day. 

^5 Thomas Thirlby, who was translated to Ely on 21 June 1555. He was deposed 
by Elizabeth on 5 July 1559, and died a prisoner in Parker's house on 26 August 

^* Bowyer, as is recorded on his tombstone in Old Greenwich Church, was Master 
of the Children under Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary, and Elizabeth ; in reality, 
from 1545 till his death on 26 July 1561. He wrote the tragedy of Appius and Virginia, 
and gave the cue for ' tragicall comedies', but was chiefly celebrated as a choir- 

1' Huchins, or Hychyns, was a composer as well as a singer. His death occurred 
on 9 November 1568. 

" Richemont, Barbour, and Wright were gentlemen of the chapel at the coronation 
of Edward VI : see H. C. de Lafontaine, The King's Musick (1909), pp. 7, 8. 

1^ Wayte was organist of Westminster Abbey from 1559 to 1562. 

2" Byrde was father of the celebrated William Byrd. 

21 Perry was a gentleman of the chapel in 1529 : Nagel's Annalen der Englischen 
Hofmusik (1894), p. 17. 

22 See note 18. 

23 Thomas Tallis, styled ' Father of English Cathedral Music ', was organist of 


Robert Bunnock Sergeant of the Vestry. 

Thomas Causton^^ 

Select Singers 
at M. per day each. 

Richard Lever 
John Denman ^^ 
Walter Thirlby ^7 
Morris Tedder 38 
Hugh Williams 405. a year, 

xii children of the Chapel. 

The total salaries for court musicians under King Edward VI 
was £2,209 Os. 6d. a year; under Queen Mary it was £2,233 175. 6d., 
of which sum the singers cost £469 Ss. 4:d., while the three players 

Waltham Abbey from 1534 to 1540. He retained his post as gentleman of the chapel 
till his death on 23 November 1585. 

2* Mellowe and Bendebow were noted singers. 

25 See note 18. ^s gge note 24. 

27 Robert Stone, who harmonized Cranmer's Litany, lived to receive mourning 
livery in 1603. 

28 John Shepherd was organist of Magdalen College, Oxford, from 1542 to 1547, 
and became Mus.D. in 1554. His masses, motets, &c., are of high value. He died in 
1563. Among the New Year's gifts to Phibp and Mary on 1 January 1557, ' Shepherd 
of the Chapel' presented ' three rolls of Songs'. Much of his Latin church music 

in manuscript in Christ Church, Oxford : see G. E. P. Arkwright's Catalogue of 
Music in the Library of Christ Church, Oxford, part i, 1915. 

-' Mauperly was an old retainer. On 8 December 1553 he received a warrant 
for livery as ' a server of our Chamber and our ordinary singer'. His name is also 
spelled ' Maperleye ' : Lafontaine, p. 9. 

^" Edwards is one of the most considerable figures in the history of the drama 
before Shakespeare. He was a student of Christ Cliurch, Oxford, in 1547, and was 
Master of the Children of the Chapel Royal from 1561 till his death on 31 October 
1566. His plays of Damon and Pithias and Palemon and Arcite were performed before 
Elizabeth in 1565 and 1566. 

2^ Hunnis was a composer, choirmaster, and play producer, and was Master of 
the Children of the Chapel from 1566 till his death on 6 June 1597. See Mrs. C. C. 
Stopes, ' William Hunnis and the Revels of the Chapel Royal ', in Materialien zur 
Kunde des cUteren englischen Dramas, vol. xxix (1910). 

32 Palfreyman appears as a member of the domestic establishment of Queen 
Mary in 1558, as quoted by Collier ; see Nagel's Annalen. 

33 Caustell and Adams were noted singers under Edward VI. Both received fees 
in 1552 as members of ' The Chappell ' : see the Catalogue of Manuscript Music in 
the British Museum, iii. 469, 482. 

3* Farrant was a remarkable composer, choir-trainer, and dramatist. He was 
a member of the chapel under Edward VI and Queen Mary, and was Master of the 
Children of Windsor from 1564 to 1569, but in the latter year he returned to the 
Chapel Royal. In December 1576 he opened the Blackfriars Theatre for the queen's 
boys. He died on 30 November 1580 : see Proceedings of the Musical Association^ 
1914, p. 129. " See note 33. 

3^ Causton was a composer whose works ought to be better known. He wrote 
some interesting Latin services, including a Te Deum and a Benedictus, now in the 
British Museum (Add. MS 31,226). He died on 28 October 1569. Henry Davey 
suggests that he was the composer of the anthem, ' Rejoice in the Lord', but from 
internal evidence this seems unlikely : see Dr. Ernest Walker's Hist, of Music in 
England, pp. 37, 47. 

3' The names are also written ' Denham ' and ' Thirleby ' in the Chapel Accounts 
•f 1552 : Cat. of MS. Music in Brit. Mus. iii. 487, 535. 

38 This name also appears as ' Morrison Tedder ' : ibid. 535. 


on the virginals (John Heywood, Anthony Countie, and Robert 
Bowman) received an annual fee of £92 lis. 8^.^^ 

There is still preserved a printed duodecimo volume, entitled, 
A Godly Psalme of Mary Queene — a sacred song of forty-four 
quatrains — written and composed by Richard Beard, rector of 
St. Mary-at-Hill, 1553, pubHshed by William Griffith in London, 

* a little above the Conduit ', the first verse of which runs as 
follows : 

A godly psalme of Marye Queene 
Which brought us comfort all, 
Thro' God Whom we of duty praise. 
That gave her foes a fall. 

Another sacred song of thirty-six stanzas, sung before the queen 
on St. Nicholas's Day and on the Feast of Holy Innocents at 
St. James's in 1555, was written by Hugh Rhodes, a gentleman 
of the Chapel Royal, also known as the author of The BoJce of 
Nurture or ScJioole of Good Manners. A third song in honour 
of the queen was written by the Rev. William Forest, one of her 
chaplains, and was entitled A new Ballade of the Marigolde, 
which is said to have been sung to the fine air now familiarly 
associated with ' The Leather Bottel '. One of the verses is here 
given from the copy preserved in the Library of the Society of 
Antiquaries : 

The God above for man's delight 

Hath here ordayned every thing. 
Sun, Moon, and Stars shining so bright, 

With all kind fruits, that here doth spring, 

And flowers that are so flourishing ; 
Among all that which I behold 

(As to my mind best contenting), 
I do commend the Marigolde. 

Forest was a good musician, and to his industry is also due 
the collection of many valuable contemporary compositions by 
Fayrfax, Marbeck, Tye, Taverner, Shepherd, and Norman, still 
preserved in the Library of the Music School at Oxford. 

Although John Heywood did not belong to the Queen's 
Chapel, he held office at court during the reigns of Henry VIII, 
Edward VI, and Queen Mary, and was not only a capable singer 
and musician, but was also famed as a man of letters. He was 
a minor canon of St. Paul's Cathedral, and trained many of the 

* singing children ' to perform his own interludes. Through 
religious scruples he fled to Louvain in 1566, and in 1576, although 
an octogenarian, was admitted to the Jesuit College at Antwerp. 

'* Musical AntiqiLary, iv. 58. 


He died at Louvain in 1578, and his two sons, Ellis and Jasper, 
became Jesuits. 

Truly, Queen Mary could boast of a galaxy of musical talent 
in her Chapel Royal. Tallis alone was capable of holding his 
own with giants like de Lassus and de Monte, and his exquisite 
motet, * O Sacrum Convivium ' (which has been anglicized as 
' I call and cry ') would be sufficient — apart from his higher 
flights — to put him on a plane with the best of Italian contem- 
poraries. Dr. Ernest Walker, in appraising the works of Tallis, 
says that ' Sacrum Convivium ' is such a gem that ' it is doubtful 
if Palestrina himself ever surpassed it '. 

W. H. Grattan Flood. 

The Graves of Swift and Stella 

About the position of Swift's grave there is no doubt. He was 
buried on the south side of the nave of his cathedral, beside the 
second pier from the western door. The coffin, as I have been 
told by the only person now living who has seen it, lay east and 
west, and almost in contact with the pier.^ But contradictory 
statements have been made regarding the resting-place of Stella. 
Mr. W. Monck Mason, whose intimate knowledge of Swift and 
of St. Patrick's need not be emphasized, declared in 1820 that 
she lay ' on the south side of the nave of St. Patrick's Cathedral 
at the foot of the second column from the western entrance '. 
And he added that the spot was then marked by her epitaph 
fixed to the pier.^ Elsewhere Mason describes the position of 
Swift's grave in exactly similar terms.^ The two passages, if 
construed literally, can be reconciled only on the supposition 
that Swift's coffin was laid above Stella's in the same grave. 

But fifteen years later a different tradition was current. In 
1835, Dr. J. Houston, of Dublin, asserted that Swift and Stella 
lay ' side by side '.* Sir W. R. Wilde endorsed this opinion, 

^ Dr. J. Houston, who saw the coffin in 1835, says that it lay ' transversely in 
from the pillar supporting [Swift's) tablet, and as close as it could be placed ' {Phreno- 
logical Journal and Miscellany, ix. 604). What ' transversely in from the pillar ' 
means I do not know. 

2 St. Patrick's, pp. 368, lix. It is not clear whether in Mason's time Stella's 
monument was on the same pillar as Swift's, or on the next pillar to the west. He 
writes, ' Next adjoining to the monument of Primate Marsh, is that of Dean Swift . . . ; 
and fixed in the column, next to this last, is a marble slab, consecrated to the memory 
of Esther Johnson.' =» p. 411. 

* Phrenological Journal and Miscellany, ix, 604. So also J. Churton Collins, 
Jonathan Swift, 1893, p. 236 ; W. E. H. Lecky, Prose Works of Sivift, 1897, introd., 
p. xci ; and Leslie Stephen in the Diet, of Nat. Biog. Iv. 222 (2nd cd. xix. 222). In 

ordance with this tradition brasses were laid on the floor of St. Patrick's in 1882, 

cribed with the names of Dean Swift and Esther Johnson. 


and built upon it the inference that Stella and the dean ' had 
long arranged the place of their burial '.^ Sir Henry Craik in 
like manner tells us that Swift had Stella's body ' placed where 
it might one day lie side by side with his own '. Thus both 
these writers suggest that it was Swift's intention that he should 
be buried beside Stella. But Sir Henry adds a foot-note which 
can scarcely be brought into agreement with his text : ' Quite 
recently ', he wrote in 1882, ' a fresh excavation revealed a coffin 
which contained the bones both of the Dean and Stella.' ^ In 
due time the natural conclusion was drawn from these words. 
The article on Swift in the eleventh edition of the Encyclopaedia 
Britannica (1911), by the late Dr. Richard Garnett and Mr. 
Thomas Seccombe, made the astounding statement that Swift 
' was interred in his Cathedral at midnight on the 22nd of October, 
in the same coffin as Stella 'P Meanwhile, in 1905, the admirable 
Guide to St. Patrick's, compiled by the present archbishop of 
Dublin while he sat in Swift's chair, had told us that Stella ' is 
buried two or three feet to the west of the spot where Swift lies '.^ 
Now it must be remarked that if Swift was buried by the 
side of Stella, or in her grave, this was not done in fulfilment of 
a desire expressed by him. We can appeal to evidence which 
has long been in our hands. In a letter to Mrs. White way, nine 
years after Esther Johnson's death, 25 March 1737, he wrote, 
' As soon as you are assured of my death, whether it shall happen 
to be in town or the country, I desire you will go immediately 
to the Deanery ; and if I die in the country, I desire you will 
send down a strong coffin, to have my body brought to town, and 
deposited in any dry part of St. Patrick's Cathedral '.^ The 
words which I have italicized in this extract show that Swift did 
not wish to be interred in Stella's coffin. But more, the whole 
passage proves that he did not desire that his grave should be 
near hers. In those days St. Patrick's was notoriously damp. 
The river Poddle flows underground outside the western door, 
and the building is intersected by a stream which runs north- 
wards, under the floor, to the west of the choir. Until recent 
times it was a not rare occurrence that the floor should be under 
water. Nowhere could ' any dry place ' be found except to the 
east of the crossing. If Swift's instructions had been carried 
out he would have been buried at least 150 feet to the east of 
Stella's grave. In view of his own words it can hardly be main- 

^ Closing Years of Dean Swift's Life, 1849, second edition, p. 120. ^* 

® Craik, Life of Swift, 1882, p. 405. Both text and note remain unchanged in the 
edition of 1894, vol. ii, p. 141. 
' Encycl. Brit. xxvi. 230. 

* J. H. Bernard, The Cathedral Church of St. Patrick, p. 64. 
' Scott, Memoirs of Swift : Prose Works of Scott, vol. ii (1834), p. 489. 


tained that he selected the place of her burial with the intention 
that he should lie beside her. 

But it may be well to set out the facts for which there is docu- 
mentary evidence. In the first place it is certain that Esther 
Johnson was not buried beside Swift. Here are two entries in 
the register of St. Patrick's Cathedral : ^^ 

Jan. 30th 1727. Esther Johnson intend in the great Isle near the 
first Pillar upon the entrance to the Church to the South Side of the West 

The Revd. Doer. Jonathan Swift Late Dean of St. Patrick's deceased 
Octr. the 19th 1745 ; and was interr'd the 22nd of the same, at the 2d 
pillar from the west gate in the south side of the great isle. 

Each entry is attested at the foot of the page by the signature 
' Jon. Worrall ', a name well known to all students of Swift. 
They prove that Stella's grave is under the first, not as Mason 
said the second pier of the nave, some 10 feet to the west of 
Swift's, at the east end of the present site of the Cork monument. 
Mason's error may be due to a mere slip of the pen, or he may 
have been misled by Stella's monument having been attached 
to the wrong pier.^i 

Now in 1835 certain alterations were made in the cathedral, 
in the course of which some coffins were exposed to view ; and 
among the rest. Swift's, and another adjoining it, which was 
described as Stella's. In that year the British Association held 
its meetings in Dublin from Monday, 10 August, to Saturday, 
15 August. A ' corps of phrenologists ' who were there at the 
time asked and obtained from the dean of St. Patrick's, Henry 
Richard Dawson, permission to examine the skulls. They were 
accordingly exhumed in the presence of Dr. Houston on the 3rd 
of August. It appears that some persons doubted whether they 
were really those of the great dean and Stella. Houston wrote 
a letter, which was subsequently X3ublished,i^ to prove their 
' authenticity '. Swift's coffin-plate, which remained almost 
intact, demonstrated the identity of one of the skulls. But 
Houston produced no such evidence for the position of Stella's 
grave. He relied mainly on the testimony of the sexton, William 

»» Edited for the Parish Register Society of Dublin in 1907, by Dr. J. H. 

" Stella's epitaph is of uncertain date ; but it was probably composed after 
Swift's death. It is possible, therefore, that it was originally misplaced. Or it may 
have been removed from the first to the second pillar at some subsequent time. It 
I is now on the wall of the south aisle of the nave. 

12 Phrenological Journal and Miscellany, ix. 603 ff. The letter is dated 22 October 

j 1835. It is worth noting that at least two well-known men were filled with ' horror ' 

I at the desecration of the graves. Sec the letters of Aubrey de Vere and Sir W. R. 

' Hamilton, written in September and October 1835, in Graves's Life of Hamilton, 

ii. 162, 164. 


Maguire, who was believed to have been ' oftentimes ' informed 
of its situation by Swift's servant, Richard Brennan, who had 
died forty years earUer. Such evidence was of httle value. 
Brennan was probably a mere child when Stella died, and at 
the time of his death Maguire was only fourteen years old.^^ 
There is therefore serious reason to question his conclusion that 
the second exhumed skull was Stella's. 

But on one point Dr. Houston's letter is important. It 
contains a minute record of the disposition of Swift's bones 
when the coffin was opened. No one can read it without being 
convinced that in the coffin were deposited the remains of the 
dean and of no other person. Stella's dust was not mingled 
with Swift's in 1835. For the more indecorous proceedings of 
the ten days which followed the exhumation the reader may be 
referred to the graphic and, it is to be hoped, somewhat exag- 
gerated account in Wilde's Closing Years of Dean Swiff s Life. 
It will suffice to say that casts of the skulls were made which are 
preserved in the anatomical museum of Trinity College, Dublin, 
and elsewhere. On 13 August the skulls were returned to 
St. Patrick's Cathedral,^* and apparently it was left to the 
sexton to reinter them. But Maguire did not deem it to be his 
duty to restore them to the places where they were found. Both 
were put into Swift's coffin. 

Evidence of this fact was discovered half a century later.^^ 
In 1882 the floor of the cathedral was tiled. When the old flags 
were taken up. Swift's remains were once more exposed. In his 
coffin were found the two skulls, and a paper on which the 
following sentences were written, according to a copy made at 
the time by Mr. John Lambert, then assistant-sexton, now 
sexton, of the cathedral : 

" Brennan was old enough in 1742 to make an affidavit. See F. E. Ball's Corre- 
spondence of Swift, vi. 179. He seems to have been the Richard Brenan whose children 
were baptized at St. Patrick's between 1745 and 1759. He was for many years beadle 
of the cathedral. He was incapacitated by age and infirmity in June 1795, and died 
a year later. William Maguire was born on 14 January 1782, was appointed sexton 
in 1810, and died 28 June 1844. The account given of him by Dr. Houston produces 
the impression that he was a witness who ought to have been cross-examined. It 
may be remarked that Houston's own statements about the position of Stella's coffin 
are not consistent. In one passage {Phren. Journ., ix. 607) he says that it was 'in the 
same relation to the pillar bearing the tablet to her memory as that of the Dean '. 
This seems to impW that the two slabs were fixed on different piers, and if so it is 
probably correct. But howsoever interpreted, it contradicts his previous assertion 
that Swift and Stella lay side by side, Houston's recollection of what he had seen 
and heard two months before he wrote may have been somewhat blurred. 

" It is said that they were examined ' on the 16th August [Sunday] at the house 
of Dr. Marsh ' {Phren. Journ., ix. 466). Mr. Hamilton, quoted by Wilde (p. 55), 
declares that they were in his possession in September. Both dates may be rejected. 
See below. 

^' Wilde was unaware of it. He writes (p. 120), ' The skull of Stella was restored 
to its former, and we hope last resting place at the same time as Swift's '. 


Copy from a pamper found in a bottle in Deans Swift grave. Sept. the 1st 1882. 

Aug. the 3rd 1838.16 
Doctor Swift grave was opened This day by the British Association ^^ 
who Got Permission from the Dean. The were holding there Meeting in 
Dublin. The Scull of Swift was in two as it now appears having been 
opened after his Death to examine the Braine. 

On the other Side of the Paper is the following additional writing. 
Stella's Scull was taken out of the adgoing [adjoining] Grave and is 
now Deposited with Swift. 

William Maguire Sexton. 13 August 1835. 

Thus far Mr. Lambert copies Maguire's memorandum. He 
then proceeds on his own account : 

In Swift Scull was found the Bottle containing the paper. It was 
Sealed with red wax and had the arms of the Maguire famley impresed 
on it. it was inside Swift Scull, it had been in to part. I have seen Dean 
Swift grav opened and the two Sculls of Swift and Stella, and the remains 
of what was left of Swift. The Coffin was cleaned of the Mud and water 
that was in it And a box Made by a Carpenter who was working at the 
time in the Cathedral. And the two Sculls, and the remains of Swift 
put in the box. And from two to three feet of Concrete put over it. I sup- 
pose Never to be opened Any More until the Great Day. 

At the same time i did ask the Verger Mr. Cornegie to get a Nother 
Bottle while the Grave was opened and to write on a paper what took 
place at the time and put it in the Box with Swift, but he took to long 
to Make up his Mind and the grave was closed it May be for ever. I would 
have put a bottle and Paper in with the remains of Swift. Something 
about what took place at the time, but he the Verger would not Consent. 

John Lambert, 

Assistant Sexton. 

1 Sept. 1882. 

In justice to an old friend I must point out that Lambert 
had only a subordinate part in this transaction. He tells me 
that Swift's bones were deposited in the box to protect them 
from being scattered. The box was placed in the coffin, which 
was not disturbed. The coffin was much decayed, and the 
plate had disappeared. Mr. Lambert's memorandum is apparently 
the only existing evidence of Sir Henry Craik's ' excavation ' 
which revealed ' the bones both of Swift and Stella ' in the 
same coffin. The legend that Swift was buried in Stella's coffin 
has no foundation. H. J. Lawlor. 

" A slip of the transcriber for 1835. 

" The British Association is here confused with the phrenologists who met in 
Dublin at the same time. Aubrey de Vere made the same mistake in his letter of 
10 September 1835, referred to above. In his reply, Sir W. R. Hamilton acquits the 
Association of any participation in 'that inhuman act'. There is no reference to 
Swift in the proceedings of the British Association for 1835. 

94 January 

Reviews of Books 

Church and State in England to the Death of Queen Anne. By Henry 
Melvill Gwatkin, D.D., late Dixie Professor of Ecclesiastical History, 
Cambridge. With a preface by E. W. Watson, D.D., Eegius 
Professor of Ecclesiastical History, Oxford. (London : Longmans, 

At Dr. Gwatkin's death he left this book, written (as we learn from 
Dr. Watson's preface) at various intervals during the course of some 
years, still in manuscript, and every one who knows how much a book 
often owes to its author's final revision of it while in that state, and to 
his corrections and other emendation of it while passing through the 
press, will understand that this history should not be taken as in all 
respects representing its distinguished author's erudition. Had oppor- 
tunity been given him he would, doubtless, have removed many blemishes ; 
some lapses might have been retrieved, some omissions supplied, some 
judgements reconsidered, and fuller advantage taken of the latest results 
of historical inquiry. But here we have to consider the book as it stands, 
not what it might have been had the author been spared to see it through 
the press. It is written with vigour, indeed in places with somewhat 
thoughtless energy, and it is decidedly readable, provided that the reader 
knows enough history not to be puzzled by its frequent allusions. The 
author seems to have been more at home in the later portion of his subject 
than in early and medieval times ; his evidently strong sympathy with 
the protestant and puritan movements made the ecclesiastical affairs of 
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries especially attractive to him. 
He is unsparing in condemnation, calling in question even the ' purity 
of mind ' of Charles I and accusing Laud of ' stupid pedantry '. On the 
other hand, he writes with pleasant and warm appreciation of men of 
various schools of thought whose characters appealed to him. On the 
whole his portraiture has much truth in it, but its dark parts are too 
unrelieved. His point of view in ecclesiastical matters is easily discernible : 
all that was of Rome, since the earliest days of the church, was evil, and 
legal restraint on the exercise of the liberty of the individual in matters 
of religion generally to be condemned. 

The book leaves the reader in some doubt as to its design : if, as the 
title suggests, it was intended to trace the relations between church and 
state, some of its contents, especially those concerning civil affairs, are 
irrelevant, and there are strange omissions, such as that of the refusal 
of convocation to transact business until William of Wykeham was enabled 


to be present. The notices of civil history are not illuminating, and some 
seem ill considered ; among them that ' the reign of Richard 11 was in 
large part the struggle of Henry of Derby with the crown ', that political 
reasons had little to do with the peace with Spain in 1604, and that when 
Charles (II) invaded England in 1651 'nobody joined him' : the earl of 
Derby, though his following was small, was not a nobody. As the whole 
liistory before the Norman conquest is disposed of in thirty-six pages, it 
would scarcely be worth while to notice such a summary were it not that 
it affords two instances of an apparent neglect of the results of modern 
scholarship : the story of King Lucius has been shown by Harnack to be 
almost certainly not a ' legend ' but a mistaken piece of genuine history ,i 
and the account given of the origin of the parochial system has, as Dr. 
Watson points out, long been exploded. Later on, if the author had read 
Mr. J. H. Round's Feudal England,^ he would scarcely have described 
the cause of Becket's dispute with the king in 1163 as ' obscure '. That 
the ' guiding principle ' of John's Great Charter was that the king is 
'subject to the law' has been controverted successfully by M. Petit- 
Dutaillis, and the assertion that ' papal interference ' in the early part 
of the fourteenth century aggravated the evil of pluralities would 
scarcely have been made if the writer had given attention to Mait- 
land's essay on ' Execrabilis in the Common Pleas '.^ No one doubted 
that the pope had a right to legislate for the church, or held that he was 
' meddlesome' (to adopt a word freely used here in this connexion) when 
he did so, and in accordance with that right John XXII issued a con- 
stitution against pluralists and acted effectively upon it. Again, it is 
clear that the conclusions arrived at by the late Mr. Leach and Professor 
Pollard as to the effect on education of the dissolution of the chantries 
must have escaped the writer's notice. 

Religious prejudice appears with annoying frequency. For instance, 
we are told that no reform of the catholic church in its head and members 
was possible to the fifteenth century, because it held a false doctrine 
about the efficacy of good works. Did it then abandon this doctrine 
before the period of the so-called ' counter-reformation ' ? Its marriage 
laws are spoken of with great severity : ' Nobody could ever be sure 
that he was living in lawful marriage ' (p. 74), ' the church kept all mar- 
riages uncertain for the sake of gain ' (p. 131), and it was not until the 
reign of Edward VI that this ' demoralizing uncertainty ' was checked 
in England (p. 184). After the accession of Henry VIII, ecclesiastical 
history is treated at far greater length than before, but though the treat- 
ment is more minute the lack of revision is not less apparent. The Institu- 
tion of a Christian Man is represented as acknowledging three sacraments 
only. This is a peculiarly unfortunate slip, for historically the chief point 
of interest in the Institution lies in the fact that it restored to their former 
place the four which had been omitted in the Ten Articles published by 
the king's authority the year before. Dr. Watson tells us that some 
' obvious lapses of the pen ' have been corrected ; it is unfortunate that 
this lapse was not obvious to the corrector, and there is a fair crop of 

^ See ante, xxii. 767 fE. ^ pp. 497 seqq. 

^ Canon Law in England, pp. 148 fE. 


misprints in the early pages of the book, where we find ' Politus ' for 
Potitus, ' Lindhard ' for Liudhard, ' Peretarit ' for Perctarit, and Waverley 
described as in Hampshire. Not to be classed among mere slips is the 
statement that in the Act of Supremacy Elizabeth strongly asserted ' the 
principle of English law that the competence of parliament covers faith 
. . . without regard to convocation '. Elizabeth was not apt to magnify 
the competence of parliament in ecclesiastical affairs, but the Supremacy 
Act provides that her commissioners should not determine heresy except 
in accordance with previous determinations or with respect to such 
matters as should thereafter be so determined by parliament ' with 
the assent of the clergy in their convocation ', words actually quoted 
by the author on an earlier page. With much that is said about the 
harsh treatment of the puritans no one will disagree, but the argument 
that ' plainly something was wrong ' with the church because certain 
' serious and earnest men ' engaged in what is admitted here to have been 
a disloyal scheme against it, implies a doctrine subversive of all law. The 
writer is not always fair to the men whose duty it was to establish order 
in the church ; it is incorrect to say that when Whitgift became arch- 
bishop the court of high commission was ' reorganized ', presumably in 
order to enable him to strike more hardly at the puritans. The accession 
of a new primate necessitated the issue of a new commission, but it was 
expressed in the same form as that issued to Grindal and others on 23 April 
1576. It is hard too on Bancroft to accuse him of having caused the first 
serious schism by his enforcement of subscription to the articles imposed 
by the new canons, for he acted under pressure from the king and the 
council, and certainly showed no desire that objectors should be harshly 
dealt with. Dr. W. H. Frere has adduced good reason for believing that 
the number of those actually ejected from their benefices was far less 
than ' some three hundred ', as stated here. The Commonwealth, under 
which term this book includes the protectorate, was ' a noble failure ', 
and it failed because the puritans ' trusted in an arm of flesh ', but this 
introduces considerations foreign to historical inquiry. Enough has 
probably been said to show that this book, as it stands, is unworthy of the 
author's reputation. W. Hunt. 

History of the Abbey of St. Alban. By L. F. Rushbrook Willia 
(London : Longmans, 1917.) 

The preface of this work is dated 1914, and there is evidence in t' 
author's entertaining ' Lectures on the handling of Historical Material ' 
that he has spent a good deal of time on the study of the St. Albans 
Chronicles. It seems, however, to have been revised since the preface 
was written, as it contains references to a then unpublished volume of the 
' Victoria County Histories '. The avowed object of the book is to present 
a summary and balanced account of the history of the abbey. On the 
whole, Mr. Williams may fairly claim to have succeeded, although he 
passes somewhat lightly over the architectural history of the buildings, 
and bestows more than proportionate pains on the history of the library 



and the ' scriptorium '. His avowed preference is for Chronicle evidence, 
but the book is well provided with references to records. 

Unhappily the confidence of the reader is shaken by some lapses 
from accuracy in detail. Thus, in dealing with the legend of St. Alban 
(of which Mr. Williams published a special study in 1913), we are informed 
that ' St. Germanus . . . dedicated a church to him '. The references given 
are ' Bouquet, " Recueil des Historiens ", 172 ',^ which is insufficient, and 
' Haddan and Stubbs, "Councils", i. 6', which gives the account of 
St. German's visit to Britain, but does not mention the dedication of 
a church to St. Alban. A page or two further on the account of this 
pilgrimage is stated to be an interpolation in the life of St. German, 
not earlier than the end of the sixth century. We are not told, however, 
that the statements that St. German went to Britain to do honour to 
St. Alban, and returned safely by favour of St. Alban, are contained in 
the Silos MS. of the life of St. German by Constantius, and that only 
the details of the exhumation of St. Alban and the gift of relics by St. 
German are interpolated. The point is a trifling one, but this looseness 
of statement is disquieting. Mr. Williams does not appear to have read 
Mr. W. R. Lowe's interesting paper on churches in France dedicated to 
St. Alban ; ^ nor has he utilized the researches of Professor W. Meyer (in 
the Abhandlungen of the Royal Society at Gottingen for 1905) carrying 
back the Passio of St. Alban to the early part of the sixth century, and 
referring its origin to mid Gaul. 

Again, on pp. 119, 120, we have a story extracted from the 'Gesta' 
of how the abbey offended Edmund, son of Henry III, whom Mr. Williams 
calls ' Edmund of Langley ', borrowing the name usually appropriated to 
the son of Edward III, and compounded the offence by creating a corrody 
for one of his men. ' For nearly a century this corrody continued to be 
a charge upon the House, until in 1364 it was at last commuted for certain 
lands in Langley.' On examining the passages cited, we find that the 
corrody commuted in 1364 was the customary corrody claimed by the 
king in all houses of his foundation or advowson, nor does there seem 
any reason to suppose that the corrody granted to William de la Rue 
in the declining years of Abbot Roger lasted any longer than the 
life of William himself, or at all events that of Edmund of Lancaster. 
Again, Mr. Williams says that Abbot ' Wulsin ' ' built three churches 
to guard the three gates of the town ' (p. 26), and adds in a foot-note, 
' This looks as if the Abbot built a wall round the town '. For this period 
the ' Gesta ' appears to be the sole authority. But it contains no mention 
of ' gates ', merely stating that the three churches stood respectively 
north, south, and west of St. Albans, as indeed they still do. It looks 
accordingly as if the inference rested solely upon an inaccurate recollec- 
tion of the statement in the ' Gesta '. 

In the same way the statement (p. 14) that ' No trace can be found 
in the Papal registers of Offa's alleged visit to Rome ' seems to imply 
a momentary oblivion of the fact that no ' Regesta ' of that time are 

^ This should be x. 172 and refers to a mention in a chronicle, under the date 
1025, of the church of St. Alban at Auxerre as having been built by St. Grerman. 
•^ Proc. of the Soc. of Antiq., 2nd ser., xxvii. 58-67. 


preserved in the Vatican archives, and that the collections of JafEe and 
Potthast are derived from scattered originals and entries in cartularies 
throughout Europe, and can lay no claim to completeness. A similar 
lapse of memory has caused the author to attribute (p. 149) Froude's 
Short Studies to Freeman, an unintentional outrage which might well 
disturb the repose of both those historians. A more serious mistake is 
the ascription (p. 203) to Henry VI of Edward IV's grant to the abbey 
of the right to appoint its own justices of gaol -delivery, with the 
comments, which show a complete misconception of the character of the 
privilege, one by no means peculiar to St. Albans. 

It would be unfair to judge the whole work by these instances. It has 
many merits. Mr. Williams is temperate in his estimate of garbled 
charters, though hardly so conservative as Mr. G. J. Turner in his Black 
Book of St. Augustine, and has some sensible remarks on the account 
given by Matthew Paris of the Saxon abbots, which he is indisposed to 
reject as purely imaginative. He has compressed into a reasonable com- 
pass an exceptionally large volume of material, and always keeps his eye 
on the essential features of the history of the abbey. The lay reader, to 
whom his book is addressed, would perhaps have welcomed a fuller descrip- 
tion of the normal life of a Benedictine house, and a further discussion 
of its relation to its dependent priories, and the serious student cannot 
help regretting the omission of an index. C. Johnson. 

Calendar of the Liberate Rolls preserved in the Public Record Office. Henry III 
Vol. I, A. D. 1226-40. (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 

This volume begins a new series in the calendars of Chancery records 
prepared under the superintendence of the Deputy-Keeper of the Records. 
In the preface Mr. C. Johnson makes an important correction with regard 
to the rolls classified as Liberate Rolls. Of the 148 rolls so classified, the 
first three — ^those namely for the second, third, and fifth years of John — 
are not of the same nature as the others, but in reality are the beginning 
of the series known as Close Rolls. They have been printed in full in 1844 
in the Rotuli de Liberate ac de Misis et Praestitis regnante lohanne, edited 
by Sir T. D. Hardy. The fourth roll, though entitled Liberate anno 10 
R. H. 3, is actually a duplicate of mm. 29-22 of the Close Roll of that 
year. Thus the series of Liberate Rolls properly so called begins with 
the eleventh year of Henry III (1226). It was formed by removing from 
the Close Roll certain classes of writs employed in ordering or warranting 
expenditure, and entering these on a separate roll. These writs were also 
enrolled at the Exchequer in a somewhat different form — either in the 
Exchequer Liberate Rolls (of which only three exist for the period of this 
volume, and which form the beginning of the Issue Rolls of the Exchequer 
of Receipt), or in the Memoranda Rolls of the Upper Exchequer, and in 
the Pipe Rolls. The writs which were enrolled in the Liberate Rolls of 
the Chancery are those of Liberate, Allocate, Computate, and Comfutabitur 
or ' Contrabreve '. The formulae of all these are given in the preface. 
The writs of Liberate, or warrants for the issue of money, are addressed 



to the Treasurer and Chamberlains (or occasionally to the Constable of 
the Tower of London), the writs of Allocate and Compiitate, or warrants 
to acquit accountants, to the Barons of the Exchequer, and the writs of 
Computahitur to the individual accountants, chiefly sheriffs : counterparts 
of the last class of writs were kept at the exchequer, and hence the term 
contrahrevia was reserved for them. 

The text, for which Mr. W. H. Stevenson is responsible, is given in 
English, not as in the case of the earlier volumes of the Patent and Close 
Rolls of Henry III in the original. The preparation of it must have been 
a task of exceptional difficulty ; for though the rolls generally are well 
preserved, the number of obscure words is extraordinary. A ' list of rare 
words and of words with rare meaning ' is printed at the end of the volume, 
but this only includes a fraction of the puzzles which Mr. Stevenson has 
met and for the most part solved in the text. The Latin has been given 
in brackets in all cases where the translation was doubtful, and archaeo- 
logical experts may be able to throw light on some of the obscurities, 
which appear to be most numerous in the domain of architecture. One 
is inclined to doubt whether ' watch-tower ' can be the correct translation 
of eschiva (p. 193), on finding that an esciva was to be made and placed 
in the cellar of Rochester Castle (p. 207). ' Gingebr' ' in the list appears 
in a less abbreviated form on p. 71 as ' gingebrad' '. The oft-mentioned 
' oboli de muse' ' — or in one place ' oboli musse ' (p. 246), or ' oboli 
Muc' ' (p. 366) — remain unexplained : they cost about Is. 3d. each. There 
is also a ' pannus de Muse' ' (p. 356), and ' pennies de Muse'' ' (p. 501). 
Some strange words turn out to be English or French words latinized, 
such as ' alea ' (passage, p. 272), ' bermanni ' (porters, p. 387), ' brecka ' 
(breach, p. 366), ' kabla ' (rope, p. 383), ' kanevacium ' (canvas, p. 383), &c. 
Many other words omitted from the list seem rare enough to have been 
included, such as ' scorz ' (cork, p. 2), ' hachiis ' (hatchets, p. 3), * cleie ' 
(hurdles, p. 7), ' sperun' (screen, p. 316). 

The matters treated in the writs are as numerous and varied as the 
objects on which a medieval king could spend money, and range from 
diplomacy and war to the repayment of half a mark which the king 
borrowed from one of his officers, ' ad opus episcopi puerorum ', on Innocents' 
Day (p. 64), or the purchase of chains and other things for the use of the 
king's lion (p. 457). There is a great deal of valuable information about 
wages. Many entries refer to building operations and the decoration 
of the royal palaces. The hall of Windsor Castle was to be adorned by 
a painted map of the world (p. 405). Some early references occur to 
king's scholars at the university (pp. 44, 212, 243, 275, 291). The range 
of subjects is shown and research greatly facilitated by an admirable 
index of subjects which, like the index of persons and places, has been 
compiled by Mr. C. T. Flower. A few omissions in the subject index 
may be noted : under ecclesiastical matters, p. 610, ' friars minors, chapters 
of, add 331; under religious houses named (p. 628), 'Northampton, 
friars preachers of ', add 403, 413 ; and ' Stamford, friars minors, chapter 
of,at',408. Onp.633,'gingercake',81— rm^ 71. Under 'wardrobe, keepers 
of the' (p. 634), a cross-reference to the index of persons and places would 
have been more helpful than the reference ' 241-504 passim '. In the 



text there is clearly an error on p. 234, where 54/. 2d. is given as the price 
of 100 pairs of shoes at Id. a pair. 

Though the entries relate almost entirely to payments of money, there 
are a few unexpected entries of other sorts : e. g. the summoning of wit- 
nesses to prove that the prior of Norwich is of servile condition (p. 299) ; 
the names of the Welsh princes who did homage in 1240 (p. 477) ; and the 
bringing up to London of a heretic in the hands of the friars preachers 
of Cambridge (p. 485), probably the heretic mentioned with some detail 
by Matthew Paris, Chron. Maiora, iv. 32. A. G. Little. 

The Estate Book of Henry de Bray of Harleston. Edited by Dorothy 
Willis. (Camden Third Series, XXVII.) (London : Royal Historical 
Society, 1916.) 

The Estate Book of Henry de Bray, who died about 1340, is a volume 
of unusual interest. It seems to be unique as the account compiled by 
a layman with legal training of his estate, the means by which it had 
been acquired, and the terms on which he held it. Besides much matter 
of general and genealogical interest, it is of value as showing how early 
enclosure had begun in Northamptonshire, the county in which it was to 
be most complete. Most of the book is concerned with the little parish 
of Harleston, near Northampton, of which a very full picture is given. 
In Domesday there had been four fees, which still survived as rather 
unprofitable superiorities, whose chief value must have been the 
possibility of escheat. We read little of villeinage ; the land was 
held for the most part by free tenants, and there was frequent sale 
of small parcels, for many of the half virgates, the normal holdings, had 
been broken into fragments. By a process of accumulation most of the 
land had fallen into three hands, Bray, Bulner, and the abbot of St. 
James, Northampton, each of whom held under all four representatives 
of the Domesday tenants. We are told in detail how Henry de Bray had 
acquired his share. Part was inherited, the rest gained by thirty exchanges 
or purchases, in which he dealt with nineteen sets of people. Miss Dorothy 
Willis, the editor, reckons that he held 495 acres, of which 250 were in 
demesne ; the other two estates were of similar size. Bray's land, apart 
from demesne, was let at rack-rents, the services, except in the case of 
the smaller tenants, being insignificant or absent. Hence he had to 
employ labourers, for whom, like a modern landlord, he built cottages. 

The common is tending to disappear. As early as 1269 there is a deed 
whereby the commoners convey their rights of pasturage over a portion 
of it to the grandfather of Henry de Bray, and the latter was able to 
buy pieces of ' bruera ', now held in severalty, but doubtless originally 
common land. Another symptom is an agreement of 1309, whereby 
Henry surrenders his right of pasturing bull and boar on the common 
in return for the right of enclosing a small part of common from the 
Purification to St. Peter ad Vincula every year ; in other words, of taking 
a hay crop. He could not have made this bargain had he not had other 
pasture, which can only have been subtracted from the common, on which 
the male animals could accompany his herds. When, as was doubtless 


the case, tlie three chief landowners and also the rector had each his bull 
and boar at large, travellers at Harleston must have had adventures. 
Finally, by a deed which Miss Willis has not quite understood, the com- 
munity in 1294 conveyed an acre, which can only have come from the 
common, to the rector, ' pro cordis campanarum sufficienter inveniendis '. 
This was not ' given by the community to provide funds for bell-ropes '. 
That, like every expense in regard to the church and its furniture outside 
the chancel, was incumbent on the parish, which relieved itself by paying 
the rector to take it upon himself. Unless the bells were numerous and 
hard rung, he made a good bargain. The church was rebuilt during 
Henry de Bray's lifetime, and he has left an account of the business. 
While the lay landowners made handsome special contributions, the 
abbot gave nothing, though he, like all others, would pay in accordance 
with his rated value. Nor did the patron, the prior of Lenton, contribute : 
but in his defence it may be said that he had no interest in the parish 
beyond the advowson, and his house never appropriated the rectory. 
The volume, which is well edited, annotated, and indexed, is full of mani- 
fold interest. E. W. Watson. 

The Collegiate Church of Ottery St. Mary, being the Ordinacio et Statuta 
Ecclesie Sancte Marie de Otery Exon. Diocesis A.D. 1338-9. By 
J. N. Dalton, M.A., F.S.A., Canon of Windsor. (Cambridge : Uni- 
versity Press, 1917.) 

In this sumptuous volume Mr. Dalton gives us in extraordinary ampli- 
tude of detail the history of a collegiate church. The collegiate churches 
of Europe, standing midway between monastic and strictly parochial 
corporations, were very numerous, and, with certain general features in 
common, very diverse in their individual constitution. Westminster 
Abbey was refounded as a collegiate church. St. George's, Windsor, 
has a history of its own. Southwell was collegiate before its refoundation 
as a cathedral, and many ancient collegiate churches exist in England 
which the legislation of the nineteenth century found, or left, more or less 
in a decayed condition in respect of their collegiate character. Examples 
will occur to all. 

Ottery St. Mary enjoyed about two centuries of collegiate life. The 
vicarage of the parish church was suppressed by Bishop Grandison to 
clear the way for his new foundation in 1337. The college, unlike some 
others, was suppressed five years after the last monasteries by Henry VIII 
in 1545, and a new vicarage of the church was erected. The change has 
left its mark on local nomenclature. The vicar of Ottery lives at the 
* Vicars' House ' (plural, not singular), for the building is the old house 
of the vicars, eight of whom stood to the canons of Ottery as the twenty- 
four vicars choral stood to the twenty-four prebendaries of Exeter. The 
links of the present church of Ottery with its collegiate past are accordingly 
confined to the buildings and their names, first of all the beautiful church 
itself, then the different buildings which still survive round about it, the 
manor house on the north, the chanter's house to the north-west, and the 


vicars' house on tlie south. Some other buildings have disappeared 
almost within living memory, and the chanter's house has been practically 
rebuilt by the same architect who less successfully restored the church 
about 1850. The church, and all that existing remains and other evidence 
can tell us of the collegiate buildings, furnish the theme of a great part 
of the present volume. But its nucleus is, as the title indicates, the body 
of statutes reprinted in full from the manuscript at Exeter (Cathedral 
Library, no. 3521) and from the Winchester Cartulary, vol. i, part 2, 
folios 98-114, and in part from the Register of Bishop Grandison. A full 
account of these sources is given by the editor (pp. 1-9). The whole is 
equipped with a most careful and instructive commentary, illustrating 
every point of interest. 

The documents printed comprise the Ordinacio primaria and the 
statutes proper, mutually related somewhat in the fashion of a memoran- 
dum of association and articles of association in a modern public company. 
The Ordinacio lays down the fundamental constitution of the college and 
its personnel, and for this Grandison was careful to obtain papal sanction, 
and in addition the consent of the dean and chapter of Exeter. We have 
it both in the form of its original draft and as finally ratified. The statutes, 
embodying many points laid down in the Ordinacio, are directed to the 
details of the corporate and spiritual life of the foundation, descending 
from the highest solemnities of religious worship to the table manners of 
the schoolboys belonging to the choir. The editor's notes to every important 
point that arises in the text are delightful reading to any one interested 
in the life and work of our spiritual ancestors, and few will read them 
without gratitude for trustworthy information on many points. Mr. 
Dalton has wide and accurate knowledge, and if there are few who could 
have undertaken such a book as that before us there are fewer still who 
could have produced it anything like so well. Any criticism of points of 
detail by the present reviewer would be precarious and tentative as com- 
pared with the editor's calm sureness of touch ; and as far as can be seen, 
on all matters of importance Mr. Dalton is a trustworthy guide. If a 
reviewer must find some hole, however small, to pick, we would suggest 
that the title priest-vicar (e. g. pp. 72, 146, 152) is out of place in a founda- 
tion where there were no lay-vicars. This was the case at Ottery all 
along. At Exeter the title ' priest-vicar ' sprang into being with thei 
introduction of lay-vicars in the reign of Edward VI. This, it may bej 
remarked in passing, affected the constitution of the college of vicars 
choral, founded at Exeter by a charter of Henry V. The lay-vicars art 
for certain purposes members of the college, but for purposes of property 
and corporate action the priest-vicars alone constitute the college of 
vicars choral. At Ottery, however, no such question ever arose, and th( 
vicars choral were vicars simpliciter. 

In general the personnel constituted by Grandison in his ordinance 
and statutes corresponds with the normal type, which had its origin ii 
the rule of Chrodegang at Metz. This rule had been soon extended t< 
non-monastic clergy grouped into chapters, which differed from monasteries' 
n the gradation of offices, and in the right of the members to private 
property. Many such chapters were in the eleventh century brought 


under the Augustinian or Norbertine rule, and became bodies of ' canons 
regular '. But the more independent chapters were able to preserve 
their type. And it should be added that colleges of canons secular fitted 
more completely into the episcopal system of church government than 
did the regulars, who formed local branches of world-wide and privileged 
communities, increasingly exempt from episcopal jurisdiction. 

Turning to the higher personnel of collegiate churches — the original 
head was the archdeacon, but before long his relation to the chapter 
becomes loosened, and we find, in addition to and over the three funda- 
mental dignities (namely the precentor, the chancellor or scholasticus, and 
the treasurer or sacrist), the variously related (and frequently united) 
dignities of dean, arch-priest, and provost. At Ottery, Grandison sub- 
stituted for the last-named dignity that of warden as the head of the 
chapter. Next to him and prior in dignity to the precentor or third canon, 
comes the minister as second canon, the warden being the first. Fourth 
in order the sacrist, corresponding to the treasurer in the cathedral church. 
Of these four senior canons the minister had charge of the parish with 
a priest to assist him. As canon he was exempt from, but as parish priest 
he was subject to, visitation by the archdeacon. It should be added that 
the four offices above named were incompatible with the holding of any 
other benefice with cure of souls. 

Mr. Dalton gives us (p. 87) a very interesting calculation of the 
value of the revenues of the collegiate church compared with that of other 
religious houses in the diocese of Exeter. With the exception of the 
monasteries (in descending order) of Plympton (£912), Tavistock, Buckfast, 
Tor, Launceston, and Ford (£381), and of course with the important excep- 
tion of the cathedral church (£1350), Ottery (£337 95. 5d.) was the best 
endowed religious foundation in the diocese. These figures, of course, 
relate to the value of money at the times in question. Ottery was, in 
fact, very amply endowed by its generous founder, and he hoped that 
further endowments would in course of time flow in. 

It is perhaps natural to find the great bishop preferring to found 
a collegiate church rather than a monastery at this date. But it is still 
more interesting to realize that Bishop Grandison's foundation of Ottery 
on collegiate lines was the work of a bishop who had to carry on a per- 
sistent battle (1328-58) with his cathedral chapter to secure a minimum 
of decency and reverence in the worship of the cathedral church, and of 
conscientious strictness on the part of the dignitaries in the performance 
of their religious and other duties. Evidently the bishop was confident 
in the vitality of collegiate institutions properly organized and supervised. 
The statutes of Ottery have, at any rate, one great advantage over 
those of the cathedral church, in being codified from the outset. The 
statutes of Exeter Cathedral consist of documents executed by the bishop, 
with the assent of the dean and chapter, dealing with whatever matters 
needed statutary regulation from time to time. Accordingly, to ascertain 
the bearing of the statutes on any point (there being no index) it is neces- 
sary to read the statutes through on each occasion, and there is no quite 
complete copy in existence. The most complete, which is in the hands 
of the dean and chapter, owes its preservation to the fact that it was 


bequeathed for that purpose by its owners, two canons of the eighteenth 
century. The bishop's registry also possesses a copy, but lacking some 
of the more recent statutes. A partial attempt at codification was made 
by Bishop Veysey in a statute of King Henry VIII's time ; a more com- 
prehensive draft was prepared in the reign of Elizabeth at the request of 
the dean and chapter for Bishop Woolton, but was not executed by him. 

At Ottery, on the contrary, the statutes were cast in a comprehensive 
mould, and along with the Ordinacio they form a complete guide, each point 
being dealt with under its proper head. The notes to the statutes, furnished 
by the present editor, are beyond all praise for their minute accuracy and 
historical value. Long notes are given on matters of wide interest con- 
nected w4th the life of the church in the fourteenth century ; among 
these we may refer to provisors — a somewhat indefensible, but, as Mr. 
Dalton shows, an occasionally convenient stretch of the papal pre- 
rogative. Grandison himself was ' provided ' to Exeter by John XXII, 
a process which not only saved much trouble, but also provided the see 
with a bishop, who, although a foreigner, proved a most exemplary and 
efficient administrator. Other notes deal with two somewhat difficult 
subjects, namely, the growth of the daily mass as an obligatory part of 
the priest's life, which at the date of these statutes was not yet universal 
but on its way to become so. The other point is the history of private 
or sacramental confession — the rise and final enactment of which as 
a universal Christian duty is traced by Mr. Dalton with fairness and 
accuracy. A word of praise is necessary for the illustrations. Admirably 
chosen and well executed, they may be pronounced worthy of the text, 
which is high praise. One can only hope that the paper on which they 
are printed will last as long as the beautiful paper used for the letterpress. 

Throughout the book we are face to face with the strong personality 
of John Grandison, the greatest of the medieval bishops of Exeter. A 
foreigiier (his family belonged to Grandson in the dominion of Savoy), 
he was yet connected by kinship and affinity with most of the great 
families of England. The connexions, intricate and numerous as they 
are, are worked out for us by Mr. Dalton in all necessary detail, and 
correlated with the rich heraldry of the beautiful old church, heraldry 
thus serving its proper function of a guide to personal identification 
and to genealogical relations in the historic past. On his first arrival at 
Exeter, Grandison lamented that his lot was cast in a country whose ways 
and speech were so strange and uncouth, and begged his papal patron to 
find him other preferment before long. But this mood wore off, and no 
bishop could have identified himself more thoroughly with the see allotted 
to him, nor have impressed his character more deeply on its buildings 
and its life. The cathedral, in its main lines, was planned out before 
he came, but the completion was his work, and at Ottery he set himself 
the aim of reproducing the plan of the cathedral in its broadest features. 

It is impossible to do justice in a short review to the accuracy and 
thoroughness of Mr. Dalton's treatment of the fabric ; he makes clear 
the probable relation of the ground plan to that of the church associated 
with the name of Bishop Bronscombe. This is specially the case with 
the difficult question of the lateral towers. Bronscombe's church had 


two transepts : these transepts Grandison, by an ingenious adaptation, 
worked into the foundation of the two existing towers which are his 
Avork ; so that while at Exeter his predecessors are thought to have cut 
transepts into the Norman towers, at Ottery, on the contrary, Grandison 
moulded towers on the two transepts which he found in being. The 
])resent reviewer had frequent occasion during the last fourteen years 
of visiting the church of Ottery, but very little leisure to yield to the 
keen desire which the building inspired to investigate all its richness 
of historical and archaeological detail. This Mr. Dalton has done, it 
may be said, to perfection. Intricate and fascinating as are the problems 
suggested by almost every detail, Mr. Dalton has brought out their interest 
! o the full, and on most points he convinces us that he has the true key 
to each. 

Ottery is, in essentials, the work of one man and one mind. Whatever 
Grandison may have found on the site, the whole was worked up by him 
lO a harmonious and accurately symmetrical result down to the minutest 
measurements. Apart from the Dorset aisle, which 150 years later enriched 
the design of the church at the cost of its original symmetry, almost 
everything bears the sign manual of the great bishop. Grandison was 
conscious of style, and Ottery is a great experiment in nascent Perpen- 
dicular ; forms are borrowed from the Early Pointed of the previous 
century, but to attentive study they reveal themselves as Grandison's 
own design. It is very interesting to know that Grandison also experi- 
mented in styles in his private chapel at his great manor house at Clyst 
(now known as Bishopscourt, in the parish of Faringdon, Devon, not to 
be confounded with the ancient house of the name, formerly in Ottery 
parish). Here the modern restoration of the chapel and stripping 
of the whitewash has revealed Grandison's three lancets over the altar, 
each flanked with a pair of Purbeck marble shafts painted on the wall, 
carefully copied from the thirteenth-century style. As far as the present 
reviewer knows, we have to go to the vaulting in Milan Cathedral for an 
adequate parallel. It may be permitted to express regret that the glorious 
church of Ottery was restored too soon. No architect of the present day 
would be likely to venture, for example, on the drastic alteration of levels, 
which has arbitrarily altered the exquisite proportions of the choir aisles, 
making them appear unduly narrow and high shouldered. But on the 
whole the church remains a precious relic of a most interesting period of 
medieval architecture, and the Dorset aisle, in spite of what was said above, 
is in itself a noble monument of almost the latest days of spontaneous 
architectural development in this country. 

Mr. Dalton, by his labour of love, has earned the gratitude of all 
who know and love our ancient ecclesiastical heritage. 


Public Works in Medieval Law. Edited by C. T. Flower. Vol. I. (Selden 
Society, Vol. XXXII.) (London : Quaritch, 1915.) 

Mr. Flower's collection is one of indictments for non-maintenance of 
local public works extracted from the Ancient Indictments and the Coram 


Rege Rolls. As he explains (p. xxi), further material of the same kind 
must be forthcoming from the Eyre Rolls of the King's Bench, those of 
the Common Bench, and the records of the Chancery and Exchequer, not 
to mention other series of records ; ' the present book merely taps two 
obvious sources of information.' But this in no way reduces the interest 
and value of the material collected. The indictments printed all come 
from the reigns of Edward III and Richard II. Throughout this period 
they ' become gradually briefer ', and in Richard's reign are ' completely 
stereotyped ' in form. Mr. Flower inclines to the opinions that the marked 
activity in presentment shown from 22 Edward III to the end of the 
reign may be due in part to a ' vague recognition ', after the time of the 
Great Pestilence, that ' stagnant sewers and ditches were bad from a 
sanitary point of view ', and that it is certainly connected with the diffi- 
culties of landowners in providing labour and material for the upkeep 
of waterways, roads, and bridges after the ravages of the plague. The bulk 
of the places referred to are in Middlesex, Surrey, and Essex, Gloucestershire, 
Lincolnshire, and Yorkshire ; a fact which is probably due, as Mr. Flower 
suggests, to the location of the King's Bench at this time — generally at 
Westminster, but also for long periods at Gloucester, Lincoln, and York. 
The situation of the principal waterways and ' fenny grounds ' has also, 
naturally, a good deal to do with the geographical distribution of the 

All discussion of the origin, ' nature, and general form of the various 
processes ' is postponed to the second volume. In connexion with an 
indictment in 1357 of John, son of Roger, and thirty -three other men of 
Belgrave for encroaching on the Fosse Way, which ' per fossata levata 
ac pilos fixos et arbores plantatas necnon purpresturas et alia nocumenta 
quamplurima ita artata est et obstructata ', &c., the editor points out 
that presentments for purpresture in a more rudimentary form are found 
in the very earliest Assize Rolls, and that ' possibly from them ... all 
presentments relating to highways and bridges developed ' (p. 217). In 
an appendix to the introduction he illustrates this point from fines for 
purpresture in the Pipe Rolls, 22 & 23 Hen. II, from the Assize Roll 2, 
3 Hen. Ill, and from other thirteenth-century sources. The appendix 
also contains extracts from a number of chancery inquisitions, mainly of the 
fourteenth centmy, as to the liability to maintain bridges. The references 
in the early documents are brief, whereas some of the fourteenth-century 
indictments printed in the body of the book are extraordinarily detailed 
and interesting. They relate to bridges, causeys (calceta), highways, 
drains, sewers, rivers, watercourses, paths, and one gaol. Mr. Flower 
adopts Fuller's definition of the causey as a ' bridge over dirt ', and sup- 
ports his view from the causey at Marcham in Berkshire, ' defractum et 
concavum et multipliciter ruinosum ', which — according to the evidence 
(p. 16) — was in the charge of certain ' bryggewry glitters ' , John Bochard, 
John Ball, and John Percival. The typical causey is clearly a raised way 
of some kind, as in the case of a bridge and causey at Brant Broughton 
in Lincolnshire (p. 262), of which it is put in evidence that ' pons predictus 
post primam pestilenciam ibidem primo per quendam heremitum factus 
fuit ponendo tabulam ultra quoddam vadum in medio calceti predicti. 


et . . . si calcetum predictum ad plenum foret mundatum et reparatum 
non indigeret aliquem pontem ibidem fieri ', &c. This is one of the live 
touches which are common in these indictments. 

The Great Bridge of Cambridge, which is so fully discussed in the 
Hundred Rolls, is the subject of elaborate indictment and inquiry in 1338 
and subsequent years. It is one of the cases in which scattered lands were 
liable for bridge repair, cases which led to endless litigation. In this 
instance lands in about a score of villages were liable, and ' communitas 
ville Cantabr' tenetur reparare unum caput pontis ', against St. Clement's 
Church. Rochester bridge, whose history has already been written, is 
a somewhat parallel case, the liability resting on eleven townships. It 
occurs among these presentments, as does a bridge near Stroud, for which 
Stonehouse, Bisley, and Minchinhampton w'ere responsible. There are 
many less complex cases of pontage liability, such as that of Feering 
bridge in Essex, for which the abbot of Westminster was responsible, 
because he was lord of the soil on each side. 

An interesting personal record occurs in a presentment at Chigwell, 
Essex, of 1364. From this it appears that Alice de Perers was lady of 
the fee at this time, i. e. as Mr. Flower points out, before her known con- 
nexion with the court of Edward III. This bears out the view put forward 
in the Dictionary of National Biography that she belonged to the Hert- 
fordshire Perers, though said by her enemies to be of low birth. 

Curious questions of fact sometimes arise. In 1378 three broken 
bridges near Gloucester are presented. But in evidence it appeared that 
these three bridges were one bridge. In 1387 Anselm le Gyse, accused 
of blocking the Severn * per quandam seweram ', explained that there 
had always been weirs (gurgites) in the Severn ; that one always left 
an 18-foot gap for the passage of boats ; and that his manor of Elmore 
had always had ' quandam gurgitem qxiam per declaracionem attornati 
domini regis supponitur esse seweram '. Anselm had maintained the 
gap or sewer and went away quit. These Severn cases also yield some 
curious information about fishing ' engines ' (p. 161). There are also 
some very elaborate cases, as might have been expected, in the Lincoln- 
shire marshes. An important series (pp. 215 seqq.) relates to the marsh 
land between Louth and the sea; others to the districts of Alford, 
j Bourn, Spalding, Sleaford, and elsewhere. These Lincolnshire cases 
i occupy nearly 100 out of the 306 pages of the text proper, and are very 
intricate, detailed, and of an importance which is by no means merely 
I local. Such a case as that of Surfleet, Gosberton, and Quadring (all near 
j Spalding) in 1359, villages whose ' fossate maris et marisci . . . sunt nimis 
j debiles et basse ', yet ' ignoratur qui ea debent reparare ', show the need 
I for some central machinery of compulsion such as that subsequently 
] provided by the Commissioners of Sewers appointed by the Chancellor, 
i under the Act of 1427. On this occasion the townships eventually admitted 
j a general liability to mend all these things, ' cum necesse fuerit ', and were 
amerced. J. H. Clapham. 


Notes et Extraits four servir a VHistoire des Croisades au xv^ siecle. Publies 
par N. JORGA, Professeur a I'Universite de Bucarest. 4^i»es^rie (1453- 
76) ; 5enie serie (1476-1500). (Bucarest, 1915.) 

Readers of the Bulletin of the Rumanian Academy know the indefati- 
gable diligence of Professor Jorga, whose publications even alone would 
supply it with ample material. His contributions to it, while chiefly con- 
cerned with his own country (for which reason we welcome them the 
more), have also a wide outlook and ready control of original sources. 
Twelve years ago he published three series of notes and extracts similar 
to those now before us. This material, along with that now published, was 
meant for a history of the Crusades against the Turks in Europe (after 
1453). But Professor Jorga, who has a scheme for a universal medieval 
history on a large scale and has been called to other labours, has not 
realized what he calls ' ce projet de jeunesse '. Some of the material 
so painfully collected he has used, however, in his history of the Ottoman 
empire, published in German at Got ha, 1908-13, and some has appeared 
in the Annates of the Rumanian Academy for 1914. But he thought 
that the rest deserved publication, especially for their account of trade 
in the Levant, and the Rumanian Academy wisely and generously sup- 
plied the funds needed. It is pleasant to see that labour so ungrudgingly 
given should be recognized in such a way. 

The first volume comes down to 1476, just after the capture by the 
Turks of the Genoese colony at Caffa and their conquest of the Black 
Sea littoral, and just before Venice, unable to defend Scodra (Scutari), was 
to give it up and to pay tribute for her commerce. Some of the extracts 
in both volumes, although found in other published works, are added for 
the sake of completeness ; in some cases the editor summarizes the contents 
as is done in the English Calendars of State Papers, in others he quotes 
passages or phrases in full. Special mention may be made of the long 
extracts from two Venetian chronicles, both now at Dresden : the Zena 
Chronicle (see i. 200-14), and another (see ii. 227). Some of the shorter 
pieces are specially interesting and give local colour (e. g. ii. 20-9) ; we 
find Kitzbiihel in Tyrol and other places disturbed at the Turkish advance ; 
information gathered from travellers, refugees, and spies depicts the 
general state of terror ; there is a long and lively letter from Hanns 
Hychsteter, Richter at Villach (ii. 39-42) ; Wenedict Kastner writes to 
Albert of Austria (ii. 45) that a merchant of Brescia passed the night 
with his brother-in-law at Miihlbach and gave secret information ; we 
find the town of Nuremberg announcing (August 1456) to other towns 
and to some princes the victory of Hunyadi at Belgrade ; there is a 
pathetic ' epistola lugubris et lacrimabilis pariter et consolatoria ad 
cunctos fideles de expugnacione et amissione insule Negropontis ' (1496). | 
This ' epistola lugubris, et mesta simul et consolatoria, de infelice ex- * 
pugnacione ac misera irrupcione et invasione insule Euboye dicte Nigro- ' 
pontis, a perfido crucis Cristi hoste, Turchorum impijssimo principe |, 
et tyranno, nuper inflicta ' (to quote its beginning words), is addressed •■ 
(i. 276) in the first place to Cardinal Bessarion, w^hose importance in the i 
West is well exhibited by these extracts. There is also a ' Lamentatio i; 


Nigropontis * (i. 291). There was, indeed, need of all the appeals that 
could be made : there is one to the council of Basel (i. 25, in 1436) by John 
of Ragusa. Some documents are more informative, as an account of 
Constantinople, and one of the Greek church (i. 31) ; also the oration 
delivered before Ladislas of Hungary by the Dominican John bishop of 
Caffa (i. 57), and an account (i. 217) of the Turkish power sent to Pius II 
by Laurus Quirinus (who rightly congratulated the pope on his crusading 
zeal). There are, too, harrowing accounts of the sorrows of the patriarch 
of Antioch, in a letter from himself and in one from a Franciscan, ' Alexander 
Ariosto, commissary to his province ' (ii. 5-10). It was impossible, however, 
to get the princes to agree : Albert of Bavaria grudged help, as he did 
not like interfering in other lands (ii. 15), but he gave way (ii. 33) in face 
of the threat to his duchy, although the plan sketched out for combined 
operations by the Bavarian and Austrian princes and the archbishop of 
Salzburg was not carried out. The diets at Nuremberg in 1466 (i. 251 
and 253), in 1467, and also again at Nuremberg in 1479 (ii. 52), and yet 
another diet in 1481 (ii. 104), did little, although they planned much : 
that of 1479 was too slightly attended to be of any use, and was not 
moved by the sketch of Turkish history provided by the Hungarian 
ambassadors (ii. 54 and 55). 

The interest of the volumes is therefore varied, and they illustrate 
many sides of the later crusading period. They have the advantages of 
giving fresh materials, in spite of the slightness of some of the pieces, and 
the frequent use of summaries in place of the originals. But for the very 
reason that they are the results of Professor Jorga's own collection for 
his own special objects, they are not of continuous interest or utility ; 
they answer, though on a smaller scale, rather more to the notes at the end 
of some of Ranke's works than to anything else. It is therefore a little 
difficult to classify these volumes appearing by themselves. A little more 
description of the sources and more notes (those provided are sufficiently 
useful) would have been welcome, and above all an index would be useful, 
if indeed it is not necessary. Thus, for instance, there are references to 
that popular preacher, the real Peter the Hermit of a later day, John of 
Capistrano (i. 131 and 141) ; it would have been convenient to have such 
references collected. 

The preface gives an interesting account of Professor Jorga's search for 
material ; he has used for the first time the Archivio del Duca di Candia 
at Venice : he has worked in libraries at Genoa, at Venice, elsewhere in 
Italy, at Dresden, Munich, and at Vienna, where, however, for political 
reasons his work has been for some time forbidden. His larger works 
and his many published papers are the complement of the material here 
collected. J. P. WniTNEY. 

English Domestic Relations, 1487-1653. A Study of Matrimony and Family 
Life in Theory and Practice, as revealed by the Literature, Law, and 
History of the Period. By Chilton Latham Powell, Ph.D. (New 
York : Columbia University Press, 1917.) 

Dr. Powell has attempted to deal with a vast subject within a narrow 
compass, and to digest into readable form a mass of details mainly of 


a bibliographical cbaracter. Bibliography is, indeed, the base from which 
he approaches the study of literature, and his account of the family life 
of the period is really a bundle of notes on the list of books he has compiled 
dealing with the subject. This method of treatment reminds one of the 
counsel given to students of literature in a recent American text-book, 
that they should make themselves familiar with the titles of at least some 
of Shakespeare's plays ; but Dr. Powell realizes some of its limitations 
and admits for instance (p. 159) that * we should fall into a similar error 
were we to maintain that the books we have been examining represent the 
true state of man's regard for woman '. The enumeration, and even the 
description, of books dealing with a subject tell us little about the subject 
itself, and bibliography is no more than a somewhat mechanical aid to 
history. It is not even a substitute for reading literature ; and Dr. Powell, 
not being familiar with the poetical works of Thomas Gray, contents 
himself with writing (p. 13) : ' some one has made a remark to the effect 
that Henry first saw the light of the Reformation in the shining eyes of 
Anne Boleyn.' 

The main part of Dr. Powell's book deals, however, with the law of 
marriage, and the principal implication in his thesis is the ' progress ' from 
the chaos of canon law to the simplicity, justice, and humanity of Crom- 
well's Act of 1653 requiring marriage before the magistrate for the purpose 
of recognition by the state, which leads on apparently to the perfection 
of the present system in the United States ; for since the Restoration 
' England has muddled along in her usual way, and even the reforms of 
1857, the first since Cromwell's time, left divorce affairs in a state that can 
hardly be thought satisfactory ' (p. 100). Dr. Powell ignores altogether 
one great branch of his subject, the question of polygamy, the importance 
of which for the period of the Reformation has been well indicated by 
Dr. Powell's colleague Dr. Rockwell, in his work on Die Doppelehe des 
Landgrafen Philipp von Hessen, although it is a question which has pro- 
vided Americans with exceptional opportunities for original investigation. 
He is, however, painfully conscious of superiority, and his book is full of 
claims to originality in the demonstration of truth and of the errors of 
previous writers ; and these claims challenge some investigation. 

Undue stress should not perhaps be laid on slips which may be due to 
careless proof-reading, and we take it that Dr. Powell's latinity is not to 
be judged by such forms as de coniunctio episcopum (p. 21), a mensa et 
iliori (p. 87), and facultas theologicum (p. 214 n.). Nor do we suppose 
that it is more than a misprint which makes Dr. Powell speak of Robert 
Baillie writing ' in 1595 ', that ' this is the constant practise of all in New 
England ' (p. 52), or of England as ' commonwealth ' in 1646 (p. 35). But 
misprints will not account for his references to ' the Thirty-nine Articles of 
1552' (p. 40), to the 'establishment of the court of High Commissions 
[sic] in 1571 ' (p. 30), or his statement that Thomason, who died in 1666, 
secured ' practically all tracts of any importance during this period for 
the museum library ' (p. 59 b). Bias, no doubt, is responsible for the 
remark (p. 32) that popery was ' in the ascendent ' under Laud ; but there 
are implications of considerable ignorance in the statement that Laud 
was supported by all the bishops ' with the exception of a few who had 


become nonconformists ', in the remark that 'Elizabeth refused to legalize 
the marriage of priests ' (p. 120), and in the omission of all reference to 
any but German continental influence on English ideas. More serious is 
Dr. Powell's treatment of evidence. Thus on p. 28 he says *the first years 
of the Keformation in England were picturesquely and aptly described 
by Thomas Fuller ', and the description he quotes is a passage from 
another writer which Fuller only cited to repudiate. Nevertheless, he 
again, on p. 72, quotes a sentence of it with the remark ' as Fuller said '. 

Dr. Powell's qualifications as a censor of others' scholarship may, 
however, be best illustrated by his treatment of the English project for 
the reform of the canon law. It is introduced by a characteristic note 
that ' Milton is mistaken in saying that the committee was appointed by 
Edward VI ' (p. 63). Dr. Powell is confident that it was appointed by 
Henry VIII, who ' died before he could force ' its work, the Reformatio 
Legum Ecclesiasticarum, through Parliament ; the scheme ' was defeated 
under Edward VI ', and * that the bill was defeated by the commons 
without ever reaching the lords is illuminating in showing how little the 
Reformation had as yet actually touched English public opinion ' (p. 64 n.). 
It would be difficult to pack more errors into so small a space. Milton 
was right ; no commission was appointed under Henry VIII, who would 
have been the last person to force such a document as the Reformatio 
1 hrough parliament. The commission was appointed by Edward VI, but 
ts labours were frustrated by the rejection of the bill giving it statutory 
authority. But that bill was not defeated in the commons; it failed to 
get further than a second reading in the lords, and did not reach the com- 
mons at all. Its failure was not due to the weakness of the Reformation, 
but to the strength of its secular aspect, Northumberland and his friends 
objecting to the jurisdiction which the Reformatio left to the clergy. 

Equally misplaced is the assurance with which Mr. Powell sets out to 
correct the dates assigned in Brewer and Gairdner's Letters and Papers 
to various ' books ' on Henry VIII's divorce. He is 'now able to demon- 
strate ' (p. 209) that the earliest of these — two letters from Robert Wake- 
iield and Richard Pace — are misdated 1527 instead of 1529. One of his 
arguments is that Edward Foxe, to whom Pace refers, had ' in 1527 
aever been heard of by the court '. Yet in February 1527-8 Wolsey is 
^ending Foxe on a most important mission with Stephen Gardiner to the 
])apal court, and explaining that as a king's councillor Foxe should take 
i)recedence of Gardiner. ^ Mr. Powell further claims that the letters ' are 
lefinitely settled to have been written' in August 1529, although Pace, one 
"f the writers, was then in disgrace and in custody, and was not released 
until Wolsey's fall. Mr. Powell's confidence on this point is partly due to 
his ignorance of the Spanish Calendar ; and writing of a letter from 
< 'hapuys to Charles V dated 6 February 1530, he says ' the last recorded 
letter from Chapuys to Charles is dated October 25, 1529 ', but there are 
a dozen long and important dispatches from Chapuys to Charles printed 
at length between those two dates in the Spanish Calendar. 

A. F. Pollard. 

^ Letters and Papers, iv. 3925. 


Prereforme et Humanisme a Paris pendant les premieres guerres d'ltalie 
{1494-1517). Par A. Eenaudet. (Bibliotheque de I'lnstitut Francais 
de Florence, Universite de Grenoble. V^ Serie, Tome VI.) (Paris : 
Champion, 1916.) 

The scope of this book is to trace in detail the movements of thought in 
the capital of France on two great questions of the day — the reform of 
the church and the development of university education under the in- 
fluence of the revival of learning. M. Eenaudet fixes his limits with 
precision. He is concerned only with Paris — similar monographs for 
other centres of national life, each grouped round a university and its 
attendant printers, he leaves to other pens — and the years which he 
submits to minute study are less than twenty-five : though, in fact, he 
allows himself an ample introduction, amounting to nearly a third of his 
700 pages, for discussion of the conditions of Paris life and thought 
at the time when he begins — a discussion which necessarily carries 
him back more than a century. His chosen years he subdivides into 
four short periods, and in each traces first the progress of the orthodox 
movement of the ' rigoristes ' for reform from within, as it took shape in 
Paris before passions were stirred throughout Europe by the outbreak of 
Luther, and then the gradual change in university studies which accom- 
panied the introduction of printing. In his web are many interlacing 
strands which he dexterously follows up ; many dominating figures are 
vividly portrayed. Where such wealth of detail is brought together, 
some of the work is necessarily at second hand, but most of it is the fruit 
of his own research. The parliamentary and monastic records in the 
National Archives, the records of the university and its colleges, provide 
him with abundant material ; and page after page shows long series of 
notes derived from these manuscript sources. But his investigations have 
not stopped here. For illustration of the life and ways of French students 
he has laid under contribution the Amorbach correspondence at Basle 
and Beatus Rhenanus' library at Schlettstadt, much of which was collected 
in Paris. 

With his large space, M. Renaudet gives us interesting pictures of such 
men as Oliver Maillard the preacher ; St. Francis of Paola, founder of 
the Minimes, restored to Europe after a visit to Mecca as a Turkish slave ; 
Standonck, the refounder of Montaigu, and his bold candidature for the 
archbishopric of Rheims ; Mombaer (Mauburnus), the reformer of Livry, 
and the men he brought from Windesheim ; Gruy Jouenneaux at Bourges, 
and many others whose names cannot find their way into more summary 
histories. On the side of ' doctrines ' the scene is even fuller, and with this 
section of the work the bibliographers may well be gratified. For years 
they have been elaborating lists of books, carefully classified and dated 
for the different centres of printing, discovering many that were thought 
to be ' lost ', others of which only a few copies are to be found, and at 
length some one has arisen to build with the bricks they have so devotedly 
gathered. M. Renaudet has examined for himself a very large part of 
the output of the Paris presses during these years, and is at his ease in 
describing the publications of the different schools of thought. Faber 


Stapulensis, first as philosopher and then as biblical commentator, is 
given due prominence. Erasmus for these years is as much in Paris 
as anywhere. Fichet and Gaguin, Clicthove and Budaeus, Aegidius of 
Delft, John Major the Scot, the Italian adventurers Andrelinus, Balbus, 
and Aleander, all receive detailed treatment ; and the amount of work 
M. Renaudet has put into his undertaking may be gauged from the use 
he makes not merely of edited correspondence, but of less known collec- 
tions, such as the letters of the Fernands and John Raulin, William de la 
Mare and Charles de Bouelles, which he has had to sift and arrange for 
himself. Incidentally come illuminating glimpses of the changing life of 
the times : as of the young Dominicans asking for more freedom to walk 
outside the town, in the greater security that was coming over the country, 
or of the authorities at the Sorbonne determining in 1480 to add to their 
library a small room to hold printed books. Not long ago the experta 
were as uncertain of the date of the Aristotelian commentator, Thomas 
Bricot, as they are to-day of Marchcsinus', the author of Mammetrectus. 
Some placed him in the thirteenth century, others in the fifteenth. 
M. Renaudet's researches have rescued him from this nebulous existence 
and established him as a Doctor of the Sorbonne, who after a long career 
as a commentator died in Paris 10 April 1516. This is only one example 
of many obscurities on which he sheds ample light. 

In a work on so grand a scale and produced in time of war — M. Renaudet 
is serving on the staff of the French army — some errors are inevitable. 
On p. 121 he accepts the quite baseless date given for Balbus' birth ; on 
p. 136 the meeting of Faber with St. Francis of Paola is placed in an 
obscure village near Alessandria instead of at Bologna ; and there are 
occasional divergences between dates given in the text and in the biblio- 
graphy. This latter is a great feature of the book, filling 29 pages. One 
point in particular deserves the attention of those who work with abbre- 
viated titles : the ingenious system by which each book in the list receives 
a number and then is cited by the name of its author with the number 
attached, e. g. Thuasne 310. The author's name is in most cases sufficient 
guide to the reader to remind him of the work intended, and the number 
is more compact than an abbreviated title, and far less cumbrous than 
the unabbreviated accumulations which sometimes render notes almost 
trackless. P. S. Allen. 

Intolerance in the Reign of Elizabeth, Queen of England, By Arthur Jay 
Klein, Professor of History in Wheaton College, Norton, Massa- 
chusetts. (London : Constable, 1917.) 

The subject of this book is attractive, and opens up prospects of an interest- 
ing study. Elizabeth's declaration that she would make no inquiry into 
people's consciences, but only demand of them an external conformity 
to law, makes a distinct step forward in the development of religious 
toleration ; and it is the religious aspect of the quarrel between tolerant and 
intolerant, rather than some of the other less justifiable sorts of intoler- 
ance — social, artistic, and the like — which is here in question. To have 
this policy of Elizabeth set in its place, and contrasted with other theories, 


past and contemporary and even future, would be a pleasant acquisi- 
tion full of profit. If, further, the policy could be confronted with the 
actual practice, by an inquiry as to how far Elizabeth's dealings with 
recusants, nonconformists, and sectaries coincided with her declara- 
tion of policy, then the result might well promise to be more valuable 
still. But Professor Klein does not justify his title-page in the manner 
described. The question of intolerance determines the form only rather 
than the content of his book. The greater part of it is a general essay, of 
a pleasing and well-informed kind, on the ecclesiastical affairs of Elizabeth's 
time, grouped round five themes, viz. politics and religion, the government 
and the catholics, church and state, anglicanism, and protestant dissent. 
A very brief introduction touches, but does not handle, the root-problem 
of intolerance — what it is, why it is continually changing, and so forth : 
and then the historical survey begins, which ambles along comfortably 
for a couple of hundred pages before reaching the inevitable bibliography. 
Mr. Klein restates the commonplaces of Elizabethan ecclesiastical history, 
instead of taking them for granted and passing on from them to grapple 
with the special topic. 

There were some real possibilities of a toleration of the ' conservatives ' 
in the early stages of the reign. Would the government allow any 
latitude to conservatives who could prove their political loyalty to 
the new civil regime ? Would the Council of Trent or the pope 
stretch a point, and allow, at any rate for the moment, or acquiesce in, 
an attendance pro forma at mattins in the parish churches ? If this 
was tolerated, would the government in return wink at masses said in 
private ; or if it could not tolerate the ' privy mass ', could it allow the 
Latin rite to be used sub rosa, provided that there was ' communion ' ? 
Such hopes existed, but they were dashed to the ground, and an inquiry 
into the reasons for this failure might form a very good first chapter in 
a history of Elizabethan tolerance or intolerance. More would readily 
follow. When the Seminarists and Jesuit missionaries come, what signs 
are there in the dealings with them that Elizabeth's declaration of policy 
is being honestly carried out ? If it is not, why is it not ? The stories of 
Cuthbert Mayne, Campion, and many others raise such questions in an acute 
form. More familiar, perhaps, is the working out of the policy as it con- 
cerned nonconformity. But in this case, as in the other, Mr. Klein does 
not get beyond the usual generalities, or penetrate at all below the surface. 
At a later stage in the reign, separatism comes in for treatment almost i' 
as hard as that meted out to recusancy. The early ideal of tolerance has .• 
largely faded, and penal statutes are passed and strained to the utmost ■ 
limits in order to secure the condemnation of men who, whether recusant ; 
or separatist, are convinced that they are suffering only for conscience' 
sake. What has happened to produce this state of things ? Which have 
the better of the argument, the pamphlets and protests of the victims, or 
the justifications put out by Cecil ? 

Taking the book as it is, apart from what it professes to be, it gives 
a readable, well-informed, and fair-minded outline of some of the problems 
connected with Elizabethan religion. In other points besides the main 
one, there is, however, the same lack of penetration. Some deeper theology 


would have saved the author from a superficial dealing with questions 
concerning formularies of faith. A better insight into the relations of 
church and state would have made more satisfactory the handling of 
several problems that lie on the borderland between the two— the eccle- 
siastical authority of the crown would not have been confused with 
spu-itual authority ; the relation of ecclesiastical law to state law would 
have been less confusedly stated. The bibliography is carefully done, 
and is valuable as giving references to some less well-known American 
work. On the other hand, there are some surprising omissions, e.g. 
Mr. Bayne's Anglo-Roman Relations, 1558-1565, or the excellent work of 
the author's fellow countryman. Dr. R. G. Usher, The Rise and Fall of the 
High Commission. The author does not often criticize the work of others, 
and is not very successful when he attempts the task. For example' 
when he takes Dixon to task (p. 11) for rejecting the legend that the 
pope offered to confirm the English Prayer Book if his own authority was 
acknowledged, he tries to support the legend by a wholly irrelevant papal 
brief. Indeed, no one who had grasped at all the Roman view of the 
Prayer Book, as revealed for example in Mr. Bayne's monograph, could 
ever treat the legend seriously. 

The most attractive feature in Mr. Klein's book is the ' Comparison 
between the first and last apologists of Elizabeth's reign ', pp. 118-24, 
where an interesting contrast is drawn between the views of Jewel and of 
Hooker. But even so the author does not appear to have measured 
Hooker carefully : he does not seem to know Bishop Paget's ' Introduction ', 
nor to share his estimate of the Ecclesiastical Polity as a work of genius 
and permanence. The best result of the book might be that it should 
stimulate some one else, or, better still, the author himself, to see the 
richer possibilities of the subject and to give it a more worthy and full 
treatment. W. H. Frere. 

The Freedom of the Seas or the Right which belongs to the Dutch to take part 
in the East Indian trade, a Dissertation by Hugo Grotius. Translated 
with a revision of the Latin text of 1633 by Ralph Van Deman 
Magoffin, Ph.D. Edited with an introductory note by James 
Brown Scott, Director (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 
Division of International Law). (New York : Oxford University 
Press, American branch, 1916.) 

I This reprint, in an almost sumptuous form, of Grotius's classic Mare 
j Liberum, with an English translation facing it, ought to appeal to a large 
I number of readers and students, though it cannot be regarded, in any 
I way as a definitive edition. ' The Latin Text ', says Professor Magoffin, 
i* IS based upon the Elzevir edition of 1633,i the modifications being only 
, such as to bring the Latin into conformity with the present-day Teubner 
land Oxford texts.' How far such an attempt is desirable may be open 
to debate. But the spelling has certainly not been made to conform in 
J€very case with the results of present-day scholarship, ' intelligerent ', 
|for example, and ' rempublicam' being left unaltered. Again, in ' contra 
I » There are, however, two Elzevir editions bearing this date. 

! 12 


praesidium edicta ', p. 2, 1. 11, the second word, even if its form is due to 
Grotius's deliberate preference, ought, on the editor's principles, to have 
been discarded for * praesidum '.^ Nor is the present issue free from 
errors in cases where the correct reading is given by the 308-page edition, 
at least, of the 1633 Elzevir. On p. 2, 1. 9, there should be a full stop 
after ' occurrent ' ; on p. 18, 1. 18, ' nolent ' should be ' nolint ' ; on 
p. 72, 1. 11, there should be a colon after Icrov and a full stop after cTrtray/xa- 
TO)v, while on p. 73, 1. 10, fikv has dropped out after virlp at the 
beginning of the quotation from Demosthenes ; on p. 74, 1. 10, the full 
stop after 'sententia' has been turned into a comma ; on p. 75, 1. 15, 

* proprius ' has been printed instead of * propius ', and on p. 78, 1. 13, 

* ergo ' instead of ' ego '. But an entirely satisfactory text can only be 
attained by the aid of the editio princeps (1609). A good illustration of 
this may be seen on p. 33, 11. 11 seq., where in the present edition we find 
' Ante aedes igitur meas aut praetorium ut piscari aliquem prohibeant 
usurpatum quidem est, sed nullo iure '. Did Mr. Magoffin, we wonder, 
feel uneasy about ' prohibeant ' ? Had the first edition been consulted, 
it would have shown ' prohibeant' in the text, it is true, but * prohibeam' 
in the table of Errata, a correction ignored by subsequent editions.^ 
Mr. Magoffin recognizes a difficulty on p. 36, 1. 20, where the solution 
is to be found in the first edition. The words are ' quod Iserniam et 
Alvotum non latuit'. Who is Alvotus ? The editor notes that ' Alvotum' 
is probably a misprint, and that Alvarus (Alvarez) is the author intended. 

* Alvotum' is undoubtedly a misprint, which first appeared in the edition 
of 1618, but the name should be Alvarotus (who wrote de Feudis), as may 
be seen in that of 1609. 

Labour has evidently been spent on the translation, so as to present 
Grotius's thoughts in an intelligible form to the English reader. More 
than once perspicuity has been gained by skilfully recasting the Latin 
sentences in a different mould. But in several places the meaning has 
been misunderstood ; in others the English rendering is inadequate. On 
one occasion Grotius's margin supplies references that might have saved 
the translator from error. ' Signa navium', &c., p. 40, 1. 10, is rendered 
by 'pieces of shipwrecks'. 'Signa' here means ' figureheads'.* Among 
minor, or major, errors we have noticed the following. P. 1, 1. 4, ' pesti- 
lens ' is hardly ' detestable ' ; ihid., 1. 13, ' metiendam ' is not ' dispense ' 
but ' measure ' or ' estimate ' ; p. 5, 1. 5, ' demum' after ' ii' is neglected ; 
ihid., 1. 15, ' infensis ' does not mean ' foolish ' ; p. 6, 1. 7, ' icta foedera ' 
=* treaties were made ' (not ' are') ; p. 7, 1. 18, ' apud omnes natam ' is 
not * destined for all ' ; p. 16, 1. 18, ' nullo modo posse ' is incorrectly 
translated ; p. 20, 1. 22, ' scandalizare ' does not mean ' to subdue ' ; 
p. 24, 1. 22, the 'et' before 'alteri' misses recognition; p. 39, 1. 1, 'qui 
alteri incumbant' does not mean 'those who lay burdens on foreigners', 
nor ' dicendi erunt ', 1. 24, ' be justified in saying '. There is a curious 

2 Apuleius, Florida, ii. 17. 16, to which one used to be referred for the gen. plur. 
praesidium, has praesidum in Helm's Teubner text of 1910. 

' Those familiar with Greenhill's edition of the Rcligio Medici will recall the 
curious fate of Sir Thomas Browne's errata. 

* See also Cecil Torr, Ancie7it Ships, p. 113. 


piece of oversight on p. 41, where ' quingenties sestertium' is translated 
' 500,000 sesterces ', and ' millies ', 1,000,000, instead of 50,000,000 and 
100,000,000 sesterces respectively. On p. 52, 1. 18, ' in docendo liber- 
tatem ' is rendered ' the exposition of the principles of liberty ', as though 
' libertatem ' were the object of ' docendo '. On p. 68, 1. 3, * nor am I 
compelled to stop doing what I have never done ' is a somewhat Hibernian 
equivalent for ' nee [cogor] quod non feci omittere'. A little lower down 
on the same page, ' the same Vasquez has also most justly said that not 
even the lapse of infinite time establishes a right which seems to have arisen 
from necessity rather than choice ' (the italics are our own) is a singularly 
perverse translation of ' Idem Vasquius et illud rectissime, ne infinito 
quidem tempore eflici, ut quid necessitate potius quam sponte factum 
videatur '. On p. 69, 11. 10, 11, ' serio Theologorum examine probatam ' 
does not mean ' seriously approved by the swarm of theologians ', but 
* approved by the serious judgement of theologians '. On p. 69, 1. 23, 
' he is preventing some one from getting a profit which another was 
previously enjoying ' is not a proper translation of ' lucro quo adhuc 
alter utebatur eum prohibet ', inasmuch as he misses the point that ' alter ' 
and ' eum ' refer to the same person. On p. 70, 1. 2, * perceperat ' means 
' had enjoyed', not ' had discovered'. At times the translator obscures the 
line of Grotius's argument by introducing words in the English which are 
illogical. For instance, ' and yet' is twice employed, p. 8, 1. 11 and p. 19, 
1. 23, where there is nothing concessive in the thought. Elsewhere, p. 33, 
1. 12, 'adeo quidem ut ' is rendered ' although '. 

What is specially characteristic of Grotius is the learning and ingenuity 
with which he drew parallels and precedents from a wide range of reading. 
For the most part he furnishes his own marginal references. A modern 
editor may reasonably be expected to correct and supplement these, 
when necessary. In the present edition the reader is sometimes left with- 
out assistance, and at times misled. 

P. 9, note 1, ' Diodorus Siculus XI '. The right reference is xii. 39. 4. 
Ihid., note 2, ' Sigonius De regno Italiae '. The passage will be found in 
Book XX, under the year 1270. 

P. 9, 1. 11, ' Et hoc nomine Hercules Orchomeniorum, Graeci sub 

Agamemnone Mysorum Eegi arma intulerunt '. Grotius in a note on this 

refers to Sophocles, Trachiniae, ' but probably from memory ', observes 

the editor, ' for there is no such reference in that play '. The solution of 

this puzzle may be seen if we examine the extract from Apollodorus* 

Bihliotheca, ii. 7. 5-7, prefixed to the play in the Laurentian MS., and 

printed as the hypothesis in the Aldine editio princeps of Sophocles.^ 

There we find, (Ls 8e ck 'Op/xeVtov rJKev, 'A/JLVvrwp avrov 6 ^ao-tXcv? ovk ctao-€ 

jxiO ottXwv TraptevaL, kcoAuo/xcvos 8e TrapeXOetv koI tovtov aTre/cTCtvcj/. Ihe 

confusion between Ormenion and the better known Orchomenos is fairly 

i easy. It occurs in no. 35 of the epitaphs on Homeric heroes in the so-called 

I Aristotelicos Peplos, where Eurypylos is said to lie buried in his native 

I Orchomenos, though in Iliad ii. 734 seqq. we are told that Eurypylos's 

I followers were from Ormenion. 

® See Jebb's ed. of the Trachiniae, where, however, the extract is not given. It 
may be read, amongst others, in R. Y. Tyrrell's edition. 


On p. 12, note 1, Gordianus is conjectured by the editor to be ' pro- 
bably Fabius Claudius Gordianus Fulgentius (468-533), a Benedictine 
monk, one of the Latin Fathers '. If Grotius's reference to Code viii. 
40. 13, had been carefully examined it would have been apparent that the 
Gordian here was no monk but a Roman emperor. On p. 15, note 1, 
the editor remarks that for a certain statement ' Grotius cites Osorius, 
but gives no reference '. If so, why not remedy his omission by giving 
it — De rebus gestis Emmanuelis Regis Lusitaniae, lib. xi, vol. i, col. 1054 
in Osorius's Ofera Omnia, Rome, 1592 ? 

P. 23, 1. 13, ' quod Cicero dixit : " Sunt autem privata nulla natura ".' 
The reference is De officiis, i. 7. 21, which should be given also in note 4 
on page 25, where the reference is incomplete. 

P. 29, 1. 18, * unde apud Athenaeum convivator mare commune esse 
dicit, at pisces capientium fieri '. No reference is given. It comes from 
Book viii. 346 e. But the fish are not said to belong to those who catch 
them but to those who have bought them (twv wi/ryo-a/xeVwv). 

On p. 34, note 2, Johannes Faber the jurist has been confounded 
with his namesake, the bishop of Vienna. 

P. 41, note 1. The full references to Strabo are ii. 118 and xvii. 798. 

P. 49, note 3. Gianfrancesco Balbi is here said to have been a ' juris- 
consult at Muentz-hof '. This last statement seems to be due to a mistake 
in reading Jocher's Gelehrten- Lexicon, or some other work of reference. 
Jocher styles Joh. Franciscus Balbus a 'JCtus und koniglich-frantzosischer 
Advocat im (not in) Miintz-Hofe ' (? Cour des monnaies). 

P. 63, note 8, Grotius, after quoting from Seneca, * quae emeris, vendere ; 
gentium ius est ', adds the marginal reference, 'De hene,ficiis, v. 8'. The 
editor's comment is * Not a quotation, but a summing up of the chapter '. 
But the Latin is a quotation : see De henejiciis, i. 9, 4. 

P. 73, 1. 14, ' quod et Alexander Imperator ita expressit '. The Greek 
quotation here introduced, for which no reference is given, comes from 
Herodian, vi. 3. 4, Alexander being, of course, the Emperor Alexander 
Sever us. 

Without in any way underrating the usefulness of this book or the 
amount of work put into it by Mr. Magoffin, it must be acknowledged 
that, before there is a second edition, translation and notes alike ought 
to be submitted to a searching revision. Edward Bensly. 

British Foreign Policy in Europe to the End of the Nineteenth Century. By 
H. E. Egerton. (London : Macmillan, 1917.) 

This little volume is, to quote the words of its author, a modest attempt 
to answer the practical question, how much of truth there is in the charge 
so often made by German publicists and historians that the past history 
of British foreign policy has been conspicuous for its display of perfidy 
and unscrupulousness. Its object is ' to marshal the evidence by which 
it can be shown that, whilst British statesmen may often have been 
mistaken and wrong-headed, the policy of the country, on the whole, 
has been singularly honest and straightforward '. Its appearance is cer- 
tainly timely ; for the campaign of German calumny against this country, 


directed to the loosening of the bonds between us and our allies, has 
never been conducted with more thoroughness, or with a more cynical 
disregard for truth, than at the present time. And to meet this unscru- 
pulous campaign English apologists have hitherto had no very readily 
accessible armoury of arguments. Our historical literature is rich in 
memoirs of particular statesmen ; various aspects of our foreign policy 
have been adequately dealt with in special treatises ; but certainly * there 
was room for a book which, by dealing with British foreign policy, apart 
from a narrative of events, should endeavour to put forward the views 
of past British statesmen ' in such a way as to bring out clearly the prin- 
ciples by which this policy has been consistently directed. Such a book, 
published at such a time, might easily incur the suspicion of being tendenzios. 
It is greatly to the credit of Professor Egerton that he has avoided this 
vice, characteristic of German historians, and that he has given us, not 
a panegyric of British statesmanship, but a careful historical study in 
which no attempt has been made to disguise the motives, commendable 
or the reverse, by which it has been actuated. 

The charge most generally brought against us is that our foreign 
policy has been inspired by the meanest motives of ' commercial egoism ', 
and that, in this as in previous wars, we deliberately stirred up strife on 
the Continent in order to be able to fish in troubled waters. This absurd 
accusation should, once and for all, be refuted by the evidence collected 
in this single volume. Mr. Egerton makes no claim for any peculiarly 
lofty disinterestedness in the British statesmanship of the past ; he 
maintains, rightly, that the statesman is in the first instance the trustee 
of the interests of his own country ; and, from the point of view of the 
world at large, the foreign policy of England should be judged solely by 
the degree to which, in pursuing her own interests, she has recognized 
that these are in the long run intimately bound up with those of the 
community of nations of which she forms a part. The fact of this recog- 
nition, for nigh on three centuries past, is clearly brought out in Mr. 
Egerton's book. When, during the Luxemburg crisis. Queen Victoria 
spoke of England as ' a Power who, above all others, can have no ambitious 
views of her own, nor any interest but in the preservation of peace ', she 
was but echoing words which had been repeated over and over again by 
British statesmen during the preceding hundred years. The principle of 
preserving the balance of power on the continent, which, from 1688 till 
the second half of the nineteenth century, governed the foreign policy 
of Great Britain, and led us into war with the Powers — Louis XIV, revolu- 
tionary France, Napoleon — who sought to overthrow it, was a principle 
directed solely to the preservation of peace on the basis of a just equili- 
brium. Our interests dictated to us that we should suffer no one Power 
to give the law to the Continent, but in this our interests marched with 
those of every state whose liberties and rights were threatened. There 
was no hypocrisy in the claim that England was the guardian of the free- 
dom of Europe, a claim at one time universally admitted, and by no 
means compromised by the fact that we sought our compensations in 
the world beyond the ocean. If later on, when the principle of the 
balance of power was subordinated to a natural sympathy with national 


aspirations among the continental peoples, the charge of hypocrisy could 
be brought with greater weight, this was because our statesmen ' adopted 
the grand manner, without having behind them grand armies '. Mr. 
Egerton, in words not a whit too bitter, castigates this attitude in the case 
of Lord John Russell's luckless intervention in the affairs of Poland : 

To bluster and then give in ; to excite fervent hopes and then to disappoint 
them ; to threaten and then to bow meekly before a note of warning — such was 
British foreign policy as practised by men whose minds lived in the spacious days of 
British predominance, but whose military estimates were, to a great extent, regulated 
by Mr. Gladstone. 

This attitude was certainly not deliberately hypocritical ; it was due 
rather to a consciousness on the part of British statesmen of their own 
fidelity to the fading conception of international obligation as defined 
in treaties, and to their simple belief in the effectiveness of merely moral 
sanctions. It was due also to their conviction that the interests of Great 
Britain demanded peace above all things. More than twenty years 
after the fiasco of Russell's intervention on behalf of the Poles, Lord 
Salisbury once more defined the aims of British foreign policy as ' a policy 
of peace ' : 

To retain things as they are in Europe and the Mediterranean, that is our policy 
, . . but in order that peace should prevail, there was need of two things : first, that 
each individual nation should be willing to agree to a policy of give and take, and 
secondly, that the Concert of Europa should be a reality. 

As for the reality of the Concert of Europe and the character of Great 
Britain's part in it during the greater part of the nineteenth century, the 
truth cannot be better summed up than in a passage quoted by Mr. 
Egerton from a letter of Lord Malmesbury to Disraeli. ' England ', he 
wrote, ' always acts de bonne foi in these cases, and therefore has the dis- 
advantage of being like a respectable clergyman, co-trustee with five 

In preparing this excellent little work, ]\Ir. Egerton has rightly thought 
it unnecessary to call in aid unpublished material. He has, however, 
made a wise and discriminating use of ' the amount of authority con- 
tained in the printed correspondence and biographies of leading states- 
men and diplomats', and his many references to these make his work, 
apart from its immediate aim, a most useful index and guide to a vast 
mass of published material. But it is to be regretted that the 
frequent long quotations from secondary authorities (e. g. Ranke, pp. 46-7) 
tend to give the book, quite unnecessarily, the appearance of a mere 
compilation, and to diminish in the mind of the ordinary reader the 
weight of the quotations — by far the greater number — from original 
sources. W. Alison Phillips. 

Gli Studi storici in Toscana nel secolo xix. Da Antonio Panella. (Bologna : 
Zanichelli, 1916.) 

This little volume will awaken many pleasant memories for older students 
of Italian history, and will serve as a guide, almost as a bibliography, for 
those of to-day. The author's commission was to chronicle the first half- 


century of the R. Deputazione di Storia Patria (1862-1912), but lie rightly 
felt that the Deputazione was but an offshoot from an old stock which 
sprang from the marvellous nursery-garden of Muratori. Thus the first 
section sketches the excellent work produced in the eighteenth century, 
until Italian history was threatened with extinction by the encyclopaedist 
invasion ; then it notes the conflict between classicism and romanticism, 
between the analytic and synthetic schools, out of which arose a gradual 
revival taking definite shape in the foundation of the Archivio Storico 
Italiano. This journal was the work of the publisher Vieusseux, to whom 
was already due the famous Antologia, under the inspiration of that 
noble and talented patron of all that is good in Italian historiography, 
Gino Capponi. Vieusseux had, indeed, long been influenced by the pro- 
gress of historical study in France and Germany, and by the personal 
friendship of A. von Keumont, to whom Italian history owes much. The 
author pays a just tribute to the group of publishers which led the van 
in the new adventure, to Vieusseux, Molini, Alberi, Le Monnier, Barbera. 
The impetus given by the Archivio, and the facilities offered by these 
patriotic publishers, did much to stimulate the growth of historical study 
not only in Florence but in Pisa, Lucca, and Siena, and to reinvigorate 
the older societies. The work of Muratori was continued, for instance, 
in the Archivio, and in the Bihlioteca Nazionale issued by Le Monnier 
and Barbera, and was encouraged by the establishment of the provisional 
government at Florence after the fall of the grand dukes. 

Vieusseux feared that the Archivio would die with him, for the cost 
was great and there was no individual to take his place. He wished 
therefore the Archivio Centrale di Stato to take it over. The government 
preferred, however, that it should be acquired by a new institution, the 
R. Deputazione Toscano-Umbra (1862). The Deputazione Piemontese had 
existed since 1833, and in 1860 was extended to Lombardy ; it then 
began the Miscellanea di Storia Italica, which was to comprise all Italian 
history. In 1860 also had been founded the Deputazione for the three 
Emilian provinces. The government's new scheme was, in the opinion 
of Vieusseux and the author, a mistake. History in Tuscany, to a greater 
extent than in any other state, had long aimed at being national rather 
than provincial or municipal. Since 1830 this ideal had been before the 
eyes of Vieusseux, Capponi, and their associates. Thus the Archivio had 
from the first a character distinct from that of other Italian periodicals, 
though its aim had not been entirely realized. The new foundation 
thwarted the national activities of the Deputazione Piemontese, and 
emphasized the tendency to particularism. This was further increased 
when later (1890) the Tuscan Deputazione lost the Emilian section, which 
had temporarily been united with it, and then the Umbrian (1894). Never- 
theless it was intended that the Archivio should retain its national character, 
and the Deputazione also undertook the publication of Monumenti Storici, 
arranged on the model of the Monumenta Germaniae. The editor was 
Milanesi, who had done excellent work for the Bihlioteca Nazionale. The 
Monumenti met with diflftculties, and were in time replaced by the well- 
known Documenti di Storia Italiana, a revival of Molini's collection of 
1836, which had been published at the expense of Gino Capponi. The 


author's criticism is that the documents have been somewhat too provincial 
in character, and too desultory in appearance. 

Meanwhile the Archivio, in spite of several changes of form, has main- 
tained its general direction, and widened its area in a truly national 
sense. It has treated largely of public and private law, more slightly of 
economics, church history, art and literature. Palaeography found a 
generous welcome, and this led to the criticism of sources, especially 
the Florentine medieval chronicles, the authenticity of which was being 
attacked by German students. The hottest fight was over the chronicle 
of Dino Compagni, in which Isidoro del Lungo victoriously engaged the 
sceptic SchefEer-Boichorst. We could wish with the author that the 
invaluable bibliographical notes in the Archivio had achieved greater 

The Deputazione has been extraordinarily fortunate in its presidents. 
Gino Capponi, who died in 1876, was succeeded by Marco Tabarrini, and 
he in 1898 by Pasquale Villari, the sole survivor (when Signor Panella 
wrote) of the brilliant group which had gathered round Vieusseux. The 
political unity of Italy was leading to a more general desire for a common 
system in her historiography. On the initiative of the Neapolitan Society 
a series of congresses was started in 1879, and the outcome was in 1883 
the foundation of the Istituto Storico Italiano, which should unite the 
several Deputazioni and Societa. This rendered possible the co-operation 
of national and provincial history for which Villari had long been striving; 
it should be the duty of the provincial societies to illustrate local history 
and prepare the material for the future national history which should be 
the task of the Istituto. So far the chief work of this has been the resump- 
tion of Muratori's work in the series of Fonti per la Storia d' Italia, 

The concluding chapter treats of other Tuscan historical institutions 
closely connected with the Deputazione, the Soprintendenza agli Archivi 
Toscani, with its publication the Giornale Storico, and the Istituto di Studi 
Superiori. The former has proved an admirable school which has trained 
many of the best Italian archivists, Guasti, Milanesi, Bongi, Paoli, and 
Gherardi. Villari's professorship gave life and dignity to the Istituto, 
but the author complains that the Italian youth seldom devotes itself to 
learning for its own sake, and thus the Istituto trained its pupils for 
professional posts rather than for historical study, and such good work 
as it has produced has been the result of individual industry rather 
than of corporate activity. Full credit is given to the admirable societies 
of the secondary Tuscan cities — Pisa, Lucca, Siena, Pistoia, and the 
Val d'Elsa — which naturally are occupied with municipal rather than with 
general Italian history. Among individual writers, Capponi and Villari 
were the pioneers, and find worthy followers in Peruzzi, Salvemini, Rodolico, 
and Tommasini. The more modern French and German representatives, 
Perrens and Davidsohn, receive recognition tempered by criticism. 

Throughout his volume the author laments that in Italy provincial 
and municipal history has ousted national, and that the Italian tempera- 
ment is too individualist, and often too lazy, to work in that perfect 
collaboration which has been the keystone of German success. The 
difficulty is perhaps greater than he would admit. History is after all 


the handmaid of facts. As there has been in the past no national polity, 
diplomacy, naval or military glory, the only common ground could be 
found in the legal, social, and economic spheres. But such study is for 
many minds too abstract and colourless to be attractive, and, after all, 
even in these respects the community between medieval Florence and 
Naples, or between Venice and Piedmont, has been extremely slight. On 
the other hand, the provincial and municipal history has been incomparably 
more vivid in Italy than in any other country ; the individual has counted 
for much more, the incidents have been infinitely more exciting, even the 
political lessons more varied if not more educative. For a foreigner the 
charm of Italian history lies in its picturesque, broken ground, but the 
modern Italian patriot feels that this is not a sound foundation for the 
history of the present and future, which must be national. All the more 
credit to those who are so securely and so skilfully adapting the new 
edifice to its old foundations. During the eighteenth century Italian 
culture was the slave of France, during the nineteenth of Germany. If, 
wrote Tabarrini in 1883, her historians cannot break away from German 
methods, let them at least think and write like Latins. There is now 
little doubt that Italian history fara da se, both in thought and form. 

E. Armstrong. 

U Europe et la Resurrection de la Serbie {1804-34). Par Gregoire Yak- 
CHiTCH. 2^ edition revue. (Paris : Hachette, 1917.) 

The general desire of the public in the allied countries to know more of 
the history of Serbia fully justifies Dr. Yakchitch, a Serbian scholar 
resident in Paris, in issuing a second edition of this valuable diplomatic 
study, originally published ten years ago. Saint-Rene Taillandier in 
France, Ranke in Germany, Kallay in Hungary, and Novakovitch in 
Serbia, have all written valuable works on the ' resurrection of Serbia ' ; 
but the two former wrote with few diplomatic materials, while the two 
latter covered only a portion of the Serbian revolution. Dr. Yakchitch 
bases his narrative almost exclusively on documents, notably the archives 
of the French Foreign Ofiice and of the ' Polish Library ' in Paris, those 
Serbian documents which have survived two destructive fires,^ and the 
' Memoirs ' of the arch-priest Nenadovitch, who was personally acquainted 
with the chiefs of the revolution and one of its actors. The result is 
a first-hand account of what occurred, which, if not so artistic as that 
of Ranke, is more historical, and a worthy addition to the products of 
Serbian scholarship. 

Dr. Yakchitch pays special attention to the play of international 
diplomacy in the Serbian revolution. From the outset two great powers 
were interested in the rising — Russia, to whom the Serbs sent a deputa- 
tion in 1804, and Austria, to whom they appealed in 1806 — while a third 
great power, France, become a Balkan state by the acquisition of 
Dalmatia in 1805, supported Turkey against the Serbs, because they 
were encouraged by Russia. Thus, from the beginning Serbian interests 

^ M. Gavrilovitch, the eminent Serbian historian, informs me that one of the two 
lost barrels of documents, mentioned at p. vi, has, he hears, lately turned up at Agram. 


were made the instruments of neighbouring states, and from the appoint- 
ment of the Greek, Eodofinikin, as Russian resident at Belgrade, began 
that diplomatic game which, as at Athens under 0th o, as at Durazzo 
under Wied, was a cause of demoralization to the countries concerned. 
It was Austria's ' interest ' — to take one example — wrote a diplomatist 
in 1808, ' to trouble this country by intrigues and never allow it to enjoy 
tranquillity and justice '. It is, therefore, a great tribute to the super- 
ficially criticized Balkan states, that, despite the rivalries of the Great 
Powers, they have, after centuries of foreign misrule, made in so short 
a time so much progress. 

Great Britain, who had no official representative in Serbia till 1837, 
appears only once during the Serbian struggle which ended in 1833 with 
the recognition by the sultan of Milosh Obrenovitch as hereditary prince 
of an enlarged Serbia. At the congress of Vienna the arch-priest Nena- 
dovitch obtained an interview with Castlereagh's secretary, who told 
him that it was an awkward question for Great Britain, because she was 
on excellent terms with Turkey. The Serbian delegate replied that that 
was the very reason why the sultan would be more likely to listen to any 
recommendation that came from Great Britain. The British diplomatist 
answered that the Serbian petition was drawn up in German, ' which the 
English do not understand', and advised a Latin translation ! A further 
interview was even shorter : Castlereagh, the British diplomatist said, 
had not had time to read the Serbian petition ; but even if he had read 
it, he would have declined to meddle in such a delicate affair. A century 
later, Castlereagh's successor acted otherwise. 

The respective attitudes of the two rival Serbian chiefs towards Greek 
independence is very striking. Kara George was a Hetairist, and eager 
to head an insurrection to free all the Balkan Christians from the Turks 
— the germ of the Balkan League of 1912 ; Milosh, looking to purely 
local interests, declined to collaborate with the Greek insurgents — the 
type of that policy of ' sacred egoism ' which kept the Balkan states 
divided and kept Turkey in Macedonia. Further examples of foresight 
in Kara George were his congratulation of Napoleon on ' resuscitating 
Illyria, which our brothers inhabit ' (p. 206), at a time when there was 
already a movement among the Hungarian Serbs for a big Serbia, and 
his refusal of the Austrian offer to make him a vassal prince of Serbia 
and Bosnia under Austrian protection (p. 317). 

The venality of the Turkish ministers in their negotiations with Milosh 
is illustrated by some remarkable figures : on one occasion the ministers 
themselves submitted a list of the bribes which they wanted. Unfor- 
tunately, the settlement of 1833, like most diplomatic settlements, was 
incomplete, and contained the germs of further conflicts ; for the quibble, 
by which the Turks were allowed to remain in the town of Belgrade, on 
the plea that it was also a fortress, caused the bombardment of 1862. 

The value of this study is enhanced by the portions of treaties relating 
to Serbia during the period from 1812 to 1833, and by a map showing 
(a) the Pashalik of Belgrade in 1804, (6) Serbia after the settlement of 
1833, (c) Serbia after the treaty of Berlin, and (d) Serbia after the third 
treaty of Bucharest in 1913. William Miller. 


History of the British Army. By the Hon. J. W. Fortescue. Vol. VIII, 
with a supplementary volume of maps. (London : Macmillan, 

This instalment of Mr. Fortescue's History covers the years 1811 and 1812, 
and is concerned almost entirely with events in the Peninsula. With the 
exception of a few pages on the doings of William Bentinck in Sicily, and 
a chapter and a half on the causes and opening events of the American 
war, there is nothing to take us away from Wellington, for the simple 
reason that 1810 had seen our arms victorious over both French and Dutch 
in outlying places, so that there was no need to plan new distant expedi- 
tions. In connexion with the American war we may think that it was a pity 
to print on the top of pp. 310 onwards the date 1812, for the friction caused 
by the Orders in Council between the United States and Great Britain 
is being discussed in the text, and the reader for the moment is confused 
when he reads ' July 2 ', which is July 1807 and not 1812. The straight- 
forward narrative requires no criticism ; it satisfies the keen student, 
yet does not offend the lover of Napier who is also perfectly aware that 
Napier, the pioneer, has his faults. Justice is done to Craufurd, whose 
retreat across the open plain near Fuentes d'Onoro, covered though it 
was by Cotton's horse, was a truly great exploit ; yet his disobedience 
on another occasion is described as putting Wellington in serious danger, 
when ' it occurred to him readily that the commander-in-chief might be 
ill-tempered, never that Robert Craufurd could be in fault '. The issue 
at Albuera is attributed to the faulty French tactics, the divisions being 
crowded straight behind each other on drenched ground, but mainly to 
the ' incomprehensible ' valour of the English (and one Welsh) battalions ; 
this thought leads Mr. Fortescue on to some illuminating remarks on 
regimental pride which works miracles in times of danger ; we had then 
* a congeries of regiments ' rather than an army, but, when theii' commander 
had got them into a tight place, ' this very exaggeration of regimental 
independence ' pulled them through. 

Very temperate and well-weighed are the judgements passed on 
Wellington's advance on Madrid after the battle of Salamanca, and on his 
failure at Burgos. It is suggested that even the moral advantage of the 
possession of the capital was counterbalanced by the direct challenge to 
the French which made them concentrate, regain Madrid, and drive him 
back to the Portuguese frontier ; this was done, it is true, at the expense 
of the complete evacuation of Andalusia, but they were less formidable 
when they were scattered over the whole of Spain. The Burgos catastrophe 
is explained by the staleness of the army after ten months of incessant 
fighting, and in particular by the absence of the third and light- divisions 
who alone * understood how to assault a breach '. The whole story of 
1812 shows the enormous difficulty when an army, whose primary duty 
was to defend Portugal and after that to threaten the French in Spain, 
was pushed on, after its three conspicuous triumphs at Ciudad Rodrigo 
and Badajoz and Salamanca, to hold positions and attempt further suc- 
cesses too far from its base. It would be impossible to praise too warmly 
Mr. Fortescue's handling of these problems. He does not hurl his views at 

126 BE VIEWS OF BOOKS January 

his readers and demand that they should accept them, but argues thought- 
fully even to the point of criticizing Wellington's strategy. After all, it 
was a great year, even if Wellington did at its close fall back as if baffled. 

J. E. Morris. 

Geschichte Europas von 1848 bis 1871. Vol. I. (Geschichte Europas seit 
den Vertrdgen von 1816 his zum Frankfurter Frieden von 1871. Vol. VII ; 
Part III, Vol. I.) Von Alfred Stern. (1916.) 

The appearance of this notice of the last published volume of Professor 
Alfred Stern's standard History of Europe from the Treaties of Vienna has 
been unavoidably postponed ; yet we would fain hope that its successor 
may speedily be in our hands. The steady progress of an historical work 
of this kind, especially one that has grown towards completion on a free 
and neutral soil, is of inestimable value to the students of later develop- 
ments of European political life ; and Professor Stern is to be specially 
congratulated on having been enabled, so far, to impart to his labours 
a unity of treatment which cannot in most instances be said to lag far 
behind the unity of conception belonging to the work as a whole. It 
would not be reasonable to expect all portions of the vast and varied 
ground covered even by the present single volume to be surveyed with 
the same thoroughness of research as those which deal with France, 
Germany, and Italy ; while of Russian affairs we may perhaps look for 
a closer study in the volume which will deal with the Crimean war, 
and which, with the aid of fresh evidence at first hand, will also carry 
the fortunes of the Balkan lands into a more generally interesting stage. 
The grouping of the several parts of his comprehensive subject was not 
the least difficult part of the historian's task ; and he has managed the 
transitions from chapter to chapter with really remarkable skill. He 
relieves a rather perfunctory account of Russo-Turkish complications by 
an animated section on the European emigration of the early fifties, 
beginning with Herzen and ending with Mazzini and the ' European 
Democratic Central Committee ', and passes from the interesting passage 
on the injury done to the eminent Netherlands statesman, Thorbecke, by 
his supposed morigeration to the church of Rome, to a general chapter 
on the triumphs of that church, when on the eve of the suppression of its 
temporal power, to be followed by its advance of unprecedented claims. 
What may be called the main sections of the volume thus fall naturally 
into their places. It begins with a narrative of French affairs from the 
morrow of the February revolution of 1848, to the election of Prince 
Louis Napoleon as president of the republic, and ends with a chapter 
continuing the story to the foundation of the Second Empire. Whither 
the current was tending we perceive from the first — when, during the dis- 
cussions on the constitution of the republic, Tocqueville, as he after- 
wards confessed, was less interested in these than he was in the chances 
of seeing as soon as possible a vigorous chief at its head — to the last, when, 
a few months before the coup d'etat, the same true friend of ordered liberty 
declared that outside the constitution there remained naught but revolu- 
tions or adventures. The party of order (the Whites), of which the 


distilled essence was to be known as the party of the l^lysee, was destined 
to master republicans both Blue and Red, and its policy was to prevail 
as the one thing needful. Thiers, who had thought to use the prince- 
president as a tool, was to be among the victims of the process of his 
seizure of despotic authority ; and, when that process stood to be con- 
firmed by a vote of the people, Montalembert was to be found declaring 
that to vote for Napoleon was to choose between him and the downfall 
of France. Professor Stern's narrative of the denouement itself is clear 
and dispassionate. It owes nothing to Kinglake, who is not even men- 
tioned at the foot of a page ; but it has an impressiveness of its own, 
and, though in general matter of fact and concise, it finds room for such 
personal episodes as the rise of Saint-Arnaud to supreme military re- 
sponsibility. On the other hand, among notable passages in the parlia- 
mentary history of the immediately preceding period, special attention 
is given to that concerning the educational law first proposed in June 
1849, on which de la Gorce has already thrown light, and in which the 
versatile Thiers was found on the same side as the clerical champion, 
Dupanloup. The originator of the bill was Count de Falloux, the chief link 
between the prince-president and the ultramontane party, which through 
him exercised so important an influence upon French policy in the matter 
of the occupation of Rome. 

From France, Professor Stern's narrative at an early stage turns to 
Germany and Austria, in order to tell once more the tale — tedious to 
many, heart-rending to some — of the progress and ultimate overthrow 
of the revolution, from the time when its firstfruits, the Mdrzerrungen- 
schaften of 1848, had been hastily gathered in. He is rightly of opinion 
that the effects upon Europe at large of the February revolution of that 
year went much deeper than those of the July revolution of 1830 ; and 
that in Germany (including Austria) in particular it had in the name 
of constitutional liberty dealt effectual blows to the exclusion of all but 
a privileged class from an active share in the conduct of public affairs, 
and to a disregard of the interests of any class in the community. Not the 
less determined was the reaction of the years which followed upon Olmiitz, 
though it could never reach the ruthlessness of that which had followed 
upon the war of liberation in the days of the Carlsbad decrees, or even 
of that of the period of the Six Articles and the Vienna conference. Metter- 
nich (except as a not wholly platonic adviser) and Frederick William 
* the Just ' were no longer on the scene ; Schwarzenberg's chief interests, 
though it is true that in Austria the revolution had been more incisive 
than in Prussia, were other than internal matters, and him, too, death was 
soon to remove ; while in Prussia, though the efforts of Stieber and 
Hinckeldey reproduced on less dignified lines the denunciatory action of 
Schmalz and his agents, the spirit of the government was not essentially 

In venturing on what may wear the appearance of a paradox, I am not 
thinking of the complex character and often inconsistent action of King 
Frederick William IV, whom it is not surprising to find here judged 
with much severity, as indeed he must be in any concise estimate, but 
of the statesmanship of Manteuffel, who (so to speak) has better reason 


than his sovereign to complain of his censors. The amplitude of the 
documentary evidence concerning Otto von ManteufEel's official career 
should at least make it possible to judge him with fairness, unattractive 
though his personality may seem under certain aspects, especially when 
brought into contrast with the genius of Radowitz. Raised to power 
as the ' elephant-driver ' of Brandenburg, and bound, like him, to have 
nothing in common with the revolution, Manteuffel had thrust upon him 
the task which his chief had been in a sense fortunate to escape by 
death.^ Radowitz had been dismissed ; the mobilization against Austria 
had been nothing more than a ' heroic gesture ' on his part and the king's, 
and when Schwarzenberg granted the interview at Olmiitz, Manteuffel 
went thither to capitulate. Opinions still differ as to whether Prussia, 
isolated as she was, could have been equal to a contest in arms ; Professor 
Stern quotes Moltke and the future Emperor William as having been 
ready for war ; but Bismarck, as well as the actual minister of war, thought 
differently ; and, in any case, as Professor Stern shows, Prussia must 
have definitely thrown in her lot with the forces of democracy, if not of 
revolution, had she resolved to wage war with Austria and to provoke 
the greater power behind her. Such a resolution it was not for Manteuffel 
to form, and he acted patriotically in ' taking ', as he soon afterwards 
phrased it, ' the shame of a compact with Austria upon himself '. What- 
ever, finally, may be thought of his conduct on this occasion, he incon- 
testably showed spirit as well as judgement in the memorial which he 
addressed to the king, when, late in 1855, the latter thought of seizing 
the occasion of the election of a thoroughly docile chamber (the so-called 
* LandratsJcammer ') to revise the constitution in a feudal sense by 
means of letters patent {Freihrief) issued by himself. Manteuffel, while 
warning his sovereign against violating without sufficient reason duties 
to which he had pledged himself by oath, laid his finger upon the real 
sores of the existing system of the government — including the inter- 
ference of the sovereign in details, the bye-government of the Camarilla, 
and the action of the third power, the president of police. ' My belief 
in Prussia ', he concluded, ' is shaken ', and the resignation which he laid 
at the king's feet was by no means intended as a mere form. 

It is with something like a sense of relief that we turn our eyes across 
the Alps from this seemingly hopeless picture, or from the really more 
desperate condition of the Austrian monarchy, after Schwarzenberg's death, 
with a government centralized in accordance with his plans by the inde- 
fatigable labours of Bach, or, again, from the other states of the Germanic 
Confederation, galvanized back into existence, with their Beusts, Dalwigks, 
Borrieses, and the rest. Professor Stern directs attention to the extra- 
ordinary force with which in Italy, where it had been in a measure antici- 
pated by the Sicilian insurrection and by political concessions made by 

^ In some respects even Brandenburg's position had been less difficult than that 
of his predecessor Pf uel — he, too, a man of honour — who, with the Camarilla against 
him, had to mediate between the king and the Prussian National Assembly. On 
this head the present volume contains some interesting information from manuscript 
sources ; see pp. 289 ff. and appendix iii (some sadly characteristic letters of Frederick 
William IV). 


other governments besides King Ferdinand's, the February revolution 
of 1848, affected the political life of the people, and how here the strengthen- 
ing of national feeling irresistibly plunged it into the midst of the struggle 
for independence and unity. And we come to understand, if we did not 
understand before, how in our own and other countries, while the interest 
in the political aspirations of Germany was fitful and incomplete, a 
sympathy not less wide than intense, and shared by many of our best 
and noblest, was from the first and throughout given to the land of 
Gioberti and Cavour, of Manin and Garibaldi. Nothing could be worthier 
of its theme than Professor Stern's narrative of the long and widening, 
and then again contracting but never subsiding, contest, and nothing 
more commendable than his endeavour to do justice to all the forces, 
at times conflicting, at times co-operating — from the unextinguishable 
flame in the soul of Mazzini to the manly tenacity, to which justice has 
perhaps not always been done, of King Victor Emmanuel. The story 
comprises many episodes of hope deferred and of action delayed — ^the 
fears of Charles Albert before the crossing of the Ticino and the manifesto 
of Lodi, and the hesitation of Tuscany (' always the last in the field ', 
according to Ricasoli), made good at Curtatone and Montanara ; and, 
after Custoza, the gradual collapse of Rossi's league-plan even before his 
death and the flight of the alarmed pope ; followed, after Novara, the 
Peace of Milan, and the fall of the Roman republic, by the triumph of 
the reaction from Venice to Naples. But Sardinia — and herein lay her 
real claim to the national inheritance which she was to assume — held 
firmly ' not only to the national tricolore but to the constitution ' threatened 
by the reaction at home, and asserted in season the independence of the 
state as towards the church expressed in the Siccardi laws. Thus, though 
the ministerial programme which was put forward at the end of 1848 
by Gioberti, the philosopher proper of the risorgimento, and which depended 
on the co-operation of the people with the reformed governments, was 
not destined to be carried out as it had shaped itself in his mind, he died,, 
nearly two years later, with the prophecy on his lips (in his last published 
work) of the regeneration of Italy as it actually came to pass, under 
the hegemony of the Sardinian government, and with the downfall of the 
temporal power. No political epic of modern history has evolved itself 
with the intrinsic completeness of the achievement of the long-delayed 
national unity of a free and independent Italy. 

In a perusal of this volume not a few points will present themselves 
to many in a light made clearer by the close research of the writer, and by the 
comparative method followed by him ; but on these we cannot here dwell. 
Of what he says of the progress of British national life in the period under 
treatment we have no reason to complain, though he might perha-ps have 
entered more fully into some of the economic and social questions 
which constitute its main interest. He dwells at comparative length on 
the religious movement of which he regards the unfortunate Ecclesiastical 
Titles Bill as one of the outward signs, and describes the Roman pro- 
paganda as having continued in spite of the agitation provoked by that 
measure, ' every new Cathedral (?) testifying to the attractiveness of the 
Church of Rome '. Very curious is the reference to the progress of the 
same propaganda in the Scandinavian lands, of which one would have 



liked to hear more, and to the papal brief and allocution of March 1853, 
which reorganized the catholic church in the Netherlands and took occasion 
to fulminate against the ' monstrosity and pestilence ' of Jansenism. Of 
British foreign policy in this period we hear little except incidentally, 
though the writer is well posted as to the vicissitudes of the Palmerston 
legime at the Foreign Office, and, it may be noted, throws doubt upon 
the story of Palmerston's reasons for giving way to Russia in the matter 
of the London Protocol of 1852. And we are glad that he has a few 
sentences to spare for Cobden's agitation, fruitless though it seemed, 
begun in 1848 for disarmaments, and, more especially, for treaties 
establishing the principle of international arbitration — a principle as to 
which parliament and the constituencies required a longer education than 
they did as to the extension of parliamentary reform. In general. Professor 
Stern's trained accuracy renders him a safe guide in the topics which he 
touches,^ but, in speaking of great national leaders or causes, he speaks 
with fit breadth of phrase as well as candour of judgement, and is borne 
along the mighty course of the eventful quinquennium which is the subject 
of his record by an unfailing sympathy with freedom and progress. 

A. W. Ward 

The Early Diplomatic Relations between the United States and Japan, 
1853-65. By Payson Jackson Treat, Ph.D. (Baltimore : The 
Johns Hopkins Press, 1917.) 

This is a carefully framed narrative of American relations with Japan 
during the period covered by the title, based mainly upon official reports 
and other printed sources of information, the only new material being 
furnished by the manuscript collection of the late Robert H. Pruyn, 
United States minister in Japan from April 1862 to May 1865. It naturally 
gives the history of events from the American point of view, and justly 
dwells upon the eminently conciliatory and reasonable attitude of Townsend 
Harris, the first United States minister at Yedo. To an English reader it 
might appear that Sir Rutherford Alcock is treated with less than justice. 
He was undoubtedly a diplomatist of great courage and insight, as was 
proved by his consular career in China, and may be judged from the 
dispatches he wrote from Peking, whither he was transferred in April 
1865, after the successful vindication of his policy in Japan by the course 
of events. It is true that his dispatches were often extremely long and 
verbose, but it was the fashion of those days. Only in more recent days, 
since the portentous increase in the amount of correspondence daily 
received at the Foreign Office, has it been found necessary to inculcate 
upon the diplomatic service abroad a greater economy of time and space 
in relating facts and offering opinions. The universal use of the telegraph 
for reporting matters of importance or dispatching instructions from home 
has undoubtedly influenced the style of dispatch-writing, and curtailed 
the amount. 

The author quotes Mr. Griffis to the effect that Harris was * brought 
up " to tell the truth, fear God and hate the British ", and all these things 

1 We may pardon him such petty slips of titulature as * Lord Temple ', * Hem-y 
Grey', and ' Sir Stansfeld'. 



he did all his life '. This last trait may explain how it was that his inter- 
course with his British colleague was never cordial, but it did not justify 
him, when negotiating his commercial treaty in 1856, in trying to persuade 
the Japanese ministers that ' England would desire to seize Saghalien, 
Yezo, and Hakodate ', in order to defend herself against Russia, or in saying 
to them that ' England, dissatisfied with Admiral Stirling's treaty [with 
Japan], was ready to make war ', or in suggesting that ' Siam had protected 
herself from England by making treaties with America and France '. 

Dr. Treat tells us (p. 124) that 'it was not until 1863 that Pruyn was 
able to point out the absolute necessity of securing the Mikado's approval 
of the treaties, which indicates how far at sea the representatives were 
in the intervening years ' [since 1859]. This necessity had been for at 
least a year the common topic of conversation among foreigners resident 
at the ports. Early in 1862 An Open Letter was published at Yokohama 
showing that the Mikado had not yet given his consent to the treaties 
made with the foreign Powers, and that foreigners must either leave the 
country, or must obtain from 'the only Ruler who is supreme in it' 'the 
full ratification of the rights and privileges they came there to enjoy '. 
Harris had believed (p. 200) that the treaties had been ratified by the 
Mikado, except so far as they related to Osaka, and he so informed his 
successor. Alcock, on the other hand, had been impressed with the lack 
of validity while travelling overland from Osaka to Yedo in June 1861. 
Colonel Neale and Mr. Winchester, successively in charge of the legation 
during Alcock's absence on leave in Europe, both reported to the home 
government that the Mikado's ratification was indispensable. It was not, 
however, until after the successful naval expeditions against Satsuma 
and Choshiu in 1863 and 1864, which convinced those two clans that it 
was more prudent to be friends with foreign Powers than to oppose them, 
and amicable relations developed between the leading men among the 
samurai and members of the foreign legations, that the idea became a part 
of practical politics. When Sir Harry Parkes arrived in Japan as minister 
I he speedily began to act accordingly, and induced his colleagues of France, 
Holland, and the United States to join him in visiting the Tycoon's 
I ministers at Osaka, and the result was that on this occasion the Mikado's 
j ratification was obtained. 

I On p. 324 is quoted an interesting example of the way in which dis- 
I patches are sometimes edited for blue-books. Earl Russell in addressing 
I Alcock, July 26, 1864, had written : ' There is another course of policy 
I which appears preferable, either to precipitating hostilities, or to the 
i abandonment of the rights we have acquired by our Treaties. This course 
I of policy appears in conformity with the views so moderately and carefully 
{expressed by the minister of the United States.' When this dispatch was 
Ipublished the second of these sentences was omitted. What was the 
^reason for the excision is not easy to conjecture. Alcock gave to Pruyn 
a copy of the dispatch as he received it, which was printed in the American 
Diplomatic Correspondence for that year. 

Although relating to a period somewhat later than that dealt with in 
bhe volume under review, I may perhaps be excused for placing on record 
Im incident that has not yet been related in print. In the spring of 1866, 
peing then interpreter to the British consulate at Yokohama, I wrote 


132 BE VIEWS OF BOOKS January 

for a local newspaper three articles discussing the treaties with the Tycoon, 
and after pointing out their inadequacy, proceeded to advocate the con- 
clusion of a new treaty with the Mikado and the confederated daimios, 
of whom it then appeared probable that the future government of Japan 
would consist. My private teacher, a samurai of the Awa clan, translated 
these articles into Japanese for the information of his prince. They 
found their way into circulation, and in the summer of 1867, when the 
late Lord Kedesdale and I were travelling together across Japan, we 
found the Kaga clansmen in possession of copies printed with movable 
wooden type, as was the usual practice at that time in the case of sur- 
reptitiously published books, under a Japanese title meaning ' The policy 
of England '. I am vain enough to fancy that this pamphlet contributed 
not only to the dislike of the Tokugawa officials for the British legation, 
but also to the friendly feelings entertained towards us by the majority 
of the clans, and enabled us to acquire an influential position. 

There are a few slips to be noticed : On p. 91, * Ship's articles ', which 
properly means the roll containing the names of the crew, is enumerated 
among goods on which the import duty was fixed at 5 per cent, in Harris's 
treaty tariff of 1858. What is intended by this term, however, is 'All 
articles used for the purpose of building, rigging, repairing, or fitting out 
of ships '. On p. 84, the titles Shinano no kami and Higo no kami, which 
no more indicate territorial jurisdiction than modern English, Scotch, 
and Irish titles of nobility, are rendered ' Lord of Shinano ' and ' Lord 
of Higo ' ; the former is repeated at p. 96. A similar mistake was com- 
mitted by the historian of Admiral Perry's visits to Japan in 1853 and 
1854, when he concluded by a show of forceful firmness the treaty which 
first brought that country in modern times into close relations with 
Occidental Powers, and gave an impulse to the patriotic movement that 
has achieved the present lofty position of Japan among the nations, and 
led to her political and military pre-eminence in the Far East. 

An excellent and full bibliography has been appended, and an exhaustive 
index, for which Dr. Treat deserves the ample gratitude of students. 

Ernest Satow.— 

Archaeologia Aeliana. Published by the Society of Antiquaries of New- 
castle-upon-Tyne and edited by R. Blair. Third Series, Vol. XIV. 
(Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1917.) 

This year Corstopitum has disappeared completely from the Archaeo- 
logia Aeliana ; that is a great loss, but there are certain compensations. 
Room has been left in this volume not only for the most important 
chapter of the serial (Dr. Greenwell's 'Catalogue of Durham Seals') which 
has yet appeared, and for elaborate notes on the Butchers' Company of 
Newcastle, with a 63-page list of the freemen's sons and apprentices, 
but also for an unusual quantity of deeds printed in extenso (not all, it 
must be confessed, of great interest), and some miscellaneous matter of 
high value. Perhaps the most attractive of the short articles is Dr. 
Gee's paper on ' A Durham and Newcastle Plot in 1663 ' (no. vi), a 
really dangerous conspiracy which was nipped in the bud so successfully 
that, though its occurrence may have been the chief cause of the Con- 


venticle Act, it is barely noticed by historians, while all the actors in it 
are ignored in the Dictionary of National Biography. Then there are ade- 
quate biographical accounts of two northern antiquaries, John Brand the 
historian of Newcastle (1774-1806), with pedigrees of Brand and Wheatley 
(no. iii), and W. W. Tomkinson (1858-1916), the author of the most 
recent guide to the city and county, with bibliography (no. v). Nos. vii 
and viii also deal with family history ; in the former Mr. W. Brown traces 
the devolution of the manor of St. Helen's, Auckland, through Conyers, 
Colville, Wandsford, Mauleverer, and Fulthorpe ; in the latter. Dr. 
Dendy works out the Heton-Denton-Fenwick lines of Lowick, Ingram, 
Fenwick, and Cardew. Illustrative documents are appended to both 
papers. No. ix consists mainly of the foundation charters of the Maison 
Dieu, otherwise St. Katherine's Hospital of the Sandhill, and the chantry 
in All Saints Church, Newcastle, founded by Eoger Thornton, who became 
a legendary hero, and afterwards under the patronage of the Lumleys. 
The interest is purely local ; but some readers may be reminded of the 
fine Thornton brass preserved in All Saints, and would have been glad 
to see it figured here. The same author, Mr. J. C. Hodgson, describes 
clearly in no. iv a prehistoric barrow near South Charlton, Northumber- 
land ; and the other short paper (no. ii) is an adequate summary by 
Dr. Hepple of the main points which can be ascertained about early 
libraries and scriptoria in the north, the home of the Lindisfarne Gospels 
and the Codex Amiatinus. 

Last and best comes the catalogue of the episcopal seals appended 

to Durham charters, with no less than twelve well-filled plates of really 

beautiful photographs : a few more occur in the text. Probably no 

line of bishops can show a finer series than that of the Palatinate, and 

here we have it set out, with many other fine examples at the cost of 

Dr. Gee, Mr. W. S. Corder, and other subscribers, by Mr. C. H. Hunter- 

Blair, who has also collated and annotated Dr. Greenwell's manuscript. 

The value of this instalment will be seen at once when we say that it 

includes every bishop of Durham from William of St. Calais to 

Tunstall ; the descriptions and notes form by themselves a history of 

all classes of episcopal seals, tracing the development of such features 

as the lettering, the vestments, the hagiology, the private arms, and the 

architectural decorations. Some of these seals are fairly familiar, such 

as the superb design engraved for Richard de Bury (with which compare 

those of Archbishops Thoresby and Neville) ; but it is unlikely that anything 

so complete and exact as this illustrated catalogue has yet been published. 

1 The most valuable specimens from various other sees are also reproduced, 

j but only York figures largely on the plates, though every seal is described 

j with the same minuteness. The reproductions are made more valuable by 

i being nearly always the exact size of the originals ; and in this volume 

; the instalment is complete in itself, and there is complete correspondence 

between the plates and the text. In fact the treatment is in every way 

worthy of the subject. Truly, ' amidst the tumult of conflicting nations 

. . . antiquarian pursuits shed tranquillizing influences upon the mind ', 

i not only by the presentation of objects of beauty and facts of curious 

j interest, but by the methodical and intelligent study which is essential 

! for dealing with them to advantage. H. E. D. Blakiston. 


The Records of the Western Marches. Published under the auspices of the 
Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History and Antiquarian Society. 
Volume I. An Introduction to the History of Dumfries. By Robert 
Edgar. Edited with an introduction by R. C. Reid. (Dumfries : 
Maxwell, 1915.) 

Robert Edgar, son of a Dumfries burgess, was born in 1669. He became 
a writer, and in 1701 was appointed clerk to the incorporated trades of 
Dumfries, a position which he held until 1746. Immediately after his 
resignation he seems to have begun his history, in which he intended to 
give an account of the rise of the corporations of the crafts of Dumfries. 
But -linfortunately he only accomplished the first part of his design, 
a history of the burgh itself. This is of great value, in spite of Edgar's 
confused style, largely because of the light it throws upon the history of 
the internal administration of Scottish burghs, for which, as a rule, it is 
difficult to get any material except from official documents. His editor 
considers Edgar's account biased in its treatment of the conduct both 
of the magistrates and of the town clerks, but whether he is fair to indi- 
viduals or not, his book is certainly an interesting indictment of the 
system of municipal government in Scotland, and illustrates the evils 
whichwere attacked by the burgh reformers of the later eighteenth century. 
Of extant charters granted to Dumfries, the earliest is that of 1395, 
in which Robert III granted the burgh in feu farm to the provost, baillies, 
and community, but the burgh no doubt ranked as a royal burgh at an 
earlier date. There is little information about its constitution in the 
middle ages, but Edgar refers to the influence of the earl of Nithsdale 
on the council, which enabled him to get possession of the land and build- 
ings of the Franciscan convent about 1540, and to the quarrel between 
crafts and merchants in the sixteenth century. In 1623 a decreit 
arbitral was obtained to settle this dispute, fixing the representation of 
the merchants on the council at double that of the crafts. As usual, the 
magistrates and council elected their successors, and Edgar gives the 
names of the families — Cunninghams, Corsans, Irvings, McBriars, and 
others — ^in whose hands he declares that the magistracy was kept. The 
town clerkship, a lucrative office, was also in the hands of a faction. The 
loss of part of the common pasturage of the burgh and the alienation of 
some of the town property and revenue, of which Edgar gives details, 
were no doubt partly results of the monopoly of the administration by 
certain cliques. He also gives an account of the manipulation of the 
magistracy by James VII. The value of the history is much increased 
by Mr. Reid's very full and careful notes and genealogical tables and 
also by the appendices, containing a large collection of writs and charters 
relating to Dumfries, some common good accounts, and the custom books 
for 1578 and 1580, and also a pamphlet written in 1704 about an election 
to the town clerkship. All those interested in the history of the burgh 
and of families connected with it and with the county will find the notes 
and pedigree charts most valuable, and also the explanations of Edgar's 
description of the aspect of the town in the eighteenth century. Altogether, 
the volume is a very useful contribution both to local history and to 
Scottish municipal history. Theodora Keith. 

1918 135 

Short Notices 

In recent years French scholars have given considerable attention to 
the history of Norman monasteries, in the form either of comprehensive 
monographs, like M. Sauvage's excellent volume on Troarn, or of studies 
of monastic charters, such as M. Ferdinand Lot's searching examination 
of the early documents of Saint-Wandrille. M. J. J. Vernier's Charles 
de VAbhaye de Jumieges (v. 825 a 1204) conservees aux Archives de la Seine- 
Inferieure (two volumes, Societe de I'Histoire de Normandie, Rouen, 
1916) is a more modest undertaking in the same field. The docu- 
ments are published, to the number of 247, from the best available texts, 
but without any critical discussion, and with no attempt to utilize them 
for illustrating the history of the abbey or of the period. The editor, who 
has been for some years in charge of the departmental archives at Rouen, 
has been compelled by circumstances to limit himself to the documents 
there preserved, so that he omits some material accessible elsewhere, 
such as the curious notice respecting certain of the Conqueror's chaplains 
published by Stapleton.^ Fortunately the archives of Jumieges were 
transported to Rouen with little loss at the time of the Revolution, and 
the fonds still contains nine cartularies and a large body of originals. Of 
the earlier documents, the greater number were already in print ; but the 
most comprehensive of these, the general confirmation of Duke Richard II, 
is published in full for the first time by M. Vernier (no. 12), who does not, 
however, discuss the puzzling question of its date and that of the related 
charters for Bernai and Fecamp. A charter of the next reign (no. 13) 
applies to Robert the Magnificent the phrase, perversorum consiliis illectus, 
which appears as the stock characterization in William of Jumieges and 
writers from Saint- Wandrille.^ Other new documents are the long series 
of donations by the Conqueror and his followers (no. 32) and two originals 
of Robert Curthose (nos. 37, 38), with one of which has been preserved 
a separate bit of parchment certifying seisin ' per hoc lignum '. No. 49 
(no. 156 of Mr. Round's Calendar), a charter of Henry I issued at Caen 
which the editor dates 1100-10, can be dated 1107-9, probably even 
1108-9, because of the mention of Ranulf as chancellor and of Archbishop 
William, who died soon after Henry's return to England in 1109. The 
editor has not noticed that no. 61, interesting for the ducal cwm,^ and 
no. 115, recording a session of an assize under Henry II,* have been pre- 
viously printed. As is usual in French publications of this sort, the 
identification of place-names receives special attention, and there is an 
elaborate index. C. H. H. 

* Archaeologia, xxvii. 26. * AnU, xxxi. 259. 

^ Cf. anle, xxiv. 212 ; Valin, Le Due de Normandie, p. 260. * Valin, p. 271. 

136 SHORT NOTICES January 

Signer Giuseppe La Mantia, who has written on the medieval institu- 
tions of Palermo, gives in Messina e le sue Prerogative (extracted from 
the Archivio Storico Siciliano, N.S., Anno xli, 1916) a useful account of 
the royal privileges obtained by the rival city. He makes it evident 
how dynastic wars were utilized by the trading town to extract desirable 
concessions. Emperor Henry VI, for instance, granted to the Messinese 
exemption from tax on their merchandise, perhaps renewing a cancelled 
charter of Koger II ; and the Aragonese Frederick II in a charter of 1296, 
published here for the first time, established a general fair for which all 
custom dues were suspended. It may have been an attempt to bolster 
up the decaying commerce of Sicily, as well as a favour to the Messinese. 

C. W. P. 0. 

Professor Tout has published a capital lecture on Mediaeval Town- 
Planning (Manchester : University Press, 1917), in which he compares 
the methods adopted in settling a new country and in attracting popula- 
tion. He takes as his particular examples the towns planted by the 
Teutonic knights in Prussia and Poland and the bastides or barrier fortresses, 
sometimes adjacent to old towns, which were established in south-western 
France in the thirteenth century. On the latter Mr. Tout writes with 
special knowledge. He points out the similarity of design which pre- 
vailed in these settlements, and supplies striking illustrations of it by 
means of a number of plans taken from books printed before modern 
changes came in. In England, Wales, and Ireland we may suspect that 
something like it was arranged in the plantations regulated by the ' law 
of Breteuil '. The city of Salisbury is a remarkable instance of a town 
which owed its origin to a single founder in 1220 ; but Bishop Richard 
le Poer's aim of preserving an ample area of open land behind the rows of 
houses in the streets has been defeated by the growth of the population. 
Edward I was active in establishing new towns, above all in Wales ; 
but * Kingstown on the Hull ' and ' New ' Winchelsea furnish more 
developed specimens, which Mr. Tout has worked out in detail. The 
lecture from end to end is full of interest. J. 

Dr. Theodore Calvin Pease's prize essay on The Leveller Movement, a 
Study in the History and Political Theory of the English Great Civil War 
(Washington : American Historical Association ; London : Milford, 1916), 
is a very good piece of work, learned, accurate, and independent 
in its judgements. The author has thoroughly searched the pamphlet 
literature of the period 1640-60, and selects his illustrations extremely 
well. Like other writers on the movement, he makes Lilburne its 
central figure, though somewhat apologetically. Lilburne's importance 
and activity as a champion of the principles of the movement justify 
this. At the same time there is an interesting section on Walywyn, 
whose influence Dr. Pease rates much higher than previous writers have 
done, while candidly confessing that it is difficult to determine its extent 
or prove its reality (p. 242). Dr. Pease also brings out the significance 
of Henry Parker's pamphlets, but hardly appreciates the importance of 
the writings of Prynne and Selden. He omits to deal with the ' digger 


movement ', on the ground that it has been fully treated by Mr. L. H. 
Berens (p. 372), and does not explain adequately the attempt to find 
an historical basis for democracy and agrarian reform described at the 
time as ' Anti-Normanism '. These limitations do not diminish the value 
of what the book does give us, and it will be found useful by all historians 
of the Civil War. In a note on p. 324 the author discusses the authenticity 
of a pamphlet entitled * A Discourse between Lieutenant-Colonel John 
Lilburne and Mr. Hugh Peter', and disagrees with Dr. Gardiner, who termed 
it a fabrication. We think that it is a report of an actual conversation, 
but, on the other hand, Lilburne's detailed accounts of what he and his 
interlocutors said cannot be implicitly trusted, either in this case or in 
others. C. H. F. 

Arlington's life needed writing, and Miss Violet Barbour has done it 
very well (Henry Bennet, Earl of Arlington ; Washington : American 
Historical Association ; London : Milford, 1914). The book shows wide 
and accurate researches : much unpublished material both at the Record 
Office and at Paris has been consulted. While Arlington's character 
is adequately drawn, great attention is devoted to the part he played in 
the domestic politics of the time : his struggle against the predominant 
influence of Clarendon is traced in detail, but the account of the intrigues 
of the four years which followed Clarendon's fall is of greater interest, 
and throws new light on a rather obscure part of the reign of Charles II. 
However, as a contribution to the history of English foreign policy, this 
biography possesses still greater value. It was in that sphere that Arling- 
ton's influence was greatest, and his knowledge of French and Spanish 
made him an indispensable instrument for Charles II. The limits of his 
influence are difficult to define ; he had no hesitation in carrying out at 
the king's command schemes with which he was in little sympathy, but 
at the same time he influenced the king's decisions more than most of his 
ministers. Colbert de Croissy's conflicting opinions about Arlington's 
aims agree in saying that he possessed the complete confidence of his 
master (pp. 144, 191). Arlington endeavoured to conceal rather than 
display his power. ' My lord Arlington labours with all art imaginable 
not to be thought Premier Ministre,' wrote Lord Conway in 1668 (p. 142). 
Owing to these causes it has been rather difficult for historians rightly 
to estimate Arlington's real importance, and here the investigations of 
Miss Barbour will be of permanent service. Unluckily, the European 
history of the time is not sufficiently familiar to her ; more than once 
her comments or explanations seem to show a failure to understand the 
full significance or the relative importance of the facts she mentions. In 
spite of this drawback, the life is a good piece of work, and well deserved 
the prize which the American Historical Association awarded to it. 

C. H. F. 

Professor C. E. Chapman's Founding of Spanish California, 1687-1783 
(New York : Macmillan, 1916), is one of the best books yet published on 
this subject, showing much research and considerable breadth of view. 
It is marred by the author's inability to omit what was unessential. 

138 SHORT NOTICES January 

A full precis is given of each document, even when these run to twenty- 
seven paragraphs (pp. 383-5). As a result the author is unable to weave 
his material into a straightforward story. For instance, any fact relating 
to the second Anza expedition which is ' not discussed by Anza in his 
letters ' (p. 351) is haled in afterwards out of its chronological sequence, 
but for what reason the author alone knows. The volume soon becomes 
an analysis of the correspondence of Antonio Bucarely, viceroy of New 
Spain from 1771 to 1779. As such it may be useful, but is not very readable. 
Facts which recur in divers documents are repeated in the text in each 
analysis (see pp. 175 and 246, 229-30, and 251, 287, and 291). Such 
repetitions should certainly have been avoided. The author also takes 
far too much for granted on the part of his reader. For instance, the 
map on p. 434 is quite insufficient, and a large modern map should have 
been given. The bibliographical notes are excellent, and add greatly to 
the usefulness of the book. Why no mention is made of James Burney's 
Chronological History of the Discoveries in the Pacific Ocean, 5 vols., 1803-17, 
is not clear ; and the European reader would have preferred references 
to the press-marks in the Archivo de Indias rather than to Mr. Chapman's 
Catalogue, although a key list has been added on pp. 447-53. There is 
a useful index. H. P. B 

Bolingbroke's Letters on the Spirit of Patriotism and on the Idea q 
a Patriot King have been reissued in a very prettily printed edition at 
the Clarendon Press (1917). The author's name does not appear on the 
title-page, and that of Mr. Walter Sichel is misspelt on p. iv. Mr. A. 
Hassall has prefixed a slight introduction, which perhaps was not required. 


Professor Edward Channing, having dealt with the colonial period of 
American history and the difficult years which followed the triumph of 
independence, proceeds in the fourth volume of his History of the United 
States (New York : Macmillan, 1917) to describe the progress of consolida- 
tion. For the greater portion of the period in question, Mr. Channing is 
under the disadvantage of following in the footsteps of historians such 
as Henry Adams and Admiral Mahan. The volume, however, has special 
qualities which well justify its appearance. Throughout it is characterized 
by a quick grasp of the essential in weighing evidence, by obvious impar- 
tiality, and by a happy gift of portraiture. John Quincy Adams ' had 
all the qualities of the Adamses and all the defects of those qualities '. 
' Probably no man in our political annals achieved conspicuous political 
success so early in life ' as Henry Clay, ' or failed so utterly to win the 
largest measure of fame.' The importance of the Louisiana Purchase, 
not only in adding to the material extent and resources of the United 
States, but also in strengthening ' national ' ideals, and in affecting the 
course of future foreign policy, is clearly demonstrated. 

Supposing for the moment that Louisiana had not been acquired in 1803, what 
would have become of the trans-Mississippi region in the nineteenth century ? Would 
it have become another Mexico, or another Canada ? or supposing that Napoleon 



had remained obdurate and we had 'married the English fleet and nation' — as 
Jefferson had hinted we might. Would not to-day the peace of the world be beyond 
disturbance ? 

The account given of the events that led to the war of 1812 is singularly- 
impartial. Mr. Channing writes with natural indignation of the working 
of impressment as affecting the dignity and independence of the United 
States ; but he makes full allowance for the difficulty of Great Britain's 
position, and calls attention to the evidence given before a committee 
of the Massachusetts House of Kepresentatives, which, if it is to be trusted, 
seems to reduce to small dimensions the amount of the grievance actually 
suffered. But, whatever may have been the immediate causes of the 
war, Mr. Channing recognizes that ' the United States plunged into 
a war with Great Britain at the moment when the fate of humanity was 
hanging in the balance — when it depended on her resistance to the all- 
embracing ambitions of the conquering Corsican '. The notes to the 
chapters contain a useful summary of the various Orders in Council and 
decrees issued by the British and French governments. It should 
be added that a special feature of the volume is the light thrown on 
social and economic conditions, especially in the South, by the use of such 
material as the Ellis-Allan papers at Washington. H. E. E. 

In Main Currents of European History (1815-1915) (London : Mac- 
millan, 1917) Professor F. J. C. Hearnshaw provides a suggestive intro- 
duction to the study of an eventful century. The choice of treatment 
by movements, rather than by states, is to be commended, though it 
leads sometimes to vagueness of outline or excess in generalization. Thus, 
in the enumeration of the causes which broke up the first coalition against 
France, no mention is made of the distracting influence exerted by the 
plans for the second partition of Poland, and there is only a casual reference 
(p. 71) to the third partition. The subsequent reference to the Peace of 
Amiens is too vague ; and the British annexations of Trinidad and the 
Dutch settlements in Ceylon, which occurred then, are, on p. 110, assigned 
to the changes of 1815. Exception may also be taken to the statement 
(p. 50) that the French Revolution proved itself ' powerless to build up 
a new social and political order ' ; for, amidst its many political failures, 
it began to build a new social order. Equally open to criticism is the 
label ' conspiracy against the Constitution ' applied to the months July 
1790-autumn 1791 ; for the constitution was not fully completed until 
September 1791, and it was at once assailed by the legislative assembly 
which met on October 1. The narrative, however, proceeds more firmly 
after the first 115 pages, which form only an introduction to the remaining 
245 pages dealing with the years 1815-1915. It is unfortunate t'hat more 
space could not be given to the century named on the title-page ; but the 
accounts of the congress period and of the revolutions of 1830 and 1848-9 
are quite adequate. Greater emphasis might, however, have been laid on the 
domineering instincts of the Magyars at the expense of the Slav subjects 
—an error destined to have far-reaching results ; and Mazzini's administra- 
tion of the Roman republic of 1849 scarcely deserves the appellation 
' a wild experiment ' which ' wasted his energies '. In the four brief 

140 SHORT NOTICES January 

references to the Crimean war, its important diplomatic and political 
results are not set forth. There follow short but spirited accounts of the 
European national movements of 1859-78, of the colonial expansion 
which supervened, and of the preparations of Germany for the present 
war. The survey is rapid but stimulating. It would, however, have been 
well to bring out more clearly the date and the chief terms of the Anglo- 
French Entente of April 1904. Here and there the chronology is inexact, 
e. g. the date of Koniggratz should be ' July 3, 1866 ', not ' July 2, 1866 ' 
(p. 230) ; and the Boxer Rising was in 1900, not ' 1898 ' (p. 261). Serbia 
also took an earlier and more important part in forming the Balkan 
League of 1912 than is stated on p. 295. Mr, Hearnshaw's remarks on 
nationality (p. 156) are inadequate. The large amount of space given to 
the period 1789-1814 seriously cramps the account of the years 1815- 
1915 ; but within its limits, the narrative is effective and suggestive. 

J. H. Re. 

Of the two collections of Lord Acton's letters which have hitherto 
been issued, one is almost entirely limited to the time before the critical 
year 1870^ and the other consists of letters written to a single corre- 
spondent between 1879 and 1886.^ It is therefore a matter for congratula- 
tion that Dr. Figgis and Mr. R. V. Laurence should have undertaken the 
publication of a larger work. Selections from the Correspondence of the first 
Lord Acton, going through the whole of his life and including letters 
addressed to him by Cardinal Newman, Mr. Gladstone, and others (Vol. I, 
London : Longmans, 1917). Unfortunately the letters are not arranged 
chronologically but grouped under subjects, a plan which leads to great 
inconvenience and obscures the bearing of not a few of the letters. For 
instance. Lord Acton's letters on pp. 224, 225 are replies to Mr. Gladstone's 
on p. 228. The 'ecclesiastical correspondence' has a gap from 1863 to 
1872, in order that the letters relating to the Vatican Council, which fill 
74 pages, may stand by themselves. These letters indeed do not add 
very much to what can already be learnt from Quirinus and other sources, 
but the set of reports from Rome is full of interest. We cannot be too 
grateful for the reprint of Lord Acton's famous letters to The Times in 
1874, which have hitherto been accessible only in the files of that news- 
paper ; though the writer's fine sense of exact accuracy would have 
been offended by at least two misprints (' venerabilius ' on p. 133, and 
' eodem moda ' on p. 139). A group of letters, pp. 57-66, illustrate the 
immense care which he took in preparing his article on Dollinger for this 
Review in 1890. The letters to and from Mr. Gladstone are a fresh evidence, 
if evidence were needed, of the statesman's wide interest in learning and 
theology, as well as in other things. We cannot but note, what was 
known from the letters to Mrs. Drew, the delicate but firm severity with 
which Lord Acton performed the duty of Mentor to him (see especially 
pp. 171, 180); and in the close intimacy between the two men lies one 

* Lord Acton and his Circle, edited by Abbot [now Cardinal! Gasquet, O.S.B. 

* Letters of Lord Acton to Mary, Daughter of the Bight Hon. IV. E. Gladstone, 
edited by Herbert Paul, 1904. 


of the greatest charms of the correspondence. For Lord Acton's own 
biography the scheme of study which he drew out for himself when he 
was twenty (pp. 23-8) is of singular interest. We may compare the large- 
ness of its aims with the limits to which he considered himself bound when 
in 1895 he accepted the professorship of modern history at Cambridge. 
It is instructive to observe that one so profoundly occupied with current 
politics should decide that * teachable history does not include the living 
generation and the questions of the day, as Seeley maintained that it 
does ' (p. 173). There are many letters which throw light upon political, 
outside ecclesiastical, matters on which, had we the space, we would 
gladly dwell. Many others, concerned with literature and theology, are 
full of value ; but these lie beyond our range. To annotate the 
letters of Lord Acton satisfactorily would need an equipment almost 
as complete as his own, and we are not surprised that the editors 
have left a number of references unexplained. But had they studied 
the Janus literature they would have known that ' Huber ' mentioned 
on p. 118 was Johannes Huber, a professor at Munich, who actively 
co-operated with Dollinger, and who died in 1879, and not the Austrian 
Professor Alfons Huber who lived until 1898. Nor should they have 
stated (p. 178 n.) that Lord Hartington accepted office under Lord Salisbury 
in 1887. Sometimes the notes identifying people mentioned in the letters 
are given in unexpected places : thus Madame de Forbin appears on 
p. 41 and Baader on p. 61 ; but they have to wait for explanation until 
pp. 117 and 289. And one wonders what bearing Hain's Repertorium 
Bibliographicum can have on Talleyrand (p. 284, n. 7). Lord Acton wrote 
to Lady Blennerhassett, * You observe the golden rule, to state no fact 
without giving the evidence. But there is a silver rule, to give no unneces- 
sary evidence ' (p. 270). No admonition could be more suitably addressed 
to a writer living in Germany ; but the editors have perhaps interpreted 
the * silver rule ' with excessive freedom. Not every one will understand 
that ' this man ' on p. 191 is the Emperor Frederick. L. 

Dr. J. Wickham Legg has still further increased the immense debt 
which students of liturgiology and church history already owed to him 
by the publication of his Essays Liturgical and Historical (London : Society 
for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1917), in which he has collected 
various essays of his which were previously only to be found in reviews 
and other periodical literature. This book contains seven essays, four 
quite short and dealing chiefly with liturgical matters, such as the structure 
of collects, the carrying of lights in procession in church of England services, 
the survival of the Lenten veil in Spain and Sicily, and a most interesting 
sequence of liturgical colours in the early part of the twelfth' century. 
The three remaining studies are longer, and if one of them (on criticism of 
the Eoman liturgy by Roman Catholic authors) is concerned with liturgio- 
logy, that on the degradation of the Rev. Samuel Johnson from his priest- 
hood in 1686 (reprinted from this Review, October 1914), and that on 
Archbishop Cranmer's form for blessing the pall, are of very great interest 
to students of church history. The last most valuable monograph 


was contributed to the Yorkshire Archaeological Journal in 1898, and in 
dealing with the subject Dr. Legg was following in the footsteps of the 
late Dr. William Stubbs, bishop of Oxford, who first printed and edited 
the form in the Gentleman'' s Magazine for November 1860. In this last 
essay, Dr. Legg has here and there added a sentence to his monograph 
as originally printed and transferred a foot-note into the text, but other- 
wise the careful and learned study remains as it was, only accessible to 
a far larger public. Scholars and antiquaries will thank Dr. Legg for the 
service he has done by making these studies more widely known, and 
those who can claim to be neither scholars nor antiquaries will thank 
him for the model he gives them in these essays of how such work should 
be done, with minute accuracy, wide learning, and yet with human 
interest. S. L. 0. 

Mr. J. W. Jeudwine's Tort, Crime, and Police in Mediaeval Britain 
(London : Williams & Norgate, 1917) has many of the merits and all the 
defects of his Manufacture of Historical Material, issued in 1916.^ Among 
the latter we regret to note a distinctly increasing measure of incoherence, 
a defect which has now assumed such proportions that it is questionable 
whether any reader can take away many consecutive impressions from so 
desultory and ill-planned a work. This is the greater pity since Mr. Jeud- 
wine could do much better if he would only set before himself a precise 
object in writing and stick severely to it. Our advice to Mr. Jeudwine 
is to write no more for publication until he has something definite to say. 
A series of obiter dicta hardly make a book. T. F. T. 

Historians of law, like Sir Henry Maine, have long ago pointed out the 
serious imperfections in Austin's doctrine of sovereignty. The criticism 
of Mr. Harold J. Laski in his Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty 
(New Haven, Connecticut : Yale University Press, 1917) is more radical. 
He desires to replace the ' monistic ' conception of the state by one 
which he terms pluralistic. Yet his work relates itself to that of earlier 
critics. In all cases the objections to Austin's conception were based 
on the same ground. It is too abstract and shows no sense of the fact 
that the parts of the state are living wills, not cogs in a machine. 
Austin, it has been suggested, derived his notion of law from an English 
criminal statute. But the whole doctrine of sovereignty is really a 
deduction from a single idea — that of unity. Mr. Laski protests against 
this in the name of the reality of the individual and the group. Like 
the earlier critics he supports his arguments by historical illustrations. 
First of all we have the valuable essay on ' The Political Theory of the Dis- 
ruption ' which we have already noticed.^ There follow chapters on the 
Oxford movement, the Catholic revival in England, the theories of De Maistre 
and Bismarck. With the religious content of these movements Mr. Laski 
has nothing to do. He is concerned with their political import ; and that 
he shows to be always the inadequacy of the Austinian doctrine of the 
unitary state. In other words, as the appendix on Federalism shows, the 
* See ante, vol. xxxii. 305. * Ante, vol. xxxii. 315. 


federal idea (if not federalism strictly) so far from being contrary to the true 
state is integrally bound up with it ; and no state can be successful which 
treats itself as pure authority ruling over slaves. The state is to be con- 
ceived not as power, but as freedom. The freedom alike of individuals 
and still more of groups must be an essential fact, not a * transient and 
embarrassing phantom ' created by the state for its own ends. The 
following passage gives his notion : 

To construct a satisfactory theory of the State, we must be equipped with a psychology 
that is realistic. We must deal with men as they are and desist from the seductive 
temptation to deal with men as they would be, could they but be induced to appreciate 
the force of our ideas. For we are given variety and difference, as the basis of our 
political system, and it is a world that takes account of them that we must plan. 
Race, language, nationality, history, all these are barriers that make us understand 
how fundamental are the natural limits to unity. 

This is true. But Mr. Laski destroys better than he constructs. Many 
have begun to see what the state is not. It is not so easy to get clear 
what it is. This volume professes to be no more than an instalment. 
Doubtless as time goes on Mr. Laski will develop still further the implica- 
tions of group-personality. In this review it is not possible to criticize 
adequately the political philosophy of the author. What is pertinent here 
is the impact of historical inquiry on that theory of legal foundations 
which, useful for a time, like the Divine Right of Kings (one of its early 
forms), is now largely obsolete. J. N. F. 

In no. 12 of the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol. XXXIII (C.) 

(Dublin : Hodges & Figgis, 1917), Mr. T. W. Westropp continues his account 

of ' Certain Typical Earthworks in County Limerick ', the first instalment 

of which was noticed ante, vol. xxxii, p. 143. He also writes on * The 

' Ancient Sanctuaries of Knockainey and Clogher ' (vol. xxxiv, no. 3). 

I These places seem undoubtedly to be religious sites connected with Irish 

' mythological and legendary literature. Such sites, marked by existing 

; earthworks, are more numerous in Ireland than is generally known or 

■ suspected, while the wealth of the primitive literature of Ireland, associated 
j as it generally is with definite recognizable sites, makes the country a 
1 promising field for obtaining archaeological evidence bearing on her pre- 
j Christian religious observances. Professor R. A. S. Macalister describes 
ja runic inscription which he discovered on a stone built into the wall 
I surrounding the cathedral precincts at Killaloe (no. 13). It reads (trans- 
I lated) ' Thorgrim raised this cross '. The stone appears to have formed 
i the dexter arm of the cross so raised. Curiously enough, considering the 

■ long period of Scandinavian occupation, this is the first runic inscription 

i on stone found on the mainland of Ireland. The only other runes hitherto 

j found in Ireland are three characters on a stone in the Blasquet Islands 

land an inscription on ' a slip of silvered bronze ' found * in the earth of 

a Norman motte, which seems to have been adapted from an older 

tumulus '. Partly on palaeographical evidence and partly from historical 

considerations. Dr. Macalister refers the new inscription to about the first 

half of the eleventh century. Mr. E. C. R. Armstrong (no. 16) considers 

it certain that bronze celts were manufactured in Ireland, but inclines 

144 SHORT NOTICES January 1918 

to think that the art of alloying copper with tin was derived from Spain. 
The archbishop of Dublin gives (no. 17) a transcript of a charter in the 
British Museum (Add. MS. 4783, f. 28) by which King John confirmed 
a testament of William Marshal, earl of Pembroke, making provision for 
the performance of his vow to erect a Cistercian abbey in Ireland. This, 
Dr. Bernard shows, refers to Tintern Minor, the ' monasterium de voto ', 
in County Wexford, and must be dated 3 December 1200, thus confirming 
the date given in some Irish annals for the earl's perilous voyage to Ireland 
when the vow was made. The actual foundation-charter can hardly be 
dated before 1207. The provost of Trinity College, mainly from negative 
evidence, comes to the unexpected conclusion that the ass, now univer- 
sally used as a beast of burden in Ireland, was not so used before about 
the year 1780 (no. 18). Mr. W. F. De Vismes Kane returns to the subject 
of ' The Black Pig's Dyke ' (no. 19), an entrenchment believed to have 
bounded the ancient kingdom of the Ulaid. Partly by actual remains, 
but largely by traditional accounts and by place-names involving the terms 
muc ' a pig ' or sonnach *a rampart ', he traces the dyke in three lines, 
marking perhaps three successive stages in the curtailment of the kingdom. 
Lastly, we may note that the Rev. Patrick Power deals with the place- 
names and antiquities of south-east Cork on the lines followed in his 
Place-Names of the Decies, reviewed in these pages ante, vol. xxiii. 415. 

G. H. 0. 

The Nuovo Archivio Veneto for last July (tom. xxxiv. 1) contains 
a brief notice of Count Carlo Cipolla, who died on 23 November 1916, 
and a catalogue of his publications. Those who know him mainly for 
his important books relative to the Venetian lands and Verona and Novalesa 
will be surprised at the wide range over which his studies extended. The 
list here printed comprises 427 works, large and small, not to speak of 
more than four hundred reviews of books. The last volume which the 
count published was the second part of his edition of the works of Ferreto 
de' Ferreti, noticed in this Review in 1916 (vol. xxxi. 181). M. 

The late Captain L. J. Trotter's sketch of Indian history, A History || 
of India from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, first published in 1874 i 
and revised by the author twenty-five years later, is a sound piece of 
work, with a sureness of touch due to his intimate acquaintance with 
the country and its peoples. A third edition has now been brought out 
under the care of Archdeacon Hutton, who has continued the narrative 
down to the imperial durbar of 1911 (London : Society for Promoting 
Christian Knowledge, 1917). The antiquated woodcuts of the previous 
editions have been replaced by twenty-two full-page illustrations, well 
chosen and admirably produced ; four historical maps have been added, 
and the text has been set in a larger type. The result is a handsome 
volume, fully worthy of its contents. N. 


The English 

Historical Review 

NO. CXXX.— APRIL 1918 

TAe Office of Sheriff in the Early 
Norman Period 

a^HE generation after the government of England was assumed 
- by Norman officials was the time at which the sheriff's 
power was at its highest'. It was the golden age of the baronial 
shrievalty, the period during which the office was generally held 
and its tradition established anew by the Conqueror's comrades 
in arms. The strength of William of Normandy was in no small 
measure derived from this latter fact. The sheriff in turn profited 
from the vast access of power which the turn of events and the 
insight of experience had brought to the king. With the excep- 
tion of the curia regis, the greatest institution at the king's 
disposal was now the shrievalty. It is the aim of the present 
article to trace the activity and development of the office in this 
period for which no systematic detailed study of the subject 
now exists. 1 

There was a strong likeness between the EngHsh sheriff and 
the Norman vicomte, and the conquerors naturally identified the 
one with the other.^ As the English of the chancery gave place 

^ Stubbs treats the Norman shrievalty in an incidental fashion, covering only its 
barest outlines {Constitutional History, 6th edition, i. 127-8, 295, 299, 425-30). Dr. 
Round in his various works throws much light particularly upon its financial and 
genealogical aspects {Feudal England, pp. 328-31, 422-30 ; Commune of London, 
pp. 72-5 ; Geoffrey de Mandeville, especially appendix P ; and numerous .chapters 
in the Victoria History of the Counties of England). Mr. Stenton ( William the Con- 
queror, pp. 420-4) has treated briefly but with insight and originality the changes in 
the office brought by the coming of the Normans. Writers both upon constitutional 
and social history have usually directed their attention to the county court rather 
than to the local representative of Norman autocracy. The best brief account of the 
constitutional position of the Norman shrievalty is by Dr. George B. Adams, The 
Origin of the English Constitution, pp. 72-5. 

^ On the Norman vicomte in the time of William the Conqueror see C. H. Haskins, 
Normandy under William the Conqueror', American Historical Review, xiv. 465-70 

* All rights reserved. 


to Latin vicecomes became the official designation ; the title 
viceconsul is sometimes found .^ In the Norman-French of the 
period the sheriff is the vescunte,^ a name which in the legal 
language of later times becomes viscount. The employment of 
Normans in the office gave effect to their administrative ideas. 
Changes in the shire system soon made the sheriff, like the vicomte, 
the head of government in his bailiwick. At first sight he seems 
a vicomte rather than a scirgerefa.^ Yet the Conqueror did not 
bodily transplant the Norman office.^ The legal basis of his 
shrievalty was that of Edward the Confessor. The history, 
character, and tradition of the English county were very different 
from those of the Norman vicomte. The Norman official had 
greater advantages and importance in the capacity of sheriff 
than in that of vicomte. The greatest change, moreover, was in 
the new power behind the sheriff. 

It was in accordance with the position claimed by King William 
as the heir of King Edward that he retained in office a number 
of English sheriffs, for a time demanded by administrative neces- 
sity. Edward's sheriffs who had served during the few months 
of Harold's rule seem to have been considered in rightful posses- 
sion of their shires unless they had resisted the invasion. Godric, 
the sheriff of Berkshire who fell fighting with Harold, is mentioned 
in Domesday Book as having lost his sheriffdom,^ presumably, 
as Freeman suggested,^ because the office was regarded as ipso 
facto forfeit when its occupant moved against William. Osward, 
the sheriff of Kent, also lost his office,^ and the proximity of his 
shire to the place of conflict as well as the known hostility of the 
Kentishmen to William ^^ suggests the same explanation. Esgar, 
sheriff of Middlesex, who as s taller seems to have commanded 
against the Normans after the battle of Hastings, was not only 
superseded by a Norman in his office ^^ and his lands ,1^ but is said 
to have suffered lifelong imprisonment .^^ In regions more remote 
from the conflict Englishmen remained in office. Their names, 

[Norman Institutions, 1918, ch. i]. The shrievalty of the Anglo-Saxon period 
treated by the present writer, ante, xxxi. 20-40. 
' Domesday Book, iv, fo. 312 b. 

* Leis Willelme, 2, 1 ; 2, 2 a, in Liebermann's Gesctzc, i. 492, 494. 
5 This is well brought out by Mr. Stenton, William the Conqueror, p. 422. 
^ The personnel of the two offices was of course different. Roger of Montgomery, 

viscount of the Hiemois (Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Ecdcs. ii. 21) became an earl in 
England. 7 d_ ^ j^ 57 b. 

* History of the Norman Conquest, iv. 729. Godric's lands were seized and granted 
to a Norman with the exception of the single hide given to his widow for the humble 
service of feeding the king's dogs : D. B. i. 57 b ; cf. Freeman, iv. 37. 

» D. B. i. 2 b. 
^ " Ordericus Vitalis relates that after the battle of Hastings they came to terms 
with William and gave hostages : Hist. Ecdcs. ii. 153. 

n See note 51. 12 ^^^ j) g ^ 129^ 139 ^ ,3 j-f^^^ Elicnsis, p. 217. 


therefore, throw light on Harold's last campaign. Edric was still 
sheriff of Wiltshire in 106/ i* and Touid or Tofig of Somerset 
apparently as late as 1068.15 Alwin or Ethelwine of Warwick- 
shire 1^ and Robert fitz Wymarc i^ both remained in office ; and 
the latter, if not the former as well, was succeeded by his son. 
Marios wein or Maerleswegen, whom Harold had left in charge of 
the north,^^ retained his position in Lincolnshire until he joined 
the Danes in their attack on York.^^ The names of several 
others who continued in office are probably ^o to be added. There 
is evidence that the families of ToU,2i the Confessor's sheriff of 
Norfolk and Suffolk, and Elfric, his sheriff of Huntingdon,22 
enjoyed King William's favour. So few of Edward's sheriffs 
are known that their importance to William and his attitude 
towards them is evident. 

But changes in the shrievalty were rapid. By 1071 it is rare 
to find an Englishman continued in the office.^^ By 1068 there 

" Round, Feudal England, p. 422 ; Davis, Regesta, i, no. 9. 

" Davis, ibid., nos. 7, 23. 

1* Alwin appears as sheriff in a document which Eyton ascribes to the year 1072 
{Salt Arch. Society Publications, ii. 179). He was permitted to acquire land by special 
licence of the Conqueror (D. B. i. 242 b). His son Thurkil seems to have been sheriflF 
of Staffordshire (Salt Soc. Publ. ii. 179 ; Davis, Regesta, i, no. 25). His style, Turchil 
of Warwick (D. B. i. 238), suggests that he may have succeeded to the shrievalty of 
his father (Freeman, Norm. Conq. v. 792). He became an important tenant-in- 
chief : D. B. i. 240 b ; Ballard, Domesday Inquest, p. 100. 

" Robert fitz Wymarc had been staller to King Edward, and is said to have sent 
to William the news of Stamford Bridge (Freeman, Norm. Conq. iii. 413, n. 3). He 
was succeeded by his son, Swein of Essex, before 1075 : Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 84-6. 
Eyton dated his death or superannuation 1071-2 : Shropshire Arch, and Nat. Hist. 
Society Publications, ii. 16. 

^^ Gaimar, Estoire des Engles (Rolls Series), 1. 5255. 

*' Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a. 1067, 1069 ; see Davis, Regesta, i, no. 8. 

*" Cyneward (Kinewardus) was sheriff in Worcestershire, but mention of him in 
1072 (Heming, Chartulary, ed. Hearne, i. 82 ; Thorpe, Diplom., p. 441) hardly proves 
his occupation of the office at that time, as Mr. Davis {Regesta, i, no. 106) assumes. 
See Freeman, Norm. Conq. v. 763. The statement of William of Malmesbury {Gesja 
Pontificum, p. 253) that Urse was sheriff when he built the castle at Worcester, which 
was before 1069, makes it probable that the English sheriff was superseded by Urse 
d'Abetot at an earlier date. The names of Swawold, sheriff of Oxfordshire in 1067 
(Parker, Early History of Oxford, Oxford Historical Society, p. 301 ; Davis, Regesta, i, 
no. 18), and of Edmund, sheriff of Hertfordshire {ibid., no. 16), suggest that they may 
be sheriffs of King Edward who were not displaced. One Edwin, who had been the 
Confessor's sheriff in an unknown county, was probably retained for a time (D. B. 
i. 238 b, 241) : H. tenet de rege et III hidas emit ab Edwino vicecomitc {ibid. i. 157 b). 

" Toli seems to have died about 1066. His successor, Norman, may have been 
the same person as King Edward's sheriff of Northampton : Kemble, Cod. Dipl., 
nos. 863, 904. As to Norman's shrievalty in East Anglia see D. B. ii. 312 b ; Davis, 
Regesta, i, no. 41 ; Round, Feudal England, pp. 228-30. Toll's widow was still a tenant 
in Suffolk in 1086 (D. B. ii. 299 b). 

*^ Elfric's wife and sons were permitted to retain the manor he had held : D. B. 
i. 203. This Aluric may have been the same as Aluric Godricson, named in 1086 as 
formerly sheriff of Cambridgeshire : ibid. i. 189. 

" Moreover, Swein of Essex and Thurkil of Warwick (above, notes 16, 17), despite 
their names, are to all practical intents Norman barons. 



were Norman sheriffs in fortress cities like London and York, 
and apparently in Exeter and Worcester .^4 Furthermore, gradual 
changes in the constitution of the shire added greatly both to 
the power and the dignity of the office. Whether or not the 
bishop for a time continued as a presiding officer of the county 
court,^^ the establishment of separate ecclesiastical courts ^6 soon 
turned his interest in another direction. The earldom also 
quickly lost its old significance.^^ Domesday Book still carefully 
records the earl's rights and perquisites, but to all appearances 
no earl remains except in Kent and a few counties of the extreme 
west and north. ^^ In Kent the sheriff was certainly the creature 
of the king, rather than of Earl Odo.^^ In the palatinates of 
Chester ^^ and Durham ^^ the sheriff was long to be the official 
of the earl and of the bishop respectively. The Montgomery earls 
in Shropshire,^^ ^nd probably for a short time the Fitz Osbern 
earls in Herefordshire,^^ and Count Robert of Mortain in Corn- 

2* See below, p. 162 and notes. 

25 The present writer does not believe with Mr. Davis {Regesta, i, 7) that mention 
of the bishop's name in writs to the county court demonstrates his actual presidency 
of that body. There is too much evidence of the sheriff's activity. See pp. 158-9. 

26 See Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 485. 

" In the counties of Derby, Nottingham, and Lincoln the earl is mentioned in 
1086 as if still existent : D. B. i. 280 b, 336 b. In Yorkshire the earl may recall 
persons who have abjured the realm, and proclaim the Idng's peace : ibid. i. 298 b. 
In Worcester the earl is still said to have the third penny : ibid. i. 173 b. But there 
is no earl. 

2* This striking result was due to the merger of the earldom of Wessex with the 
Crown, the extinction of the earls of the house of Godwin, the disappearance of Edwin 
and Morcar by 1071, and finally the revolt of 1075, leading to loss of rank for Roger 
fitz Osbern and Ralph Guader, the heads of two newly created earldoms, and to 
the execution of Waltheof, the last surviving English earl. 

29 Concerning Haimo, the sheriff, see note 48. He was in office before, though 
probably not immediately before, the arrest of Odo in 1082, and held the position 
for years after the earl's overthrow. His family and that of his brother, Robert fitz 
Haimo (note 71), remained loyal to William Rufus during the great feudal revolt of 
1088 in which Odo was involved. 

2" The earl of Chester held of the king the whole shire except what belonged to the 
bishopric : D. B. i. 262 b. 

31 The bishop of Durham had his own sheriff at least as early as Ranulf Flambard's 
time: Lapsley, The County Palatine of Durham, pp. 80-1. Compare Symeon of 
Durham, ii. 209. 

22 freeman, Norman Conquest, iii. 501 ; Davis, England under the Normans and 
Angevins, p. 517. Earl Roger held Shrewsbury and all the demesne which the king 
had held in the county. It is obviously he who renders to the king the ferm of three 
hundred pounds one hundred and fifteen shillings for the city, demesne, manors, and 
pleas of the county and hundreds (D. B. i. 254). Compare the farming of county 
revenues in Cheshire by the earl {ante, xxxi. 33). The sheriff at Shrewsbury 
was the earl's official (Davis, I.e.). The shrievalty was successively held by the two 
husbands of Roger's niece, Warin the Bald and Rainald : Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. 
Ecdes. iii. 29 and n. 6 ; D. B. i. 254-5. 

33 Heming {Chartulary, i. 250) regards Radulf de Bernai (D. B. i. 181), the sheriff, 
as the henchman of William fitz Osbern ; but this could only have been previously 
to 1075. 



wall,'^^ appointed and controlled the sheriff. In the reign of 
William Rufus the sheriff of Northumberland was the relative 
and steward of Earl Robert Mowbray .^^ But elsewhere the 
subordination of the sheriff to the earl was ended. The burghal 
third penny generally passed from the earl's into the king's hands,^^ 
and, as if to emphasize the change, it was occasionally regranted 
to a sheriff .3' Except in rare cases like those just mentioned, 
and soon limited to the palatinates, earls after 1075 did not as 
such hold administrative office .^^ It was the sheriff and not the 
earH^ who had charge of public justice and the maintenance of 
the peace, ^0 and the earl's military headship of the shire was at 
an end. The conquest of Carlisle from the Scots in 1092 was 
followed by the appointment of a sheriff. *i Soon after 1066 
a county was being called a vicecomitatus or sheriffdom. ^^ Un- 
obscured by any greater official the sheriff now stands out as 
the sole head of the shire. 

The importance and power of the Norman shrievalty were 
further enhanced by a tenure of office usually long and by a 
personnel of remarkable character. The removabiUty of the 

" Robert held of the king, his brother, almost the whole shire. Thurstin, the 
sheriff, held land of him (D. B. iv. 204 b, 234 507 b), and as Tossetin vicecomes wit- 
nessed one of his charters {Monasticon Anglicanum, vi, pt. 2, p. 989). Mr. Davis thinks 
{Eegesta, i, p. xxxi) that Cornwall could not have been a palatinate as late as 1096, 
when Warin, the sheriff, is addressed by the king in a writ of the form {ibid., no. 378) 
usually addressed to county courts. 

-' B&Yis, England under the Normans and Angevins,ip. 105; A. -8. Chronicle, a,. 1095. 
Roger the Poitevin, son of Roger of Montgomery, had a vicecomes when his brother 
Hugh was earl (Monasticon, iii. 519), apparently in the region between the Ribble and 
the Mersey (Freeman, William Rufus, ii. 57). It is to be observed, however, that the 
heads of feudal baronies sometimes had vicecomites of their own. See Round, Calendar 
of Documents in France, no. 1205; also 'Some Early Sussex Charters', in Sussex 
Archaeological Collections, vol. xlii. 

3« This was true of the burghal third penny at Bath (D. B. i. 87), and in the boroughs 
of Wiltshire {ibid. i. 64 b), and must have held for Worcester (note 27) and Stafford 
(D. B. i. 246). Bishop Odo has revenues at Dover which appear to be derived in part 
from the third penny which Earl Godwin has held {ibid. i. 1), but he is not rightfully 
entitled to Godwin's portion of certain dues at Southwark {ihid. i. 32). The record 
concerning Northampton and Derby shows that the third penny might not be appro- 
priated without grant {ibid. i. 280 b). 

" Baldwin was the recipient of the third penny at Exeter, Hugh of Grantmesnil 
at Leicester (see Ballard, Domesday Boroughs, p. 37, n. 6), and Robert of Stafford at 
Stafford (D. B. i. 246). 

'* The old practice of conferring the third penny upon them and of naming them 
m writs to the county court has become mere form. 

'' For the theory of the Anglo-Saxon period see ante, xxxi. 27. 

" Below, pp. 158-9. 

" Davis, Regesta, i, no. 478 ; Monasticon Anglicanum, i. 241. 

« Herman's Miracula Sancti Eadmundi, written about 1070, has Aerfasto duarum 
Eastengle vicecomitatuum episcopo : Liebermann, Ungedruckte Anglo-Normannischc 
Geschichtsquellen, p. 248. In the Domesday inquest for Bedfordshire appears the 
expression, Omnes qui iuravcrunt de vicecomitatu (D. B. i. 211 b) ; and in the record 
of the judgement in the case of Bishop Wulfstan against Abbot Walter, 1085-6, we 
read iudicante et testificante omni vicecomitatu (Heming, Chartulary, i. 77). 


sheriff was still an effective principle, the usefulness of which by 
no means ended with its application to the cases of English 
sheriffs who fought for Harold. William dismissed from the 
office Normans of no little importance. ^^ Yet the crementum or 
sum of money occasionally paid for the privilege of farming the 
shire ^* seems to represent a bid for the appointment. The 
influence of feudal usage was also strong. It has been held 
justly that William I could not have dismissed sheriffs wholesale 
as did Henry II without risking a feudal rebellion.^^ The Norman 
viscounty was, in some instances, hereditary.^^ The sheriff was 
appointed for no specified term, and the tendency of the age was 
to treat offices like fiefs. 

Personal claims to the king's friendship or gratitude did much 
to lengthen the tenure of office. The leading sheriffs of the 
Conqueror often held office for life, and some of them survived 
until the reign of Henry I.^^ A few who stood especially high in 

*^ Among these was Froger, sheriff of Berkshire : Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, Rolls 
Series, i. 486, 494. About 1072 Ilbert lost the shrievalty of Hertfordshire : D. B. i. 133. 
For the date compare Round, Feudal England, pp. 459-61, with Liebermann, Gesetze, 
i, 485. Swein of Essex lost his place, to be followed by Ralph Bainard (D, B. ii. 2 b). 
This was before 1080 (Davis, Eegesta, i, no. 122). The latter by 1086 (D. B. ii. 1 b) 
had been superseded by Peter of Valognes, who was sheriff of Essex {Vict. County 
History of Essex, i. 346). Peter, Swein, and Ralph were all Domesday tenants-in- 

** See below, p. 167. *^ Stenton, William the Conqueror, p. 423. 

** See Haskins in American Histor. Rev. xiv. 470 [Norman Institutions, p. 47]. 

" Haimo, who has been identified as son of Haimo Dentatus, slain at Val-es- 
Dunes (Freeman, William Bufus, ii. 82 ; Norman Conquest, ii. 244, 257), and who was 
a distant relative of William the Conqueror (see Diet, of Nat. Biogr., art. ' fitz Haimon, 
Robert ') and dapijer both to him and to William Rufus (Davis, Eegesta, i, nos. 340, 
351, 372, 416), is mentioned as sheriff of Kent about 1071 (Bigelow, Placita Anglo-Norm., 
p. 8) and also in 1086. Though apparently superseded in the period 1078-83 (Davis, 
no. 188 ; no. 98 shows that he was sheriff in 1077), he seems later to have remained 
in office until his death, which Mr. Davis shows was in 1099 or 1100 {ibid., nos. 416, 
451). He was succeeded both in his household office {Monasticon Anglicanum, v. 100, 
149 ; ante, xxvi. 489) and his shrievalty {Monasticon, i. 164 ; iii. 383 ; Round, Cal. 
of Documents in France, no, 1378) by another Haimo, who was undoubtedly his son. 
The elder Haimo was one of the king's special envoys at the inquest made on the 
oath of three shires at Keneteford in 1080 (Davis, no, 122). 

Roger Bigod, probably son of a knight closely attached to the fortunes of the 
Conqueror {Diet, of Nat. Biogr., art, 'Bigod, Hugh'), became the greatest noble in 
East Anglia and dapifer to William II, He was sheriff of Norfolk by 1069 (Davis, 
Eegesta, i, no. 28), sheriff of Suffolk for two different terms (D. B. ii. 287 b) prior to 
1086, as well as under Henry I {Cartul. Monast. de Eameseia, Rolls Series, i. 249), and 
Domesday sheriff of both counties. He was present in 1082 at a trial held before 
the king in Normandy (Davis, Eegesta, i, app. xvi). For his share in the rebellion 
of 1088 he apparently lost his estates temporarily ( Victoria County History of Norfolk, 
ii. 469), and surrendered his office for a time to Herbert, the king's chamberlain 
(Davis, ibid., no. 291 and app, Ixii), but he served as sheriff later than 1091 (Goulburn 
and Symonds, Letters of Herbert de Losinga, p. 170 ; Memorials of St. Edmund's Abbey, 
Rolls Series, i. 79, 147), and probably until his death which occurred in 1107 (Ordericus 
Vitalis, Hist. Eccles. iv. 276). The title of earl was gained by his son. 

Urse d'Abetot, a trusted agent of the Norman kings for a period of forty-five 
years or more following the Conquest, was the brother of Robert the despenser of the 


the king's favour held great household offices at court.^^ Another 
group are known to have been in his special employment at 
the curia or elsewhere.^s To practically all of these he 

Conqueror (Heming, Chartulary, i. 2G8) and William II (Davis, Regesta, i, no. 326). 
He became the greatest lay landholder in Worcestershire, of which county he was 
sheriff apparently (note 20) from 1068. He is still mentioned as sheriff about 1110 
(Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 524), and at his death, probably about 1115 (Round, Feudal 
England, p. 170), he was succeeded by his son (note G3). 

Edward of Salisbury, a great landholder in the southern and south-western counties 
(Parker, Earhj History of Oxford, p. 246 ; also D. B. i. 154 ; iv. 16), and another 
curialis (Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 247, 283, 292-4), was sheriff of Wiltshire in 1081, and 
possibly as early as 1070 {ibid., nos. 135, 167). He seems to have been sheriff so late 
as 1105 {ante, xxvi. 489-90). The Edward of Salisbury who fought under Henry in 
1119 (Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Eccles. iv. 357) was probably a younger son (Eyton, 
Analysis and Digest of Dorset Survey, p. 77). His daughter Matilda married the 
second Humphrey de Bohun, who shared his vast possessions with his son, Walter 
of Salisbury {Monasticon, vi. 134, 338, 501). 

Baldwin de Meules or Baldwin de Clare, son of Count Gilbert of Brionne (Ordericus 
Vitalis, ii. 181), one of the guardians of the Conqueror's minority, was delegated 
to build a castle at Exeter after the revolt of 1068 {ibid.). He became a great landholder 
and enjoyed the rare distinction of having a castle of his own (D. B. i. 105 b), which 
was situate at Okehampton. He was sheriff of Devon by about 1070 (Davis, no. 58), 
and without doubt held the office until his death a little before 1096 (Round, Feudal 
England, p. 330, n. 1). 

Durand of Gloucester was another Domesday sheriff who served for fifteen years 
or more (note 62) preceding his death. 

Hugo do Port, who was sheriff of Hampshire possibly as early as 1070 (Davis, 
no. 267), and a great landholder, seems to have held office until in 1096 he became 
a monk {ibid., no. 379). He was sheriff of Nottingham also in the period 1081-7 
{Monasticon, i, 301). 

*® As to Haimo and Roger Bigot see note 47. 

Robert d'Oilly, who has been tentatively identified as sheriff of Warwickshire in 
1086 ( Victoria County History of Warwick, i. 219), and who was certainly at the head 
of this shire at an earlier time (Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 104, 130, 200), his shrievalty 
beginning about 1070 {ibid., no. 49), was constable under William I and William II 
{ibid., p. xxxi). 

Robert Malet, son, and probably successor in office (note 82) of a well-known 
follower and sheriff of the Conqueror (see p. 162), sheriff of Suffolk from 1070 (Davis, 
no. 47) to at least 1080 {ibid., no. 122), and an important tenant-in-chief in several 
shires, was the king's great chamberlain (Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 180). 

Aiulf, the chamberlain, Domesday sheriff of Dorset (note 82), and in the reigns 
of William II and Henry I sheriff of Somerset (Davis, nos. 315, 417 ; Montacute 
Chart., Somerset Record Soc, p. 120), was a tenant-in -chief both in Dorset 
(D. B. i. 82 b) and Wiltshire {ibid. 75), and probably at court a deputy to Robert 

Edward of Salisbury is believed to have been a chamberlain of Henry I {ante, 
xxvi. 489-90). 

*» These are Urse d'Abetot (Heming, Chartidary, ii. 413 ; Round, Feudal England, 
p. 309 ; Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 10, 416, 422 ; see also below,-p. 162 and note 130), Edward 
of Salisbury (notes 48, 49 ; Davis, nos. 247, 283), Hugo de Port {ibid., nos. 207, 220), 
Baldwin of Exeter (above, note 48), Hugo de Grantmesnil (note 58), and Peter de 
Valognes (Davis, no. 368). The last named was the Domesday sheriff of Essex and 
Hertfordshire, and tenant-in-chief both in these shires and in Lincolnshire, Norfolk, and 
Suffolk. His wife, Albreda, was the sister of Eudo the dapifer {Monasticon, iii. 345 ; 
iv. 608). He was sheriff of Hertfordshire about 1072 (note 43), and still sheriff of Essex 
in the reign of William II (Davis, nos. 436, 442). Hugh de Beauchamp was sheriff 
of Buckinghamshire in the reign of William II (Davis, no. 370), at whose court he 


made large grants of land in capite, usually in several shires. 
Similar grants prove his friendship for a still larger group. 5» 
With the exception of a very few of whom little is recorded, ^i 
and a very few in the counties still under an earl,^^ ^j^^ known 
sheriffs ^^ at or near the date of Domesday, some twenty in 
number, are all tenants-in-chief ^^ of the Crown, and as a rule 

was employed {ibid., nos, 419, 446, 447). Hugh de Bochland witnessed writs of 
William II {ibid., nos. 444, 466), and in 1099 was delegated to execute a judgement of 
the king's court {ibid., no. 416). 

5" Geoffrey de Mandeville, sheriff of London and Middlesex from the Conquest 
(Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 37, n. 2, p. 439 ; Davis, Rcgesta, i, nos. 15, 93), 
though not at the date of Domesday (D. B. i. 127 ; Davis, ibid., no. 306), and at some 
.period of his career sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire (Round, ibid., pp. 141-2), is 
well known as a landholder in eleven different shires. 

Hugh fitz Grip, sheriff of Dorset, was dead by 1086, but his wife was a tenant- 
in-chief, holding some forty manors (D. B. i. 83 b). 

Ralph Bainard, a Domesday tenant-in-chief in Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk 
(D. B. ii. 68, 247, 413), a pre-Domesday sheriff of Essex (Davis, no. 93), 
possibly of London as well {ibid., no. 211), and his brother, Geoffrey Bainard, a noted 
adherent of William II (Freeman, William Eufus, ii. 63), who, in the reign of the 
latter, seems to have been sheriff of Yorkshire (Davis, nos. 344, 421, 431 ; ante, xxx. 
283-4), bear the name of a well-known baronial family; as does Ralph Taillebois, 
sheriff of Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire ( Victoria County History of Buckinghamshire, 
i. 220), who died before 1086 (D. B. i. 211 b), and Ivo Taillebois, da'pijer to William II 
(Davis, nos. 315, 319, 326), tenens in Norfolk, and presumably sheriff of Lincolnshire 
before 1086 {ante, xxx. 278). 

Hugh fitz Baldric, sheriff of Yorkshire from 1070 to about 1080 {ante, xxx. 281-2), 
and also sheriff of Nottinghamshire, was a Domesday tenens not only in these shires 
but also in Hampshire (D. B. i. 48, 356) and Lincolnshire. 

Ansculf de Picquigny, sheriff of Buckinghamshire (D. B. i. 148 b) and Surrey {ibid, 
i. 36), also deceased before 1086, was father of the prominent Domesday baron, William 
de Picquigny. 

William de Mohun, sheriff of Somerset in 1084 and 1086, and probably for a con- 
siderable period (Maxwell-Lyte, History of Dunster, pp. xiii and 3), was a great 
landholder and founder of a well-known house. 

Durand of Gloucester (D. B. i. 168 b, 186 b), though himself not a great tenant, 
represents an important family interest. 

Robert of Stafford (Davis, no. 210 and app. xxvi ; see D. B, i. 225, 238, 248 b) hold 
much land of the Crown. 

Picot, the notorious sheriff of Cambridgeshire, one of the barons who attended the 
curia regis in the time of William II {Deputy Keeper's 29th Rep., app,, p. 37), who 
was in office as early as 1071 (Davis, no. 47), and as late as some date in the period 
1090-8, was a tenant-in-chief in his own shire (D. B. i. 200). 

Eustace of Huntingdon, of almost equally evil memory, sheriff by 1080 (Davis, 
no. 122) and superseded by 1091 {ibid., nos. 321, 322, 329), was a Domesday tenens 
in Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire as well as in Huntingdonshire. 

William of Cahaignes, sheriff of Northamptonshire under both William I and Wil- 
liam II {ibid., nos. 288 b, 283), was also a Domesday tenant-in-chief (D. B. i. 201 b). 

" Ranulf of Surrey (D. B. i. 32), Roger of Middlesex (D. B. i. 127), and Gilbert 
(D. B. i. 20 b), who may be sheriff of Sussex or vicomte of the honour of Pevensey. 

^2 Rainald, formerly sheriff of Shropshire (D. B. i. 181), Gilbert or Ilbert of Hereford 
(notes 149, 212), and Thurstin of Cornwall (note 34). 

^* The counties whose sheriffs I am unable to name are Berkshire, Oxford, Leicester, 
Rutland, Derby, Cheshire, and Northumberland. It seems impossible to tell how long 
Froger, the first Norman sheriff of Berkshire, remained in office. 

^* See notes 47, 50. Haimo, one of the smallest landholders among these, had in 
Kent three whole manors and parts of others (D. B. i. 14) lands in Essex besides 


great tenants-in-chief. Four of them left heirs, who within two 
generations became earls. ^^ The baronial status of the shrievalty 
is thus well established. As important barons or household 
officials a number of them frequently appear at meetings at the 
curia regis, ^^ even as vicomtes usually attended the duke's curia 
in Normandy. ^^ Rank, importance, or official position, moreover, 
entitled the sheriff of more than one English shire to a place in 
this Norman body.^^ 

The greater power and prestige of the Norman as compared 
with the Anglo-Saxon sheriff are evident. No longer was he 
a man of moderate means, overshadowed by the nobility and 
prelates of the shire ; on the contrary, he was often himself the 
greatest man in all his region, and was not infrequently a benefactor 
of the church. ^^ Since no official superior stood between him 
and the king he enjoyed great freedom of action. As a baron 

{ibid. ii. 54 b). Durand, another small tenant, had lands in the south-west (D. B. 
iv, fo. 8 b), as well as in Gloucestershire {ibid. i. 168 b) and Herefordshire (ibid, 
i. 179). 

^^ Hugh, second son of Roger Bigod ; Patrick, grandson of Edward of Salisbury ; 
Miles of Gloucester, grandnephew of Durand ; and Geoffrey de Mandeville, grandson 
of the sheriff of the same name. 

^^ This appears in connexion with the trial of Bishop William in 1088 : see Columbia 
Law Review, xii. 279. 

" Haskins in Amer. Histor. Rev. xiv. 469 \Norman Institutions, p. 471- 

5« Robert d'Oilly, the constable, and Robert Malet, the chamberlain (above, 

note 48), both appear at William's curia in Normandy (Davis, Regcsta, i, nos. 199, 

207), as do also Hugo de Port and Baldwin of Exeter {ibid., nos. 125, 220). Hugo de 

Grantmesnil appears in attendance even before the conquest of England {ibid., no. 2). 

In 1050 along with his brother Robert he founded the monastery of St. Evroul. Present 

at Hastings, he was employed by the Conqueror about 1068 to hold Hampshire. 

! Subsequently ho received an important post at Leicester (Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. 

Ecdcs. ii. 17, 121, 186, 222). He was a great landholder in the midlands in 1086, and 

1 appears as witness to one of the writs of William II (Davis, no. 392). The language 

j of Ordericus {praesidatum Leyrecestrae regebat, iii. 270) and his possession of the third 

penny at Leicester (note 37) indicate that he was sheriff (Freeman, Norman Conquest, 

!iv. 232). He died in the habit of a monk, 22 February 1093 (Ordericus Vitalis, iii. 

j453). His son Ivo, who succeeded to his English possessions, was one of the four lords 

of Leicester and municeps et vicecomes et firmarius regis {ibid. iv. 169). 

^» Peter of Valognes and his wife founded the priory of Binham {Monasticon, 

|iii. 345 ; iv. 608), Roger Bigod that of Thetford {ibid. v. 148-9), Ivo Taillebois the 

imonastery of Spalding {ibid. iii. 215, 217), Picot a church at Cambridge (Miss Norgate, 

\England under the Angevin Kings, ii. 463). Hugo de Grantmesnil endowed the monas- 

jbery of St. Evroul (Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Ecclcs. ii. 14 ff.), and later gave it some 

U his English property (Davis, Regesta, i, no. 140). Robert d'Oilly endowed the 

|c5hurch at Abingdon {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ii. 12-15). Warin gave land 

Ifco the monastery of Shrewsbury {Monasticon, iii. 518), Haimo to the church of 

J3t. Andrew at Rochester (Davis, Regesta, i, no. 451), and Hugh fitz Baldric tithes 

io the abbey of Preaux {ibid., no. 130). Baldwin of Exeter and both his sons who 

tmcceeded him were benefactors of Bee (Round, Feudal England, table facing p. 473). 

'peoffrey de Mandeville founded the priory of Hurley (Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, 

Y 38), and also gave land to St. Peter of Westminster for his wife's soul (Davis, 

pegresto, i, no. 209), Durand to St. Peter of Gloucester pro anima fratris sui Rogerii 

JD. B. i. 18), Thorold to St. Guthlac of Croyland pro anima sua {ibid. i. 346 b), Rainald 

p the church of St. Peter pro anima Warini antecessoris sui (D. B. i. 254). 


and a personal adherent of the king he combined the prestige 
of a local magnate and the status of a trusted official. He was, 
as it were, a sheriff of King Edward who had grown into a great 
landholder and a prominent king's thegn. The effective control 
exercised over the office by the early Norman kings ^^ is thus 
largely explained, though its basis could not be expected to sur- 
vive the generation which followed the Conqueror at Hastings. 

The hereditary nature of some of the Norman shrievalties is 
well understood, ^1 but the known instances are not numerous. 
The families of Roger de Pistri and of Urse d'Abetot each sup- 
plied four sheriffs, the former in Gloucestershire,^^ the latter in 
Worcestershire.^^ The power of these families, already strong 
through their local baronial standing, was further increased by 
the fact that in each case the custody of a castle was held together 
with the shrievalty.^* Baldwin of Exeter, another great tenant- 
in-chief and custodian of Exeter castle,^^ was succeeded as sheriff 
of Devon by two of his own sons.^^ The Grantmesnil and 
Malet shrievalties seem to have passed from father to son,^^ but 
both sons were ruined in consequence of their adherence to Duke 
Robert of Normandy in the early years following the accession 
of Henry I.^^ Haimo was succeeded both as dapifer and as 
sheriff of Kent by his son Haimo,^^ and his son Robert ^^ is no 
doubt the Robert fitz Haimon who was sheriff of Kent in the 
earlier years of Henry IJ^ Ralph Taillebois and Ivo Taillebois 

*" See Adams, Origin of the English Constitution, p. 72. 

" Stubbs, Constitutional History, i. 295. 

^2 Roger de Pistri was sheriff of Gloucester as early as about 1071 (Davis, Begesta, 
i, no. 49). His brother Durand, the Domesday sheriff, seems to have succeeded him 
before 1083 {ibid. 186). After the death of Durand about 1096 (Round, Feudal 
England, p. 313), his nephew, Walter fitz Roger (D. B. i. 169), better known as Walter 
of Gloucester, became sheriff, although Durand' s son Roger, who seems to have 
succeeded to his lands, lived until 1107. Walter is mentioned as holding the office in 
1097 (Davis, ibid., no, 389), and again in 1105-6 {Monasticon, i. 544). He evidently 
served for many years, for his son Miles, who was sheriff in 1129, still owed a sum 
which he had recently engaged to pay for the land and ministerium of his father 
(Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, p. 77). Miles was constable of England until he was super- 
seded in Stephen's time by Walter de Beauchamp. Subsequently he was created by 
Matilda earl of Hereford (Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 263, 285). 

^^ Urse d'Abetot held the Worcestershire shrievalty from about 1068 (above, 
note 20). The office passed at his death, about 1115, to his son Roger, and after the 
latter's disgrace to Walter de Beauchamp, the husband of Urse's daughter (Round, in 
Diet, of Nat. Biogr., art. ' Urse d'Abetot', and in Victoria History of Worcestershire, 
i. 263). Walter's son, William de Beauchamp, held the position in the reign of Henry II. 

«* Below, p. 162. 

•^^ Baldwin was the patron of the church of St. Mary within the castle {Devon- 
shire Association for Advancement of Science, xxx. 27). 

«« Round, Feudal England, p. 330, n. 37. " See notes 48, 58, 82. 

«» Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Eccles. iv. 167. «» Above, note 47. 

'" See Davis, Begesta, i, no. 451. 

" At some time in the period, 1103-9 {Monasticon, iii. 383 ; Round, Cal. of Docu- 
ments in France, no. 1377). He was still prominent in 1130 (Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, 
pp. 95, 97). Robert fitz Haimon, the conqueror of Glamorgan, and brother of the 


seem both to have been sheriffs of Bedfordshire before the Domes- 
day inquest."^- Swein of Essex and probably Turchil of Warwick- 
shire were hereditary sheriffs of a slightly earlier date.'^ The 
surname of Walter of Sahsbury indicates that he succeeded 
Edward, his father."^* Henry de Port, sheriff of Hampshire in 
1105, was the son, though not the immediate successor, of Hugo 
de Port.*^^ The second Geoffrey de Mandeville in the time of 
King Stephen greatly increased the strength of his newly acquired 
earldom by regaining the three shrievalties held by his grand- 
fath^ in the days of the Conqueror."^^ By this time such power 
was a menace to the state. In the great majority of counties 
there was no life tenure nor hereditary succession, and sheriffs 
follow each other in more rapid succession.'^'' 

The sheriff was in so many known instances surnamed from 
the chief town of his shire that this usage has been assumed to 
be the rule.'^^ The title of Swein of Essex affords almost the 
only case of a different usage for this period.''^ Sometimes 
a sheriff was placed over two counties, but this double tenure in 
nearly every case seems to have been of brief duration. ^^ The 
Conqueror and his sons limited the hereditary sheriff to one 

elder Haimo (William of Jumieges, Migne, Patrolog. Lat. cxlix. 898), was injured and 
lost his reason in 1105 {ante, xxi. 507-8). He left no son. 

'2 D. B. i, 209, 209 b. Ivo exacted the sheriff's crementum for demesne manors. 
See note 50. 

" Above, notes 16, 17, 

'* Walter, moreover, was the father of Patrick, earl of Salisbury {Monasticon, 
vi. 338, 501), sheriff of Wiltshire in the seventh year of Henry II. 
'' Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 377, 379 ; ante, xxvi. 489-90. 
'* Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 141-2. 

" For the sheriffs of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire see ante, xxx. 277 ff. ; for 

the sheriffs of Essex and Hertfordshire prior to 1080, above, notes 43 and 50. 

,In Warwickshire also the succession was comparatively rapid. In London, Geoffrey 

de Mandeville (note 50), Ralph Bainard (Davis, no. 211), and Roger (D. B. i. 127) all 

served before 1086. 

; '8 See Round, Feudal England, p. 168, where a list of instances is given. To this 

I may be added Durand of Gloucester (D. B. i. 168 b) as well as Peter of Oxford, who 

I belongs to the reign of William II {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, Rolls Series, ii. 41). 

I Urse d'Abetot appears as Urso de Wircestre (D. B. i. 169 b). 

I '* Yet Turchil de Warewicscyre appears in Thorpe, Diplomatarium, p. 441. 

! «" The shrievalty of Osbern in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire belongs to a slightly 

i later period {ante, xxx. 280, 284). Mr. Round has shown that the Domesday reference 

j to Urse d'Abetot in Gloucestershire (i. 163 b) does not prove that he ever had this 

shire along with that of Worcestershire ( Victoria County History of Worcester, i. 263). 

I Roger Bigod, the famous sheriff of Norfolk, was sheriff also of Suffolk at various 

times (note 47). Ralph Taillebois, who died before 1086, served both Bedfordshire 

! (D. B. i. 218b) and Hertfordshire {Victoria County History of Buckinghamshire, 

I i. 220), but in Hertfordshire Edmund was sheriff at the opening of the reign (Davis, 

I no. 16), and Ilbert probably before 1072 (above, note 43). Concerning the length 

of time during which Ansculf held the shrievalties of Buckinghamshire (D. B. 

j i. 148 b) and Surrey {ibid. i. 36), and Geoffrey de Mandeville those of Essex and 

1 Hertfordshire (see note 50), there is no definite information. Hugh fitz Baldric^ 

1 sheriff of Yorkshire (note 50), was also sheriff of Nottinghamshire in 1074 {ante, xxx. 

\ 282). 


shire. ^1 Occasionally a sheriff held two shires in succession.^^ 
Hugh de Bochland, one of the new curiales of William Rufus,^^ 
who in the reign of Henry I was cams regi and sheriff of eight 
shires,^* held nearly all of these before 1107.^^ The circumstance 
proves the king's resourcefulness on the eve of Tinchebrai, and 
marks a new era in the history of the shrievalty. New men will 
in the future be utilized to check the influence of the powerful 
sheriff with baronial interests. The participation in the rebellion 
of 1088 by two such officials doubtless recalled the dangerous 
revolt of Norman vicomtes in 1047.^^ 

The perquisites of the office, both legitimate and other, 
were probably greatest in the generation following the conquest 
of England. The view that the Danegeld was farmed and con- 
stituted the sheriff's greatest source of profit ^^ is untenable,^^ 
but there are indications in Domesday that the farming of the 
king's lands and the local pleas yielded a handsome margin.^^ 
How the oppressive sheriff might turn his power to financial 
advantage will appear later. The fact that so great a tenant as 
Urse d'Abetot might apparently gain exemption from the relief 
of 1095 9^ hints what influence at court might do. Sheriffs are 
mentioned as having certain lands for the term of their office. ^^ 
The reeveland ^^ as well as certain pence pertaining to the shrievalty, 
which Edward of Salisbury received, ^^ might add to the sheriff's 
profits, though the latter and probably the former were held 
subject to certain official obligations. 

" The case of the younger Geoffrey de Mandeville (above, p. 155) is hardly an 
exception. Miles of Gloucester, however, was sheriff of Staffordshire and Gloucester- 
shire, 1128-30 (Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, pp. 72, 76). 

" Aiulf, sheriff of Dorset in and before 1086 (D. B. i. 83), was in office in the period 
1082-4 (Davis, Bcgesta, i, no. 204), and was sheriff of Somerset before 1091 {ibid., 
nos. 315, 316), and also (above, note 48) in the reign of Henry I. William Malet, 
sheriff of Yorkshire from 1067 to 1069 {ante, xxx. 281), seems to have been sheriff of 
Suffolk before April 1070 (Round, Feudal England, pp. 429-30). 

^^ Above, note 49. Ordericus Vitalis {Hist, Eccles. iv. 164) mentions him only as 
one of the men de ignobile stirpe raised from the dust by Henry I. 

^* Chron. Mnnast. de Abingdon, ii. 117. 

"5 He held Bedfordshire (Davis, Begesta, i, nos. 395, 471) and Berkshire (below, 
note 112) in the reign of William II, and is also mentioned as sheriff of the latter 
county under Henry I {Monasticon, i. 523). He held Hertfordshire by 1105 and in 
1107 {ante, xxvi. 490 ; Liber Eliensis, p. 298), London and Middlesex before September 
1106 {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ii. 56 ; Monasticon, iv. 100 ; Round, CaL of Docu- 
ments in France, no. 1377), and Buckinghamshire {Chron. Monast. dc Abingdon, ii. 
98, 106) and Essex {Monasticon, i. 164 ; vi. 105) by about the same time. 

«« William of Malmesbury, Gesta Begum, ii. 286. 

" Stubbs, Constitutional History, i. 412. 

** Round, Feudal England, pp. 499-500. 

" Below, p. 170. 90 Round, Feudal England, p. 313. 

»^ A manor in Dorset held by Aluric, presumably the sheriff in the time of King 
Edward, is held by Aiulf of the king as long as he shall be sheriff (D. B. i. 83) ; Quam 
terram dederat llbertus cuidam suo militi dum esset vicecomes {ibid. i. 133). 

" D. B. i. 181 ; Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 169. »^ D. B. i. 69. 


The Domesday sheriff had personal agents or ministri. Among 
these may possibly be under-sheriffs, for the spirited denunciation 
written by the monk of Ely indicates that Picot of Cambridge 
had such a subordinate. ^4 It is clear that among these ministri 
were reeves, and there is a presumption that by 1086 the sheriflp 
was the head of the royal and public reeves of the shire. The 
ministri regis are sometimes seen to perform the same duties as 
reeves, ^^ and the ministri vicecomitis have the same f unctions. ^^^ 
The sheriff of the period is known to have had reeves with fiscal 
duties. ^^ Since the authority of the sheriff regularly extended 
to manors of the royal demesne, ^^ it follows that the king's reeve 
of Domesday was his subordinate. This is attested by fairly 
convincing evidence. ^^ The dependence of the hundredmen 
upon the sheriff is shown by the fact that in Devonshire they as 
well as king's reeves were collectors of the king's ferm, including 
the portion derived from the pleas of the hundred.i^o In Norfolk 

"^ Gervasius . . . irae artifex, inventor sceleris, confudit fas nefasque ; cui dominus 
eius dictus Picolus tamquam caeieris fideliori pro sua pravitate totius comitatus negotia 
commiserat. The account ends with the story that St. Etheldreda and her sistera 
appeared and punished Gervase with death for his offences against this church {Liber 
Eliensis, p. 267). At the inquest of several shires taken at Keneteford the sheriffs 
of Norfolk and Suffolk were represented by a deputy (Davis, Regesta, i, no. 122). 

^^ De his ii hidis nee geldum nee aliquod debitum reddiderunt ministri regis (D. B. 
i. 157 b, Oxfordshire). Certain customs which the king formerly had at Gloucester 
neither he nor Rothertus minister eius now has {ibid. i. 162). Hanc forisfacturam 
accipiebat minister regis et comitis in civitate {ibid. i. 262 b, Chester). According to 
Leges Henrici, 9, 10 a (Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 556), the ministri regis are officials 
who farm the local pleas. 

** The ministri of Roger Bigot increased a render to fifteen and later to twenty 
pounds (D. B. ii. 287 b, Suffolk). The Conqueror granted a hundred to the abbot of 
Evesham, qiiod mdlus vicecomes vel eorum ministri inde se quicquam intromittant vel 
pladtent vel aliquid exigant (Davis, Regesta, app. xiii). At the Domesday inquest 
for Hampshire the ministri regis, contrary to the testimony of the men of the shire 
and the hundred, declare that a certain piece of land belongs to the king's /erm (D. B. 
i. 50). 

*' The Domesday sheriff of Wiltshire was responsible for the ferm collected by 
reeves, and when there was a deficiency had to make it good (D. B. i. 69). Roger 
Bigot as sheriff cf Suffolk warranted to a reeve a free man who had been joined to 
the ferm of Brunfort {ibid. ii. 282). William II enjoined a sheriff to make reparation 
for wrong done by his reeve Edwy and his other ministri {Citron. Monast. de Abingdon, 
ii. 41). Haimo's agents who seized some of Anselm's property during his absence 
from England are mentioned by the latter as vestri homines (epist. Ivii, Migne, 
Patrolog. Lat. clix. 233). 

^« Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 167 ; see also ante, xxi. 31, note 97. 

^* A praepositus regis claimed land for pasturing the king's cattle, but was met 
by the witness of the shire that he might have it only through the sheriff (D. B. i. 49, 
Hants). A sheriff made certain estates reeveland for the praepositi regis {ibid. i. 218 b). 
Moreover, these officials are mentioned as taking part in the collection of the ferm 
{ibid, iv, fo. 513 b). Roger Bigod is shown to have been closely associated with the 
act of the praepositiis regis in his shire who seized unto the king's hand the 
land of an outlawed person : D. B. ii. 176 b ; cf. ibid. ii. 3. According to D. B. iv, 
fo. 513, the ferm of a manor was rendered praeposito regis de Winesford, who seems 
to be the ordinary official of the manor (D. B. i. 179 b). 

^'*'' Comes [de Moritonid] habet i. mansionem quae vocatur Ferdendella , . . De hue 


one of the hundred-reeves had for more than a decade held land 
per vicecomites regis P^ Finally, Mr. Ballard's conclusion,io2 that 
except at Hereford and Dover the borough praepositus of Domes- 
day was the sheriff's subordinate, appears to be well founded. 

Under the early Norman kings the sheriff's judicial position 
was most important, and his independence in judicial matters 
greatest. The usage which in the reign of Henry I regarded the 
sheriff as solely responsible for holding the sessions of the hundred 
and the shire was evidently not new.^^^ According to Domesday 
Book the sheriff holds local courts even in Herefordshire,!^* 
which for a time has probably been a palatinate, and in Shrews- 
bury ,^0^ where the earl's authority over sheriff and shiremote is 
still great.! ^^ The essence of one of the very greatest franchises 
is exemption of a hundred from the jurisdiction of the sheriff 
and his reeves .^^^ In separating ecclesiastical from secular 
jurisdiction the Conqueror forbade any sheriff or reeve or ministri 
regis to interfere in matters which belonged to the bishop. If 
any one contemns the bishop's summons three times the fortitudo 
et iustitia regis vel vicecomitis are to be invoked. ^^^ In all but 
most exceptional causes the Norman sheriff for a time must have 
been the justice.^^^ To commission some one else required 
a special exercise of the royal prerogative. The pleas of the 
Crown, the income from which was not farmed, and went to 
the king in toto}'^^ as well as the ordinary causes triable in the 

mafisione culumniantur hundrcmani et praepositi regis xxx. denarios et consuetudincm 
placitorum ad opus firme Ermtone mansione regis (D. B. iv, fo. 218). The reeve who 
held the hundredmote was apparently a dependent of the sheriff in the time of King 
Edward (ante, xxxi. 28). 

^°i D. B. ii. 120. The land had been given to the reeve originally by Earl Ralph, 
who was overthrown in 1075. 

"2 The Domesday Boroughs, pp. 45-7. Certainly this was true at Canterbury, for 
the sheriff, Haimo, held this city of the king (D. B. i. 2). 

^"^ The writ of 1109-11 (Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 524) establishes no new principle 
in this regard, but merely directs the sheriff how these sessions are to be held. 

^°* Of the Welsh of Archenfield we read, si vicecomes evocat cos ad sirernot 
meliores ex eis vi aut vii vadunt cum eo. Qui vocatus non vadit dat ii. solid, aut unum 
hovem regi et qui de hundret remanet tantundem persolvit (D. B. i. 179). 

^"^ Siquis burgensis [of Shrewsbury] frangebat tcrminum quern vicecomes imponebat 
ei emendabat x. solid. (D. B. i. 252). 

^"^ Above, note 32. See also Davis, Eyigland under the Normans and Angcvins, p. 517. 

^°' Ante, xxxi. 28. See also above, note 96. The church of St. Mary of Worcester had 
a hundred with similar liberty (D. B. i. 172 b), and the exclusion of the sheriff from 
the hundred of Hornmere, held by the monastery of Abingdon {Chron. Monast. de 
Abingdon, ii. 164), was of long standing. 

^"^ Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 485 ; Stubbs, Select Charters, p. 85. 

^"^ The king's court is in the main ' only for the great man and the great causes' : 
Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, 1899, i. 108. 

"» The usual five-pound forisfacturae {ante, xxxi. 32-3), which were extra firmas, 
the king had everywhere on his demesne in Worcestershire from all men (D. B. i. 
172), and in Kent from all allodiarii and their men. The list in the last-named county 
(D. B. i. 2) included the felling of trees upon the king's highway. For grithbreach 


shire and hundred, seem to be dealt with by him and his sub- 
ordinates. It has been shown, however, that as early as the 
reign of William Rufus there were special royal justices locally 
resident.iii Hugh de Bochland, sheriff of Berkshire in this reign, 
seems to combine the two offices ,112 but they are already separable. 
The sheriff's position as head of the judicial system of the 
shire is the central fact in Norman local government. It involved 
numerous duties and responsibilities. The law of the king's 
court being as yet unformed and fitful in operation, the most 
important law-declaring body was still the county court.^^^ 
A strong sheriff could exert a decided influence upon customary 
law.ii* His control tended towards uniformity of practice. About 
1115 the observances of judgement, the rules of summons, and 
the attendance in the counties convened twice a year are said 
to be the same as those in the hundreds convened twelve times 
a year.115 In the one instance in which Domesday affords data 
for comparison the sum collected for absence from the hundred 
is the same as that for absence from the shire.^^^ All this means 

in Kent in certain cases eight pounds was paid, and in Nottingham {ibid. i. 280) the 

same amount for impeding the passage of boats down the Trent or for ploughing or 

making a ditch in the king's highways toward York. Manslaying on one of the four 

great highways {Leis Willdme, 26, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 510) counted as breach of 

the king's peace. In Yorkshire (D. B. i. 298 b) and Lincolnshire {ibid. i. 336 b) the king 

was entitled in twelve hundreds, the earl in six, to eight pounds for breach of peace 

given by the king's hand or seal. At Oxford the housebreaker who assailed a man 

{ibid. i. 154 b), and in Berkshire the man who broke into a city by night {ibid. i. 56 b), 

paid five pounds to the king. Burghers in some towns {ibid. i. 154 b, 238) who failed 

to render the due military service paid the same amount, although sums collected 

for various other offences in boroughs were often less. In Cheshire the lord who 

neglected to render service toward repairing the bridge and the wall of the city {ibid. 

1 i. 262 b) incurred a, forisfactura of forty shillings, which is specifically stated to have 

I been extra firmas. On a Berkshire manor latrocinium is mentioned among the great 

I forisfacturae {ibid. i. 61 b) The murdrum fine {Leis Willelmc, 22, Liebermann, 

! Gesetze, i.510) was already being collected (Davis, Begesta, i, no. 202) in the Conqueror's 

1 reign. Half the goods of the thief adjudged to death in some places went to the king 

j (D. B. i. 1) ; for certain offences a criminal's chattels were all confiscated. According 

I to the Leis Willelme (2, 2 a-2, 4, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 494-5) the forisfactum regis 

I of forty shillings in the Mercian law and that of fifty shillings in Wessex belong to 

i the sheriff, while in the Danelaw the man with sake and soke who is impleaded in 

; the county court forfeits thirty-three ora, of which the sheriff retains ten for the king. 

j "* Davis, England under the Normans and Angevins, p. 520. As to the local justiciar 

: of the twelfth century see Round, Geoffrey de Mandcville, pp. 106-9. A writ of 

j William II, directed to his iudicibus, sheriffs, and officials (Davis, Bcgcstcf, i, no. 393), 

I seems to show the change. 

j ^" Et Berchescire vicecomes et publicarum iusticiarius compellationum a fege con- 
j stitutus {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ii. 43). 
j "^ Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh Century, p. 91. 
i "* Mr. Davis {England under the Normans and Angevins, 522) suggests that the 
sheriff's influence contributed to the great diversity of local judicial usage. 
"^ Leges Henrici Primi, 7, 4-7, 8, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 553-4. 
"* Above, note 104. Compare Bex habet in Dunwic consuetudinem hanc quod duo 
vd ires ibunt adhundret si recte moniti Jucrint et si hoc non fa ciunt fori sfacti sunt de ii, 
oris (D. B. ii. 312). 


activity for the sheriff and the reeves under him.^^^ The two 
great sessions of each hundred held annually to make view of 
frankpledge ^^^ met in this period under the sheriff's presidency ,11^ 
no less than in the reign of Henry II. ^^o Sentence of outlawry 
was pronounced by the sheriff in the county court/^i and Mr. 
H. W. C. Davis ^^^ has found indications that in the time of the 
Conqueror the forest law was sometimes enforced in the same 
way. It is usually assumed that this machinery was turned to 
financial oppression in the king's interest during the reign of 
Rufus.12^ So far as we can judge it was through the sheriff's 
jurisdiction that the king's financial claims were enforced. ^^4 
Nothing but the sheriff's power could have enabled Ranulf 
Flambard to drive and supervise ' his motes over all England '. 
To the sheriff in the shiremote ^^s were communicated the king's 
grants, proclamations, and administrative orders. About him 
turned the administrative as well as the judicial system of the shire. 
The sheriff might be directed by royal writ to reserve certain 
cases to the king's court,^^^ and he was sometimes commissioned 
to assume its judicial powers, as were vicomtes in Normandy .^^t 
The mention of a resident justice in the shire ^^s shows, on the 

^" Thus a writ of Henry I addressed to Roger Bigot and omnibus ministris de 
Suthfolcia directs them to permit a vill of St. Benedict of Ramsey to be quit of shires 
and hundreds and of all other pleas except murdrum and latrocinium {Ramsey Cart. 
i. 249). There is evidence that the sheriff summoned men to the shiremote (note 104). 

"^ Leges Henrici, 8, 1-8, 2, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 554 : cf. Lets Willelme, 25, 
ibid. i. 511. 

^^^ Dr. Liebermann even believes that this was true in the reign of Edward the 
Confessor {ante, xxxi. 29, note 28), when the sheriff is known to have held sessions 
of the hundred. See the present writer's Frankpledge System, pp. 113-14. 

"" Assize of Clarendon, § 9, Stubbs, Select Charters, p. 144. 

12^ Siquis pro aliquo reatu exulatus fuerit a rege et comite et ab hominibus vicecomi- 
tatus (D. B. i. 336). Since there was no longer an earl the presidency of the sheriff 
follows. 122 Jiegesta, i, p. xxxi. 

"^ Stubbs, Constit. Hist. i. 327 ; Freeman, William Rujus, i. 344. 

124 Ante, xxxi. 33 ; see below, pp. 164-5, 169. 

12^ See W. H. Stevenson, ante, xxi. 506-7. Of a grant addressed in the familiar form, 
Willelmus rex Anglorum, Gilleberto de Britteville et omnibus fidelibus suis, Francigenis 
et Angligenis, de Berkascire, the Abingdon chronicler {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, 
ii. 26) says : rex Willelmus iunior . . . concessit istas ad comitatum Berkascire inde 
litteras dirigere. Dr. Liebermann finds evidence {Trans, of the Royal Hist. Society, new 
ser. viii. 22) that the coronation charter of Henry I was to be read in every shire 
court in the kingdom: cf. Davis, England under the Normans and Angevins, p. 119, 
n. 4. 

"•^ See the writ of William II to the sheriffs in whose shires the abbot of Evesham 
held lands (Davis, Regesta, i, no. 429 ; Monasticon, ii. 22). 

"' See Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 117, 132 ; Haskins in American Historical Review, 
xiv. 469 [Norman Institutions, p. 46]. 

"® See the case of Hugh de Bochland dating from the reign of William II (above, 
p. 159). A charter of William I which mentions the sheriffs and justiciars of Devon 
has been explained by Mr. Davis {Regesta, i, no. 59) as probably a variant of later 
date. The charter of Henry I to London {Gesetze, i. 525) not only shows that the sheriff 
and iustitiarius are two different persons, but shows that the function of the latter 
was ad custodiendum placita coronae meae et eadem placitanda. 


other hand, that some other agent of the king might be entrusted 
with judicial functions which the sheriff had formerly discharged. 
During the Conqueror's reign a sheriff is known in but one instance 
to have sat alone as a commissioned royal justice ; ^-^ but the 
earUest known eyre, some time in the period 1076-9, was held 
before two sheriffs ^^^ along with other barons. Precepts of 
William II order sheriffs to dispose of certain assigned cases. ^^i 
Through such royal mandates the sheriff first came into contact 
with that royal inquest for ascertaining facts which constituted 
the original form of the jury. The king's writ enjoining such 
procedure might come direct to the sheriff 1^2 or to a person 
serving as the king's justice at whose instance the sheriff some- 
times acted. ^^^ 

The military functions of the sheriff in the period under 
consideration were derived both from English and from Norman 
usage. The principle of the general levy provided a fighting 
force exceedingly useful in an emergency, though inferior to that 
yielded by the system of knight service now imported from 
Normandy. The sheriff of King Edward led both the shire levies 
and the special forces sent by the boroughs.^^* Vestiges of such 
arrangements still appear in Domesday Book.^^^ Florence of 
Worcester mentions the military service rendered by Urse 
d'Abetot against the rebellious earls in 1074 in terms which suggest 
that he commanded a general levy.^^® Robert Malet, sheriff of 
Suffolk, was one of the leaders of the king's forces which 
put down the revolt of 1075 in East Anglia.^^' The inward, 
which in the Confessor's time was rendered in the west and 

"' Yale Law Journal, xxiii. 506. 

"» Round, Feudal England, p. 329. Urse d'Abetot may have sat as justice in his 
own shiremoto under the presidency of Geoffrey of Coutances (Davis, Rcgesta, i, 
no. 230 ; compare no. 184). 

"* To do right to the abbot of Westminster concerning the churches of Scotland 
(Davis, no. 420) or to summon throe and a half hundreds to deal with a case con- 
cerning the rights of the abbot of Ramsey (nos. 448, 449). Humphrey the Cham- 
berlain, in the latter case, seems to bo acting as sheriff. 

"2 Hist. Monasl. St. Augustini (Rolls Series), pp. 353-4, 350 ; Davis, Regesta, i, 
no. 448. 

"' See the case in which Picot and Odo of Baycux were concerned, below, p. 173. 

"* Ante, xxxi. 30. 

"« The Welsh of the district of Archenficld, who in King Edward's time served 
under the sheriff of Hereford, number 196 in 1086. They are required to make 
expeditions into Wales only when the sheriff goes (D. B. i. 179). To this service 
in exercitu regis they are so firmly bound that if one of them dies the king has his horse 
and arms (D. B. i. 181). At Taunton all were under obligation to go in expcditione 
with the bishop's men (D. B. iv, fo. 174). The quota demanded of boroughs was usually 
fixed at a comparatively small 'figure. See Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond^ 
p. 155, n. 8. 

"• Wtdfstan cum magna militari manu ct Angclwimts Eovesliamensis abbas cum 
suis ascitis sibi in adiutorititn Ursom vicecomiie Wigorniae ct Waltcro dc Laceo cum 
copiis suis et cetera multitudine plcbis : Florence of Worcester, a. 1074. 

"' Davis, Regesta, i, no. 82. 



midlands under the sheriff's direction/^^ still prevails in the 
Domesday period.^^^ In Kent the tenants of certain lands 
guarded the king for three days when he came to Canterbury 
or Sandwich.i^^ The Norman vicomte, on the other hand, was 
keeper of the king's castles,i*i and the earlier sheriffs of the 
Conqueror often appear in this capacity .^*^ William Malet held 
the castle at York, and in 1069 unsuccessfully defended it against 
the Danes.^*^ The story of the excommunication of Urse d'Abetot 
shows that he was the builder of the castle at Worcester ; ^^^ he 
was also its custodian,i^^ a post to which his daughter's husband, 
Walter de Beauchamp, and his grandson, William de Beauchamp, 
succeeded in turn. The custodianship of the castle at Exeter 
likewise became hereditary in the family of Baldwin, the sheriff 
who erected it.^*^ The constableship of Gloucester was attached 
to the shrievalty at least as early as the time of Walter of Glou- 
cester. ^^^ There is evidence of such an arrangement elsewhere ,i*^ 
although sheriffs were not necessarily custodes castelUM^ When 
Roger Bigot rebelled in 1088 he seized Norwich Castle ,i^^ and so as 
sheriff he was hardly its guardian. Both he and Hugh de Grant- 
mesnil, however, must have been materially strengthened in 

i3« Ante, xxxi. 29, 35. "9 g^e, for example, D. B. i. 132 b, 190. 

^*'' Ibid. i. 1. This obligation was commuted in one Kentish district by rendering 
for each inward two sticks of eels, and in another by a payment of twelve pence for 
each inivard. 

^*^ See Haskins in Amer. Hist. Eevieiv, xiv. 469 [Norman Institutions, p. 46]. 

1*" This suggests that William Peverel (Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Ecdes. iv. 184), 
in whose hands the castle of Nottingham was placed when it was built in 1068, may 
have been sheriff. 

"' Habuit Willelmus Malet quamdiu tenuit castellum de Euruic . . . Dicunl fuisse 
saisitum Willelmum Malet ct habuisse terrain et servitium donee fractum est castellum : 
D. B. i. 373. Florence of Worcester (Engl. Hist. Soc), ii. 4, adds details. 

'" William of Malmesbury, Gesta Pontificum, ii. 253. 

"5 Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 313-14 ; Diet, of Nat. Biogr., art.' Urse d'Abetot '»j 

"•5 Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Ecdes. ii. 181 ; Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 439; 
above, p. 154. 

"' His son Miles in the reign of Henry I held its custody sicnt patrimonium suum 
(Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 13, n. 1 ; Monasticon, vi. 134). Walter also had 
charge of the castle of Hereford. 

"* It has not been proved that Geoffrey de Mandeville held the tower of Londoi 
but both his son and grandson did so (Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 37-8, 166) 
Similarly the shrievalty of Wiltshire in the twelfth century included an hereditary* 
custodianship. In Dorset Hugh fitz Grip cleared ground for work on the castles 
(D. B. i. 75), and the sheriff at Lincoln performed a similar service {ibid. i. 336). The 
same was true at York and apparently at Gloucester and Cambridge. See below, 
note 249. 

"* Custodes castelli are mentioned in Sussex (D. B. i. 21). Robert the despenser, 
brother of Urse d'Abetot, held the castle and honour of Tamworth (Round, Geoffrey 
de Mandeville, p. 314). Gilbert the sheriff of Herefordshire had the castle of Clifford 
to farm, but it was actually held by Ralph de Todeni (D. B. i. 173). Robert d'Oilly, 
castellan of Oxford in the reigns of William I and William II, was sheriff of Warwick- 
shire {Monasticon, i. 522 ; Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ii. 12). 

»'» Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a. 1088 ; W. Malmesbury, Gesta Regum, ii. 361. 


this revolt by the resources of their office. After the failure of 
the movement in the north Durham Castle was delivered to the 
sheriffs of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. i^i During this rebeUion 
the sheriffs also took possession of the men, lands, and property 
of Bishop William of Durham,^^- one of the rebels. 

The retirement of the earl left the sheriff the authority for 
keeping the peace and administering matters of police within 
his bailiwick. At Shrewsbury, in a region where the sheriff had 
been exceptionally prominent, it was he and not the earl who 
proclaimed the king's peace in the time of King Edward.^^^ 
After the earl has disappeared throughout the greater part of 
England the Domesday inquest for Warwickshire shows that this 
function belongs to the sheriff,i^* and an entry for Yorkshire 
proves that the realm may be abjured before him, and that he 
has the power of recalling and giving peace to a person who has 
thus made abjuration.^^^ The sheriff's well-known power of 
arresting malefactors ^^^ was extended when he was made re- 
sponsible for enforcing the forest laws.^^' This phase of his 
activity can hardly have been new,^^^ but the severity of Norman 
forest regulations ^^^ certainly gave it new significance. A letter 
of Bishop Herbert de Losinga implores the lord sheriff and God's 
faithful Christians in Norfolk and Suffolk to seek and give up 
those who have broken into his park at Homersfield and killed 
a deer.i^^ The sheriff's duties were further increased through 
the enactment of the Conqueror providing that he was to deal 
with those who contemned the authority of the episcopal court.^®^ 
A writ of Henry I, addressed in 1101 to the shiremote of Lincoln- 
shire, and presumably sent to other shires, orders the sheriff and 
certain notables to administer to the king's demesne tenants the 
oath to defend the realm against Robert of Normandy .^^^ 

The sheriff was the recipient of royal mandates of many 

"* Ante, XXX. 282-3. They were possibly former sheriffs. 

"2 Monasticoyi, i. 245. ' ^^' D. B. i. 252. 

»* D. B. i. 172. 

*" Si vero comes vel vicecomes aliquem de regione foras miserint ipsi enm revocart 
et pacem ei dare possunt si voluerint {ibid. i. 298 b). 

"« Aiite, xxxi. 30-1. 

"^ Mr. Davis (Regesta, i, p. xxxi) has established such a responsibility. Not only 
does the sheriff of Kent .serve on a commission to judge forest offences {ibid., no. 260), 
but a precept of the king to his sheriff and liegemen of Middlesex forbids any one to 
hunt in the manor of Harrow which belongs to Archbishop Lanfranc {ibid.,- no. 265). 
In the Confessor's time the guarding of the forest might be a manorial duty for which 
commutation was made by money payment (D. B. i. 61 b). So in the reign of the 
Conqueror (D. B. i. 180 b, Herefordshire), WiUelmus comes misit extra suos manerios 
duos forestarios propter silvas custodiendas. Mr. Davis associates foresters with the 
I enforcement of forest law only by the time of William Rufus. 

»" See II. Canute, 80, 1, Liebermann, Gesetze, 1. 366-71. 
1 "» See Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a. 1087 ; Freeman, Norm. Conq. v. 124-5. 

"° Goulburn and Symonds, Herbert de Losinga, pp. 170-2. 

"1 Above, p. 158. "' ^'^^^^ ^^^- 506-9. 



varieties. The king's writs, whether addressed directly to the 
sheriff or to the county court to be published by the sheriff,^ ^^ 
imposed special administrative no less than judicial duties. 
They attest the prerogative powers of the Norman kingship and 
reveal the shrievalty as an arm of a central executive. Notices 
to shiremotes of royal grants of lands or privileges ^^^ incidentally 
warrant the surrender by the sheriff and reeves of part of the 
king's rights. Sheriff's made livery of lands ,^^^ and placed grantees 
in possession of customs or privileges by writ or order of the 
j^jng 166 To the usual clause of the king's writ-charter forbidding 
any one to disturb the grantee ^^^ may sometimes be added 
another restraining the sheriff or another officer from doing so/^^ 
or else ordering the sheriff to see that no injustice is done in 
the matter.i^^ A common method of enforcing the decision of 
the king's court, especially when held locally by a royal justice, 
was by writ to the sheriffs.^^^ A form of peremptory command 
bids the sheriff see that a given person shall have certain property 
or rights, and let the king hear no further complaint on the 
matter.i^i The sheriffs may be ordered to seize the property 
of rebels or other persons under the royal ban.^'^ Henry I com- 
mands the sheriffs of Kent and Essex to prohibit fishing in the 
Thames before the fishery at Rochester on pain of the king's 
forisfactumP^ William I causes Lanfranc and Geoffrey of 
Coutances to summon the sheriffs and tell them in the king's 
name to restore lands, the alienation of which had been per- 
mitted by bishops and abbots. ^'^ WilHam II orders the sheriffs 
of the shires wherein the abbot of Ramsey has lands to alienate 
none of his demesne without the king's licence.^'^ The Conqueror's 
writ to William de Curcello, presumably sheriff of Somerset, 
enjoins that payment of Peter's pence shall be made at next 
Michaelmas by all thanes and their men, and that William, 

"3 Of a mandate of the Conqueror in the usual form confirming its lands to 
the church of Abingdon it is said, Quarum reritaUo littcrarum in Berkescire comitatu 
prolata plurimtim ct ipsi ahbati et ccclcsiae commodi attulit {Chron. Monast. dc Abingdony 
ii. 1). 

"* See Davis, Regesta, i, nos. IGO, 162, 170, 209, 210, 212, 245. Nos. 244, 277, 
289 give possession with sac and soc. 

"^ The shcrifiE of Yorkshire gave possession of land to Bishop Walcher per brevcm 
regis (D. B. i. 298). See also ibid. i. 167, and Davis, Regesta, i, no. 442. In some 
places an act of livery must have been usual when the writ was read. In the Domes- 
day inquest as, for instance, i. 36, 50, 62, 164, both the men of the shire and tlio 
hundred seem to doubt that a grant of land. has been made, because they have never 
seen the king's writ nor act of livery. 

"• Davis, Regesta, i, no. 87. 

"' Ibid., nos. 14, 17, 85, 243, 244, 294. 

'•* As in Round, Cal. of Doc. in France, no. 1375. 

'*' Monasticon, ii. 18 ; Davis, Regesta, i, no. 104. 

"" Davis, Regesta, i, nos. 129, 230, 288 b. i" Ibid., no. 329. 

1" J^bove, p. 163. 173 Monasticon, i. 164. 

"* Davis, Regesta, i, no. 50. i^b jh^,^ no. 329. 


together with the bishop, is to make inquisitio concerning all who 
do not pay and to take them in pledge.^'^ 

The sheriff has charge of the king's property and of his fiscal 
rights. Land at the king's farm may be in manu vicecomitis}'^'^ 
and the sheriff often holds land which is in manu regis}'^^ Lands 
which the king holds in demesne are mentioned as having been 
officially received by the sheriff.^'^^ The sheriff has the custody 
of land which has fallen to the king through forfeiture .^^^ He 
seizes land for failure to render service due ^^^ or to pay geld ^^^ 
or gavel,^^^ and he brings action against a person who has invaded 
lands de soca regis}^^ We read at times of the king's saltpans as 
in his charge ^^^ and of boroughs as held by him.^^^ It is his 
business to see that the king's estates of which he is guardian 
are kept properly stocked with plough oxen,^^^ and he is the 
custodian of the peasants who till the land.^^^ Through an 
application of the doctrine of seisin the profits from pleas is 
said to be in manu vicecomitis. Bishop Odo sued the sheriff of 
Surrey in order to obtain the third penny of the port dues at 

"« Cal. of MS8. of the Dean and Chapter of Wells, Hist. MSS. Commission, i. 17 ; 
Davis, Regesta, i, no. 187. Pledge was not to be taken upon the bishop's land 
until the matter came before him. 

^^^ Modo est in manu vicecomitis ad firmam regis (D. B. ii. 5). 

"* A i)art of Blontesdone held by Edward the sheriff is in tnanu regis {ibid. i. 74) ; 
modo custodit hoc maneriwm Pctrus vicecomes in ma mi regis {ibid. ii. 1). Of the half 
hundred and borough of Ipswich it is said, hoc custodit Roger Bigot in manu regis 
{ibid. ii. 290). 

"® Rex tenet in dominio Rinvede . . . Qiiando vicecomes recepit, nisi x hidae. Aliae 
fuerunt in Wilt (D. B. i. 39). Cf. Quando Haimo vicecomes recepit {ibid. i. 2 b). 

i«" Hoc invasit Berengarius homo Sancti Edmundi et est in misericordia regis. Hie 
infirmus erat. Non potuit venire ad placitum. Modo sunt in custodia vicecomitis {ibid. 
ii. 449). Quas tenuit i faber T. R. E. qui propter latrocinium interfectus fuit et prat- 
positus regis addidit illam terram, huic manerio (D. B. ii. 2 b). 

^" See below, p. 171. 

"2 Hanc terram sumpsit Petrus incecomes . . . in manu eiusdem regis pro forisfa^tura 
de gildo regis (D. B. i. 141). 

"=*... ille gablum de hac terra dare noluit et Radulfus Taillgebosc gaUum dedit 
et pro forisfacto ipsam terram sumpsit (D. B. i. 216 b). 

"* Picot was the sheriff and Aubrey de Vere the trespasser {ibid. i. 199 b). 

"^ Ibid. ii. 7b; cf. Ellis, Introduct. to Domesday Book, p. xli. 

»«« Thus Haimo held Canterbury of the king (D. B. i. 2). The see of St. Augustine 
and Abbot Scotland were in 1077 reseised of the borough of Fordwich which Haimo 
held {Hist. Mon. S. Augustini, p. 352). See also above, note 178. 

^" B. B. ii. 1, 2 ; see also Victoria County History of Essex, i. 365. 

"« The services of the sokemen whom Picot lent Earl Roger to aid him in 
holding his pleas (D. B. i. 193 b) were regarded as lost to the king. Richard fitz 
Gilbert in Suffolk held as appurtenant to one of his manors certain liberi homines 
formerly acquired by agreement with the sheriff {ibid. ii. 393). In Buckinghamshire 
the sokeman who has land which he can give and sell nevertheless servit semper vice- 
comiti regis (D. B. i. 143, 143 b). The sheriff's custodianship of some cottiers at Holborn 
was of longer standing (D. B. i. 127). When in 1088 William of St. Calais was pro- 
claimed a rebel the villeins on his Yorkshire manors were seized or held to ransom 
by the sheriff {Monasiicon, i. 245). On a Gloucestershire manor of the royal demesne 
the sheriff is said to have increased the number of villeins and borders (D. B. i. 164)- 


South wark.i^^ Control of the king's lands also means control of 
their issues. It is this which in the past has made the sheriff 
an attendant upon the royal progresses.^^o 

The innate financial genius of the Norman, together with the 
unusual opportunities which the period afforded for increasing 
the royal income, render the sheriff's fiscal functions of striking 
importance both to the king and the realm. The early develop- 
ment of direct taxation in England as compared with the Con- 
tinent has been pronounced one of the most remarkable facts of 
English history .1^1 Here the sheriff appears both as the agent 
of a dominant central power and also as its main support. 

A finna comitatus existed at least in one case before 1066. 
It is known that by 1086 there are instances of the payment by 
the sheriff of one sum for the royal revenues of the county which 
are farmed.^^^ ^he number of such cases casually mentioned 
suggests that this may long have been the rule in counties where 
any of the king's lands are held at ferm. Not only is there a ferm 
of AViltshire,^^^ but the sheriff is said to be responsible for the 
ferm collected by reeves, and must make good the amount which 
is due from them.^^* The annual ferm from Warwickshire ^^^ 
and from Worcestershire ^^^ consists both of the firma of demesne 
manors and of the placita comitatus, as in the days of the Pipe 
Rolls. Indeed the Leges Henrici will speak of the soke of sheriffs 
and royal bailiffs comprised in their /erm^.^^' Northamptonshire 
and Oxfordshire ^^s each pays a lump sum in commutation of 
a ferm of three nights. Geoffrey de Mandeville held London and 
Middlesex for an annual ferm of £300, and Essex and Hertford- 
shire for a fixed sum, the amount of which is not stated.^^^ 
William de Mohun, sheriff of Somerset, likewise accounted for 
a fixed sum ; ^oo and in Shropshire, which has become a palatinate, 

*®® D. B. i. 32. Ranulf the sheriff, apparently overawed, let the matter go by 

'«» Ante, xxxi. 35, 36. 

*" Vinogradofif, English Society in the Eleventh Century, p. 140. 

*'2 Round, Commune of London, pp. 72-3. 

^»' Hanc terram tenet Edwardus [de Sarisberie] in firma de Wiltescira iniuste id dicil 
comitatus (D. B. i. 164). 

*'* Above, note 97. 

^^^ £143 ad pondus, to which are added certain customary payments, partly in 
the nature of commutation, xxiii. libras pro consuetudine canum, xx solidos pro sum- 
mario el x lihros pro accipitre et c solidos reginae pro gersuma (D. B. i. 238). 

"* . . . rcddil vicccomcs xxiii libras et v. sol. ad pensum de civitate ct de dominicis 
maneriis regis reddit cxxiii libras et iiii solidos ad pensum. De comiiutu vero reddit 
xvii libras ad pensum, et adhuc x libras denariorum et de xx. in ora pro summario. Hae 
xvii. librae ad pensum et xvi librae sunt de placitis comitatus et hundredis et si indc 
non accepit de suo proprio reddit (D. B. i. 172). 

*®^ Leges Ilcnrici, 9, 10 a, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 556. 

•»8 D. B. i. 154 b, 219. For Oxfordshire the amount is £150. 

*"' Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, pp. 141-2. 

^*"' Round, Commune of London, p. 73. 



the earl in 1086 paid one /em for theking's estates and the pleas 
of the county and hundreds.201 The augmentum or crenmitum 
mentioned in Domesday 202 appears to be a premium paid by the 
sheriff in excess of the regular ferm for the privilege of farming 
the shire, the equivalent of the gersuma of the Pipe Roll of 
Henry I.203 

There are various other evidences of the sheriff's activity as 
head of the ferm of the shire. Of this the pleas of the hundred 
formed an important source,204 the income from which might 
regularly be included in the ferm of lands.205 There are instances 
in which the sheriff annexes the revenue from a hundred court 
to that of a royal manor 206 q^ borough.^o^ Moreover, Mait- 
land's inference that the sheriff lets boroughs to/erm^os has been 
justified by more recent research. The case of Worcester and 
the famihar example of Northampton 209 by no means stand 
alone. The facts collected by Mr. Ballard make it clear that the 
sheriff was ordinarily accountable for borough renders.210 In the 

2" Above, note 32. 

^o^ In Oxfordshire £25 de augmento is mentioned (D. B. i. 154 b). Edward of 
Salisbury paid £60 ad pondus as crementum {ibid. i. 64 b). The gersuma of Domesday- 
is smaller, and seems to be in theory a gift. Oxfordshire (D. B. i. 154 b) paid a hundred 
shillings as the queen's gersuma. In Essex a gersuma of the same amount was paid 
by a manor or borough to the sheriff {ibid. ii. 2 b, 3, 107). See below, note 205. Six 
manors in Herefordshire rendered twenty-five shillings gersuma at Hereford {ibid, 
i. 180 b). 

2«3 Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I, pp. 2, 52, 73. 

*"* Both the two pence of the king and the third penny of the earl derived from 
Appletree hundred, Nottinghamshire, are in manu et censu vicecomitis {ibid. i. 280). 
Because seven of the hundreds of Worcestershire had been exempted from his control 
the sheriff lost heavily in ferm {ibid. i. 172). Swein of Essex had been granted from 
the pleas of one hundred in Essex a hundred shillings, from those of another twenty- 
five (Ballard, Domesday Inquest, p. 70). 

205 Vicecomes inter suas consuetudines et placita de dimidio hundred recepit inde 
xxxiiii libras et iv libras de gersuma (D. B. ii. 2, Essex). De hac mansione ccdumpniantur 
hundredmanni et praepositus regis xxx. denarios et consuetudincm placitorum ad opus 
firme Ermtone mansione regis {ibid, iv, fo. 218). 

^°^ T. R. E. reddebat vicecomes de hoc manerio quod exibat ad Jirmam. Modo 
reddit xv libras cum ii. hundred quos ibi apposuit vicecomes : ibid. i. 163 (Gloucester). 

^"' Ibid. i. 162. The income from three hundreds had been combined with that 
of the borough of Winchcombe. 

'"* Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 209. 

2"^ Ibid., pp. 204-5. Mr. Ballard has remarked that this is the only case in Domes- 
day in which burgesses appear to farm a borough {Domesday Boroughs, p. 92). It 
has been pointed out, however ( Victoria County History of Northampton, i. 277), that 
it was a century before they acquired the privilege of farming directly of the Crown. 
As to the ferm of the city of Worcester, see note 196. 

"" Domesday Boroughs, pp. 44-5. The sheriff is mentioned as increasing a 
borough render. There is allusion to the time when he received a borough upon 
entering office (D. B. i. 2, Canterbury ; i. 280, Northampton). He is said to account 
for the burghal third penny. The collection of the census domorum at Worcester 
(D. B. i. 172), of the poll tax at Colchester {ibid. ii. 106 b), of the port dues at 
Southwark {ibid. i. 32), and of toll in many places (D B. i. 209 ; Davis, Regcsta, i, 
no. 201) seems to be the work of his agents. 


Domesday inquest the sheriff appears as a witness to facts 
concerning the ferm,-^^ and sometimes he himself farms royal 
estates,2i2 though in most cases they are farmed by some one else. 
The sheriff is frequently mentioned as letting such lands to farm,-i^ 
and the person who holds them under him may be regarded as 
holding at the king's /erm.^i* William II let the hundred of Nor- 
mancros to the monks of Thorney for a hundred shillings, payable 
annually to the sheriff of Huntingdonshire.-^^ Extensive districts 
were sometimes administered collectively. There was a fertn of 
the king's rights for the Isle of Wight .-^^ The ferm for a whole 
group of estates might be collected through a head manor ,-i' 
a plan necessarily followed when great groups of manors in the 
south jointly paid the amount of a day's ferm in commuta- 
tion of the ancient food-rent rendered to the king.-^^ A money 
economy prevails except in the case of certain old renders which 
seem to have been added to ferms^-^^ and sometimes a cash value 
is set on these. Two Domesday passages record the payment 
of borough ferms to the sheriff about Michaelmas or Easter,--*^ 
although only the latter of these dates corresponds with one of 
the known terms for the half-yearly payment of Danegeld.--^ 

2" D. B. i. 248 ; ii. 44G b. 

2" Thus Gilbert the sheriff of Herefordshire held at farm the castelleria and borough 
of Clifford (D. B. i. 183). Harkstead manor in Essex was farmed by Peter of Valognes 
(D. B. ii. 286 b). Urse d'Abetot personally accounted for the ferin of certain manors 
in Worcestershire (D. B. i. 172, 172 b). 

21* Hoc manerium cepit W. comes in dominio et non fiiit ad firmam. Sed modo 
vic£Comes postiit eum ad Ix. solidos mimero (D. B. i. 164). Durandus vicecomes dedit 
ha^c eadem Willelmo de Ow pro Iv lihris ad firmam {ibid. 162). See also below, notes 
217, 220. 

"1* Eeddit per annum xvi. Ubras ad penswn et qnando Baldwinus vicecomea recepit 
hanc qui tenet earn ad firmam, de rege reddehat tnninmdem (D. B. iv, fo. 83 b). 

215 Davis, Regesfa, i. 453. 

216 D. B. i. 38 b. 

2" Briwetone and Frome together rendered the ferm of one night cum suis apen- 
ditiis (D. B. iv, fo. 91). Robert holds Bedretone in firma Waneiinz {ibid. i. 57, Berks.). 
Four hides of land lying in a Gloucestershire manor are ad firmam regis in Hereford 
(D. B. i. 163 b). Ad hoc manerium apposuit vicecomes tempore W. comitis Walpe/ford 
(D. B. i. 179 b). 

2" See Round, Feudal England, p. 109 ff. 

2i» Such as sheep, hawks, sumpter horses, food for the king's dogs, wood for 
building purposes (D. B. i. 38 b. Dene), salt, corn, and honey. Thus, Domesday 
has : dimidiam diem de frumento et melle et aliis rebus ad firmam regis pertinentibus. . , . 
De consiietudine canum Ixv solidi (i. 209 b) ; ii denarios et theloneum salis quod veviebat 
ad aidam {ibid. i. 164) ; Ilbertus vicecomes hahet ad firmam fiuam de Arcenefeld con- 
suetudines omnes mellis et ovium {ibid. i. 179 b). See also notes 195, 196. Domesday 
Book (iv, fo. 91) mentions ytrma?/i unius noctis cum appenditiis. 

220 Roger Bigot gave Ipswich to farm for £40 at Michaelmas (D. B. ii. 290). At 
Colchester the burghers of the king each j-ear, fifteen days after Easter, rendered 
two marks of silver which }>elonged to the firma regis {ibid. ii. 107). The reeves on 
the lands of Worcester made certain money payments at Martinmas and in the third 
week of Easter (Heming, Chartulary, i. 98-9). The burghers of Derby rendered corn 
to the king at Martinmas (D. B. i. 280). 

221 Mr. Round {Domesday Studies, ed. Dove, i. 91) points out the coincidence 


Other fiscal duties of the sheriff are occasionally mentioned 
in Domesday Book. The revenues from the special pleas of the 
Crown, such as murdrum and the five-pound forisfacturae, though 
not included in the ferm, were collected by the sheriff .222 The 
collection locally of the pence for the maintenance and wages of 
the king's levies ^^s probably fell under his supervision. Picot 
had from the lawmen of Cambridge, as heriot, eight pounds and 
a palfrey and the arms of one fighting man ; and Aluric God- 
ricson, when he was sheriff, had twenty shillings as the heriot 
of each lawman .'-24 From the reign of King Edward the sheriff 
or the king's reeve in Suffolk had the commendation or half the 
commendation of men on certain lands .225 it is recorded that in 
the counties of York, Nottingham, and Derby the thane with more 
than six manors gave a relief of eight pounds to the king, while 
the thane with six manors or less paid three marks of silver to the 
sheriff .226 There is reason to hold that the sheriff had charge of ' 
the collection of the Danegeld,227 and he is mentioned as respon- 
sible for port dues collected.228 Anselm complains that during 
his absence from England the agents of Haimo took toll of the 
archbishop's property at Fordwich.229 At Holborn the king had 
two cottiers who rendered twenty pence a year to the sheriff .2^0 
Numerous persons in Hertfordshire, not on the royal demesne, 
rendered to the sheriff pence in lieu of avera or in addition to 
averaP^ At Cambridge the sheriff had exacted of the burghers 
nine days' service with their ploughs instead of the three days 
formerly required. Moreover, the inward which he claimed, like 

between the earlier of these periods and tlie usual time of the meeting of the great 
council at Winchester, the seat of the treasury. He holds that the final annual account- 
ing of the collectors of the Banegeld was at Easter. The payment of Peter's pence 
was at Michaelmas (p. 164). 

22^ Above, note 110; ante, xxxi. 32-.'i. Averam et viii demrios in servitio regis 
f<nnper inrenerunt et forisfacturam. suam viceeoniiti emendabant (D. B. i. 189 b). 

^••'s See D. B. i. 50 b ; ii. 107. It is to be noted that William Rufus made this a 
systematic means of extortion (Stubbs. Const. Hist. i. 327). 

224 1). B. i. 189. 

2" D. B. ii, fos. 312 b, 334, 334 K 

"« D. B. i. 280 b, 298 b. 

»" Ante, xxxi. 34-5. The collectors of the Danegeld were reeves of the class 
usually under the sheriff's control. His responsibility is assumed by Stubbs {Const. 
Hist. i. 412) and by Mr. Round {Feudal England, p. 170), although one of the instances 
cited by the latter {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ii. 1()0) shows that in the reign of 
Henry I there was a collector of the geld for Berkshire who was not the sheriff. The 
evidence of the Pipe Roll of Henry I seems to establish the usage also for ah earlier 
period. The Abingdon chronicler {ibid. ii. 70) gives wellnigh conclusive evidence for 
the period when Waldric was chancellor, namely (Round, Feudal England, pp. 480-1) 
just before November 1106. The geld was to be collected in Oxfordshire 'per officiales 
fiuic negotio deputatos. From this payment the abbey was acquitted by a mandate 
of the king directed to the sheriff. 

'•'" Above, ]). 165, 

2" Epist. Ivi, Migne, Patrolog. Lat, clix. 283. 

230 j> -p. i. 127. "^ Ante, xxxi. 35-6. 


the avera, might be commuted by a money payment.-^- From 
three manors Avhich Queen Edith held in Surrey the sheriff had 
£7 on account of adiutorimn which was due from the men when 
she had need.*'^^^ The royal service called also for outlays of the 
produce or money in the sheriff's hands. The sheriff of York- 
shire in 1075 received Edgar the Atheling at Durham and let 
him find food and fodder at the castle on his route as he 
travelled to meet King William on the Continent ."^^^ 

The Norman sheriff is famous for his extortion and oppres- 
sion. The vague words of Domesday sometimes suggest that 
ferms may as yet be increased without the king's consent, and 
there is abundant evidence ^3^ that during the Conqueror's reign 
the sheriff and his agents exacted such additions. The old 
firma unius noctis paid by a group of manors in the southern 
counties, and worth about £70 in the time of King Edward,^^^ 
had risen by 1086 to £105.237 Norman prelates -^s and barons -^9 
were very ready to farm the king's lands, and the English 
Chronicle ^^^ complains that the king let his lands ' as dearest he 
might ', and that they went to the highest bidder. With ferms 
sometimes in excess of the value of lands ,-^i the chronicler may 
well declare that the king ' cared not how iniquitously the reeves 
extorted money from a miserable people '.''^'*- That the sheriff 
at the head of the system reaped his harvest is shown by the 
crementum which he paid.-^^ jjg might exact from those to 

232 Above, note 140. "s d. B. i. 30 b. 

23* Anglo-Saxon Ghron., a. 1075. At an earlier time the sherifE had provided the 
sustenance of the king's legati in going by water from Torksey to York {ante, xxxi. 31). 
The king's reeves at Wallingford met the expense of the burghers in the king's service 
with horses and by water non de censu regis sed dc sua (D. B. i. 56). 

23^ Quando Bog. Bigot prius habuit vicecomitatum statucrunt ministri sui quod 
reddent xv libras per annum quod non faciebant T. B. E. Et quando Bohcrtus Malet 
habuit vicecomitatum sui ministri creverunt eos ad xx libras, Et quando Bog. Bigot 
rehabuit dederunt xx libras, et modo tenet eos (D. B. ii. 287 b). Roger Bigot had increased 
the ferm of Ipswich to £40, but finding it would not yield that amount he pardoned 
£3 {ibid. ii. 290Vb). Mr. Round maintains {Geoffrey de Mandcville, pp. 101, 3H1) that 
in the twelfth century the amount collected from a given manor was always the 

236 Round, Victoria County History of Hampshire, i. 401. 

23' Round, Feudal England, p. 113. Under Edward the Confessor a one night's 
Jerm collected from a group of Hampshire manors was £76 I65. 8</. Under the Normans 
this was increased to £104 12?. 2d., and in Wilts and Dorset to about £105 {Victoria 
County History of Hampshire, i. 401). 

238 The bishop of Winchester farmed Colchester (D. B. ii. 107 b) and the arch- 
bishop of Canterbury held the borough of Sandwich, Avhich yielded a Jerm of £40 
(D. B. i. 3). 

239 For instance, Hugo dc Port (D. B. i. 219), Hugh titz Baldric {ibid. i. 219 b), 
and William of Eu (ibid. i. 162). -*» a. 1087. 

2" Ballard, Domesday Inquest, pp. 221-2 ; Victoria County Hi/itnry of Hampshire^ 
i. 414. The collection of the old Jerm from a manor which had lost lands and the 
increase oi Jerms is well shown in the case of royal demesne lands in Gloucestershire: 
D. B. i. 163. 

2« Chronicle, a. 1087. ^" Above, note 202. 


whom he let the king's lands a gersuma or bonus over and above 
the amount of the ferm due to him.^** In Bedfordshire this was 
called crementum.^^^ 

The sheriff stands accused of bad stewardship and greed in 
trespassing upon the king's rights,^*^ in wasting the property in 
his charge, and in depriving individuals of their property. Two 
manors in Dorsetshire had lost a hundred shillings in value 
through the depredations of Hugh fitz Grip .2*7 SherijBfs are 
credited with the loss of men and animals on the manors of the 
royal demesne ,-^^ and with the destruction of houses, usuall}^ to 
make room for a castle, which led to a decline of population 
in some towns.^^Q Norman sheriffs showed little regard for 
private rights of property .^^o Domesday Book records complaint 
that some of them have unjustly occupied the lands of indivi- 
duals. ^^i In one instance the shire testified that land taken by 
the sheriff for non-payment of Danegeld had always been quit 
of the obligation. 2 52 Violent imposition of aver a and inward is 
mentioned several times in Bedfordshire, and land was taken 
even from a former sheriff because he refused avera vicecomitir''^ 
Demands upon burghers were sometimes so great that they 
fled.254 -pi^g exactions of Picot at Cambridge are among the worst 

2" In Essex the gersuma exacted from a borough or manor in several instances 
amounted to £4 (D. B. ii. 2, 2 b, 107 b), but £10 was collected from one manor {ibid. 
ii. 3). Mr. Ballard {Domesday Boroughs^ p. 45) interprets the hawk and £4 of gersuma 
paid by the burghers of Yarmouth to the sheriff as a gift to propitiate him. 

2" D. B. i. 209, 209 b. The crementum rendered by a manor here usually con- 
sisted of a certain sum of money plus an ounce of gold for the sheriff annually. To 
one of the demesne manors in this shire the king granted Ralph Taillebois the right 
to add other demesne lands to offset the burden of the amount thus imposed. 

2" Thus Ralph Taillebois gave to one of his own knights land which he had seized 
for non-payment of gavel (D. B. i. 216 b). Superplus inmsit Picot super regem (D. B. 
i.[190). '" I>. B. iv. 34. 

"8 Loss of plough oxen on Essex manors is charged to sheriffs, especially to Swcin 
I and Bainard (D. B. ii. 1, 2). 

i "» The Domesday inquest for Lincoln states that certain houses beyond the 
I metes of the castle have been destroyed, but not by the oppression of sheriffs and 
i their ministri, as if the reverse were the rule (D. B. i. 336 b). Such destruction 
! occurred at Dorchester, Wareham, and Shaftesbury from the accession of Hugh fitz 
I Grip to the shrievalty (D. B. i. 75) ; and a destructio castellorum occurred at York in 
I 1070, for which anotlier sheriff, Hugh {ibid. i. 298 b), was responsible. At Cambridge 
1 {ibid. i. 189) and Gloucester houses were taken down for the same purpose {ibid. 
I i. 162). 

I "» Freeman says {Norman Conquest, iv. 728) of one of these officials who robbed 
j various persons of their possessions, ' he seems to have acted after the usual-manner 
! of sheriffs'. 

I 251 Froger of Berkshire held certain lands which he had placed at the king's ferm 

\ absque placito et lege (D. B. i. 58). Ansculf unjustly disseised William de Celsi {ibid. 

I i. 148 b). Ralph Taillebois wrongfully occupied the lands of others {ibid. i. 212, 

217 b). Eustace of Huntingdon appropriated the burghers as well as the lands of 

Englishmen {ibid. i. 203, 206, 208). 
I ... i^i,i^ i 141, -3 ij,,d. i. 132 b. 

i "* Ballard, Domesday Boroughs, p. 87. 


recorded. -^^ Through fear of him the men of Cambridge are 
related to have wrongfully decided a lawsuit in his favour.^^^ 

Best known of all are the grievances of the churches and 
monasteries. The spoliation of ecclesiastical possessions by the 
followers of the Conqueror was due to the policy of the king, as 
well as to the rapacity of the baronage .^^^ But the plundering 
of the sheriff was sometimes almost systematic. The wholesale 
seizure of the lands of the church of Worcester by Urse d'Abetot 
is notorious, 258 and the best of evidence shows that they were 
permanently retained.-^^ Evesham and Pershore, the other 
great monasteries of this county, also suffered heavy losses at 
Urse's hands.260 Others acted in a similar spirit.^^i The invective 
directed by the monk of Ely against the greed and impiety of 
Picot of Cambridge in appropriating lands of St. Etheldreda 
deserves to be a classic .^^s It was well for the prelate to have 
influence with the sheriff.^^s The story that the sheriff, depart- 

'■^'^■' See above, p. 1G9. Picot also imposed service with carts and appropriated 
some of the common pasture, building upon this land his three famous mills; 
whereby several houses were destroyed, as well as a mill belonging to the abbot of 
Ely and another belonging to Count Alan (D. B. i. 1S9). 
" "6 Below, p. 173. 

^" The Conqueror undertook to subject the monasteries to feudal service by 
compelling them to provide a certain number of knights in war or to surrender part 
of their lands. Out of 72 manors which Burton Abbey originally possessed over 
40 were lost {Salt Arch. Soc. Publications^ v, pt. 1, p. 1). King William quartered 
40 knights on the Isle of Ely, towards the support of whom the abbot gave in fee certain 
lands to leading Normans, among whom were Picot the sheriff and Roger Bigot 
(Liber Eliensis, p. 297). It is said that William Rufus demanded 80 knights {Monas- 
tiron, i. 461). Mr. Round {Feudal Enqlavd, pp. 296-301) shows the process by which 
a number of abbeys established knights' fees. Haimo, sheriff of Kent, was one of 
the milites of the archbishop of Canterbury to whom he had given lands (D. B. i. 4). 

2" Heming, Chariidary, i. 253, 257, 261, 267-9 ; Freeman, Norimin Conquest, 
v. 761, 764-5. 

*" Round, Feudal England, pp. 169-75. 

260 Freeman, Norman Conquest, v. 765. Evesham lost 28 out of 32 newly acquired 
properties. These were seized by Bishop Odo at a gemot of five shires which he held, 
and a large part of them soon given over to Urse and his associates {Chronicon Abbatiae 
de Evesham, pp. 96-7 ; D. B. i. 172). Mr. Davis {Regesta, i, no. 185) shows that Urse 
retained a hide belonging to the abbot of Evesham after four shires had adjudged the 
whole manor to the abbot. 

201 Froger, like his Anglo-Saxon predecessor, won evil renown by holding too 
closely to the property of the monastery of Abingdon {Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, 
i. 486). Peter of Valognes made aggression upon the property both of St. Paul's 
{Domesday Studies, ii. 540) and of the abbey of St. Edmund's (Davis, Regesta, i, 
nos. 242, 258). Eustace of Huntingdon deprived the abbot of Ramsey (D. B. i. 203) 
of burgesses, and violently seized lands of the abbey, which for a long time he 
handed over to one of his knights {Chron. Abbat. de Ramestia, p. 175). Ralph de 
Bernai with the aid of Earl William fitz Osbert (D. B. i. 181 ; Freeman, Norm. Conq. 
V. 61) also took lands from the church of Worcester (Heming, Chartidary, i. 250). 

"= Liber Eliensis, p. 266. 

"=• During his exile Anselm wrote to Bishop Gundulf of Rochester to urge upon 
Haimo and his wife the restoration of a market belonging to the archbishop which 
had been seized by a neighbour (epist. Ixi, Migne, Patrolog. Lat. clix. 235). Haimo 
was a benefactor of the church of Rochester. See note 59. 


ing from York with an imposing retinue, met the laden wains 
of Archbishop Aldred as they entered the city and ordered the 
seizure of their contents,^^* .^^ least expresses a twelfth-century 
churchman's conception of this official. 

William the Conqueror, though powerful and not devoid of 
a sense of justice, made little progress with the perennial medieval 
problem of honest local government. There was no appeal 
from the sheriff except to the king or his duly accredited repre- 
sentative ; this made it practically impossible for any but men 
of the greatest influence to oppose the head of the shire. In 
Aldred 's case, just cited, the archbishop is said to have obtained 
restitution through a direct appeal to King WiUiam.^^^ The 
clause in royal charters commanding the sheriff to see that no 
injustice is done the grantee is much more than form.^^^ When 
the king's justice convened a local court within the shire -^^ 
the sheriff took a lower place. The bishop of Bayeux, pre- 
siding in the shiremote of Cambridgeshire, not only refused to 
accept the recognition of a jury alleged to be intimidated by 
Picot, but ordered the sheriff to send them and another twelve 
to appear before him in London.'^^^ In taking the Domesday 
inquest the barones regis placed upon oath the sheriff as well 
as others. Domesday records the contested claims or question- 
able conduct of the sheriff himself, though usually of a sheriff no 
longer in office. Machinery has been fashioned which may call 
him to a reckoning. -^^ But the Domesday inquest was never 
repeated, and the mission of royal justices to the county was as 
yet unusual. Where the king was not directly concerned the 
sheriff was left to do much as he pleased. Strength and loyalty 

"* See Raine, Historians of the Church of York (Rolls Series), ii. 350-3. If the 
story is true the sheriff was William Malet. 

'" The same procedure is implied in the instance wherein William Rufus orders the 
sheriff of Oxford to right the injuries done by his subordinates to the monks of Abingdon 
{Chron. Monust. de Abingdon, ii. 41). Anselm wrote to Haimo that on his return to 
England his goods ought to have been freed according to the king's precept, and 
asking the sheriff to restore what his subordinates had seized at Sandwich and Canter- 
biu-y, lie me facere damorem ad aliiim cogatis (epist. Ivi, Migne, Patrolog. Lat. clix. 

"« One form of notifying the sheriff of a royal grant prescribed that if injury 
be done the grantee, the latter is to make complaint to the king, who will do full 
right. See Monusticon, ii. 18 ; Davis, Rcgesta, i, no. 104. Another form of writ 
enjoined the sheriff to see that in matters affecting the royal grant no injustice was 
done. See above, p. 164. 

»" He might convene several hundreds (see note 131), a shire court, or several 
shires. Odo of Bayeux is said to have presided in a gemot, at which wore present 
three or more sheriffs (Davis, Regesta, i, app. xxiv). 

2" Bigelow, Placita Anglo-lSlormannica, pp. 35, 36 ; Stenton, Wmiam the 
Conqueror, pp. 434-5. 

"» In the Leis Willeltm, 2, 1, Liebcrmann, Gesetzc, i. 492-3, possibly written 
in the first third of the twelfth century, but perhaps as old as 1090, the sheriff may 
be convicted before the justice for misdeeds to the men of his bailiwick. 


were his great qualifications. An over-display of the former 
might be condoned so long as the latter was assured. The spirit 
of feudality remained, despite striking manifestations of royal 

By the early years of the twelfth century the long process of 
reducing the sheriff's power was under way. It is not improbable 
that the ministry of Ranulf Flambard took the first steps in this 
direction. William Rufus had his experience with rebellious 
sheriffs, and the calling out of an army of 20,000 foot soldiers 
in 1194 served as further reminder of the military possibilities 
of the office. 270 The employment of local justiciars was a device 
which might take from the hands of such sheriffs the control of 
the pleas of the Crown. The baronial opposition to Henry I 
brought further changes. By this reign the sheriff seems to be 
castellan only when he inherits the position. The hereditary 
shrievalty still exists in some shires, but by 1106 the feudal 
danger may be met by placing a group of shires in the hands of 
a new officer whom the king has raised from the dust. 

A strong local official under the king's direction, whose 
activity epitomized shire government and whose business was 
administration, was a novelty in a feudal age. The king had 
other agents to whom he entrusted special judicial and military 
functions, and in some measure fiscal functions as well, but 
the fact that some sheriffs were given duties of this sort at the 
curia indicates that the king's servants there were not usually of 
superior administrative ability. The sheriff's personal prestige, and 
a feudal status which might even give him a seat in the king's 
great council, imparted to his office a dignity and a substantial 
quality which eight centuries have not effaced. Some modi- 
fication of the functions of the Anglo-Saxon shrievalty came 
through Norman usage, fiscal efficiency, and the introduction 
of new feudal dues and services, but the strong combination of 
powers in the sheriff's hands was nearly all wielded by his Enghsh 
predecessor. The disappearance of the earl hardly added func- 
tions which the sheriff had not already performed. The fiscal 
system which supported the Norman monarchy was largely 
English, although the sheriff's ideas of financial administration 
were Norman, as was the practice which made him keeper of 
the Idng's castles. Functions incident to ecclesiastical jurisdic- 
tion were actually lost. The new life infused into the office 
which made it powerful came through the energy of the Norman 
kings and their enhanced views of the royal prerogative. In 

"» Florence of Worcester, using a formula of the reign of Henry I, tells that 
when in 1085 the king of Denmark threatened an invasion of England King William 
brought over troops from Normandy, and sending throughout England episcopis, 
ahbatibus, comitibns, baronibns, vicecomitihus ac regis praepositis, victum praebere 
7nn)idavit. Cf. note 223. 


a manner astonishing to the student of old English polity 
they assume their own right to do justice, and to that end depute 
sheriffs or other agents. In the course of general administration 
the king's direction of their activity is equally prominent. The 
writ which follows the form of the Confessor's announcements 
to the shire court assumes initiative. Through it the king issues 
positive commands to sheriffs, and even lays down rules for their 
guidance which have all the force of the older English laws. 

The need of loyal local officials on the part of a feudal ruler 
permitted the shrievalty to assume the semblance of a vice- 
royalty, but its holder was subject to this strong means of 
control supplemented by the local law and custom of the shire, 
and usually by his vassalage to the king. The dread agent of 
Norman monarchy, fitting counterpart of the grim Conqueror, 
under whose administration the peasant was oppressed by 
excessive rents, the monastery deprived of its lands, and every 
one subjected to the danger of wanton oppression, seems 
a heartless adventurer. But he was no instrument of feudal 
anarchy. Despite his feudal interests, personal attachment to 
the king and the rewards which it brought committed him to 
the cause of strong monarchy. His profits in holding the shire 
were a buttress to the king's authority. His authority over both 
hundred and shire prepared for the rule of the common law at 
a later time, and apparently led to the system by which vills 
came to be represented in the shiremote and hundredmote.^^i 
His view of frankpledge kept him in personal touch with the 
hundredmote. The pubhc nature of this body could not be 
I jeopardized through the encroachment of feudal lords so 
j long as the income from its pleas formed an integral part of the 
I sheriff's ferm. The strong local position of the sheriff, sometimes 
supplemented by command of the castle, made him powerful 
j to enforce judicial decrees or royal orders affecting even the 
j strongest lords of his county .^'^ His check upon the political 
i power of feudalism and his preservation of the old communal 
I assemblies to render important service to later generations, to 
I say nothing of his maintenance of law and order and his great 
'Services to administration in general, demand for the Norman 
j sheriff our lasting gratitude. W. A. Morris. 

{ '" See Leges Henrici, 7, §§ 4-8, Liebermann, Gesetze, i. 553-4. 

*" The defection of Earl Roger in 1075 was due in part to the fact that the king's 
t sheriffs had held pleas on his lands (Adams, Political History/ of England, p. 61) 

176 ApriJ 

Some Sixteenth-century Travellers in 

NOT every traveller to Italy in the sixteenth century visited 
Naples. It was off the beaten track, and the journey besides 
being something of an adventure was moreover an exceedingly 
tedious one. The country south of Rome was overrun with 
brigands, and if one went by road it was imperative to travel 
with the carrier and his pack mules, ^ while Moors and Turks lay 
in wait for travellers by sea.^ There can be little doubt that 
delays and difficulties such as these must have deterred many 
travellers from making the journey. A century later the prospect 
of visiting Vesuvius, to ascend the cone and gaze down into its 
restless crater, was sufficient to attract visitors to Naples in 
considerable numbers, but during the whole of the sixteenth 
century, and indeed until 1631, Vesuvius was for all practical 
purposes an extinct volcano. The crater had become a veritable 
gulf of verdure, where cattle browsed and where workmen plied 
their trade among the dense forests which had grown up to matur- 
ity in the lava soil. Its slopes were covered with vegetation, and 
nothing but a rim of calcined stones at the very summit, and 
here and there a wreath of smoke, betrayed the volcanic fire 
within.^ Herculaneum and Pompeii were forgotten and Paestum 
was undiscovered, while the baths of the Phlegraean Fields which 
enjoyed a great reputation in the Middle Ages ^ (and of course 

* An escort of sixty soldiers was provided by the pope (sec Fynes Moryson, Itinerary 
(reprint, Glasgow, 1907), i. 226). Moryson is the chief authority for the conditions 
of road travel between Rome and Naples in the sixteenth century. In the next 
century much the same state of things existed (Raymond. II Mcrcurio Italico (1648), 
p. 113). 

2 Sir Thomas Hobv, Travels and Life, 1547-64, Camden Society, 3rd series, vol. iv 
(1902), p. 27. ^ 

' Sec Abate Bracini, DcW Inceiidio fattosi ucl Vesuvio (Naples, 1632). He describes 
the mountain in 1612. Cf. H. Megiser, Dcliciae NeapoUtanac (1605), p. 76. He visited 
the mountain in 1588. The condition of Vesuvius before 1631 is described in A. H. 
Norway's Naples, past and present (4th cd.) (1911), p. 182. 

* See the notices of the baths at Pozzuoli in Graevius's Thesaurus Antiq. Italiae 
(1725), IX. iv. Benjamin of Tudela (r. 1165) speaks of them as much frequented in his 
day. Itinerary (ed. M. N. Adler, Oxford, 1907), p. 8. Their virtues were sung a little 
later by Pietro da Eboli, a writer of about 1200. See E. Pcrcopo, / Bagni di Pozzuoli, 
poemetto impoktano del sec. XIV (Naples, 1887), p. 11 (from the Arch. Star, per le 


before) do not appear to have attracted foreigners in the sixteenth 
century to any considerable extent. By 1550, however, when 
the vast diffusion of Itahan influence began to affect the whole 
idea of travel, and the custom of sending young men abroad as 
part of their education became a fixed habit, we find a number 
of visitors in Naples. These early travellers often preserved 
a freshness of outlook which is not always found among later 
tourists. A century afterwards the world of letters was full of 
the * Relations ', ' Discourses ', and ' Observations upon Travel * 
of returning travellers, and not all of them repay perusal. In the 
more interesting of the earlier itineraries there is nothing that is 
second-hand. The travellers described what they saw in their 
own way and in their own words, a practice which fell much into 
disuse as time went on and the number of travellers and travel 
books began to multiply.^ 

The ordinary post route from Rome to Naples followed at 
intervals and for a considerable distance the line of the Via Appia. 
It ran first of all by Marino to Velletri and Cisterna. Shortly 
afterwards the Via Appia, which was here carried through the 
Pontine Marshes, became impassable,^ and a detour was made by 
way of the Volscian towns of Sermoneta and Sezze along a winding 
mountain road through Piperno to Terracina. The road then con- 
tinued through Fondi to Formia, an excursion being usually made 
to Gaeta, and thence still along the Via Appia to the passage of the 
river Garigliano from which two routes might be taken : the one 
usually followed ran along the modern road to Capua and thence 
south through Aversa to Naples, entering the city by the Porta 
Capuana ; the other and less frequented route foUowuig the Via 
Appia left the modern road below the passage of the Garigliano 
and continued to Mondragone (Sinuessa) where the Via Domitiana 
was reached, which carried the traveller along the coast to Torre 
di Patria (Liternum), Cuma, Pozzuoli, and Naples. This alterna- 

Prov. NapoL, xi. 597-750). When Petrarch was there in 1343 the baths were adorned 
with marble circles on which were fingers pointing to that part of the body which tlio 
particular bath was proper to cure (Letter to Cardinal Colonna, quoted by Thomas 
Campbell in his Life of Petrarch, prefixed to the Sonnets, Trium'phs.and otiicr Poems 
(1859), p. Iv). These were, however, destroyed by certain doctors who found that the 
inscriptions enabled people to dispense with their services. See Comparetti, Vergil m 
the Middle Ages, Engl, transl. (1895), p. 271 ; cf. Burchard, Diarium (1494), ed. 
L. Thuasne, Paris, 1883-5, ii. 172 ; Panvini, II Forestiere instruito allc Antickitd di 
Pozzttoli (1818), pp. 100, 101. A list of the baths in use in and before the sixteenth 
century is given with notes in appendix A to Mr. R. T. Gunther's article * The Phle- 
graean Fields', Geogr. Journal, Oct. 1897. 

» A list of travellers to Naples after 1575 is given in Mr. Gunther's Bibliography of 
works on the Phlegraean Fields, published by the Royal Geographical Society, 1908. 

• Schottus, Itinerario (1650), p. 386. The posts are given at the end of any edition 
of Schottus. I have used a late edition, but this work was first published in Latin in 
1600. It is not commonly known that Warcupp's Italy (1660) is almost literally 
a translation of this work. 



tive route, although more commodious, was more dangerous than 
the other and the accommodation was wretched.' The distance 
by either route was much the same, the roads were equally bad, 
and the journey usually occupied five days. 

. Once at Naples the ordinary round for travellers was more 
or less defined at an early period. If possible the visitor would 
contrive to witness the miracle of the boiling of S. Januarius's 
blood, or if there in February he would be present at the Shrove- 
tide carnival. A day or two would be spent in seeing the arsenal, 
the castles, the churches, the various hospitals and philanthropic 
institutions, and the harbour ; the traveller being no doubt 
carried about the city in one of the sedan chairs which were 
a feature of Naples, and which the traveller, if an Englishman, 
had probably never seen before.^ Among the attractions within 
the city were various closets of rarities preserved in noblemen's 
houses where could be seen those exotic curiosities and odds and 
ends of natural history^ which no sixteenth- or seventeenth-century 
traveller could resist. Vesuvius, as we have seen, was not commonly 
visited. An excursion would be made to Pozzuoli, but first of all 
the traveller would climb the steep ascent to the tomb of Virgil 
at the entrance to the Grotta di Posilipo where Petrarch's Bay 
Tree, despoiled by relic hunters in the nineteenth century, was 
still standing. Then penetrating through the dust and darkness 
of the grotto, that ancient tunnel by which for more than 1,500 
years travellers from Naples to Pozzuoli had saved themselves 
the trouble of the hill, the traveller would visit the Grotta del 
Cane, where an unhappy dog was thrust struggling into the cave 
till he was stupefied by the poisonous gases and then flung into 
the adjoining lake to revive or perish. The crater of the half 
extinct volcano of Solfatara, which is still worth any trouble 
to see, would be visited next. Here the traveller would inspect 
the various smoke-holes or fumaroli,^^ whilst the guide beguiled 

' Morysou, i. 258. He slept on straw at the inn at Liternum and was in constant 
fear of bandits. 

^ Cf. Moryson, i. 239. Sedan chairs were not introduced into England until 1621, 
but were in use in Genoa at this time. G. Sandys, who was in Naples c. 1615, has 
a figure of one of them. Relation of a Journey (1625), p. 268. See notes 156, 157 to 
H. Maynard Smith's ' John Evelyn in Naples ' (Oxford, 1914). This work contains 
a number of useful references to English travellers in Naples in the seventeenth 
century. m 

» The German traveller Kiechel saw in the collection of a Neapolitan gentleman 
among other things ' ein lamm mit zweyen kopfen, ein basilisckhenn ay, ein stein 
von einem donnerstrahl', Eeisen, ed. Hassler, p. 176. 

" Burchard's description of this curious and disquieting place may be quoted : 
' Est locus planus, quasi rotundus, medium miliare per circuitum interiorem continens, 
vel circa, montibus omnino circumdatus, modico spatio dempto, ad Puteolanum exitum 
prebens, habens duas piscinas ad invicem satis distantes continuo et immoderatissime 
bullientes, et unum foramen ex quo continuo horribilis fumus ignis exit sine flamma 
impetum et strepitum magnum faciens,' ii. 171. 



him with stories of hob-goblins and horrible noises within the vents 
which were indeed nothing more or less than the actual chimneys 
of hell. The amphitheatre at Pozzuoli was greatly damaged in 
1538, and few travellers describe it except as much ruined.^i 

The episcopal city of Pozzuoli would be reached about noon, 
and here the traveller, having given up his arms^^ and eaten 
his midday meal,^^ would view the ruins, particularly the Temple 
of Augustus, which had been converted into a church where were 
shown the bones of a giant ' of wonderfull bignes 'M Here a boat 
would be hired in which the traveller sailed along the coast to 
the Bay of Baia,!^ taking in the ruins of the Portus Julius, the 
Lucrine Lake, then a ' little sedgy plash ', and Monte Nuovo on 
the way. The terrible disturbance which produced this mountain 
in the space of twenty-four hours was very fresh in the memories 
of the natives ,16 and the travellers returned with the most varied 
and extraordinary stories concerning its formation. An eye- 
witness 1^ records that the eruption was so terrific that the ground 
was covered with ashes for seventy miles, and it is small wonder 
that an event so sensational in itself should lead to exaggeration. 
Cuma, Lake Avernus, the various underground baths and sweating 
places, and the Sibyl's Grotto had all to be visited in turn. From 
Baia the traveller, having inspected the antiquities, the sub- 
terranean building called variously the Cento Camerelle, the 
Carceri di Nerone or the Labyrinth, and the reservoir known as 
the Piscina Mirabile, proceeded to Misenum and returned to 
Baia, whence he took boat again for PozzuoU, reaching Naples 
by carriage or on horseback. One day only was usually devoted 
to this excursion, and it must have been a fatiguing one.i^ The 
leisurely traveller, however, frequently spent ten, twelve, or 
fourteen interesting days in Naples itself. A century later than 
the period of which we are writing, when the city had become 

" Fichard is a notable exception. See below, p. 1 87. . 

" Cf. Villamont, Les Voyages (1605), p. 87 ; Moryson, i. 246 ; Wedel, Eeisen, 
ed. Bar, p. 193 (see below, p. 189, n. 46). Kiechel and his fellow travellers obtained 
some kind of permit, possibly connected with their arms, Reisen, ed. Ha8sler,p. 170 (see 
below, p. 193). The city, although subject to the king of Spain, had its own laws and 
was not under the government of Naples : Wedel, loc. cit. 

^® Burchard (1494) took with him 'mulum vino, panibus, camibus, confectioni- 
bus, intorticiis et aliis rebus . . . oneratum', ii. 170. 

" Moryson, i. 246. 

^^ Sometimes the boatman sailed his travellers to the farthest point of 'the Gulf 
of Pozzuoli and disembarked them there. In this case the visitors would take the 
points of interest on their return journey : Fichard, Bin., p. 86. 

" Mr. Gunther has pointed out to me that probably the ashes were still warm. 

^"^ Francesco del Nero, Lettera a Niccold del Benino in Archivio Storico Itcdiano 
(1846), ix. 93-6. 

^® The Due de Rohan slept at Pozzuoli and continued the next day : Voyage faict 
en Van 1600 (1646), p. 107. Moryson continued the journey to Liternum to see the tomb 
of^Scipio, slept at Liternum, and returned the next day, i. 259. 

N 2 


something of a tourists' centre, the sights were more systemati- 
cally mapped out and a kind of circular tour could be arranged, 
so that a traveller leaving Rome could see the sights at Naples 
and be back again in Rome in fifteen days.^^ 

We begin with the German travellers. There is little doubt 
that the habit of foreign travel developed in Germany at an earlier 
stage and upon broader lines than elsewhere. As early as 1500 
influences were at work which developed later into a genuine 
mania for travel. Denunciations from the pulpit and a number 
of references in contemporary literature show to what extent this 
Reisesucht was affecting the habits and outlook of the people. 
Princes and noblemen not only sent their own sons abroad but 
subsidized others whose parents were less fortunately placed.-^ 
The foreign universities were thronged with Germans, artists 
and scholars flocked to Italy, while the South German merchant 
found in Venice an accessible and profitable outlet for his goods. 
Italian influences as affecting the German people were on the 
whole less marked than were the French, but there was a general 
movement towards Italy both for trade, culture, and experience ; 
a movement which became more noticeable as the century grew 
older.21 From among a good many narratives of travellers who 
visited Naples at this time I have selected three for detailed 
treatment, none of which seems to be well known. The first 
is earlier in date than most records of its kind, and apart from its 
general interest is valuable on that ground alone. The other two 
are of the more ordinary kind, but they present in a very human 
way the experiences of the average sixteenth-century traveller 
in Naples and its immediate neighbourhood.^^ 

" Perth Letters (Camden Society, 1865), p. 95. 

*" Notably Duke Christopher of Wurttemberg and Landgrave William the Wise 
of Hesse. See Steinhausen's first article quoted below in note 21. 

** The whole subject of early German travel and the effect of foreign influences 
in Germany is ably dealt with by Professor Georg Steinhausen in Zeitschrift fur 
vergleichende Litteratur-GescJiichte, neue Folge, vii. 349 ff. ; Die Anfdnge des franzo- 
siscken Litteratur- und Kvltur-Einflusses in DcutscJdand in netierer Zeit. See also the 
same writer's Beitrdge zur Geschichte des Ecisens, Ausland (1893), nos. 13, 14, 15, 16. 
His Geschichte des deutschen Briefes, vol. ii, contains much information concerning 
German relations with Italy at this time. 

*^ Other German travellers who visited Naples in the sixteenth century were : 

1539-43. Georg Fabricius, Itinera . . . Rotnanum . . . Neapolitanum (Lips., 1547). 

1561. B. Khevenhiiller. Czerwenka, Die KhevenhiJtUer (Wien, 1867), pp. 181-4. 

1563. Alex, von Pappenheim. Extract in Rohricht and Meisner, Deutsche 
Pilgerreisen (1880), pp. 424-9. 

1565 C. N. Chytraeus. N. Chytniei variorum in Europa itinerum deliciae (Bremae, 
1594), pp. 64-119 (frequently met with in Burton's Anatomy). 

1574. H. Turler, englished 1575, is noted later on. 

1575. S. V. Pighius, Hercides prodicus (1587) ; Life and travels of Charles Frederick, 
duke of Cleves, who died at Rome before reaching home. 

1582-9. Michael Herbcrer, Acgyptiaca serviius (1610), pp. 475-9. 


Johann Fichard,^^ the son of a Frankfurt schoolmaster, was 
born at Frankf urt-on-the-Main on 23 June 1512, and died there 
on 7 June 1581. His youth is fully described in his auto- 
biography published in the Frankfurtisches Archiv filr dltere 
deutsche Litteratur und Geschichte^^ He studied law under Simon 
Grynaeus and Sinapius at Heidelberg, and became Doctor of Civil 
Law in 1531. After practising as an advocate at Speyer he 
returned to Frankfurt, and was made Assessor iudicialis and 
Consiliarius or Advocatus rei puhlicae in 1533. In April 1536 
he started on his travels. He first visited Innsbruck, where he 
remained several months, and then travelled through Italy to 
Naples, and finally settled at Pavia where he continued his studies 
until 1537. In 1538 he returned to Frankfurt, to take up his work 
again ; here he married the daughter of one of the old patrician 
families and was ennobled. 

The account of his travels in Itaty, written in Latin, has been 

printed in volume 3 of the Frankfurtisches Archivr-' Fichard was 

! a shrewd and interesting traveller, but a curious sidelight is 

thrown on his general outlook by the following account of his 

I apparently fruitless attempt to recover possession of certain gold 

I rings which had been stolen before his departure from Rome. 

When I was about to set out for Naples, he says, I had entrusted some 
gold rings of mine to a certain citizen and he had lost them through theft. 
I was taken to a certain Jew, a famous magician and necromancer. I saw 
him conjuring and hiding a demon in a glass jar, but what he answered 
was certainly meaningless. But I had deposited them with a rascal whom 
I used formerly to believe to be an honest man.^^ 

1583. Johann von Lauffen, text printed in the Lnzerner Zeitwng (1864); see also 
Rohricht, Deutsche Pilgerreisen (1900), under date 1583 C. 

1587. Hans Breissinger, MS. Dresden. Cod. F. 171 c; see Hantzsch, Deutsche 
Keisende des I6ten Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1895), p. 77. 

1588-9. H. Megiser, Deliciae Neapolitanae, 1605. 

1589. Anon., Itinerarium totius Italiae (1602). Naples, May 6 to l\.— Studio et 
iTidustria trimn nobillissimorum Germaniae adolescentium, qui omnia anno praeterito 
maximis suis siimptibus ipsimet experti sunt, omniaque contemplati (from title-page). 

1593. Duke Max of Bavaria, MS. at Munich, Cgm. 1972 ; see Hantzsch, op. cit., 
p. 86. 

1599. Paul Hentzner, Itinerarium Germaniae, Galliae, Angliae, Italiae (1629), 
pp. 444 ff. 

This list does not pretend to be complete. See p. 192, note 53. I had hoped to 
be able to trace a number of manuscript sources in Germany, but that is now out of 
the question, and owing to the exigencies of military service it has been impossible to 
search at all exhaustively even for printed materials. 

" Allgetneine Deutsche Biographic, vi. 757. 

" Edited by J. E. von Fichard (1812-15), ii. 7 ff. 

" pp. 1-130 (Naples, pp. 74-96). The editor tells us that the author had adorned 
the margin of his manuscript with a number of sketches and drawings. It has not 
been possible to trace the present owner of this manuscript, if it is still in existence, 
but the drawings might form an important addition to our knowledge of the condition 
of the various ruins and antiquities at this time. ** P- "5. 


The narrative, although not in the form of a diary, was evidently 
written down at the time. It bears considerable evidence of 
haste and was obviously not intended for publication. Fichard 
does not record the time he spent at Naples nor the date of his 
arrival, but he was in Rome in July and August 1536, and was 
most probably in Naples during a considerable part of the month 
of September. 

He approached Naples by the coast road, the second of the 
two routes above described, passing through the Grotta di 
Posilipo on the way. His description of the grotto is as follows : 

Those who are going to Naples, at the last milestone to the city, must 
cross that very famous mountain the Grotto of Virgil (for so, unless my 
memory deceives me, they call it). Now at that Grotto there is a very 
straight and level passage through the mountain itself from the lower 
part, its length half an Italian mile (to say the least), its width such that 
two loaded wagons can pass through at the same time. Its height is unequal, 
for close up to both entrances (which have the form of doors) [the entrances] 
are so lofty that a man sitting on a horse can ride in with upright lance, but 
within, the roof is lowered so that the whole does not much exceed the 
stature of three men. The mountain has been hewn out with the utmost 
care, the walls on both sides being even and equal, meeting at the top in 
an arch. Each of the two doors has a certain higher aperture by which 
light is supplied to a great part of each entrance. The inner parts, however, 
are very dark. On which account it is the custom that when persons meet 
with wagons or horses (because on account of the dusty soil hearing is 
not easy) they cry ' alia montagna ' or * alia marina ', that both parties 
may know on which side they should give way.^^ There is a common belief 
that any one committing murder or robbery there is powerless to go forth, 
which thing is said to have been proved by experiment.^ Towards the 
middle a crucifix has been set up against the wall.^^ 

*^ The history of the grotto and of the various alterations made to it from time 
to time is to be found in Mr. Gunther's Pausilypon, the Imperial Villa ncxir Naples 
(Oxford, 1913), pp. 16-19, where an excellent drawing and ground-plan are given. 

28 The belief can be traced back to Gervasius of Tilbury, who tells us that the magi- 
cian Virgil was able ' by his mathematical knowledge ' to bring about that no con- 
spiracy could ever take place in the cave at Puteoli. See Comparetti, Vergil in the 
Middle Ages, p. 262. Of. Petrarch, Itinerarium Syriacum {Opera, Basle, 1581), p. 560 : 
* Sunt autem fauces excavati mentis augustae, sed longissimae, atque atrae tenebrosa 
inter horrifica semper nox, publicum iter in medio, mirum et religion! proximum, 
belli quoque immolatum temporibus, sic vero populi vox est, et nullus unquam 
latrociniis ac tentatum patet.' 

This legend is also recorded by Dietrich von Schachten, who was at Naples in 
December 1491, in the train of the Landgrave William the Elder of Hcssc. His account 
is as follows : ' Da riettenn mir durch einenn berg hienn, dasselbige loch ist fienster, 
muss mann Kertzenn habenn, hienndurch zu reittenn : denselbenn gang durch 
gedachttenn berg hatt gemachtt Virgilius mitt seiner Kunst, dann Es ein grosser 
umbgang undt reittenn wehre, soltte Mann einenn grossenn berg gahr umb ziehenn, 
undt mittenn ihnn dem gange ist die figur unsser Liebenn Frawenn mitt Ihrem 
Liebenn Kiendte auif einer seittenn undt auff der Andernn seittenn. Darzu hatt die 
tugentt ann Ihme, das Mann Niemandt darienn nichtt mordenn magk noch bestelenn, 
darzu nichtt raubenn, undt wer solche dienge darien handelt, der mag nichtt darauss 


At the Naples entrance to the grotto Fichard found a chapel 
or shrine of the Virgin above the doorway reached by steps cut 
in the rock, of which only the upper ones remained.^o The lower 
steps had been cut away, with the object apparently of preventing 
easy access to the hill-side. It seems that certain of the Neapolitan 
ladies, ' non Virginem Divam, sed Venerem colebant ', had been in 
the habit of using the steps as a means of approach to the dark- 
ness and seclusion of the woods, and the authorities had cut them 
away in order to put a stop to the practice. 

Close to this chapel on the right hand was the tomb of Virgil, but 
no description of it is given. Fichard was disposed to be sceptical. 

In truth, he wrote, others say that it stands not here but in the garden of 
the monastery which is upon the hill, with these verses which are commonly 
known : 

Mantua me genuit, Calabri rapuere, tenet nunc 
Parthenope &c. 

kommenn, undt dasselbige ann zweienn Mordernn probirct ist, die Jemandt sciii 
Lebenn namenn, mochttenn nichtt vonn dannenn hienn weg komenn sondern 
Ihnenn wardt Ihr rechtt, wilches die bosenn bubenn verwiercktt, nach der Justitien 
mittgetheilet undt ann Ihnenn exequiret, undt ist solches Etwann zwei Armbrost 
schuesse lang.' See Dietrich von Schachten, Beschreihung der Reise ins heilige 
Landt welche Herr Landgraf Wilhelm der dltere anno U8S (1491) sontags nach Ostern 
vorgenommen. In Rohricht and Meisner's Deutsche Pilgerrcisen nach dem Heiligen 
Lande (Berlin, 1880), pp. 162-245 (224-5). 

In this legend and in the existence of the chapel of Santa Maria della Grotta in 
the middle of the tunnel which replaced an earlier Mithraic shrine we are able to 
trace a definite attempt to preserve order in what might otherwise have been a very 
dangerous locality. 

-» Cf. Burchard (1494), ii. 173: 'Circa medium habcns Crucifixum ipso monti 
incisum ab uno latere, ab alio vero imaginem beatae Virginis.' 

^^ p. 75 : ' Super portam sacellum quoddam S. Virginis adhuc videtur ... Ad hoc 
sacellum ad dextram sepulcrum Virgilii Maronis a quibusdam dcmonstratur.' I am 
unable to identify this chapel. It was probably nothing more than a shrine. J. Ray- 
mond, who was in Naples a century later, states {II Mercurio Italico (1648), p. 145) that 
the guides commonly show a false building as Virgil's tomb, and gives a drawing (p. 147) 
showing (A) Virgil's tomb, (B) the entrance to the grotto, and (C) ' a little chappell 
taken for Virgills Tombe but falsely '. From Fichard's statement the chapel must 
have been quite close to the tomb, the tomb being to the right of it. Raymond's 
drawing, however, shows (C) as just below the tomb slightly to the right hand, and 
between it and the entrance to the grotto. Mr. R. T. Gunther of Oxford, whose valuable 
work already quoted gives the best modern account known to me of the grotto and 
the tomb, tells me that below the tomb there used to be a niche covered with a sub- 
stantial arch with a fresco painting of the Virgin surrounded by angels. When first 
built this would have been raised only a little above the roadway, but when the roadway 
was lowered it must have been left skied up on the tufa rock surface. This corresponds 
more or less with Raymond's chapel and may possibly have been the shrine referred 
to by Fichard. The vicinity had a bad reputation from early times, and the hermit 
who in the early nineteenth century used to show his presepio in the excavation to 
the right of the entrance of the grotto used also to take people to see a little tunnel 
cut in the rock where the inhabitants of Naples went to worship the god Priapus. 
Cf. Capaccio, La vera Antichitd di Pozzmlo (1682), p. 20; Carletti, Topograjm del 
Bcgno di Napoli (1776), pp. 303-4. My thanks are due to Mr. Gunther for much 
valuable assistance here and elsewhere. 


which appears to me to be most probable. However I can scarcely believe 
that his sepulchre exists to-day either here or there.^i 

At the eastern entrance to the grotto was a church of ' Nostra 
Donna de la Grotta ', famous for its miracles, and which Fichard 
states was just beginning to collect votive offerings as it had 
only recently been set up.^- Shortly after Naples itself could be 
seen, the possessions and gardens of the city reaching almost from 
the church to the city boundary. Fichard thus describes the city : 

It is situated at the gulf of the Tuscan sea, of triangular shape, sea at 
two of its angles, at the third mountains, which, when one looks back, are 
no great distance away — it has five citadels of which two are in the sea 
and two in the town, one is called Castel Veggio, another Castel Nuovo, 
and the fifth on the top of the mountain overhanging the city, which is 
the most famous of all, not by reason of its own strength but on account 
of its situation. The city is not level but with buildings rising gradually 
(for the soil slopes upwards) as if it were built cleft in two. The lower part 
which is most densely inhabited is occupied by the common people and 
merchants and the public buildings. The higher part is inhabited by nobles 
of which there is a great number, wherefore in this even more beautiful palaces 
are seen than in the whole city besides, amongst which the palace of the 
prince of Salerno and the palace of the lord of Ursinum^^ in the region of the 
church of Monte Oliveto are most noticeable ; the owners of the rest I do not 
know. But also in the rest of the city the houses are excellent and beautiful. 

Like most other travellers of his time he was much struck by 
the excellence of the water-supply. Almost every house had its 
cistern of excellent water, a benefit enjoyed by no other town in 
the whole of Italy. The streets he describes as 

rather narrow than wide . . . three are of wonderful length, the upper one 
known as La Vicaria, another as Capuana, and the third leads from the 
region of the citadel to the Market Place.^* Each is memorable. 

*^ The vexed question as to the exact spot at Naples where Virgil was buried will 
perhaps never be settled. The traditional site at the east entrance to the Grotto is 
the one usually accepted by travellers, but even here two sites were shown, SandysJ 
(1010), op. cit., pp. 263-4. It was also claimed that the grave was to be found at thea 
other or western end of the grotto : Fynes Moryson, i. 241, 242. Sarnelli, Nuova\ 
Guida di Pozziioli (1782), p. 4, disposes of the western site very summarily : ' Hanm 
errato quel, c'hanno iasciato scritto essere il sepolcro di Virgilio uscendo dalla Grott 
per andare a Pozzuoli.' The question is discussed by Mr. Gunther, op. cit., p. 201. Sc 
also Peignot, Recherches siir le tomheau de Virgile, Dijon, 1841 ; Coccia, La Tomba 
Virgilio, Turin, 1889. 

^- The existing chapel to Santa Maria della Grotta was erected in 1540 by Pietroj 
di Toledo, who paved the roadway and improved the lighting arrangements. It was 
situated in the middle of the grotto. What chapel Fichard is describing is not clear 
unless it is the church of S. Maria di Piedigrotta, but this could not, even in Fichard's j 
time, be properly described as ' nam recens et iuvenis adhuc est \ 

*=* The writer of the Lansdowne MS. 720 (British Museum) notes the ' beaux j 
palais del Principe di Salerno . . . il paiazzo d'Ursino et grand nombre d'aultres pareils ', 
fo. 395. 

" Cf. Fynes Moryson, i. 238 : ' It hath three fair broad and long streetea namely 
La Toletano, La Capuana, and la vicaria ; the rest are verv narrow.' 


He passes briefly over the churches, but remarks with reference 
to the Church of S. Loi that it was so dark that it might have 
been made out of the saint's own workshop .^^ He next describes 
the market place, where were the inns, but they were for the most 
part of very poor appearance and indeed in the whole town the 
want of good clean inns was very noticeable.^*' Fichard himself 
was the guest of a wealthy Spanish lady, a widow, to whom he 
had been recommended. There were only a few galleys and no 
more than eight ships in the harbour at the time of his visit. 

Fichard climbed the heights to the Carthusian monastery of 
San Martino, and was particularly impressed by the magnificent 
view from the gardens over the town to the sea, but beyond this 
there was nothing particular to notice. Close at hand, dominating 
the whole town, was the Castel Sant' Elmo, but no one was allowed 
to enter, not even the citizens themselves. It had the appearance 
of great age, but certain of the walls were being demolished and 
the whole castle was being altered and rebuilt. 

In the Castel Veggio (Capuana) Fichard was received by the 
prior, a native of Brabant, vir perhumanus, and was very cour- 
teously treated. He led Fichard through the more worthy apart- 
ments, but they were not at all remarkable. ' They appear to have 
i)een built to contain former generations, and are now almost all 
squalid with age. It was pleasant, however, to contemplate the 
ancient buildings and especially the ancient pictures therein.' 
The armoury was visited next, where among other arms was shown 
the panoply of Francis I captured at Pavia, which Fichard tells 
us ' was made of the finest and best iron, but without any orna- 
ment of gold as I have seen in other panoplies. The breastplate, 
which was wonderfully heavy, was held out in their hands for me 
and others to weigh '.^^ Outside the castle grounds were certain 
extensive and beautiful gardens, and within the castle were little' 
hanging gardens, but except for the view they contained nothing 

The Castel Nuovo Fichard describes as a well-fortified and 
beautiful structure. ' On that side which faced the city it is 
enclosed by a deep ditch. It is in addition double, for having 
entered you see the real castle itself which is fortified by a similar 
ditch and by walls and towers. The pavement, however, is raised 
so that one goes up to it by an ascent.' The triumphal arch 

'' St. Loi, St. Eloi, St. Eligius, the patron saint of blacksmiths. Sarnelli describes 

the church as ' una delle principali di Napoli, se bene non ornata alia modema' : 

(Inidit de' Forestieri delta Regal Cittd di Napoli (1697), p. 254. 

j ^' Cf. Moryson, i. 238 : ' Neere the market place are many Innes but poore and 

base ; for howsoever the City aboundeth with houses where they give lodging and meat, 

I yet it deserves no praise for faire Innes of good entertainment.' 

=«' It was kept in the armoury in the town in Moryson s time (1594), i. 236. He 
likewi'^o notes that it lacked ' anv ornament of gold '. 


erected by Alfonso of Aragon to celebrate his entry into the city, 
probably the finest piece of building now left in Naples, was even 
in Fichard's time the most beautiful he had ever seen. Adjoining 
the Council Hall was the tower in Avhich lived Dominus Joanne 
de Corteville, the custodian of the Jocalia Caesaris^^ to whom 
Fichard had been recommended by a deacon of Notre Dame at 
Antwerp. Fichard was graciously received by this great man who 
detailed a certain Cornelius, who lived with him in the tower, 
a learned man, to be his daily companion. By the courtesy of 
de Corteville the Jocalia was displayed to Fichard and to certain 
friends of the custodian who were invited to be present with their 
respective wives and daughters, so that, as Fichard gallantly 
puts it, his eyes were rejoiced by a double spectacle. 

He next describes the Poggio Reale, a famous place of summer 
resort outside the town, with its gardens, aviaries, fish-pools, 
and beautiful views. The palace, of which a few ruins remain 
to-day, and the wonderful bathing-place surrounded by an elabo- 
rate portico 3 9 had been sadly despoiled by the French in the last 
siege, but even in decay it was a place of singular charm. 

If it could be restored to its former beauty, says Fichard, it would be 
difficult to find a more spacious or a more magnificent bathing place in 
the whole of Italy. . . . Everywhere are little fountains and the soothing 
murmur of gliding waters, and the delightful prospect of woods, trees, and 
fruit. But indeed all the gardens and the fields around Naples have a 
certain extraordinary charm.'*^ 

Naples, he thought, was rightly called the gentle, since in no 
other town was there a greater number of nobles who more 
worthily preserved their dignity. 

No one deigns to walk on foot, nor is any one negligently clad. And in 
one day a greater number of beautiful horses can be seen than in half 
a year in the court of a. German prince. 

^^ ' The kingly ornaments,' Moryson, i. 237. 

2^ Cf. Burchard, ii. 174: 'Poggio Regali, quod est pulclicrrimum palatium extra 
Neapolim, ad duo miliaria, quadratum, in quatuor angulis, quatuor quadratas turres 
habens altum, ad duo solaria supra terram, ab intus circumcirca testudinatum, ad 
deambulandum in medio habens locum, ad quern per octo vol decern gradus descendi- 
tur, qui quemdam conductum habet amplissimum, per quern, volentc rege, locus ipse 
quasi in uno momento aqua repletur.' Earlier than the period covered by this article 
the flat country around Naples must have been a pestiferous swamp of stagnant 
waters. All the rain water which scoured the deep torrent beds on the flanks of the 
hills of Camaldoli and of the Leutrecco then accumulated until it could find a sluggish 
outlet to the sea. In 1483 Alfonso II, being persuaded of the possibility of drainage, 
chose a site — Poggio Reale — on the higher ground and there built a palace (Giuliano 
da Majano being his architect), the grounds of which he laid out with bathing pools, 
trees, shady walks, &c. The water was collected in cisterns and reservoirs from the 
torrents which swept down from the hills after rain. 

*" ' The gardens without the wals are so rarely delightfull as I should thinke the 
Hesperides were not to be compared with them,' Moryson, i. 230. 


Fichard found the heat of the summer months trying, and was 
glad to avail himself of the open roofs of the houses where he 
could rest in the cool of the evening and look out over the city 
to the sea and the mountains. *i The existence of an open market 
for the sale of servants, mostly Moors, surprised him, but he has 
not much to say about the daily life of the people. What struck 
him most in their dress was the prevalence of ear-rings among 
all classes of women. 

Fichard did the excursion to PozzuoU and Baia very thorough- 
ly. He visited the Stufe di San German© where the viceroy came 
every year to sweat, and at the Grotta del Cane he experimented 
with frogs instead of with the dogs which were usually at the 
disposal of visitors. At Solfatara, within the enclosure here and 
there, were certain furnaces constructed of leafy branches where 
sulphur was boiled. He visited the various smoking pits or vents, 
and was told that if an animal was thrown into one of them in 
a very short space nothing was left but a heap of bones. 

The place of the larger cavity, he continues, is filled all round with small 
crosses which those who seemed to themselves rather bold have placed 
on the extreme edge. Wheresoever you tread a little more firmly you 
perceive by your hearing a certain underground hollowness, and stones 
cast from above do not run otherwise (so to speak) or give forth any other 
sound than as if cast on ice. The surface is level and dry, nor is it permitted 
to walk anywhere upon it. 

Returning to the road Fichard 's love for beautiful views 
again finds expression. From the hill-side he looked down upon 
Baia with its harbour in the distance, and midway in the bay 
lay the ancient town of Pozzuoli, thrust out so prominently from 
the shore that it appeared to be standing in the sea. At Pozzuoli 
itself he met by chance an old German miller, but found little 
of interest in the town. The amphitheatre, which was much 
damaged a few years after Fichard saw it, was then seemingly 
fairly complete. The walls were intact, and the seats could be 
plainly seen although in many places overgrown with shrubs. 
The arena was in a state of cultivation, so that it resembled 
a beautiful garden enclosed by a magnificent building. Here, 
too, were traces of the recent wars. In the outer colonnade, on 
the opposite side to the one entered by Fichard, the French, 
during the Neapolitan war, had built stables for more than 
100 horses and had kept their horses there.*^ xhe amphitheatre 

" ' The houses of the City are foure roofes high, but the tops lie ahnost plaine, so 
as they walke upon them in the coole time of the night,' Moryson, i. 23S. 

" ' Ad unum railiare est edificium quoddam vetustissimum rotundum, ad instar 
Colisoi Romani, Trullio nuncupatum, sub cuius testudinibus subterraneis centum 
equos vel circa locari possunt ; sunt enim testudines ipse ad id cum presepibus ct 
rastellis parate,' Burchard, ii. 171. 


pleased him so much that he numbered it among the most 
interesting Roman remains in existence. Pozzuoli was inhabited 
chiefly by fishermen, who made no small profit out of visitors, to 
whom they acted as guides, exhibiting the wonders of the neigh- 

Here Fichard embarked and made for Baia. It was the 
custom of the sailors to take their visitors to the farthest point 
of the guK of Pozzuoli and disembark them somewhere in the 
neighbourhood of Misenum. Fichard first visited the Piscina 
Mirabile and then, headed by a sailor bearing a lamp, he proceeded 
to the Cento Camerelle where he found little but bats. Both 
places are carefully described in considerable detail, but Fichard 
tells us scarcely anything that is not noticed by later travellers. 
He then returned to the boat again and sailed for Baia, passing on 
the way the mighty promontory upon the very summit of which 
was perched the famous castle of Baia recently erected by Pietro 
di Toledo, ' built with the utmost skill on its own rock as it were, 
which is level with the mountain but separated from it '. From 
Lake Avernus the travellers passed to the Sybil's Grotto, which 
Fichard describes as square and bearing every indication of former 
magnificence, in size ' ad superioris hybernaculi mei Francofurti 
amplitudinem '. It was adorned everywhere with mosaics which 
had been sadly despoiled by visitors. Enough remained, however, 
to indicate its former beauty."*^ 

He then climbed the hill to Cuma ' de qua istud dicere potes, 
Cuma fuit ', after which he returned to his boat ; and sailed close 
in along the shore past the ruins of the magnificent buildings 
which once fringed the shore, from which it was easy to form an 
idea of its former splendour. The place had been overthrow 
by repeated earthquakes and was practically deserted by the 
inhabitants, but people were dwelling in some of the less ruim 
places, and in the harbour a number of ships were refitting, ' foi 
there is here a certain moderately safe harbour. Among othei 
ruins on the lowest part of the shore there remains in th< 
middle, as it were, a certain tower, round and thick '.'** Fichan 
next visited the baths, known as the Bagni di Tritoli or thej 
Stufe di Nerone. He states that the sea approached so close 
that it was scarcely possible to visit the place except by boat.*^ 
To right and left as one entered w^ere ledges on the rock on which 
beds were placed where the sick and others could rest. Thence 
having cast off some of their clothing and lit a torch the visitors 

" According to Gius. Mormilo, DeHcrittione del amenissimo distretto delta citUi di 
Napoli e delV antichitd della cittd di Pozziiolo (Naples, 1617), pp. 132 ff.), the room was 
richly ornamented, the ceiling with ultramarine and fine gold, and the walls with gems 
of various colours : the floor was decorated with small stones in the form of a mosaic. 

•* The harbour of Baia. The round tower must be the ruins of the Temple of 
Diana. The scene is well figured in Sandys, p. 290. 


proceeded along a passage which took them into the very bowels 
of the mountain. In this passage the vapours were so hot that 
it was impossible to walk upright without sweating excessively, 
and as they had come there to see the place and not to sweat 
they were obliged to crawl along on hands and knees to take 
advantage of a current of air which clung to the floor of the 
passage.*^ At length they reached a parting of the ways. Two 
passages opened out here, one of them being so temperate that 
no heat reached them from it, the other so vaporous that they 
did not venture further but went back to the entrance, where they 
washed themselves . Here apparently Fichard regained his boat and 
returned direct to Pozzuoli. He later returned to Rome, travelling 
along the ordinary post route by way of Capua, Gaeta, and Fondi. 

Lupoid or Leopold von Wedel was born 25 January 1544 at 
Kremzow, and died there in June 1614. His father died in 1552, 
when he was eight years old, and his mother, to give him a good 
education, sent him to school at Stargard. He only remained there 
one 3^ear, however, his desire for travel making him restless. In 
1565 he came of age, and was summoned home by his eldest 
brother to take part in the division of the family estate. Lupoid 
received the Kremzow estate, where he lived from 1566 to 1573, 
when his mother died. For the following twenty years, with few 
intervals, he was abroad. He travelled extensively in Germany 
and Poland. In 1575 he was in France, and in 1578 he visited 
the Holy Land, sailing from Venice and returning to Naples. 
In 1580-1 he travelled in Spain and Portugal, and in 1584-5 
he visited England and Scotland. His private life was not 
creditable. He was apparently an unfaithful husband and an 
unlovable kinsman ; as a traveller he was interesting and indeed 
attractive. The knowledge and experience gained during his 
travels made him an acute and observant chronicler, and the 
careful, if brief, record which he kept of his journeys ^^ well 
repays attention to-day. 

Wedel reached Naples in April 1579, travelUng from Rome 
by the first of the two routes we have mentioned, and lodged with 
a German host, one Meister Ditrich.^' He had barely reached his 
lodgings when the viceroy rode past in state, returning from the 

" The majority of travellers of this time mention the current of cold air near the 
floor. It was only by stooping or crawling that they could enter this passage at all. 

*• Lupoid von Wedel's Beschrcibung seiner Reisen und Kricgserlebnisse, ed. by 
Dr. Max Bar, Baltischc Studien (1S95 ), xlv. 51-216 (Naples, pp. 190-6). 

" The host of the Inn ' Zum schwarzen Adler ' where Kiechel also lodged ; see 
below, p. 192. Kiechel gives his name as Diieterich Breitbach. Another contemporary 
German traveller gives his name as Dietrich aus Coblenz: Michael Herberer, Aegyptiaca 
■■^'crvitus, das kt ivahrhaftc Beschreihung einer drei/jdhrigen Dienstbarkeit (1610), p. 475. 
Cf. Rohricht, Deutsche Pilgerrcisen, under date 1582-9. 


council, attended by 200 horsemen and others. The viceroy is 
described as an old and grey man.*^ Four sceptres were carried 
before him, and between two other sceptres rode the herald, clad 
in a red mantle richly embroidered throughout with gold, with 
the arms of the king of Spain emblazoned on his back and carrying 
a Justicia in his hand. Of the town itself Wedel has not much 
to say, except that it lies by the sea and has three well-fortified 
castles filled with Spaniards ; but he records the existence of 
an interesting relic at the church of the Carmine which seems to 
have escaped the notice of many contemporary travellers. This 
was a large cannon ball which Charles V shot into the church 
when he was besieging the city. The ball flew straight for the 
head of a crucifix, which is said to have bowed its head to avoid 
the shot. The crucifix with bowed head was still shown and was 
held in great veneration, although Wedel is disposed to be 

Like Fichard he was much impressed by the Poggio Reale 
with its fruit trees and fountains. From there he visited the church 
of ' Sante Janare ', from which a door led into a hollow mountain 
in which were buried the Swiss and other soldiers who fell in the 
wars between France and Spain. ^^ On 28 April an excursion 
was made to Pozzuoli. On the road there, while passing through 
the Grotta di Posilipo, one of the attendants fell with his horse 
and lost his saddle cushion bearing his stirrup, which owing to 
the darkness it was impossible to recover and the party had to 
proceed without it. Wedel's account of Pozzuoli and the neigh- 
bourhood is much like that of other travellers. He describes the 
smoke-holes and boiling places in the Solfatara, and then passes 
on to Monte Barbaro which interested him on account of the 
legends associated with its name.^^ 

*' Marchese di Monde jar, viceroy, 1575-9. 

*® ' Die Leute halten es hir vor ein gross Wunderzeichen. Dass es also steet habe 
ich gesen, ob es aber van sich silber so geworden ist, weiss ich Nicht,' p. 191. The 
miracle is recorded by Brantome, Vie des Hommes Illustres (1722), i. 169 ; but Wedel ^■J 
is wrong in his details. The shot was fired in 1439, and it was Alfonso of Aragon who^n 
was besieging the city, not Charles V. The story has several variants ; see H. Megiser, 
Deliciae NeapoUtanae (1605), p. 32 ; J. H. ^ Pflaumern, Mercurius Italicus (1625), 
p. 343 ; J. G. Keysler, Travels (1758), iii. 296. Cf. Norway, p. 160. 

^^ This early reference to the catacombs at Naples is interesting. They are situated 
on the flank of the hill of Capodimonte, the entrance being from the church of S. Gennaro 
de' Poveri. They have only been partly excavated, and are believed to be very intricate 
and extensive. The passage is as follows : ' Von da sein mir in eine Kirche, welche 
ausserhalbe der Statt ligt, gefaren, Sante Janare genant, aus dersultigen get eine Dure 
in einen rumen holen Berk, daselbest in dem holen Berge sullen alle Schwitzer, auch 
zum Theil ander Knechte begraben ligen, die in den Sturmen und Schlagen gebliben, 
wie Reiser Carolus Quintus das Kuninkrich van dem Kunink aus Frankrich erobert,' 
p. 191. 

^^ The legends chiefly connected with the hordes of gold hidden in the caverns 
of Monte Barbaro are as old as Conrad of Querf urt, who refers to the belief in a letter 


Inside, he writes, are said to be seven kings seated upon thrones who in 
the old times ruled and possessed the land, but six years ago the entrance 
fell in, so that it is not possible to go in and see them. Formerly every one 
could enter. One of the kings is said to be sitting with a book under his 

Wedel and his companions breakfasted at Pozzuoli, having 
first given up their arms. They then visited Monte Nuovo, and 
Wedel gives a somewhat exaggerated account of the disturbance 
which produced it. He then visited the Sibyl's Grotto, the 
Piscina Mirabile, and the Cento Camerelle, and has something quite 
fresh to say concerning the Bagni di Tritoli. 

From here (Cento Camerelle) we rode to a place hard by the sea where 
is a passage running into a mountain. If one proceeds along this passage 
for a distance there are other passages opening from it which with this 
passage are so hot that many people on account of the heat cannot enter. 
Far within the mountain is a horse of stone,^^ j^^^ f^^ people can reach it 
because of the great heat. Our company consisted of fifteen men, but only 
two of us approached the horse and one of these did not actually reach it. 
I reached it, however, and seized it with my hands and wanted to proceed 
further, but the peasant who let us in told me that I had better not go 
on, for once upon a time some one had gone on and had perished. As 
I returned I was informed that it was very healthy to sweat in the pas- 
sages, and for this cause I returned and walked along the passage to the 
end again. 

On 1 May Wedel was present at a betrothal, the ceremony 
taking place not in a church but in a private house. The bride 
was preceded through the streets by a number of men, two of 
whom conducted her to the house, but there was no other 
I woman among the escort. The people on both sides of the 
streets showered roses from the windows, and as the bride 
approached the house of betrothal a white and gold veil was 

written from Sicily in 1194 to an old friend of his, the prior of the monastery of Hildes- 
heim (published by Leibnitz in the Scriptores Berum Brunsvicensium, ii. 695-8). 
Petrarch heard of them when he visited the Phlegraean Fields, and was told that of 
the covetous men who had gone to seek them none had returned : Letter to Cardinal 
Colonna, quoted by Campbell, Life of Petrarch, in Sonnets and Triumphs (1859), 
p. liv. See also Parrino, Nuotu Guida di Pozzuoli (1751), p. 32: 'In questo Monte 
vanno i forsennati Tesoristi, ricercando le ascose ricchezze stimando che vi siano Re 
d'oro ornati di carbonchi e pietre preziose con gran ricchezze custodite da' Demonj.' 
Monte Barbaro and the cave of the Sibyl were also associated in popular legend with 
the Grail Quest and the Mountain of Venus. It was widely believed that here was 
jthat rock-bound earthly paradise visited by Tannhauser where men and women were 
living amidst love and magic until the day of judgement. See P. S. Barto, Tann- 
hauser and the Mountain o/ Venus (New York, 1916), p. 16, n. 25, p. 33, n. 37, and p. 53. 
^^ Cf. Burchard, ii. 173: 'Est in eo quidam lapis positus, cavallo nuncupatus, 
quem transgredi non licet propter caloris periculum.' I can find no other mention 
of this horse of stone, but Moryson, i. 252, says ' there is a marke set which they say 
no man ever passed '. He did not reach it. 


thrown over her. She was then welcomed by her lover and taken 
into the house. 

From Naples Wedel sailed to Malta, returning to Naples in 
July on his way back to Rome. 

Samuel Kiechel, who was born in 1563 and died about 1649, 
belonged to an old family of Ulm which is said to be still flourishing. 
He received a scanty education and was brought up to trade, but 
in his youth he travelled extensively in most of the European 
countries and in the East.^^ His Tageb^cch, which records his 
journeys between the years 1584 and 1589, is an extremely 
interesting document and was printed in 1866.^* 

The interest of his narrative as far as Naples is concerned 
commences almost as soon as he sets out from Rome in company 
with the procaccio and some sixty other horsemen, including 
a fellow traveller named Haas. On 17 January, after leaving 
Fondi, the travellers were overtaken by a terrific storm, the like 
of which Kiechel had never experienced before. Such was the 
fury of the wind and hail that the horses could not move a step 
forward and one of the party was blown from the saddle, while at 
* Casscadt ' ^** the water was so high that the boat could not carry 
the travellers across the ferry and they were obliged to ford the 
stream on horseback. That day they began to traverse a beautiful 
country, rich with corn and fruit, and the next evening at vespers 
they reached Naples. Kiechel and his companion repaired at 
once to the inn * Zum schwarzen Adlerr ' kept by a fellow country- 
man, Diieterich Breitbach. Here they found a German nobleman, 
Herr von Diietrichstein, whom they had previously met on the 
way to Venice. He had arranged to visit Pozzuoli the following 
day, and Kiechel and his companion sent their host to inquire 
whether he would allow them to join him, Kiechel being of the 
opinion that if they went in the company of a gentleman of his 
standing they would be better treated than if they went alone. 
Herr von Diietrichstein agreed, and preparations were made 

" Hantzsch, Deutsche Reiscnde des XVI'"^ JahrJiunderts (1895), p. 105 ; A. Weyer- 
mann, Nachrichten von Gdehrten und Kilnstlern (1829), p. 218. Kiechel and Wedel 
were among the host of German pilgrims to the Holy Land whose names have been 
preserved by Rohrieht {DeutscJic Pilgerreiscn, 1900). Of those who visited Naples 
the earliest appears to have been Giso von Ziegenberg who reached Naples c. 1374 
on his return journey, bringing with him ' das Blut Christi '. Others were Duke John 
of C!leve, 1451, Hans von Redwitz, 1467, Count Eberhard of Wurttemberg im Bart. 1468, 
Ulrich Leman, 1478, Landgrave William the Elder of Hesse, 1491, Elector Frederick 
the Wise of Saxony, 1493, Bernhard von Hirschfeld, 1517 (who met Torkington at 
Jaffa), Heinrich Wolfli (Lupulus), 1520, Philip Hagen of Strassburg, 1523, Jodocus 
Meggen, 1542, Andreas Strobeli, 1588 ? (Rohrieht under date 1595). See Rohrieht 
under the respective dates. Wedel and Kiechel with Khevenhiiller, von Pappenheim, 
Herberer, and von Laufien (see above, p. 180, note 22) complete the list to the end 
of the sixteenth century. 

^* Hassler, Die Reisen des Samuel Kicchd, in Bibl. des Litt. Vereins in Stuttgart, 
l.vxxvi. 1866 (Naples, pp. 169-79. He was there in the early months of 1587). 

^** Sant Agata, about 32 miles from Naples as the crow flies. 


accordingly. The next morning in two coaches the travellers 
set out. In the first coach was the nobleman with three Jesuits, 
and in the second rode Kiechel, Haas, the host, and another 
traveller. After celebrating mass at a convent hard by the sea 
the journey was continued to Pozzuoli, where the host obtained 
the necessary permits to enable the travellers to inspect the various 
places of interest. 

Their experiences were not unlike those of other sixteenth- 
century travellers. From Pozzuoli they crossed by boat to Baia, 
and accompanied by a guide proceeded to visit the Cento Camerelle, 
where according to Kiechel the Tyrant Nero kept his Christian 
slaves, so that when he needed relaxation or 'Kurzweil ' he fetched 
them out and had them torn in pieces by lions. Kiechel notes 
the danger of entering the place without guides and torches, and 
next describes the Piscina Mirabile, the so-called tomb of Agrippina, 
and other points of interest in the neighbourhood. The castle 
of Baia, he tells us, at this time was strongly garrisoned by the 
Spaniards as a defence against Turkish pirates. Kiechel appears 
to have penetrated less deeply than Wedel along the passages of 
the Bagni di Tritoli. On entering he was at first forced back by 
the heat, but accompanied by a native of the place he made 
a second attempt, and by bending down, so that the heat and 
vapour j)assed over his head, he managed to grope his way 
forward with the sweat pouring off him as though he had been 
drenched with water. At last he reached a spring which was 
boiling like a cauldron, where he burnt himself severely in attempt- 
ing to test the heat of the water with his hand. He quickly 
retraced his steps to the mouth of the passage, where he waited 
to cool himself, and then visited the Sybil's Grotto. Returning 
to Pozzuoli the company refreshed and repaired to the Solfatara, 
which Kiechel describes as a ' dreadful fearsome ' place, and teUs 
the story of a German horseman of the viceroy's house who, 
a few days previously, had fallen into one of the pits or 
hollows in the earth, and had been killed by the heat, his 
horse only escaping. The usual visit was then made to the 
Grotta del Cane,^^ and as night was drawing on the party returned 
to Naples. 

^° His description of the experiment made there may serve for all travellers of his 
period. ' Von do hat es noch ein gueten theil wegs nach der vergiftn grotta, wolche 
mann diie hundtsgrueben nennet : gleich dobey ist ein clein haus, in wolchem ein 
armer mann wohnet, der einen hund dorin laufen liies an einem strickh angebunden. 
Als nun der hund so lanng drinnen wahr, das einer hundert zohlen mochte, fiiel er 
gleich umb, ward do fiir todt, zog ine am strickh herauser. Gleich neben der grotta 
hat es einen deich, wolches wasser ein besondere natur oder eygenschaft haben mues, 
stost also denn hundt 2 in 3mal dorein, legt in hirnach an gestad nider, ist er ein 
cleine zeiit do fiir todt, gibt am wehnigsten kein lebendiig zeichen von ime, biis iber 
ein weyi kompt ime von erst der athem, nachmals thuet er diie augen auf, street 




Kiechel seems to have been impressed by the size and strength 
of the three castles, but of Naples itself he writes that it is of no 
particular size and ill-defended, with a poorly built wall without 
ditches. He was much interested in the churches and philan- 
thropic institutions, particularly the institutions known as 
L'Annunziata and ' La Curabile ',^^ in which orphans and 
foundlings were received and educated and eventually put out 
to trade. In these two establishments, he tells us, there were 
upwards of one thousand children and elderly persons housed like 
great folk, all of whom were fed handsomely and had wine to 
drink. Like Wedel he saw the viceroy as he rode abroad with 
a guard of fifty German horsemen in long slashed breeches and 
attended by a vast train of noblemen and gentry. He describes 
the viceroy's stables, which were the wonder of most travellers 
of his time. 

Item, he says, to see in the riding place at break of day the horse-masters 
teaching those who come to them for riding lessons, and breaking in the 
horses which is a dehght to see if one cares to get up so early. For this 
place above all others carries off the prize for breaking in horses. 

Kiechel was present at the carnival, which greatly pleased him. 
He appears to have joined wholeheartedly in the mummeries, the 
games, and the dancing. Everywhere was complete lack of 
restraint. Noblemen, knights, and fine gentlemen engaged in 
wrestling bouts and trials of skill with the common people. On 
the last feast-day the streets were almost impassable, the pleasure 
seekers cast off all semblance of order and pelted each other with 
fruit and egg-shells filled with scented waters. From Kiechel's 
inn alone more than one thousand oranges were thrown into the 
street. On the Wednesday, however, at the beginning of the 
fast, everything was changed. The people became suddenly pious 
and solemn, refraining not only from meat but from eggs, butter, 
milk, and cheese. Kiechel is not the only traveller to remarl^J 
that Lent was no time to enjoy oneself in Italy. ^^ 

Kiechel inspected a collection of coins and a closet of rarities, 
both preserved in the houses of certain Neapolitan gentlemen, and 
was present at the wedding festivities of a daughter of the late 
viceroy of Sicily, Marco Antonio Colonna. Through the good 

diie gliiderr, wendet sich hiin und wilder, biis er zulotst ufston wil, follt er wol ottlich- 
mal donider, dann nicht sovil craft noch storckh in ime ist, biis er ein wehnig ruewet, 
dann hobt er wilder an zue gohn ', pp. 173-4. 

^* There is a full account of the hospital called La Casa Santa (adjoining the church 
of S. Maria Annunziata) in Keysler's Travels (1757), ii. 402-4. The annual income was 
said to be about £250,000 sterling. In Keysler's time the number of children there 
averaged about 2,500, ' it being no uncommon thing in one night for 20 infants to be 
put into the wheel or machine which stands open both day and night for their 
reception.' Cf . Lassels's Voyage of Italy (1670), ii. 274-5. The Ospedale degl' Incurabili 
founded in 1521 must be the other institution referred to. * 


offices of his host he was admitted to the palace and gardens to 
watch the guests at dinner, while many notable Italians had to 
remain outside. It was a magnificent spectacle. The repast 
was arranged on a large table with a series of movable tops, one 
above the other, so that when the course of fish and game was 
finished the plates, dishes, and cloth were all removed at once, 
leaving the second course ready spread in front of the guests as 
it were on a fresh table, and the same procedure was adopted with 
the other courses and with dessert. No wine was placed on the 
table, but each guest called for what he required. The banquet 
lasted well into the evening, and was followed by a masque in 
the garden adjoining, at which Kiechel was also present. The 
festivities were continued until after midnight, when Kiechel 
returned to his inn to spend the remaining hours until morning 
in a riot of feasting with a number of compatriots and others. 
After a stay of twenty-four days he departed for Malta. 

In the middle of May we find him at Naples again on his 
homeward journey. On this occasion he was present at the feast 
of Corpus Christi and attended a celebration in honour of the duke 
of Savoy. The palace and the three castles were all illuminated 
at night, and the firing of cannon caused such a disturbance in 
the town that the houses shook to their foundations. 

Of these three German travellers Fichard, the first in point 
of time, is undoubtedly the most interesting. Our only regret 
is that he does not tell us a little more about things which he 
alone was able to see and a little less about the more ordinary 
' sights ' with which the narratives of other contemporary 
travellers are full. One would gladly have sacrificed his lengthy 
accounts of the Sibyl's Grotto, the Cento Camerelle, the Piscina 
Mirabile, and the sweating places of Pozzuoli for a glimpse of the 
coast-line before the eruption of 1538. In his time the canals 
and piers of the Portus Julius, that great harbour in which the 
whole Roman fleet was able to manoeuvre, were more or less in 
perfect condition. He must have looked upon the Lucrine Lake con- 
nected with the sea by a deep channel forming, with Lake Avernus, 
a wide inlet fit for shipping. Two years later the whole aspect 
of the countryside was changed by the volcanic disturbance which 
produced Monte Nuovo and reduced the Lucrine Lake to what 
is little more than a narrow marsh filled with weeds. Unlike some 
of his contemporaries, of whom it is at times difficult to believe 
that they moved in a world peopled by living beings, he displays 
a certain amount of interest in the daily life around him, but what 
is perhaps most valuable is his genuine love of natural beauty, 
a quahty which developed very late in the history of travel and 
which he possessed to a very modern degree. Again and again 

o 2 


he speaks with delight of the magnificent views, the rippling 
waters, and the charm of the gardens and landscape around 
Naples. Wedel and Kiechel belong to a different class of traveller 
altogether. Wedel was perhaps slightly more antiquarian in his 
taste than Kiechel, but both were unlearned travellers, concerned 
less with fine buildings and antiquities than with carousals and 
pageants, the pleasures of the table and whatever was exciting, 
curious, or out of the way. Virgil's tomb is barely mentioned by 
either, and there is no evidence that they troubled to inspect it. 
Wedel cannot even spell the name correctly. No attempt is 
made by any of these travellers to estimate the prevailing 
characteristics of the everyday Neapolitan of this period, although 
certain of their French and English contemporaries have some 
very searching and not always flattering remarks to make on 
this subject. Each, however, has something to tell us which the 
others failed to observe. The ideal sixteenth-century traveller 
would have been a mixture of all three. Malcolm Letts. 

1918 19* 

Pasqttale Villari 

J October 182J—8 December ic)ij 

THE first week of Italy's last December was dark indeed, and, 
as the second opened, darkness was deepened by the extinc- 
tion of one of her brightest stars. Pasquale Villari's light had 
shone so long that it will be missed the more. Not only ItaHans 
but many English friends and countless English readers will 
mourn the loss of one of whom Mr. G. P. Gooch in his History 
and Historians in the Nineteenth Century has said that he alone 
of the Italian historians of recent times has gained not only 
a European reputation but a European public. Pasquale Villari, 
born on 3 October 1827, had fought in the streets of Naples for 
the futile revolution of 1848, had witnessed the disillusion of 
all the hopes of young Italy after the field of Novara, and yet, 
when still in his full powers, had lived to see Italy free and united. 
He would have been the last to be discouraged by a hard knock, 
and would have looked bravely forward to a new and glorious 
risorgimento, which should gather in her few outlying districts, 
and above all cleanse her from the coarse materialism, mainly 
of alien growth, which he had long denounced, and which has 
been the blot on her recent prosperity. 

Villari's life history, though long, may be shortly summarized. 
His childhood was passed in a substantial house, no. 48 Via 
Sette Dolori, at Naples, and in a villa at Apagola. His father, 
Matteo Villari, a lawyer, died of cholera in 1837, but Pasquale, 
also a victim, fortunately recovered. The failure of the revolution 
of 1848 caused his withdrawal from Naples. He Hved quietly 
in Florence from 1849 to 1859, giving private lessons to foreigners 
and working at a biography of Savonarola, to whose poems he 
had been attracted as a boy at Naples, reading them in his attic 
on the sly. His criticism of Perrens's work on Savonarola in the 
Archivio Storico of 1856 brought him into notice, and probably 
led to his appointment as professor of the philosophy of history 
at Pisa in 1859. The first volume of his own life of Savonarola 
appeared in 1860 and the second in 1861. In 1862 he was given 
the chair of history at the new Istituto di Studi Superior!, 
and he represented his government in the educational section 


of the International Exhibition in London. A remarkable 
pamphlet on the failures of the Italian campaign of 1866, followed 
later by his Letter e Meridionali, gave him political reputation. 

Elected to the Chamber of Deputies for Bozzolo in 1867 and 
for Guastalla in 1870, he was disqualified on technical grounds, 
and first sat for Guastalla in 1870, and then for Arezzo in 1873, 
1874, and 1880. He was raised to the Senate in November 1884, 
and became vice-president in 1897 and 1904. His one ministerial 
office was that of minister of public instruction in the Eudini 
government from February 1891 to May 1892. In January 1910 
he received the high distinction of the Collar of the Annunziata. 
Numerous admirers, Italian and foreign, had in 1899 contributed 
to a foundation bearing his name for prizes awarded for post- 
graduate research. The university of Oxford enrolled him as 
an honorary D.C.L. on the occasion of Lord Goschen's inaugura- 
tion as chancellor in 1904. His wife, an English lady. Miss 
Linda White, predeceased him in 1915, leaving an only son, 
Luigi Villari, who already bears an honourable name as journalist, 
author, and soldier. 

Villari's three chief works, and those best known in England by 
translations, are his Savonarola, his Machiavelli, and The Two 
First Centuries of Florentine History. Of these the Savonarola is the 
most popular, and, perhaps, the most characteristic. His earliest 
book, it took ten years of his life, and glows with the fire of 
a youthful martyrologist. His researches were wide, if, as is 
natural, not yet complete. He first gave their true value to the 
writings of Savonarola's contemporaries and worshippers, which 
must always form an important element in the preacher's 
biography. Villari, on this subject, was eminently a pioneer, 
and all subsequent works, whether of allies or opponents, have 
had to reckon with him. 

The fourth centenary of Savonarola's death in 1498 raked 
up the embers of controversy which from the first his biography 
had lit. Perhaps no modern historical book has been so fiercely 
discussed, for it is not only a matter of individual taste but of 
party traditions and beliefs. Protestants strove to prove that 
Savonarola was a precursor of the Reformation, and, much to 
Villari's indignation, Savonarola in the great monument at 
Worms sits with Hus and Wyclif at Luther's feet. The Fran- 
ciscans, who had largely contributed to Savonarola's death, were 
more or less quiescent, but the Jesuits made him the object of 
their denunciation for his disobedience to the Pope. Secularists, 
conservative or radical, indifferent to his doctrines or his practical 
piety, flung themselves into the fray over his character as the 
reformer of the Florentine constitution. Nationalists held him 
up to scorn as the opponent of a united Italy and as the ally of 


the French invader. Men of letters and lovers of the arts abused 
him for the destruction of precious books and pictures on the 
pyre of the vanities. Dominicans stoutly defended one of the 
greatest figures of their order. Amid this turmoil Villari took 
a dignified and almost silent part, contenting himself with 
printing in collaboration with his pupil, E. Casanova, a selection 
from Savonarola's sermons and other works. For one moment 
only his indignation got the better of him, and he wrote in the 
Archivio Storico Italiano a courteous but severe rebuke to the 
editor for what he thought a one-sided approval of Dr. Pastor's 
somewhat intemperate attack upon his hero. It is by no means 
necessary to agree with Villari's estimate of Savonarola as 
a religious or as a poHtical reformer, but it must be confessed 
that for originality and Hfe his book still holds the field against 
all rivals. 

Notwithstanding the great merits of his Savonarola, the 
Life of MacMavelli is, perhaps, Villari's best book. He now had 
the experience of his first great work behind him, his mind was 
riper, his method surer. Above all the subject kept a curb on 
his emotions. He set himself down resolutely to write with 
scrupulous impartiaHty, and Machiavelli's character, no nidus 
for any germ of hagiology, enabled him to keep his pledge. He 
must, of course, make the best of one who, with all his faults, 
was the now recognized prophet of Italian unity, who had not 
only formulated the theory, but had personally on a minute 
scale set up the machinery, the model national army, which 
nearly 400 years later converted the theory into a working 
scheme. Villari regarded the army even more from a political 
and social than from a military point of view. The army had 
not indeed won the nation's unity, for victory was largely due 
to French and then to Prussian aid ; but it was the great pubHc 
school of Italy, bringing together the youths of every province, 
giving them a common discipline and a national outlook. Thus 
then Machiavelli's cause and his character, his noble ends and his 
repulsive means balanced each other, and Villari's critical sense 
suffered from no disturbing emotions. His book, too, has this 
merit that, fond as he was of philosophizing and moralizing, he 
avoided the temptation of making his hero the peg for disquisi- 
tions on political science ; he wrote a straightforward biography, 
from which the reader can draw for himself such lessons as he 
pleases. His own conclusions are well stated in a review ^ of 
Lord Morley's Romanes lecture of 2 June 1897, and Greenwood's 
article in Cosmopolis, August 1897. He here holds that the 
two moralities, public and private, are distinct, and that the 
latter logically followed in national affairs would lead to bUnd 

» Nitova Antologia, 16 October 1897. 


chance and peril to the state, but that the public conscience is 
gradually attracted by the private. 

Villari's third great work. The Two First Centuries of Florentine 
History, had not quite so favourable a reception as the other two. 
There was a gap of many years between the lectures which form 
the basis of the earlier and later portions of the work, and from 
an artistic point of view the composition as a whole somewhat 
suffers. In a subject so obscure new documentary evidence 
frequently entailed reconsideration and readjustment. Villari 
was indeed always ready to allow for new developments in matters 
of detail, though he was reluctant to withdraw from positions 
which he regarded as essentials. On the whole, however, the author 
might justly claim that more often than not the fresh discoveries 
did but confirm his original ideas on the general character and 
progressive development of Florentine history. 

The inevitable question arises : Will Villari live ? The answer 
depends less on his own merits than on accidents. Should 
a writer arise with the advantage of later and fuller knowledge, 
and with an equally arresting personality, Villari's work would 
doubtless be superseded in Italy. In England this would be more 
difficult, for the new author must find a translator with the inti- 
mate knowledge of the historian's mind, and with the literary gift 
which Signora Villari possessed. Working in the closest com- 
panionship with her husband, and having a more than mere 
verbal knowledge of his text, she could afford herself a freedom 
upon which the ordinary translator could scarcely venture. The 
question of living is, perhaps, not really important. To have 
lived is often more vital than to live. Every historian, as every 
saint, has had his iconoclasts, but he has not lived in vain, for 
he will have provided the materials out of which the iconoclasts 
will fashion their own idols. Villari himself, in his Inaugural 
Address to the Historical Congress at Rome in 1903, has said : 

Historical studies are naturally connected with the existing political 
and social conditions. Society changes from age to age, and as fast as 
it turns to us another of its thousand facets we are obliged to re-make 
history under a new aspect. This is the reason why, even when it was 
written by men of the highest ability, we have to reconstruct it afresh. 

In this same address Villari dwelt on the defects of Italian his- 
torical study in recent times. Whereas, he said, in the collection 
and editing of documents much admirable work had been done in 
the last half-century, these documents had not been sufficiently 
used for what he terms synthetic history, whether political or 
constitutional ; editors there were in plenty, but of writers very 
few. This is a criticism which must often have occurred to 
EngHsh readers who have given any close study to modern 


Italian historical work. With ourselves synthetic history is apt 
to be too rapidly turned out ; our ambition is usually not to 
collect material, but to write a book. The Itahan from modesty 
or indolence prefers to hide his talents in a napkin marked 
*UnpubHshed Documents '. The other defect to which Villari called 
attention was the prevaiHng ignorance of foreign history, often 
the necessary complement of the students' own work. This he 
thought was due to the exciting national events of their own age, 
which absorbed their attention in the past of their own country. 
On neither of these counts could Villari himself be impeached. 
His knowledge of foreign writers and of foreign history was very 
wide, as may be proved by reference to his essay on the subject, 
La Storia e una Scienza ? Research was for him not an end in 
itself, though he never wearied in the delving required for the 
foundations of his superstructure. As befitted a professor of the 
Studi Superiori and a minister of public instruction his aims 
were to educate and edify. Hence arose his efforts to popularize 
history, to create a reading pubHc, to fill the gap between school- 
books, which are read and thrown away, and those intended 
for professional historians. For this purpose he would have 
nothing to do with historical hacks ; the volumes must be 
entrusted to the best men, to Orsi, Balzani, his own pupil Sal- 
vemini and himself ; they must not be mere mechanical abstracts, 
but should be written with spirit and lucidity. This project took 
shape in the Collezione Villari and the Biblioteca Villari. He 
himself wrote Le Invasioni barbariche and Ultalia da Carlo 
Magno alia Morte di Arrigo VII, while excellent volumes were 
contributed by the authors mentioned above, by Errera and 
Buzzolara. The series, however, has not been so extensive as 
Villari contemplated, and Italian historians could raise no better 
monument to their old leader than the fulfilment of his scheme. 

Historical studies in Italy have long suffered from a surfeit 
of societies and academies. From 1864 onwards Villari took 
a leading part in the attempt to co-ordinate their work, to give 
it a common aim and provide for mutual aid. At the Congress 
held at Naples in 1879 he presented a scheme for a central com- 
mittee which should serve as a clearing house for the collection 
and pubHcation of the output of the various societies, and utiHze 
the Archivio Storico Italiano as its organ. Provincial rivalries 
or indolence thwarted the realization of the project, but in 1883 
the ministry of pubhc instruction did actually found the Istituto 
Storico Italiano on the lines suggested by Villari, though the 
results were disappointing until at the fourth Historical Congress 
in 1889 he again urged the necessity of co-operation between the 
societies and the Istituto, and this time with more effect. 

Villari's educational activity ranged far beyond the higher 


historical studies. During his visit to England in 1862 he had 
visited English and Scottish schools, and his first pedagogic work 
was on public education in Great Britain. Thus it was natural 
that in the Menabrea government of 1869 he was made general 
secretary to Angelo Bargoni, minister of public instruction, who 
had no expert knowledge of education. Here he had a free hand, 
and during his seven months of office initiated numerous reforms. 
An upper normal school was established at Naples to train 
masters for the ginnasio and the liceo ; the passage from the lower 
to the higher of these institutions was regularized ; concessions 
were made to any commune which built elementary schools 
subject to strict hygienic and pedagogic rules. Owing to this 
experience Villari was no novice when he himself became minister 
of public instruction in February 1891. His appointment was 
hailed with enthusiasm, but the results were somewhat disap- 
pointing, a not unusual experience with ministers of education. 
There are crises in national history when economy is more 
essential than even education, and this was one. Italy was on 
the verge of bankruptcy, and Rudini was clutching at every 
expedient to avert it. Large schemes for both primary and second- 
ary education were pressed upon Villari, but they entailed yet 
wider social reforms, and he had not the wherewithal to satisfy 
the idealists. After all the form of education must in some 
measure depend on the material which it is meant to mould. 
In a famous speech the minister drew a picture of the Neapolitan 
urchin who begs a soldo of the inspector of compulsory education, 
because he is starving : the inspector threatens the parents with 
a fine, but they too have nothing on which to live : with the 
alphabet the little starveling learns that the law is equal for all, 
that liberty produces all possible and imaginable blessings : he 
goes home to find that his mother has burnt her bed for firing 
and has not a crust to give him, and later on that the sanitary 
reformers have destroyed the family hovel and forgotten to 
provide a new one : might the lad not ask for less learning and 
more pity ? 

In university education there were difficulties of another 
kind. On presenting a bill for the reorganization of the Istituti 
dTstruzione Superiore (28 May 1891) he said, ' " There is some- 
thing rotten in the State of Denmark ", and that is the lack of 
a spirit of discipline and insufficient moral education ; with such 
deficiencies no system succeeds, and therefore a new system is 
not enough.' Many professors in fact were neglecting their 
duties, and had almost ceased to lecture ; an epidemic of rioting 
was spreading from university to university. Villari did not 
believe in the herding of all classes and all intellects under the 
so-called classical education prevalent in Italy. He wished to 


make the classical education more severe, so as to divert the 
majority towards agriculture, commerce, and industry. 'In 
modern society', he said, ' the workman has become almost the 
principal personage, and the richest, the strongest nation is that 
which succeeds in making the best workman.' He had, perhaps, 
witnessed in a neighbouring country the results of gratuitous 
literary education, which emptied the fields and workshops to 
fill the cafes. A literary education was in his belief the highest, 
but it must be of the best and for the best ; above all it must be 
alive. Educationalists are apt to lapse into pedantry, but for 
Villari this was impossible ; his aim was always to bring the life 
that was in the subject or the author into contact with the life 
that might lie dormant in the learner. As he despised sham 
research, so he deprecated useless research. In his article La 
Storia e una Scienza ? he gives as an example of the latter a youth 
who spent two years in the study of a wretched dialect poem of 
the seventeenth century, and ended by discovering its sources 
in two miserable French poems. Life was the secret of Villari 's 
success as a teacher ; a pupil has written of him that as he spoke 
he opened a window and let air and light into the mind. 

Villari met with no striking success in his parliamentary 
career, nor even in his short ministry, in spite of his sound common 
sense and expert knowledge. He confesses that he was often 
called an Anglophil, and indeed his references to our system of 
insurance of labour, the success of our Land Acts in checking 
Irish emigration, the generous versatility of our colonial poHcy, 
give some colour to the impeachment. He beHeved, however, 
that our parHamentary system was ill-suited to the Latin nations, 
steeped as they were in the principles of the French Revolution, 
and realized that even in Great Britain modern developments 
were outgrowing it. The Italian party system in its burlesque 
exaggeration, its greed for patronage, its indifference to social 
reform, ran counter to his sense of proportion, his honesty, his 
philanthropy. Even in England he would never have been 
a successful party man. For all that he was a real power in the 
nation, and his cry for social betterment met at times with a 
practical response, though governmental ears might be hard of 
1 hearing. He has been well called the conscience of Italy, a con- 
1 science which had no self-deceit and no flattery, a conscience 
j which raised no objections to disagreeable duties. To the nation's 
I credit it sometimes obeyed its conscience, and rarely resented 
\ its denunciations. This conscience worked through the agency 
of pamphlets, which took indeed the form of journahstic articles 
in the Perseveranza, the Giornale d'ltalia, the Politecnico, the 
Gorriere, and very frequently the Nuova Antologia. Villari had 
all the qualifications of the perfect pamphleteer. Everything 


that he wrote he really felt, while on the other hand he had from 
early youth, as he tells us in his article on his brother-in-law, 
Domenico Morelli, the critical, analytical, investigating spirit. 
His style was vivid, trenchant, simple, free from superfluous 
ornament, possessing the real quality of rhetoric, that is, the 
art of persuasion. In some of his pamphlets, notably in that 
on the sulphur workers of Girgenti, his literary gift is seen to 
even greater advantage than in his greater works. His first 
important pamphlet, Di chi e la colpa ? created an immediate 
sensation throughout Italy, so much so that one Erba, vendor of 
a popular beverage, had it reprinted as a wrapper to his bottles. 
The defeats of Custozza and Lissa in 1866 had, in spite of the 
territorial gains of the war, caused deep depression and acute 
resentment. There was a fierce cry, as is usual in Latin countries, 
and indeed elsewhere, for a victim, whether traitor or scapegoat. 
Villari proved that the fault was not in the individual, but in 
the national system ; Italy was not yet educated up to her task. 
To this theme he returned again and again in later articles. 
In 1872 he wrote that, whereas in Germany social and economic 
progress had preceded national union, in Italy political revolution 
had come before social and industrial ; owing to diplomatic and 
mihtary aid from outside liberty had been won too rapidly and 
easily, and therefore social reform had to be introduced too quickly 
and experimentally ; education lagged behind poHtical advance, 
and hygiene behind education. In an article written in 1898 on 
Savonarola and the present day he compares the heroism and self- 
sacrifice of the Risorgimento with the low standard of more modern 
times, and quotes Sir James Hudson as saying that in Italy men 
fall to pieces. Hidden idealism, thought Villari, was the reason 
why through all ages Italy had endured such vicissitudes, why 
sometimes she rose to unexampled superiority, only to lapse with 
equal suddenness into unworthy degradation. Much later in 
La Nostra PoUtica ^ he gives more definite reasons for the contrast, 
holding that the promoters of the wars of liberation were really 
a minority confined to the bourgeoisie and a few of the aristocracy, 
that after the too rapid success the real heroes remained heroes, 
but those whom they had inspired fell back to the personal 
interests of yore, but should a crisis ever come they would be 
once more heroes. Italy, he believed, unHke northern nations, 
depended on sentiment and imagination to rescue her : out of 
from 33,000,000 to 34,000,000 inhabitants only 8,000,000 to 
10,000,000 really formed the new Italy, and counted in the 
balance of nations : the masses should have been assimilated 
by higher education and social reforms, which were always 
postponed and only conceded in scraps : hence arose con- 

« Oiornal.e d' Italia, 4 October 1910. 


tinuous tumults, obstacles to all progress industrial, commercial, 
agricultural : hence all discipline had gone, the government 
was always weak and a prey to parties, while not the least conse- 
quence of the failure was the colossal emigration. This article 
was perhaps the last of the formal Jeremiads, for in that on the 
Tripoli campaign 3 Villari contrasted the extraordinary enthusiasm 
uniting all classes and north and south with the general indifference 
shown in the Wars of Liberation. Will Italy, he concludes, do 
her duty by her victory ? will she try to reconcile the differences 
of race and religion ? 

Tuscany had been Villari 's home since he was twenty- two, 
but his heart was still in the south. In 1859 he disseminated 
clandestine literature in Naples, and he witnessed Garibaldi's 
entrance on 7 September 1860. His Lettere Meridionali on the 
grievances of the south were collectively printed in 1875, and he 
constantly returned to this subject, to boy slavery in the sulphur 
mines, to the latifundia of Sicily and southern Italy, to brigandage, 
the Mafia and the Camorra, to the barbarous treatment of convicts 
in the Lipari Islands, to the poisonous water-supply and the 
horrible housing conditions of the poor in Naples. Painfully real 
to those who have witnessed on a smaller scale the destruction 
of slum districts in certain English towns is his description in 
Nuovi tormenti e nuovi tormentati (1890), of the replacement of 
the old hovels either by cafes, restaurants, theatres, palatial 
shops and houses, or else by huge blocks of model lodging-houses 
with no space, no air, no sun, but elaborate cooking arrangements 
for occupants who had nothing to cook, and a hygienic system 
which required the temperament of a Job and the technique of 
a sanitary plumber. As with us, of course, clerks walked in 
where paupers feared to tread. 

In his article. La Nostra Politica, of 1910, already quoted, he 
repeats his indictment of the treatment of the south from the 
day of its liberation. The north had sent its refuse to administer 
the old Bourbon kingdom, it had combated the Camorra and the 
Mafia by Camorra and Mafia : firm justice was the one thing 
needed, and which the south never got. Northerners were too 
busy and prosperous to enter the administration, the army or 
the navy, thus they were flooded by southerners who were only 
elected to win favours ; every measure was spoilt by party, local, 
or personal interests, and yet the improvement of the south, 
moral, hygienic, and economic, was the fife and death question 
for all Italy. 

The oppressed, wherever they were to be found, could claim 
Villari as their champion, the casual labourers of Romagna, the 
straw-working women of Tuscany, the quarrymen of Carrara, 
3 Dopo la Guerra, Corriere, 24 October 1912. 


wood-cutters in the Casentino, harvesters stricken by fever in 
the Maremma, and peasants hj pellagra in the Mantovano. This 
was no mere philanthropy ; it was forced on Villari by the two 
grave modern dangers of Italy, emigration and socialism. It 
was argued, indeed, that emigration was a boon, that much 
money was sent back to fructify in Italy, that emigrants returned 
with hoarded wealth and settled down again in their own districts. 
Villari replied that they left the districts where labour was most 
needed, and returned to urban centres already overcrowded, or 
that, if they resettled in their country houses, they became 
petty tyrants or drifted away from the malaise of a life to which 
they had become unaccustomed. Again and again he expresses 
his fear of the consequences of the rapid spread of socialism in 
Italy. He saw that as it grew in volume in England, in Switzer- 
land, or Germany it lessened in violence, that the more moderate 
elements gained the lead, while the more fantastic disappeared ; 
this he ascribed in England to the readiness of both parties to 
meet genuine grievances half-way. In Italy, on the contrary, 
socialism, from being badly handled by the governing classes, 
was in danger of degenerating into anarchy. He used the example 
of the riots at Milan and the revolt in Sicily to illustrate its 
progress. At first its existence was disbelieved and derided, 
then was regarded as a mysterious horror, the very thought of 
which must be put away ; when disturbances broke out no 
precautions had been taken to check them, they were hurriedly 
suppressed with unnecessary violence, and then, worst of all, 
an amnesty was granted to the guiltiest propagandists. Nursed 
in the teeming industrial population of the rich north Italian 
towns, socialism was spreading to the poor countryside of Naples 
and Sicily, where theoretical Marxian collectivism found material 
in the land hunger of the peasantry. The young hot-heads 
from the universities, who posed as the intellectual leaders of the 
new doctrines, were pure idealists, who had never mingled, as 
their English contemporaries had done, with the lower classes, 
who knew nothing of their real grievances or needs, or of their 
uncontrolled passions, who preached that any means, even the 
artificially produced ruin of their converts, were justified to 
stimulate revolt, and who, if they did come into authority in 
this commune or in that, exaggerated all the faults of the bour- 
geoisie which they had supplanted. The Bolshevism of Russia 
of to-day is the precise fulfilment of the fate which Villari used 
to fear for Italy. 

Chief among the causes of Italian unrest was, in Villari's 
opinion, the decay of religion. He was no papalist, and he 
detested the ultra-cathoUc press, but he had deep religious 
feehng, and he held that the exclusion of religion from secular 


education was a fundamental fault. In the cities there was an 
entire lack of religion of any sort, while the country districts, 
dominated by reactionary priests, remained under a cloud of 
barbaric superstition. Even the upper middle classes, who were 
professedly cathoKc, made religion no part of their everyday 
life ; they treated it as the baggage which travellers on a walking 
tour send on by parcel post to their destination, only too glad 
to be relieved of its weight. Villari was no violent reformer, he 
did not wish for the overthrow of the papacy, beheving that 
reconciliation was not impossible, and arguing in 1910 against 
the pinpricks which he attributed to Sonnino. His ideal would 
have been reform in a modernized Savonarolist sense, aUke 
ethical and spiritual, such as might have been secured at the 
close of the fifteenth century, if only Savonarola could have 
converted the papacy to his own catholic principles. 

It would be difficult to class Villari as a politician. He was not 
afraid of the people, indeed he attributed the troubles of Italy to 
the chronic exclusion of the lower classes from Roman times to 
the present. Yet he feared a wave of democracy which would break 
all barriers. In a review of Lord Bryce's book on The American 
Commonwealth,^ he wrote that America offered the sole material 
for a judgement on the new democracy, but that the author was too 
optimistic, and that its full dangers would appear when popula- 
tion had increased and all ground was occupied, that at present 
they were veiled by unexampled prosperity. It is characteristic 
of Villari that he was never content with lifeless facts or abstract 
theories ; he always draws educational lessons from them. Thus 
in a recent short study on Marsilius of Padua (1913) he marks 
I the contrast between the centralized, all-including, all-compeUing 
j state and the loose federation of feudal and communal units, 
which Marsilius would replace by it. He concludes by applying 
t his contrast to the modern transition from the constitutionalism 
j of England with its barriers of groups and classes, all representing 
valuable interests, and the level flood of democracy flowing 
j from the French Revolution, based upon equahty, and making 
i the most vital problems of state depend upon an accidental 
•numerical majority. To check this flood from spreading 
I disaster he imagines a league of European nations founded 
j on resistance either to the reaction of the east or the domina- 
jtion of the United States ; meanwhile all that could be done 
• was to study the problem how democracy can be saved from 
jits own excess, how equality is to be reconciled with liberty 
iand justice. 

In the last public utterance by Villari which I have read he 
jseems a truer prophet. On 18 January 1914 he inaugurated 

1 * Nuova Antologia, 16 November 1911. 


a new series of lectures upon Dante in the Casa di Dante at 
Florence. Here he discussed the possibility of reconciling Dante's 
imperialism with his nationalism, showing that Dante firmly 
believed in Italy as a nation, but that in his day Italy as a state 
was beyond all practical politics. Thus between 1848 and 1861 
Dante was not popular, because the immediate aim was to build 
up the lesser unity of the state, but, that once laid on sure 
foundations, Dante again found favour, because Italy could then 
take her share in the brotherhood of nations for the common 
liberty. Thus Dante was an internationalist rather than an 
imperiahst in the modern sense, rising, as Villari writes in an 
article on Dante's De Monarchia in 1911, together with his 
fervid worshipper Mazzini, above the more practical national 
heroes, Bismarck and Cavour, as being international patriots, 
champions of the freedom of all mankind. 

Of very present interest are Villari 's annual addresses to the 
meetings of the society ' Dante AHghieri ', held each year at 
a different ItaHan or Sicilian town. The object of this society 
was to maintain or to expand, by means of schools and charitable 
institutions, Italian culture in Italian populations outside Italy, 
whether in the Trentino or Istria and Dalmatia, in Brazil or 
Argentina, in Malta or among labourers employed on the Simplon 
tunnel or other such enterprises. Each year from 1897 to 1903 
Villari, who succeeded Bonghi as president, gave a detailed 
account of the successes and needs of the society. The travels 
which he made beyond the Italian frontiers gave him a store of 
information of the highest value, showing the ebb or flow of 
Italian population and culture, the hostility of Austrian or Slav, 
the comparative favour of Hungary at the one port of Fiume, 
the contempt of the prosperous, well-fed Swiss, the renegade 
action of the clergy in Italia irredenta, and the passionate devotion 
of the unredeemed population to the motherland. The society 
was professedly non-political, but it must be confessed that such 
a frontier-line is perilously indistinct. 

Enough has been said to show that Villari was no mere his- 
torian of the far-off past ; the next generation may regard him as 
the surest authority on his own time. His articles form a precious 
commentary upon the troubled years that elapsed from the 
unity of Italy almost to the outbreak of the present war. Every- 
thing which he wrote for the last half-century of his life, even if 
it might be on Dante, on Marsilius, or on the vexed question as 
to whether history is a science, contained a contribution, greater 
or less, to this commentary. He had no personal, local, or political 
interest to make him swerve. Straightforwardly, in language at 
once reproachful and persuasive, he told Italy and her government 
of her faults and failings. Italy in return has done him justice ; 


she did not resent his reproaches, and in the latest years of his 
life was yielding to his persuasion. 

It is to be hoped that Villari has left materials which may 
serve as an autobiography. Of his early life and education he 
has given a fairly full account in his articles on his brilKant young 
comrade, Luigi Vista, slain in the streets in 1848, on his inspiring 
teacher, Francesco De Sanctis, the close friend of after years, 
and of his sister's husband, the artist, Domenico MorelU. like 
other young Neapolitans he was trained in the decadent ultra- 
purist school of the Marchese Puoti, in which imitative phrase, 
drawn from the Italian classics from the fourteenth to the 
sixteenth century, was the end and aim of literary education. 
Its one merit was its horror of Gallicism, which had threatened, 
and, indeed, still threatens the purity of ItaHan prose. It is 
possible that Villari owed to this training more than he would 
admit, even as many of us would have missed that of the Latin 
and Greek verse, which we are apt to write off as a valueless 
asset. From this somewhat deadening education he was drawn 
by Luigi Vista to the little class which gathered round De Sanctis, 
of whose life-giving power as a teacher none can doubt, whatever 
view may be held of his merit as a literary critic or a Dantist. 
It is impossible to read Villari 's books or pamphlets without being 
reminded of the three great literary commandments of his master 
— * The style must be natural, the author must be sincere, even 
as the man must be honest.' Of Villari 's Ufe after those early 
years next to nothing is to be found in his own writings. The 
present article owes much to a biography and bibliography 
written by Francesco Baldasseroni in 1907, and to an account of 
his secretaryship and ministry of public instruction, published 
by Carlo Fiorilli in the Nuova Antologia, 16 October 1907. 

Others will speak of Villari's personality with more intimate 

knowledge than the writer of this notice. This much may be 

said, that he could combine the dignity and reserve of the Tuscan 

of olden days with the vivacity, wit, and humour of the southerner. 

He was peculiarly modest and a most courteous opponent, in 

spite of his outspoken denunciations of wrongdoing or neglect. 

His hfe was of the simplest, whether in his home at Florence or 

! in a quiet hotel in the Italian or Tyrolese mountains. Italy, or 

1 any other nation, might well be proud of such a union of historical 

j and literary gifts, of political wisdom and foresight, and of deep 

jrehgious feehng for suffering humanity. F. Maggini,in a notice 

j of his article on the De Monarchia, has truly said : ' Every time 

i that a word of Pasquale Villari's is to be heard, we may be sure 

that it is a word with life therein.' E. Armstrong. 


210 ApriJ 

Notes and Documents 

The Earliest Use of the Easter Cycle of Dionysius 


In the last number of this Review I endeavoured to ascertain the 
time at which the cycle of Dionysius first became current in the 
west. I mentioned that it was recommended by Cassiodorus, 
but found no further evidence of its knowledge until the synod 
of Whitby in 664. The words of Cassiodorus occur in his Institutio 
divinarum Litterarum, a book which is commonly assigned to 
543-4, but which the Rev. John Chapman, O.S.B., gives strong 
reasons for believing to have been composed later than 558.i 
I did not refer to the little tract entitled Computus Paschalis 
which is printed among the works of Cassiodorus, because its 
authorship has been commonly denied. Mommsen pointed out 
that there was no good evidence for attributing it to him. More- 
over, as the tract was written in 562, he thought it unlikely that 
Cassiodorus could have been still working at so late a date.^ 
Kj?usch knew of no earlier authority for attributing it to Cassio- 
dorus than a modern note in the Cottonian MS. Caligula A. xv, 
fo. 71.^ The source from which the annotator derived his in- 
formation appears to be unknown. But Mommsen's argument 
from the date can hardly be maintained ; for Cassiodorus tells us 
that he was still writing in his ninety-third year, and even if he 
was born as early as 480 * there need be no difficulty in ascribing 
to him a tract composed in 562. The tract, it may be added, is 
simply a new edition of a work by Dionysius, adapted to the 
later date. The most recent writer on technical chronology, 
Dr. Ginzel, accepts it as the work of Cassiodorus and infers from 
it that he was the first person who applied the computus of 
Dionysius to the purpose of establishing the date from the 

» Notes on the Early History of the Vvigate Gospels, pp. 31-9, 1908. 

^ Abhandlungen der Kon. Sdchsischen Gesdlschajt,^h\\o\. -hist. Classe, iii. 572, 1861. 
Mommsen then assigned the Computus to the compiler who continued the Chronica 
to 559, but afterwards he regarded this continuation as attached to the Cursus 
Paschalis of Victorius : Chronica minora, i. (1892) 675. 

' Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft fur dltere Deutsche Geschichtskunde, ix. (1884) 113 f. 

* Cf. Chapman, p. 36 and n. 3. 


Incarnation as an Era.^ If the attribution be accepted it furnishes 
additional evidence for the knowledge of the cycle of Dionysius 
at Squillace,^ and corrects my statement that Cassiodorus did 
not make use of it. 

Mommsen ' was of opinion that a chronological note at the 
end of the Chronicle of Victor Tunnunensis,^ which was written 
in the latter part of the sixth century, was based on the table 
of Dionysius. This note states that the years from Adam to the 
Nativity are 5199 and the years from the Nativity to the first 
year of Justin II are 567. Had it been derived from Dionysius 
we should have expected the writer to speak not of the Nativity 
but of the Incarnation, for the terms are not synonymous. But 
in fact the calculation is evidently taken from St. Jerome's 
translation of the Chronicle of Eusebius, according to which the 
creation was placed 5201 b. c. and the Nativity 2 b. c. ; so that 
567 years from this date bring us to A. d. 565, the year of the 
accession of Justin. Moreover, it cannot be said that Victor 
made use of an era.^ In his Chronicle he reckons by consular, 
and at the end by imperial, years. In the last few years the 
chronology becomes confused : ^^ he makes Justinian reign on 
into an imaginary fortieth year ; and he places the first year of 
Justin in the fifteenth indiction, i. e. in a. d. 567, an error which 
was repeated by John of Biclar. The note and the chronological 
scheme of the Chronicle thus appear to be drawn from independent 
sources, and the note is merely a chronological statement of a type 
of which there are numerous examples. 

It has lately been suggested that there is evidence of the use 
of the era in Spain nearly thirty years before the synod of Whitby, 
iln 1811 Jaime Villanueva described a Visigothic manuscript 
of the eighth century (not earlier than 773) in the monastery of 
JRipoU in Catalonia (cod. 62), which gave a table of ancient eras, 
land included the following notice : 

l^b incarnatione autem Domini lesu Christi usque in presentem primum 
puintiliani principis annum, qui est Era Ixx quart a sunt anni mdccxxxvi. 

jV'illanueva thought that mdcc was omitted in the Spanish Era, and 
interpreted the date as referring to a. d. 736 and to a Chintila 
j)therwise unknown.!^ The manuscript has disappeared and we can 
|)nly take the text as it is printed. But it is evident that a writer 

I ^ Handhuch der mathem. und techn. Chronol. iii. (1914) 180. 

j * There is nothing to indicate any connexion with Rome, as Ideler supposed : see 

iis Handhuch der mathem. und techn. Chronol. ii. (1826) 375. 

j ' Chron. min. ii. (1894) 181. 

® Vict. Tonnennensis [so Mommsen spells the word], Chron., ibid., p. 206. 

» Cf. J. G. Janus, Hist. Aerae Christ., p. 25 (Wittenberg, 1714) ; and W. H. 
[tevenson, in Notes and Queries, 9th ser., i. (1898) 232. 
} " Cf. Mommsen, Chron. min. ii. 180. 

1 " Viage literario a las Jgleaias de Esi/ana, viii. (Valencia, 1811 J 45-50. 
1 P2 


who was capable of omitting the hundreds in the Era might also 
insert a hundred too many in the years of the Incarnation, 
especially since by so doing he gave the century in which he lived. 
Rudolf Beer therefore proposed to read the Era as 674 and the 
year of Grace as 636, which was in fact the first year of the 
Visigothic King Chintila.^^ The emendation seems convincing, 
but it does not follow that the original from which the manuscript 
is taken actually contained a mention of the year of the Incarna- 
tion. There are other instances in which writers of the eighth 
century inserted that year with an equation with the Spanish Era.^^ 

When I discussed the place with which Felix abbas CyrilliUinus, 
ChylUtanus, or Ghyllitanus, the continuator of the cycle of Diony- 
sius, was connected, I ought to have mentioned that he had 
a namesake sixty years earlier who bore a similar appellation. 
Pope Vigilius speaks of him as monachum Afrum qui Gillitano 
monasterio dicitur praefuisseM He is twice mentioned by Victor 
Tunnunensis : once under the year 553 as Felix Gillensis mona- 
sterii provinciae Africanae hegumenus, with a variant Guillensis ; 
the other time under 557 as Felix hegumenus monasterii Gillitani 
or Gallitani}^ In the former passage Mommsen suggested that 
Cillensis was meant, a name which might indicate several places 
in Africa. I was not aware that in 1899 Father Delattre published 
some inscriptions which had then been recently found at Henchir 
el Eras, near Thibar, some seventy miles west of Tunis, and which 
contain dedications by the decuriones Gillitani; one of . them 
bears a date corresponding to A. d. 229.^^ These, he believes, 
establish the fact that the Felix of the sixth century belonged 
to a monastery at this place, Gillium. He adds that he was 
informed by Monsignor Toulotte that the monastery was founded 
by monks who came from Saint Sabas in the Holy Land after 
the Byzantine conquest : these Greek monks quitted Africa on 
the Arab invasion and went to Rome, where they settled them- 
selves on the Palatine, and there their name of Saint Sabas 
remains to this day. I have not examined this statement, and 
will only note that the accuracy of a writer who places the 
monastery of St. Saba on the Palatine, whereas it lies to the 
south-east of the Aventine, is not above suspicion. 

While, however, I do not dispute the identification of the 
monastery over which this Felix presided, I hesitate to accept 

" Die Handschriftcn dcs Kloskrs Santa Maria de JRipoU, in Sitzungsberichte der 
kais. Akad. der Wiss. in Wien, philos.-hist. Klasse, clv. iii. (1907) 25-8. 

" Cf. ante, p. 62, n. 23. 

" See his letter in the 7th collation of the Fifth General Council : Labbe and 
€os8art. Concilia, v. (1671) 556 d ; Mansi, Condi. Collect, ampliss. ix. 359 a. 

" Chron. min. ii. 203, 204. 

'• Comptes rendus de V Academic des Inscriptions et BeUes-Lettres, 4th ser., xxvii. 


it for that of his later namesake, whose denomination appears 
in various forms and in only one manuscript is given as Gillitanus.^' 
If he came from Gillium, he wrote at a date earlier than the Arab 
invasion, and it would not be easy to show how his cycle travelled 
into western Europe. If on the other hand, as I have suggested, 
he belonged to Squillace, the transmission of his manuscript would 
be readily intelligible. Reginald L. Poole. 

Cardinal Ottohoni and the Monastery of Stratford 

When Ottoboni, cardinal deacon of St. Adrian, was in England 
as legate from 1265 to 1268, he exercised his power of visiting 
exempt monasteries and Orders .^ But he met with resistance 
from the Abbot and Convent of Stratford Langthorne, an impor- 
tant Cistercian monastery in Essex, a few miles from London. 
They refused to admit two Franciscans who were sent by Ottoboni 
to visit them,2 and appealed to Clement IV, in virtue of papal 
privileges which had been granted to the Cistercian Order. 
I have been unable to find any other reference to this dispute, so 
that it is impossible to discover if the abbot and convent finally 
submitted to the legate's visitation. The series of documents 
concludes with a humble letter from the abbot to the cardinal 
on behalf of two monks who had evidently been punished by him, 
and forbidden to exercise their functions as priests. When 
Ottoboni was besieged in the Tower of London by the earl of 
Gloucester in 1267 he was released by Henry III, who brought 
him to the monastery of Stratford. Peace was made there with 
the barons on 6 June 1267.^ 

The proceedings printed below are found in MS. 499, ff. 257^- 
261, in the Lambeth Palace library ; it is a quarto of 345 folios, 
written in a minute and much contracted hand, probably in the 
early years of the fourteenth century. The contents are mis- 
I cellaneous, and include several works of St. Augustine.* From 
f. 252 onwards there are records and proceedings relating to 
Cistercian monasteries, forms, letters, and charters, e.g. letters 
from Robert Grossetete, bishop of Lincoln, to the papal curia, 

! " MS. 298 of St. Remi at Rheims, according to Janus, Hist. Cydi Dionysiani 
j (Wittenberg, 1718), p. 51. 

1 » e. g. Westminster (Cotton MS., Faustina A. iii, f. 210), and the Order of Sem- 
pringham (Douce MS. 136, f. 88, Bodleian Library). 

2 Clement IV gave Ottoboni the power of compelling any of the friars to undertake 
any commission for him: Bidlarium Franciscanum, ed. J. H. Sbaralea, iii. 9, no. 12. 
=» Annates Monastici, ed. Luard, ii. 105; iv. 201, 202, 205. 
* See Todd, Catalogue of MSS. in the Library of Lambeth Palace, p. 64. 


the reissue of Magna Carta in 1217, and the Charter of the Forest. 
No dated document appears to be later than 1274. 

Some charters concern the Cistercian monastery of L. in 
the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, which I have identified 
with Stanlaw in Cheshire, often described in charters as Locus 
benedictus de Stanlawe.^ The monks of Stanlaw were trans- 
ferred to Whalley in 1296, and as the word Whalley is written 
inside the cover of MS. 499. there can be little doubt that it was 
formerly in the library of that monastery. Stanlaw was probably 
founded by monks from Combermere,^ which, Hke Stratford Lang- 
thorne, was among the English houses of the Order of Savigny ; ' 
they were united to Citeaux in 1147, but were reckoned as 
daughter houses of Savigny. This connexion explains how a 
record of proceedings concerning Stratford Langthome comes 
to be found in a manuscript at Whalley. Rose Graham, 



f. 257^ 2)g adventu 0. legati in Angliam anno M^-CC^-LXV.^ 

Memorandum quod anno domini Mo*CC<>*LXV ® venit Othobonus 
apostolice sedis legatus in Angliam deferens secum Utteras Clementis 
pape qui sedit ante Gregorium decimum ^^ in hec uerba : — Clemens 
episcopus seruus seruorum dei dilecto filio Othobono sancti Adriani 
diacono cardinali apostolice sedis legato salutem et apostolicam bene- 
dictionem. Cum te ad partes Anglie et commisso inibi ac in regno Scocie 
Wallie et Hybernie plene legacionis officio pro urgenti et arduo negocio 
destinemus, quia in desideriis nostris grauiter ut commissum tibi negocium 
amotis impedimentis quibuslibet felicem consequatur effectum, priuandi 
quoslibet religiosos cuiuscumque ordinis, qui super hiis que spectant ad 
tue legacionis officium et aliis tibi commissis a te moniti plenarie tibi 
parere contempserint, omnibus indulgenciis et priuilegiis eis ab apostolica 
sede concessis, discrecioni tue plenam concedimus auctoritate presencium 
facultatem. Datum Perusii iij nonis Maii pontificatus nostri anno primo. 
f. 268. Clemens episcopus et cetera, sicut audiuimus, nonnullis religiosis tue 

legacionis scilicet Cluniacensium et aliorum ordinum a sede apostolica sit 
indultum quod legati eiusdem sedis eos absque speciali mandato sedis 
eiusdem faciente plenam et expressam de indulto huiusmodi mencionem 

° The charters on ff. 262, 263 are printed in the Couchcr Book of Whalley, ed. 
Hulton (Chetham Society), ii. 425, 426. 

• Ihid. I. iv, 

' Ante, viii. 669, 675. 

« MS. M^-CC-LXX. Cardinal Ottoboni arrived in England on 29 October 1265, and 
left this country on 28 July 1268 : Annales Monastici, iv. 219. 

» Ihid. 

*" The scribe ahnost invariably indicates numerals by puzzling signs, which I have 
deciphered through his use of them in numbering the titles of the chapters of the 
Books of the Decretals on ff. 252% 253. I have since found them reproduced with 
their Roman equivalents in Matthew Paris' s Chronica maiora, v. 285, where it is said 
that they were brought to England by John of Basingstoke, who had studied at Athens. 


nequeant visitare, nos volentes quod aliqui a tua visitacione pretextu 
indulti huiusmodi se tueri non valeant, discrecioni tue vt tales quouis 
indulto huiusmodi sedis apostolice non obstante uisitarc ualeas tibi aucto- 
ritate presencium concedimus facultatem. Datum Perusii vt supra, 

Aliud procuratorium. 
Clemens episcopus et cetera?-^ Cum prosperum regni Anglie statum 
plenis desideriis affectantes te de cuius industria et circumspeccione con- 
fidimus ad idem regnum commisso tibi tarn inibi quam in quibusdam 
aliis partibus plene legacionis officio de fratrum nostrorum consilio pro 
reformacione status eiusdem regni duximus destinandum. Vt autem in 
commisso tibi huiusmodi officio deo propicio uel propiciante valeas 
prosperari, exercendi libere per te uel per alium uel alios censuram 
ecclesiasticam in venerabiles patres archiepiscopos nostros et episcopos ; 
ac in catbedralium et aliarum ecclesiarum domorum et monasteriorum 
tam exemptorum quam non exemptorum prelates et clericos conuentus 
st capitula, necnon comites barones et nobiles potestates rectores balliuos 
consilia communia vniversitates et populos locorum cuiuslibet legacionis 
tue, et quascumque personas ecclesiasticas et seculares publicas et priuatas 
cuiuscumque ordinis condicionis seu dignitatis existant et terras eorum 
eiusdem legacionis tue cum uideris expedire, non obstantibus aliquibus 
priuilegiis uel indulgenciis quibuscumque personis locis seu ordinibus sub 
quauis uerborum forma, ab apostolica sede concessis de quibus quorumque 
tenoribus plenam et expressam ac de uerbo ad uerbum opporteat in 
nostris litteris fieri mencionem ; et eciam concedendis ^^ per que id quo- 
modolibet valeat impediri, discrecioni tue liberam concedimus auctoritate 
presencium facultatem. Datum et cetera. 

Primum mandatum legati. 
Othobonus miseracione diuina sancti Adriani diaconus cardinalis apo- 
stolice sedis legatus de Stratford' de Bermondseye de Merton' abbatibus 
prioribus et conuentibus Cisterciensis Cluniacensis et sancti Augustini 
ordinum Londoniensis Wintoniensis et Cantuariensis dyocesium salutem 
in salutis auctore. Cum ex iniuncti nobis officii debito nos opporteat 
ecclesiarum et ecclesiasticarum personarum statui et saluti prospicere, 
expedit ut que per nos dpsos circa hoc implere non possumus aliis viris 
discretis committamus. Qua propter super vos et ecclesias uestras 
summum in Christo gerentes affectum et omnia in vobis agi recte et 
j spiritualiter et temporaliter affectantes religiosos et prouidos uiros fratrem 
I Henricum de Wodestok' et consocium ordinis fratrum minorum conuentus 
t Londonie latores presencium duximus destinando, vobis et ecclesiis uestris 
] vice nostra inpensuros visitacionis officium, eciam ea que circa vos m- 
1 uenerint fideliter nobis relaturos, vt in bonis et bene placitis deo cum 
i graciarum accione gaudere possimus ; et si qua minus conueniencia uel 
honesta fuerint illis correccionis debite remedium apponamus. Quocirca 
vniuersitatem uestram monemus rogamus et hortamur in domino vobis 
in uirtute obediencie qua fungimur auctoritate mandantes quatmus 

" Printed in Registrcs de Clement I V, ed. E. Jordan, p. 14, no. 4. 
" MS. concedenda. 


prefatos fratres benigne recipientes et condigne tractantes eisdem circa ea 
que pertinent ad commisse sibi visitacionis officium obediatis humiliter et 
efficaciter intendatis. Alioquin sentencias quas tulerint in rebelles ratas 
habebimus et faciemus auctore Deo inuiolabiliter obseruari. Datum Lon- 
donie ij kal. Marcii pontificatus domini Clementis papa iiij anno ij.^^ 

Littere visitatoris. 
Reuerendo religionis uiro domino abbati dei gracia sancte Marie de 
Stratford' priorique ac ceteris fratribus vniuersis Henricus de Wodestok' 
de ordine fratrum minorum conuentus Londonie utriusque honoris in 
Christo salutem et continuam sospitatem. Ex nouo ac speciali precepto 
domini iegati hac quinta feria mihi iniuncto vobis denuncio quod opportebit 
me ad vos accedere et auctoritate domini pape personas uestras et que 
circa uos geruntur et aguntur visitare. Tamen procuram nobis inducias 
aduentus mei usque ad feriam quartam ante dominicam in ramis pal- 
marum. In cuius rei testimonium ex precepto eiusdem domini Iegati 
sigillum meum presentibus apposui. Datum Londonie feria quinta post 
dominicam qua cantatur Letare lerusalem anno gracie Mo'CCo* sexagesimo 

> Memorandum. 

f. 268'. Anno autem domini Mo*CCo* sexagesimo quinto ^^ feria quarta ante do- 

minicam in ramis palmarum venit quidam nuncius domini episcopi Lon- 
doniensis ueleius officialis nuncians cuidam monacho de Stratford' inecclesia 
sancti Pauli Londonie quod eadem die uenturi essent duo fratres minores ad 
domum suam de Stratford', missi a domino legato ut eos uisitarent. Qui 
uidelicet fratres uenientes ad dictam domum de S. eodem die sero obuia- 
uerunt domino abbati extra abbaciam. Volentes autem ei causam adventus 
sui demonstrare, et eciam auctoritatem quam a domino legato habuerunt, 
respondit abbas se non posse tunc illis intendere, rogauitque eos intrare 
in abbaciam locuturi cum priore et monachis quousque ipse rediret. 
Quibus ingressis et a monachis dicte domus honeste receptis scita eciam 
causa aduentus eorum benigne illis respondentes dicebant se huiusmodi 
visitacionem admittere non posse nee eciam debere aliquo modo maxime 
autem in absencia abbatis sui. Nolentibus uero illis in abbacia hospitari 
sed in uilla miserunt illis monachi cibo et potui necessaria, dicentes se 
cum illis in crastino colloquium habituros. Mane autem facto perrexerunt 
ad eos ostendentes eis priuilegia sua quare huiusmodi visitacionem ad- 
mittere non debebant, petentes eciam ab eis sibi dare inducias quousque 
saltem cum abbate suo colloquium habere possent. Illis autem dare 
nolentibus miserunt statim ante faciem suam duos monachos cum priui- 
legiis suis ad dominum legatum. Ipsi enim dicebant se eorum sequi 
uestigia quamcicius possent. Quo cum peruenerint dicti monachi et 
ibidem usque ad horam prandii morarentur nee predicti fratres ad eos 
uenerunt, nee ingressum ad dominum legatum habere potuerunt, sicque 
domi inperfecto negocio redierunt. Feriaque autem tercia sequenti ueniens 
ad dictam domum de Stratford' predicti domini episcopi Londoniensis 
officialis in propria persona, talique accepto a domino legato mandate, 

" MS. iiij. " MS. septuagesimo. »* MS. septuagesimo. 


citauit peremptorie videlicet dominum abbatem, priorem, cellerarium et 
consilium domus quod comparerent in crastino coram domino legato cum 
omnibus priuilegiis suis et indulgenciis presens negocium contingentibus 
audituri quid aduersum eos esset propositurus. Comparuerunt iuxta 
tenorem citacionis et lectis quidem priuilegiis suis respondebat ills ea 
nihil valere nee eius potestatem infirmari per ea in hac parte ; inponens 
eciam eis quod predictos fratres minores ad se missos non benigne sed 
aspere et inhumaniter et in obprobriosa uerba prorumpentes suscipientes 
eos affecerunt, quod in consciencia eorum non est nee aliquis eorum vnus 
talia uerba proferre posse scire potest. Sicque factum est ut inducias 
ab eodem inpetrare non possent quousque super liac re commune ordinis 
sui consilium haberent, nee eadem die alterius rei graciam consequi, set 
cum tali repulsa recesserunt. Statimque feria quinta sequente scripsit 
illis frater ille qui super eos talem a domino legato receperat potestatem, 
videlicet frater Henricus de Wodestok' quod ex speciali precepto domini 
legati iterum ueniret ad eos uisitandi gracia videlicet tali die prefigens eis 
diem. Interim autem dum hec agerentur miserunt dicti monachi de Strat- 
ford' quosdam amicos suos ad dominam reginam supplicantes eidem ut 
interpellare dignaretur pro eis. Que statim sui^ gracia nuncios suos 
misit ad dominum legatum mandans ei quod pro amore suo cessaret ab 
inquietacionibus eorum in hac parte. Nee regine acquieuit legatus. Que 
tamen a precibus sic cessare nolens, mandauit alios nuncios ad eundem, 
ut in propria persona ueniret ad se locuturus secum ; quern cum multis 
precibus pro ista causa pulsaret regina exaudiri non potuit. Accesserunt 
eciam ad eum plures nobiles Anglie pro ista causa quorum primi erant 
dominus P. Basset ^^ et dominus R. Waleranus," supplicantes eidem pro 
illis et eciam allegantes, quorum non sunt exauditi preces, nee allegaciones 
allocate. Iterum autem uenerunt predictus frater et socius die quem 
prefixerant sero ad portas dicte abbacie quibus dicte domus monachi 
ingressum denegauerunt mandantes eisdem quod mane illis responderent. 
Illis autem reuertentibus ad hospicium suum in villa miserunt monachi 
quod eisdem ad potum nocte ilia necessarium fuit, mane autem facto 
perrexerunt ad eos. Qui cum eis exponerent causam adventus sui statim 
monachi in prima fronte in scriptis appellauerunt, mittentes eciam eadem 
hora procuratores suos Londoniam qui eciam coram domino legato 
eandem appellacionem fecerunt. Quibus iterum ille precepit quod prior 
et seniores domus comparerent coram eo vigilia Pasche cum priuilegiis 
aliis si forte plura haberent. Quod eciam factum est. Eadem siquidem 
die post missam suam in capella eius conspectui se presentantes minus 
honeste eos a se repelli fecit. Iterum autem cum intraret cameram suam 
steterunt ibidem petentes audienciam eius. Quo a conspectu suo re- 
pellens ut prius, precepit eis audienciam cuiusdam magistri petere qui 
tunc presens in curia non erat. Cui eciam scripsit sub hiis uerbis. 

Epistola ad commissarium. 
0. miseracione diuina et cetera discreto uiro magistro G. de sancto 
Petro canonico Londonie salutem in salutis auctore. Cum ex officii nostri 

" Cf . Dictionary of National Biography, s.v. Sir Philip Basset. 
" Ibid., s.v. Robert Walerand. 


debito super statiim et reformacionem ecclesiarum quantum ad honorem 
dei et animarum salutem spectat secundum datam nobis a deo graciam 
intendentes religiosum virum fratrem H. de Wodestok' do ordine fratrum 
minorum ad monasterium beate Marie de Stratford' Cisterciensis ordinis 
Londoniensis diocesis misissemus, ut ibi circa quedam que in ipso mona- 
f. 259. sterio a regularis honestatis semita declinare ad audienciam nostram 
peruenerat diligenter inquireret et que inueniret corrigenda corrigeret 
nisi talia essent que ad nos merito perferri deberent. Abbas et monachi 
dicti monasterii non benigne sed aspere et inhumaniter recipientes et in 
obprobriosa uerba temere prorumpentes, se a nobis sen de mandato nostro 
visitari non posse dixerunt et contra hoc se munitos apostolice sedis 
priuilegiis allegauerunt. Prefatus frater missus a nobis eis deferens certum 
diem prefixit eisdem ^® quo se coram nobis cum iuribus et defensionibus 
suis presentarent. Cum igitur prefati monasterii abbas et conuentus 
termino sibi prefixo qui in hodiernum diem incidat minime comparuerunt 
coram nobis, nosque contra ipsos tanquam contra contumaces procedere 
possemus iuste benignius tamen et micius religionis intuitu agere cum eis 
cupientes, nee tamen tantum scelus silencio preterire ualentes, discrecioni 
tue qua fungimur auctoritate mandamus quatinus sine more dispendio 
ad monasterium prefatum personaliter accedens dictis abbati et conuentui 
peremptorie terminum prefigas vt tali die cum omnibus priuilegiis indul- 
genciis et iuribus suis presens negocium contingentibus per se uel per 
procuratorem suum ydoneum compareant coram nobis ex parte nostra 
prefato abbati necnon et priori nihilominus iniungendo vt dicta die et 
cetera personaliter compareant, visuri et audituri que sibi duxerimus 
proponenda. Denuncies eciam eisdem quod nisi citacioni tue paruerint, 
nos contra ipsos prout secundum iusticiam expedire uidebimus uel uideri- 
mus. Datum Londonie xiv kal. Aprilis pontificatus domini Clementis 
pape iiij anno ij.^^ 

Item memorandum quod hec facta sunt anno domini Mo-CCo-LXV»^o2° 
et quod dicti monasterii procurator apud dominum legatum nullam gra- 
ciam inueniens statim lecta sollempniter eius procuracione in conspectu et 
audiencia multorum clericorum uidelicet et laicorum appellauit vt prius sic. 


Cum ego frater A. de B. commonacbus et procurator religiosorum 
virorum abbatis et conuentus monasterii beate Marie de Stratford' Cister- 
ciensis ordinis Londoniensis diocesis coram vobis sancto patre domino 
Othobono sancti Adriani diacono cardinali apostolice sedis legato alias 
proposuerim, me probaturum optulerim et a vobis appellauerim in forma 
que sequitur ; coram vobis sancto patre domino 0. et cetera propono eciam 
ego frater A. de B. monachus monasterii de Stratford' Cisterciensis ordinis 
Londoniensis diocesis procurator abbatis et conuentus eiusdem monasterii 
procuratorio nomine pro eisdem abbate et conuentu. Quia cum a sede 
apostolica abbati Cistercii eiusque coabbatibus et conuentibus sit con- 
cessum vt a nullo nisi a patribus abbatibus seu eiusdem ordinis monachis 
a dictis patribus abbatibus super hoc deputatis visitari uel corrigi 

'« MS. eidcra. " MS. iiij. ^o ^^g. M^CCLXX""**. 


ualeant,^^ sitque concessio memorata per statutum sedis eiusdem nihilominus 
roborata, quod me offero nomine et vice dictorum abbatis et conucntiis 
pro loco et tempore coram iudice competenti legitime probaturum, vos 
pie pater volentes in prefato monasterio per vos uel alium uel per alios 
uisitacionis et correccionis officium exercere, salua in omnibus et per 
omnia uestre sancte paternitatis reuerencia, dico quod hoc facere non 
potestis, nee de iure debetis ex officio legacionis generaliter vobis com- 
misse. Sane licet eadem auctoritate sit decretum irritum et inane si contra 
concessionem supradictam aut statutum memoratum a quoquam fuerit 
presumptum, sitque decretum quod si alique sentencie in abbates ct 
conuentus^^ supradictos occasione huiusmodi fuerint prolate, nullum 
robur optineant firmitatis ; sit eciam concessum eisdem a sede apostolica 
memorata ne aliquis legatus sedis eiusdem sine speciali mandato dictc 
sedis in eosdem abbatem et conuentum predictos aut in eorundem mona- 
steriis aliquas excommunicacionis suspensionis uel interdicti sentencias 
contra ea que ipsis a dicta sede indulta sunt promulget.^^ Tamen ego 
procurator prefatus metuens ne si vos sancte pater per vos uel alium uel 
alios uisitacionis officium in preiudicium concessionis prefate ct statuti 
supradicti exercere velitis in monasterio supradicto eciam contingeret 
abbatem et conuentum supradictos vos uel alium seu alios uestro nomine 
ad hoc non admittere, ne propterea aliquam seu aliquas interdicti sus- 
pensionis aut excommunicacionis sentenciam seu sentencias in prefatuni 
abbatem seu aliquem vel aliquos de dicto conuentu uel in ipsum conuentum 
aut in monasterium prefatum, de facto per vos uel per alium uel per 
alios proferatis uel proferri mandetis, nomine et vice supradictorum 
abbatis et conuentus sanctam sedem apostolicam in hiis scriptis appello 
et appellaciones instanter peto, supponens supradictos abbatem et con- 
uentum necnon et eorum monasterium et ecclesiam et statum ipsorum ac 
eciam concessionem prefatam et statutum memoratum et alia priuilegia 
eisdem et aliis de eorum ordine a sede apostolica concessa protectioni ct 
defensioni sedis apostolice memorate. Item ne aliter uel alio modo 
abbatem et conuentum predictos uel eorum monasterium aut ecclesiam 
grauetis, seu contra priuilegia eisdem a sede apostolica indulta aliquid 
per vos uel alium seu alios attemptetis, sedem apostolicam nomine et vice 
dictorum abbatis et conuentus in hiis scriptis appello et appellaciones 
instanter peto. Et cum vos, sancte pater, post hoc preceperitis quod prior 
et officiales supradicti monasterii uestro se conspectui certa die prc- 
sentarent ostensuri concessionem statutum et priuilegia sedis apostolice, 
de quibus in superioribus habetur et fit mencio et sic comparuerint, ct 
de hiis uestre sancte paternitati inde fecerint plenam fidem, appellaciones f. 259' 
supradictas alias uel alia vice interpositas a vobis procuratoris nomine pro 
abbate et conuentu supradictis innouo, et iteruni ut prius propono ct 
appello coram vobis sancto patre domino 0. sancti Adriani diacono et 
cetera ut supra. Item ne aliter uel alio modo abbatem et conuentum 
predictos et cetera ut superius notatum est. 

-1 Regida, Constitutioncs, et Privilegia Ordinis Cisterciensis, ed. Henriquez, p. 04, 
no. XX ; p. 68, no. xxxi. " MS. conuentos. 

" Regda, Constitutioncs, ct Privilegia Ordinis Cisterciensis, p. 59, no. xi ; p. 73, 
no. XXX vii. 



Item memorandum quod iste legatus inhibuit ubi uisitauit, scilicet in nigro 
ordine, fieri liberaciones secularibus 2* que solebant concedi in hac forma, 
^^niuersis sancte matris ecclesie et cetera frater P. dictus uel vocatus prior 
de tali loco et eiusdem domus conuentus salutem in domino sempiternam. 
Noveritis nos vnanimi assensu et pari uoluntate dedisse concessisse et hac 
presenti carta nostra confirmasse tali, scilicet aliqua persona nominata, solo 
caritatis intuitu cum vno garcione et vno equo in domo nostra sustenta- 
mentum suum et honestum hospicium cum sufficienti focali in suo perpetuo 
uel quoad uixerit uel ad suam vitam, videlicet tot panes in die uel in 
ebdomada sibi de pane conuentuali et tot lagenas uel galones ceruisie 
conuentualis, et diebus qui comedunt carnes tot fercula competencia 
quorum duorum generum uidelicet vnum de came salsa seu sallita et 
aliud de insulsa vel tot bacones per annum et tot carcosia uel corpora 
bourn et tot multones, et diebus quadragesimalibus et quibus commedun- 
tur pisces tot fercula piscium competencia et que ipse duxerit acceptare ; 
et nihilominus diebus piscium quibus potest lacteus cibus uel oua com- 
medere racionabilem quantitatem casei et butiri vel tot petras per annum ; 
et ad seruientem suum de pane grossiori et ceruisia seruiencium tantum 
vel sic vni puerorum qui sunt in stabulo prioris ; et ad equum suum 
fenum et prebendam sicut palefrido prioris uel tantum, et in estiuo tem- 
pore quando equi herbam commedunt herbagium competenter et sufficienter 
inueniemus ; habendum et percipiendum in domo nostra omni tempore 
uite sue sine contradiccione cuiuscumque. Ista autem omnia eidem N. 
in suo perpetuo contra omnes fideliter warantizabimus et solo caritatis 
intuitu persoluemus. Si uero alibi morari uoluit nihilominus predictam 
liberacionem per nuncium suum quemcumque mittere uoluerit percipiet ; 
et utrum uoluerit semel in ebdomada pro tota septimana percipere uel 
MS. 9». cotidie sicut conuentus, in sua uoluntate esset. Et ut hec * nostra donacio 
et cetera pro nobis et successoribus nostris huic scripto sigillum nostrum 
apposuimus. Ista autem plenarie faciemus sub pena decern solidorum operi 
maioris ecclesie de N. soluendorum quocienscumque aliquod horum omisi- 
mus uel in liberacione tardauerimus, hiis testibus et cetera. 

Item aliter. Noueritis nos solo caritatis intuitu concessisse tali omni 
tempore vite sue ad sustentamentum suum illud et illud a nobis annuatim 
ad tales terminos ibi aliquo loco nominato percipiendum, videlicet ad ilium 
terminum hoc et ad ilium illud. Si autem aliquo tempore ei propter preci- 
puam soUempnitatem uel manifestam corporis sui infirmitatem ei uberius 
uel curialius prouisum uel ministratum fuerit, non poterit hoc in con- 
suetudinem trahere uel a nobis hoc exigere uel extorquere et cetera. 

Vel Noueritis nos teneri tali in tanto a nobis solo caritatis intuitu 
concesso et percipiendo in tali loco quousque eidem de competenti 
ecclesiastico beneficio quod quidem ipse duxerit acceptandum prouiderimus 
uel per nos prouisum fuerit et cetera. 

Item. Noueritis nos teneri domino N. de Lee militi pro auxilio et 
seruicio suo nobis et hominibus nostris in illis duobus comitatibus ubique 
et sine ficcione cum tamen premunitus fuerit de negocio impendendo in 

2* Thi8 was forbidden in the Constitutions of Ottoboni in 1268 : Wilkins, Concilia, ii, 
p. 17, cap. xlviii. 



tantum persoluendum eidem et ab eo uel special! attornato suo ad hoc 
deputato et directo percipiendum ad illas nundinas annuatim quousque 
circulus 25 octo annorum plene compleatur. Ad quod faciendum obligamus 
nos et domum nostram districcioni et cohercioni illius balliui concedentes 
quod possit nos per bona nostra in balliua sua existencia de die in diem 
compellere quousque dicto domino N. competenter satisfecerimus. Et si 
testes idoneos habere potuerimus ad probandum quod ipse seruicium suum 
uel auxilium a nobis uel nostris postulatum denegauerit licebit nobis dictum 
redditum eciam ante terminum ab eo uel ei subtrahere uel retinere. In 
cuius rei testimonium vel ad maiorem securitatem huic scripto et cetera. 

Procurator ium ad mutuum contrahendum miUuum ^^ quasi in eum terminum, 
Vniuersis et cetera abbas de Stratford' Cisterciensis ordinis Londoniensis 
diocesis et eiusdem loci humilis conuentus in domino salutem eternam. 
Mittimus dilectos nostros in Christo filios fratres A. et B. priorem et 
cellerarium domus nostre latores presencium ad nundinas sancti Botulphi, 
(Vel noueritis quod nos constituimus, facimus et ordinamus ilium et ilium 
commonachos nostros) speciales procuratores et attornatos nostros ad 
mutuum contrahendum cum quocumque fideli seu cum quibuscumque 
fidelibus de C. libris argenti ad prouisiones necessarias domus nostre 
faciendas et procurandas cum ad presens nos grauia et exquisita ad hoc 
faciendum urgeant negocia. Obligamus eciam nos et domum nostram et 
omnia bona nostra mobilia et immobilia ecclesiastica et mundana ubi- f- 260. 
cumque seu quibuscumque locis existencia creditor! nostro seu creditoribus 
nostris quibuscumque aput quem uel aput quos graciam negocii huiusmodi 
expediendi inuenerint, scilicet a quo uel a quibus pecuniam prenominatam 
mutuo acceperint, ad omnem illam pecuniam fideliter et sine ulterior! 
retencione dilacione uel dolo persoluenda die et loco seu diebus et locis 
inter eosdem procuratores uidelicet nostros predictos et creditorem nostrum 
seu creditores nostros si plures fuerint constitutis ratam stabilem et gratam 
habituri conuencionem quamcumque uel qualemcumque prenominat! 
procuratores nostri cum quocumque creditore uel cum quibuscumque 
creditoribus in scriptis confecerint. In cuius rei testimonium presentes 
litteras sigillo nostro maiori et communi signatas ad omnimodam 
securitatem per predictos procuratores et atornatos nostros creditor! 
nostro uel creditoribus nostris transmittimus patenter. Valete in domino 
semper. Datum et cetera. 

Nota quod in procuratoriis nunquam bene ponitur preteritum tempus 
uel preteritum plusquam perfectum, verbi gracia, Noueritis quod nos 
constituimus fecimus et cetera, uel Noueritis nos constituisse et cetera, 
propter disputaciones que tunc insurgunt inter causidicos uel legistas. 

Alittd genus. 
Item aliud ad mutuum contrahendum. In omnibus causis et negociis 
nos domum uel ecclesiam nostram maxime ad instantes nundinas sancti 
Botulphi qualitercumque tangentibus dilectos filios et commonachos 
nostros et cetera constituimus facimus et ordinamus, dando eisdem 
plenam potestatem agendi defendendi excipiendi replicandi appellandi 
tot saccos bone lane per decem [annos] de rebus nostris ubique ex parte 
85 ^[^ in ijjg^ 2« MS. repeats mutuum. 


nostra pre manibus disponendi vendendi et pecuniam pro dicte lane 
uendicione pre manibus percipiendi ecclesias nostras de A. et de B. per 
decern annos ponendas ad firmam sub quacumque conuencione nobis 
uiderint expedire ; domum nostrum et omnia nostra quibuscumque et 
sub quacumque forma uerborum uel quocumque modo nobis uiderint 
expedire obligandi, ac eciam omnia alia faciendi et dicendi quecumque 
nos si presentes essemus facere possemus aut dicere, et quecumque ueri 
et legitimi procuratores facere poterunt aut debebunt. In cuius rei 
testimonium et cetera. Valete et cetera. Datum et cetera. 


Vniuersis et cetera [abbas] de Stratford' et eiusdem domus conuentus 
Cisterciensis ordinis Londoniensis diocesis et cetera. Noueritis vniuersitas 
uestra nos teneri et boc scripto obligatos esse A. filio B. ciui de Londonia 
in viginti libras sterlingorum bone integre et legalis monete legaliter 
numeratorum quas ab eodem in magnis necessitatibus et pro grauibus 
et arduis negociis que nos tunc urgebant monasterii nostri et vtilitatibus 
ecclesie domus nostre utiliter expediendis dominica quarta post pascha 
anno domini M^ et cetera aput Londoniam mutuo accepimus. De cuius 
pecunie solucione eidem uel atornato suo specialiter ad hoc deputato et 
nobis hoc scriptum deferenti sine restituenti tali die anno proximo venture 
absque omni dolo fraude uel ulteriori ^s retencione uel diuturniori dilacione 
plenarie integre et iideliter aput dictam civitatem de L. satisfaciemus sub 
pena decem solidorum tali archidiacono uel tali iudici uel balliuo uel operi 
talis ecclesie soluendorum. Si nos quod absit in dicte pecunie solucione 
contigerit dictis die locoque defecisse uel si in parte uel in toto defecerimus 
vel quam quidem pecuniam eidem persoluemus et cetera ut supra vel si 
solucionem tardauerimus uel pacacionem distulerimus. Et ad hec omnia 
legitime sicut supradictum est facienda obligamus nos et omnia bona 
nostra ecclesiastica et mundana iurisdiccioni potestati coherccioni et 
districcioni vel subicimus nos et cetera talis archidiaconi uel talis balliui 
qui pro tempore fuerit ; concedendo uel concedentes quod possit nos per 
predictam penam uel qualitercumque uoluerit de die in diem uel inces- 
santer compellere et distringere quousque dicto A. de dicte pecunie 
solucione competenter ut dictum est satisfecerimus. Expensas autem, si 
quas miserit aut fecerit, expectando pacacionem suam ultra statutum diem 
eidem uel atornato suo allocabimus et refundemus. Renunciamus eciam 
in premissis uel renunciantes et cetera omni excepcioni cauillacioni regie 
prohibicioni omnibus litteris seu priuilegiis seu indulgenciis inpetratis et 
inpetrandis et omni iuris auxilio uel remedio canonici et ciuilis, quod uel 
que in hac parte nobis prodesse et sibi obesse posset uel possent. In cuius 
rei robur et testimonium eciam ut eundem securum redderemus hoc 
scriptum sigillo nostro communi signatas eidem litteras fecimus fieri 
patentes. Valete et cetera. Datum. 

Vel Noveritis nos recepisse et habuisse aput Londoniam in pecunia 

" In 1266 the Abbot of Stratford borrowed money from London Jews: Cat. 
oj Pat. Bolls, 1258-66, p. 566 ; ibid. 1266-72, p. 496. At the request of his mother, 
Queen Eleanor, Edward I acquitted the Abbot and convent of Stratford of usuries on 
all debts due to the Jews, saving to the Jews their principal debts : cf. Cal.of Close 
Bolls, 1272-9, p. 140. « MS. ulterione. 


numerata tali die illius anni ab illo et illo mercatore soluentibus tarn pro 
se quam pro illo et illo sociis suis ciuibus et mercatoribus Florentinis, uel 
Florentibus, tot libras sub tanta pecunia eisdem soluendis tali anno etf. 260' 
tali die si ob regiam inhibicionem aut acta de lane nostre uel decimarum 
de tali loco uendicione conuencio in suo statu et robore stare et permanere 
non potuerit. Si autem supradicta conuencio regali inhibicione non 
obstante nee inpediente firmiter usque ad statutum tempus in antedicta 
conuencione et stabiliter perseuerauerit et durauerit, predicte tot libre 
dictis mercatoribus in pacacione sua pro dicta lana seu pro dictis decimis 
a nobis sine condicione allocabuntur. Ad quod fideliter faciendum obli- 
gamus et subicimus nos et omnia bona nostra ubicumque existencia dictis 
mercatoribus ; concedentes quod possint nos secundum leges et con- 
suetudines mercatorum ad nundinas sancti Botulphi distringi facere uel 
distringere si eisdem ut dictum est dictam pecuniam si tamen soluenda 
fuerit fideliter non persoluerimus, vel si allocanda fuerit, eam non 
allocauerimus. In cuius rei testimonium et cetera. Valete et cetera. Datum 
et cetera. 

Vel Noueritis nos anno domini et cetera tali die mutuo recepisse ab tali 
tantam pecuniam, de qua pecunia uel de cuius pecunie solucione vel 
quamquidem pecuniam et cetera pro nobis et successoribus nostris ap- 
posuimus. Et hec est forma probabilis et usualis multum faciendi 
obligaciones uel in dacione obligacionum. 

Peticio consilii. 
Magne discrecionis viro et amico suo specialissimo et confidentissimo 
magistro N. rectori ecclesie de N. sui semper deuoti fratres R. dictus 
abbas de Stratford' et eiusdem loci humilis conuentus salutem, et sic 
transire per tempora ut non amittat eterna. Licet per uestram pru- 
denciam et mirificam sapienciam quedam negocia nostra grauia expedita 
sint et ad effectum debitum deducta et mancipata, tamen adhuc restant 
expedienda vobis ^^ feliciter et ad domini beneplacitum grauiora. Vndique 
enim aduersarii et inimici nostri consurgentes vallo persecucionum et 
placitorum nos circumdederunt, ita quod continua nobis foris inest pugna 
et innumeri intus manent timores. Ecce enim ille antiquus aduersarius 
noster videlicet ille magnas qui nos per tale placitum inquietare et uexare 
per modum accionis uel in curia domini regis solebat de nouo prius occultas 
resumpsit uires, et illud breue quod olim expirauerat per mortem prede- 
cessoris sui iam leuauit et resuscitauit vtique quo dicior eo forcior ad 
nocendum. Omnes enim hiis diebus diligunt munera^® et cetera. In- 
super et ille dominus legatus nos adhuc fatigare non cessat immo eciam 
libertates et indulgencias ordini nostro concessas et hucusque in ordine 
usitatas et approbatas stipatus utique consilio et instigacione multorum 
prelatorum secum existencium pro viribus nititur adnilare inpugnare et 
infirmare. Ob quam rem tali die ab eo ad sanctam sedem Romanam 
appellauimus in forma iuris. Et propter hoc et alia multa que nimis esset 
longum enarrare et per singula enumerare, in presenciarum in tam arto 
positi sumus quod necessitate legem non habente compellimur uel com- 

^' MS. vt. 

^*» Isaiah i. 23. The MS. has in misericordia, the scribe having apparently misread 

tuwrCa as in mm. 


puli[mur] amicos nostros vniuersos et singulos omnes ad consilium nostrum- 
que ubicumque existentes conuocare, uestram discrecionem et cetera. 

Vel Quum inter nos et talem nuper, uel de nouo, noua lis sen contencio 
orta est que sine magnorum consilio et discrecione finem debitum sortiri non 
potest, vnde et ad earn sine uestro consilio et disposicione manum apponere 
non audemus, pro qua quidem lite bac instanti die iouis apud Cestr* 
coram domino archidiacono comparere debemus, nescientes adbuc quid 
ipse agere uel proponere intenderit, nee babemus ad presens alicuius alterius 
tutum et securum consilium cui nos contra dicti aduersarii nostri insidias et 
maliciam, qui pro viribus nos exheredare disponit et intendit, committamus, 
discrecioni uestre attente supplicamus et denote quatinus omni occasione 
remota ceteris interim pretermissis, licet uobis graue sit et sumptuosum 
quod bene nouimus sic commodum et bonorem nostrum diligitis hac 
instanti die Lune super dicto negocio tractaturi, et nobis super hoc consilii 
uestri et auxilii impensuri beneficium ; ad nos uel ad domum nostram 
personaliter accedatis, uel nobis presenciam uestram exbibere seu presen- 
tare uelitis ; vt per uestrum consilium et per uestram prudenciam dicti 
aduersarii nostri maliciam, qui nos uexare non cessat, caucius euitare 
possimus. Tantum igitur si placet faciatis ne domus nostra contra priui- 
legiorum nostrorum indulgencias in aliquo casuram paciatur vel ad 
aliquam deiicionem seu apporiacionem, quod ad vestre discrecionis 
lesionem cederet quod absit, cum et vos ita cum ipso sitis ut nos tamen non 
deseratis deueniat, uel aliquod dampnum sustineat in presenti. 

Vel Quum in necessitatis articulo solebant amici specialiores et dis- 
creciores requiri, in quorum discrecione uel audacia maior pendet fiducia, 
ad vos tanquam ad vnicum et singulare in hac parte refugium necessitate 
ducti recurrimus, rogantes attencius quatinus super magnis et arduis 
negociis libertates ecclesie nostre tangentibus tractaturi tali die ad nos 
et cetera. 

Vel Noueritis nos a quibusdam parochianis nostris uel parochianorum 
nostrorum inplacitari de quibusdam decimis que f orsitan dari non consue- 
uerunt quas nos violenter asportauimus ; pro quo placito ad prosequendum 
querelam nostram ibi tali die coram tali comparere debemus. Propterea 
vos rogamus vel quapropter vel ob quam rem et cetera. Tantum igitur 
pro nobis in absencia capitis uel prelati nostri si placet faciatis quod ipse 
qui nuper uersus Londoniam iter arripuit cum aduenerit preter certam et 
debitam conduccionem et mercedem merito vobis teneatur ad grates uel 
graciarum acciones et ad obsequia. 


Viro reuerentissimo summi pontificis vicario domino O. miseracione 
diuina sancti Adriani diacono cardinali apostolice sedis legato suus si 
placet filius deuotus frater N. dictus abbas de Stratford* Cisterciensis 
ordinis Londoniensis diocesis utriusque honoris in Christo salutem et 
pedum oscula beatorum. Firmiter credimus et confitemur quod in 
f. 261. aduentu uestro ad regnum Anglie uisitauerit nos oriens ex alto. Qui 
uenistis utique ad consolandum pusillanimes et medendum contritis corde 
ac pauperibus euangelizandum. Hinc est pater reuerende quod latores 
presencium fratres A. et B. commonachos nostros vestre destinamus 


clemencie, deprecantes et excusantes in domino quatinus si dispensacionis 
locus est in casibus eorum scilicet casus in transcriptis vobis inspiciendis 
non notarii manu sed nostra scriptis et sub sigillo nostro vestre paternitati 
transmissis cum eisdem si placet dispensare uelitis. Verum quidem et 
fidele testimonium perhibentes eisdem dicimus in veritate quod satis 
contristantur super errore suo uitam honestam cum conuentu fratrum 
suorum ducentes et pacificam, sed ut eo feruencius sub disciplina regulari 
militare ualeant quo propinquius diuinis fuerint coniuncti petiuerint 
pro deo ab altaris ministerio diucius non separari. Huius autem rei 
causa beneuolencie uestre complementum assiduis exoramus anxietatibus 
clamoribusque humilibus humiliter supplicantes quatinus super afflictos 
pia gestantes viscera prouida consideracione condescendatis, casibus 
horum fratrum nostrorum si aliqua indulgencia possint in gradu sacer- 
dotali diuinum officium exequi et exercere. Periculosum enim eis esset 
ad dominum papam Rome existentem transalpinare et per tot galaxias 
incedere deficientibus expensis ob nimiam paupertatem. Mandatum uero 
beneplaciti uestri expectamus languentes filiorum nostrorum egritudine, 
sed Salomone dicente quia legatus fidelis sanitas,^! non desperamus 
sauciati, si nobis placuerit uestra consueta benignitas ^2 que ubique puplice 
circumdatur et priuatim dolorem nostrum temporare et mitigare. Con- 
seruet altissimus incolumitatem uestram ecclesie sue per tempora longa. 
Datum et cetera. 

Memoranda of Hugo de Assendelff and others 

In the library of Corpus Christi College, Oxford (MS. 462, A. 5. 
20) is a copy of the Utrecht missal printed in Paris by John 
Higman for Wolfgang Hopyl, 30 November 1497. Being on 
vellum the book is suited for the preservation of family records ; 
and for this purpose it was used by a member of the family of 
Assendelff, or Assendelft, which took its name from a village and 
estates lying about ten miles to the NE. of Haarlem. On the 
verso of f. 1 before the title a name is inscribed, with marks of 
possession ; but subsequently, when the book passed, perhaps by 
presentation, to Master Hugo de Assendelff, the first owner's 
name was effectually erased, and all that can now be read is that 
he was ' wonende toe Delft '. The calendar prefixed to the 
missal is full of manuscript notes in various hands, which can 
without difficulty be identified. They chronicle a few public 
events ; but, as is natural, are concerned mostly with the family, 
recording births, marriages, and deaths of its members. • 

Master Hugo was born on 3 November 1467. As a boy he 
saw the enthronement of MaximiHan at Haarlem in March 1478 ; 
and was present when his great-uncle, Hugo, founder of the 
Cistercian house at Heemstede, died in February 1483. In 1487 
he was M.A. at Louvain, and ten years later became Licentiate 

31 Proverbs xiii. 17. " MS. benigne. 



there in Civil and Canon Law. He then took orders at once in 
the diocese of Liege, passing from deacon to priest within eleven 
days. To celebrate his first mass he returned to Lou vain ; but 
shortly afterwards went home to undertake the vice-curacy of 
St. Bavo's at Haarlem, his provost being Nicholas Ruter or 
Ruistre, who was also provost of St. Peter's at Louvain, and 
therewith Chancellor of the University. In 1507 Hugo was ap- 
pointed Canon of The Hague, but did not at first relinquish 
his vice-curacy at Haarlem ; for in 1508 he made the official 
* harangue ' to Maximilian on behalf of the two estates in the 
town. But in 1510 he resigned, in consequence of having received 
in 1509 the appointment of Consul at the Hague ; and there the 
rest of his life seems to have been spent. In a letter of Dorp 
from The Hague, November 1519, he is mentioned as favouring 
Erasmus's work ; and in the pages of de Hoop Scheffer, Geschiedenis 
der Kerkhervorming in Nederland, he appears as taking part in the 
suppression of heresy. To the children of his married sister and 
brother he showed regard ; acting as godfather to several of them. 
In his entries in the missal he often amuses himself with making 
chronograms. Two of these, which are marked here with an 
asterisk, I have not been able to work out. It is noticeable that 
he always treats the letter d as having no numerical value. 

In 1530, ten years before his death, he handed over the missal, 
not to Nicholas, the future head of the Assendelff family, but to 
Adrian de Treslong, eldest of his sister's line. It may be noticed, 
however, that notwithstanding this cession there are entries by 
him still in 1534 and 1536. Adrian kept the book till after 1547, 
and then surrendered it to his son Louis ; who in 1594 passed it 
on to the next generation, choosing again not an Assendelff, but 
Reynold de Brederode, the eldest son of his first cousin. 

The extracts which follow give information which in most 
cases is at first hand ; and, except for occasional uncertainty as 
to the precise day against which an entry is placed, they are 
entirely to be relied upon. If the persons whose lives they illus- 
trate had been insignificant and obscure, the regular series of 
records would still have some interest : as they concern a family 
distinguished in Dutch history, they have importance for bio- 
graphical purposes. 

1. Entries made hy Hugo de Assendelff about public events. 

<26 Sept. 1345.) NoX CosMe LVXIt HoLLos qVos FrIsIa fLIXIt, siue 
obitus illustrissimi Wilhelmi, Comitis Hollandie, 1345. 

<May 1417.) Obiit Wilhelmus, Comes Hollandie, ao. xiiiic. xvii, filius 
Alberti Bauarien. Qui Albertus ao. xiiic. Ixv erexerat Collegium 
Hagen. Et anno domini xiiiic. 4^. plantauerat arbores lynden nuncu- 
patas supra montem viuarium. 


<9 Oct. 1436.) Obiit illustris Comitissa Hollandie domina lacoba 
ao. xiiiic. xxxvi. 
< 19 Aug. 1466. ) Arnoldus Dux Gelrie a filio suo Adolpho capitur ao. 1465. 
Adolphus Dux Gelrie patrem suum Arnoldum captiuum duxit matre 
auxiliante ao. 1466. PeCCaVIt In ConspeCtV aLtlssIMI, vel sic, 
♦PeCCatVM LVo qVod peCCaVI, ao. xiiiic. Ixvi. Et anno subsequen. 
illustrissimus Dux Phillippus, pater Karoli, magnam (in Francia 
circa montem Herriii) obtinuit victoriam, vt patet in data, A 
CbeVaL, a CheVaL, gens darMes, a CheVaL, sc. anno domini 
millesimo quadringe(nte)simo sexagesimo septimo, 1467. Et anno 
subsequen. sc. 1468 bellicosus Karolus inuasit et destruxit pro 
parte Leodium. Qui victorio(si)ssimus Karolus Ducem Gelrie 
Adolphum captiuum secum duxit Et ao. 1473 ipse illustrissimus 
Karolus in Gelria intronizatus fuit. Qui anno domini xiiiic. Ixxiiii 
obsedit Nusiam mensibus vndecim, & anno 1475 inuasit Ducatum 
Loringiam R. circa spacium anni. 
<5 Jan. 1477.) NanCI noCte regVM KaroLVs sVCCVbVIt ense. 
<20 Jan. 1482.) Ley da spoliabatur ao. 1482. 

(3 May 1492.) Anno domini xiiiic. xcii Harlem porte Crucis violenta 
apertio facta fuit a Kenemariis, quod bellum intestinum Casenbroot 
fuit nuncupatum. 
(1492.) Fridericus Imperator, Maximiliani genitor, obiit ao. xiiiic. xcii 

Ladnis. A.E.I.O.V.2 
(7 Aug. 1502.) Anno domini xvc. secundo reuerendissimus dominus 
Nicolaus Ruuter consecratus in ecclesia diui Petri Louanii Attrebaten. 
<26 Sept. 1506.) Et eodem die, sed ao. xvc. sexto, sine 1506, obiit serenis- 
simus Rex Castelle Phillippus, Arcbidux Austrie (qui genitus fuit 
lohannis Baptiste ao. domini 1478, vt patet 
OMnlbVs aCCeptVs regnat noVVs eCCe PblLIppVs: xiiiic. Ixxviii). 
CIta Mors CLarl regis CasteLLe PblLIppI. 
<6 Aug. 1510.) Gestopt dat gut en Sparendam d. ao. xvc. x sed non per 

Heynrados (?). 
<19 Sept. 1510.) Obiit D. magister Albertus Coninck, ao. 1510, confrater 

<12 Jan. 1519.) Obiit Maximilianus Imperator ao. xvc. xix, 1519, xvc. 

*DVM Cesar CeCIdIt, doLVIt CaroLVs. 
ACCIpIas aqVILaM reX CaroLe Cesarls heres : • 
scilicet data electionis ad imper(ium). 
<5 Nov. 1530.) Anno xvc. xxx mense Nouembri die quinta maxima ruina 
aquarum fuit in multis regionibus. 

HoLLant ZeeLant besCrellen beWenen MaCh 
SInte FeLIX zinen qVaden SaterdaCh 
<30 Nov. 1530.) Anno domini xvc. xxx obiit illustrissima domina domina 
Margareta, filia Maximiliani Imperatoris et amita Karoli moderni 
Imperatoris ; cuius anime propicietur Deus. Cuius data obitus 
babetur in versu Psalmi Ixxxviii et in versibus sequen. 
» Montlhcry, 14 July 1466. « Austria erecta (?) iuste omnia vincit. 



NIChlL proflCIet InlMlCVs In ea et fILIVs InlqVltatIs non 
apponet noCere el. Ao. 1530. 

vel sic : Deslne Letarl LVgeas BVrgVndIa fessa, 

Margareta CVbat : CeLo reqVIesCat In aLto. 
<3 May 1536.) Wee Wee Wee CrVIs daCh 
DeLff zeer beCLagen MaCh. 
id est ao. xvc. xxxvi, 1536, oppidum Delfen. inuentionis sancte 
Crucis festo fuit combustum. 

2. Entries made hy Hugo de Assendelff (3 Nov. 1467 — 21 July 1540) con- 

cerning himself. 

(3 Nov. 1467.) ao. 1467 natus Hugo de Assendelft, qui me hie donauit. 
Genitus ac procreatus ao. domini xiiii«. Ixvii Hugo. 

{31 March 1478.) Anno domini xiiii«. Ixxviii, sine a^. 1478, illustrissimus 
ac inuictissimus Maximilianus, filius Friderici Imperatoris semper 
augusti, vt maritus illustris Ducisse Marie, Comitisse Hollandie, 
Zelaii. &c., filie Karoli, F. K. &c., Harlem fuit intronizatus. Attestor 
quia vidi. 

(3 Feb. 1483.) Magister Hugo de Assendelff, frater Bartoldi de Assen- 
delff, F. K., aui mei, obiit ao. xiiiic. Ixxxiii ipso die diui Blasii demane 
hora sexta. Testor quia vidi. 

(3 April 1487.) a^. xiiiic. Ixxxvii promotus in artibus Louanii. 

{30 Jan. 1497.) Feci repeticionem Louanii pro gradu licencie in vtroque 
iure adipiscendo ao. 1497. 

(1 Feb. 1497.) ao. xiiii^. xcvii gradum liceii. in vtroque iure adeptus. 

(13 March 1497.) Ordines suscepi dyaconatus ego Hugo de Assendelff 
Leodii in ecclesia diui Lamberti ao. 1497, ao. xiiiic. xcvii. 

(24 March 1497.) Hie ao. xiiiic. xcvii ordines et gradum pre(s)biterii 
Leodii suscepi in ecclesia sancti Lamberti. 

(30 April 1497.) Hac die ao. xiiiic. xcvii Louanii in capella clericorum 
meas celebraui primitias ao. 1497. 

(24 June 1497. ) Anno xiiiic. xcvii officium cure Harlemen. acceptaui. Et 
Archidux Phillippus Harlem suum fecit introitum, et lohannis Bapt*. 
finita missa (quam cantaui) fuit intronisatus vt Comes Hollandie. 

(15 March 1507.) ao. 1507 effectus capitularis Hagensis et ao. ix subse- 
quen. acceptus ad consulatum Hagen. curie. 

(16 Aug. 1508.) Anno xv^. viii Maximilianus Imperator Harlem veniebat, 
et ego vt vicecuratus arengam feci ex parte vtriusque status tam 
spiritualis quam secularis. Et de post ao. sequen., sc. xv^^. ix adeptus 
sum consulatum in Haga Comitis. 

(20 July 1509.) Anno xvc. nono receptus fui ad consulatum Hollandie 
in Haga Comitis presente illustrissima ac nobilissima domina Mar- 
gareta filia Imperatoris Maximiliani. Que mihi dedit anulum, scilicet 
saphur, valentem centum Reneii. et cyphum cum coopertorio valen. 
46 fl. 

(15 Nov. 1509.) Isto die obiit dominus mens reuerendissimus Episcopus 
Attrebaten., magister Nicolaus Ruter, pastor ecclesie Harlemen. In 
cuius officio fui xii annis continue. Anno domini obiit xv^. nono [ob*]. 
Sepultus Louanii in ecclesia sancti Petri ante summum altare. 


3. Entries made by Hugo de Assendelff concerning his oion family, 
(1 Aug. 1333.) Annomillesimotrecentesimo|3™i \obiitW 

de Assendelff, vt patet dare in suo epitaphio in ecclesia Harlemen. 
<Aug. 1362.) D. Bartoldus de Assendelff, filius Wilhelmi, auus aui mei, 

obiit ao. xiiic. Ixii, sc. 1362, vt clare patet /^^^ sculpture legenda (?)\ 

^ \in epithaphio J 

illorum de Assendelff pendente in ecclesia Harlemen. in opposite 

sepulchri antedictorum de Assendelff. 
<25 June 1412.) Obiit ao. xiiiic. xii Wilhelmus de Assendelff, pater aui mei 

ao. 1412. 
<21 Jan. 1483.) Obiit amita mea de Aemstel ao. 1483. 
<3 Feb. 1483.) ao. xiiiic. Ixxxiii deuotus magister Hugo de Assendelff, 

monasterii de Heemstede f undator, obiit ; qui annis Iviii fuit sacerdos^ 

quasi cotidie celebran., vir sancte ac castissime vite. 
<12 May 1483.) Obiit soror mea carissima domicella Ana de Assendelff 

ao. d. xiiiic. Ixxxiii. 
<11 Oct. 1483.) Anno xiiiic. Ixxxii obiit Elizabeth de Maern, monialis in 

Wyco Duerstede, in lingua Latina tritissima, matertera mea caris- 
sima, ao. 1483.» 
<26 Dec. 1491.) Obiit ao. xiiiic. xci discretus vir Albertus de Assendelff, 

mens genitor. (fo. x) Mens quidem genitor Albertus de Assendelff 

obiit ipso die Stephani ao. xiiiic. xci. 
<27 July 1494.) Obiit ao. 1494 amita mea soror Haza de Assendelff, monialis 

in Wermonda. 
<17 Sept. 1498.) Obiit domicella Margareta de Assendelff, begina in 

Harlem, a©, xiiiic. xcviii. 
<22 June 1499.) Obiit lacobus de Assendelff ao. 1499, scultetus Harlem. 
(25 May 1501.) Obiit Arnoldus de Maern, auunculus mens, ao. xvc. primo, 

die Vrbani. Sepultus Traiecti in ecclesia diue Katherine. Sed de 

post in demolitione ecclesie obrutus in ecclesia sancti lohannis 

Traiecti, data in versu : 
ArX dICor paCIs a qVInto Condlta * CharLo, 
Grata bonis statio sed ferrea VIrga MaLIgnls. sc. ao. 1529. 
(25 Oct. 1503.) Anno domini xvc. tercio hoc die Ludouicus de Bloys et 

Treslongue circa sepulchrum domini nostri Ihesu Christi fuit miles 

solempniter ordinatus. Hoc sub testimonio sigilli fratris Francisci de 

Lentonia, &c. 

Nunc ao. domini xvc. xxii fuit dominus temporalis de Veenhuyssen, 

etiam heemraedt van Eynlant en meesterknaep vander houtuesterie 

in Hollant : maritus sororis mee domicelle Anne de Assendelff. 
(2 March 1506.) Anno xvc. vi genita fuit domicella Maria de Assendelff, 

filia fratris mei ; cuius petrinus ^ sum. 
(30 Jan. 1507.) Et anno xvc. septimo Anna mea soror fuit sponsa et 

matrimonialiter coniuncta domino Ludouico de Bloys et Treslongue, 

militi Iherosolomitano. 

^ Of the conflicting year-dates the roman figures seem more likely to have been 
corrupted. « conditus MS. ' For patrinus. 


(11 Nov. 1507.) Natus fuit Raso de Bloys et de Treslongue a**, domini 1507, 

primogenitus sororis mee domine Anne, vxoris domini Ludouici de 

Treslongue, militis Iherosolomitani, a^. domini xvc. septimo. 
(18 June 1508. ) Genita filia fratris mei domicella Margareta de AssendelfE, 

monialis professa in Conincxuelt a^. xvc. viii. 
(9 March 1509.) Anno xv^. natus Albertus de Bloys, 2"s filius sororis 

mee Anne. 
(12 Sept. 1509.) Genitus Nycolaus de Assendelff, filius fratris mei, anno 

xvc. ix. 
(15 Sept. 1509.) Obiit xvc. nono mater mea domicella Cristana de Maern 

a°. 1509. 
( 14 April 1510. ) Anno domini xvc. x genitus ac Harlem baptizatus Adrianus 

de Bloys et de Treslongue, filius 3^^ continuus sororis mee Anne ; 

cuius petrinus sum. 
(2 Sept. 1510.) Obiit soror mea domicella Yda de Assendelff a^. xvc. decimo. 
(17 Jan. 1510/1.) Genita filia fratris mei domicella Adriana a^. 1510, 

scilicet xvc. x ; cuius petrinus sum. 
(16 July 1511.) Anno xvc. xi Albertus de Bloys, filius 4"" sororis mee, 

vxoris domini Lu°^ de Treslongue ; cuius petrinus fui. 
(6 March 1511/2.) Anno xvc. xi secundum cursum curie genitus Albertus 

de Assendelff, filius fratris mei. 
(7 March 1513.) Natus Georgius de Bloys et de Treslongue a^. xvc. xiii, 

quartus ^ filius sororis mee Anne. 
(8 April 1513/4.) a*^ xvc. xiii genitus Arnoldus de Treslongue. 
(4 Sept. 1515.) Genitus Wilhelmus de Assendelff a°. 1515. 
(8 Feb. 1517.) Anno xvc. xvii natus fuit Hugo de Bloys et de Treslongue, 

Septimus filius et vltimus sororis mee die dominica hora 8^. Petrinij 

dominus Consul, doctor Zasbout, soror mea Aleydis et ego. 
(6 March 1522.) Et a^. xxii (genita) Francisca de Assendelff. 
(17 Sept. 1524.) Genitus filius fratris mei Heinricus de Assendelff annOJ 

xvc. xxiiii, 1524. 
(4 March 1526.) Hac die dominica Oculi a^. xv^. xxvi obiit nobilis vir] 

dominus Ludouicus de Bloys et de Treslongue, miles Iherosolimitanus, 

Hillegom sepultus. 
(18 June 1534.) Obiit domicella Adriana de Gouda, vidua Gerardi dej 

Berkenroed, a^. 1534, xv^. xxxiiii, Meglinie. 

Fundauit magister Hugo de Assendelff monasterium diui Barnardi] 

honori, vt habetur in Cronica HoUandie folio trecentesimo, cuius data, 

habetur in sequefi., sc. a^. xiiiic. Iviii. 

HanC portaM CeLI CrIstVs regat et benedlCat. 1458. 
Data fundacionis sen erectionis huius monasterii extra Haerlem (In porta 
celi) in Heemstede ordinis Cistersien. in vnico versu : 

Est Lege phas opVs hoC InCIpIt eCCe Modo: Mcccclviii. 
Data fundationis hospitalis nostre domine in platea sancti lohannis 
Harlem : de domo paterna fundauit ipse magister Hugo. 

Epitaphium ipsius fundatoris huius monasterii in Heemstede prope 
oppidum Harlemense vel Harlemeum, cum data anni, diei et mensis 
obitus eiusdem vna cum quot annis ipse vixerat, et totum metrice : 
• Evidently fourth surviving. 


DedltVs etherels spernens erat eCCe seCVnda, 
Dans ea paVperlbVs, VIr probltate nitens. 

HVIVs orlgo gregis dassendeLf HVgo saCerdos, 

CVIVs sVnt ossa rVpe sepVLta sVb haC. Mcccclxxxiii. 

Bis qVater en denis VIXIt neXIs trIbVs annis 
Ipse sed In terna LVCe sVbIt FebrVI. 

QVIsqVe preCetVr el dentVr qVo gaVdIa CeLI: 
Ipsa Carent fine, Cetera deperlVnt 
Iste venerabilis ac deuotus in Christo sacerdos, magnus elargitor pauperum, 
mitis ac mansuetus suis amicis, Deo ac hominibus dilectus : qui magister 
Hugo de Assendelff, frater Bartoldi de Assendelff, F. R., aui mei, obiit 
ao. X iiiic. Ixxxiii ipso die diui Blasii demane hora sexta. Testor quia vidi. 
Fuit eciam fundator hospitalis Beate Marie Virginis situati Harlem in 
platea sancti lohannis Baptiste pro tredecim pauperculis, sibi et pro suis 
heredibus reseruando duo loca : quod hospitale de domo paterna erexit, 
et bene ipsis pauperculis prouidendo de missa cotidiana legenda et diebus 
Sabbatis cantanda, eciam de cotidianis laudibus nostre domine post 
laudes matricis ecclesie decantan. Et ibidem Iviii annis quasi cotidie cele- 
brauit demane hora septima ; ad quam horam pauperes confluebant in 
multitudinem, et singulis per suum familiarem denarium distribuit. Et 
singulis feriis sextis a vino abstinen. vsque ad laudes ieiunauit. Anima 
ipsius ac parentum requiescant in pace. Amen. 

Presentation to Adrian de Treslong : f°. a' v®. 

Ex donatione magistri Hugonis de Assendelff, canonici et consulis in 
curia Hagen., qui ab anno xiiii^. xcvii vsque annum xvc. decimum hie 
Harlem vicecuratus fuit. vos missam legentes ex presen., preces pro 
parentum suorum animabus fundite. In signum donationis hec sub manu 
propria scripsit et signo manuali subscripsit ao. 1530. 

NIChIL proflCIat InlMICVs In eo et fILIVs InlqVItatIs non apponat 
noCere el. 1530. 

Ita est. Hugo de Assend(elff.) 

Esto constans. Soyez constant. Hugues de Assendelff. 

Dit missael behoert mij Huge van Assendelff, priester. f.IIv»atend. 

Cest liure apartient au maistre Hugues d' Assendelff, chanone a la 
Haye en HoUande. 

Pertinet michi Hugoni de Assendelff, ecclesie Harlemensis vicecurato. f. Ill at end. 

Dit behoert meester Huge van Assendelff ,vicecureyt tot Harlem a^. xv^.ix. 

Inscription perhaps in the hand ofdonator : not before 1507. f. 2 before title. 

Pertinet magistro Hugoni de Assendelft, canonico in Haga Comitis. 
Dit bueck behoert meester Huge van Assendelft, canonick in den Hage. 

4. Entries made hy Adrian de Treslong (14 April 1510—2 March 1573). 

(19 Jan. 1533.) Lodewyck myn erste zoen is gheboeren Sacterdachs voer 
Sinte Angeniet anno xxxiii, dachs te xii veren. Zyn gheuader zyn myn 
joffr. moeder, en myn heer oem van Assendelft en heer Raessi myn 
broeder : ' opten xix lanuarii.' 

» Added by a later hand. 19 Jan. 1533 was a Sunday : the year-date is confirmed 
by Lodewyok's death, 9 Dec. 1610, aged nearly 78. 


(7 Nov. 1534.) Claes myn twede zoen is gheboeren a^. 34. Zyn gheuae- 
ders zyn myn heer om van Assendelt, myn moy van Assendelft en 
heer Raes myn breeder. 
(8 Aug. 1540.) Hac die obiit mater mea domicella Anna de Assendelft. 

. In pace requiescat. 
(9 June 1547.) Sacarmendt dach a^. 47. 
<3Dec.) Hilgom. 
'at end. Adriaen van Treslonge bihoert dit boeck toe. Espoer conforte. A. de 

5. Entries made hy Louis de Treslong (19 Jan. 1533 — 9 Dec. 1610). 

(14 April 1515.) Et mater mea charissima nata a^. 1515. 

<6 March 1528.) A^. 1528 d. 6«°. Maert quamen die Gelderscben inden 

Haech en pilleerden ii (dach). 
(21 July 1540.) A9. 1540 Mr. Hugo de Assendelfi, consiliarius et canonicus 

curiae HoUan. 21° lulii obiit. 
(8 Aug. 1540.) Augusti 8° a^. eodem obiit domicella Anna de Assendelft. 
(?9 Dec. 1550.) A^. 1550 Decembris natus frater meus Cornelius de 

Treslong : ^qui obiit sine liberis 23 Februarii 1599.^ 
(3 Jan. 1553.) d. 3en. Januarii 1553 es ouerleden Joffr. Catherijna van 

Berkenrode, Joncker Adlbrecht van Treslonge huijsvrouwe. 
(15 July 1555.) xv°. lulii a^. 1555 obiit Albertus de Bloijs de Treslonge, 

^Ludouici F.,^ meus patruus charissimus. 
(1 Oct. 1563.) d. len. Octobris 1563 starfi mijnen lieuen neeff, Joncker 

Niclaes vander Duijn, houtvester van Hollant. 
(2 March 1573.) d. ij^n. Martii a^. 1573 es ouerleden mijn z. vader, 

Joncker Adriaen van Treslong, Hr. Lodewijcx zoon. 
(20 Aug. 1573.) 20 d. Augusti a^. 1573 Lancilotus a Brederode. 
(28 Dec. 1573. ) Hoc die Innocentium obiit 2P, 1573 mater mea charissima, 

domicella Aeua, vidua nobilis Adriani de Treslonge, patris mei. 
(6 Aug. 1574.) 6 Augusti a^. 1574 domicella Adriana de Treslong, 

Albert! filia, eius (Lane, de Brederode) vxor obierat. 
(23 April 1584.) d. 23 Aprilis 84 stilo nouo obiit Cornelius de Noorden, 

cognatus meus.- 
(4 Aug. 1585.) 4° die Reinaldus de Brederode, Lanciloti filius, ordinat 

dominus in Veenhuijss a^. 1585, stilo HoUan. 
(July 1589.) Henricus de Brederode, meus cognatus charissimus, obiit 

hoc mense a*', xvc. Ixxxix. In Anglia. 
(22 May 1594.) Dit boeck behoirt in eijgendom toe mijnen neeff, 

Joncheer Reijnout van Brederode, heere van Veenhuijss, in kennisse 

van mij den xxij^n Maij 1594. 

L. van Treslong. 


6. Entries made hy Reynold de Brederode, last recorded owner of the Missal, 

15*0. Aprilis 1465 obiit D. Bartoldus dAssendelf, eques, primus Veenhusae 
dominus et Vlielandiae. 

* Added by Reynold de Brederode. 


7 lanuarii 1494 obiit Raso Treslongius, maritus Christinae de Coene, quae 

iam ante defuncta erat 2^0 Octobris 1476. 
Obiit anno 1526 4 Martii D. Ludouicus de Bloys de Treslong, eques 

Hierosolomitanus, Rasonis F., relicta vidua sua Anna Assendelfia, 

Domina de Veenhuysen. 
21 lulii obiit Hugo Assendelfius, canonicus et consiliarius curiae Hollandiae 

a°. 1540, possessor huius libri. 

8 Augusti 1540 obiit Anna Assendelfia, Veenbusae domina, vxor D. Lu- 

douici Treslong, equitis. 
(Jan.) A°. 1542 obiit Adriana de Assendelf, D. Bartholdi filia, vxorFran- 

cisci de Almaras. 
27 Nouemb. 1545 obiit Domicella Alijdt d' Assendelf, monialis Harlemi op 

19 lanuarii 1549 obiit Bartoldus Assendelfius, Alberti filius, frater 

magistri Hugonis. 
12 lulii anno 1578 obiit D. Raso de Bloys de Treslong, D. Ludouici F. natu 

maximus, Decanus coUegii Leydensis, in ecclesia S. Pancratii. 
{9 July.) Obiit a^. 1582 Arnoldus Treslongius, D. Ludouici F. penultimus, 

canonicus Leydensis in templo S. Pancratii. 
xxnio. Octobris 1592 obiit Artus Brederodius, consiliarius curiae HoUandi- 

cae, patruus mens. 
1^0. Augusti 1594 obiit Guglielmus de Bloys, dictus Treslong, Casparis F., 

Dominus de Pettegem in Flandria, sijnde geweest en sijn leuen eerst 

Baillu van den lande van voorne, daernae Gouuerneur van t'West- 

quartier van Vlaenderen en Lieutenant Admirael van Zeelant, en ten 

laetsten tot sijn ouerlijden toe Lieutenant Houtf ester van HoUant en 

Westfrieslant. Leijt tot Noorwijck begrauen. Achterlatende bij sijn 

buijsvrouwe Joffr. Adriana van Egmont, dochter van Hr. Otto Ridder, 

heer van Kenenburch, 2 zoonen, Jaspar en Willem, met een dochter 

Joffr. Catharina, de welcke ont omtrent 20 iaren en ongehijlicht starf 

den 6 Septembr. 1599. 
Nono die Februarii a^. 1600 Vltraiecti obiit Otto Bloisius a Treslong, 

praedicti Hugonis filius natu maximus, canonicus in templo D. 

Martini Vltraiecti, vulgo domheer, natus annos circiter 57 aut 58. 
xxvto. lunii 1601 obiit Hagae domicella Geertruda ab Oldenbarneuelt, 

vxor Reinaldi Brederodii, Veenhusae domini, relictis 2 filiabus. 
ij<io. lulii 1601 obiit sine liberis Harlemi Nicolaus Assendelfius, dominus 

de Sgrauenmoer, Nicolai F., Bartholdi N. 
<9 Dec.) Obiit Leydae D. Ludouicus de Treslong, olim canonicus Sti. 

Pancratii, a^. 1610, natus fere annos 78, sine liberis. 

Besides the entries given above there are a few more indica- 
tions of Master Hugo and his interests. Against 3 June he writes 
' Herasmi ', the name of a saint whose cult had been steadily 
rising into prominence through the fifteenth century ; against 
1 October ' Bauonis ', the name of his church's patron at Haarlem. 
A table to find Easter (fo. k) begins at 1520 ; a table for Septua- 
gesima (fo. c^) at 1526. 
Anno domini xvc. xxvi dominica Ixx^. erit xxviii lanuarii. Et si vis scu-e 


dominicam lxx«. ad multos annos vi<^. et vltra, vide et mastica tabulam 
meam quam posui in ecclesia sororum siue conuentus sancte Barbare 
ordinis Premonstraten penden. in opposite altaris sancte Crucis ibidem. 

In 1531 he inserts (fo. c^) : 

Spero per Dei graciam quod hoc anno illustrissimus ac inuictissimus 
Karolus Khomanorum Imperator semper augustus Turcham debellabit ; 
quod in animo habui ad Romanes iuxta datam que habetur in verbis 
sequeii. : NIChIL proflCIat InlMICVs In els et fILIVs InlqVItatls 
non apponet noCere els. sc. a**. 1531. quod habui ex sermone CardinaHs 
sancte Crucis Meglinie, qum thuribulum ad chorum portaui sc. a^. 

The table continues, sometimes in French, to 1571 ; and at the 
end he adds 

Et sic vlterius praeterea, ex oratione pulcherrima in fine breuiarii mei 
descripta vel etiam in assere posita pendente in choro sororum sancte 
Barbare in Haga Comitis in opposite altaris sancte Crucis. 

Further liturgical interest is shown in the note (f^. dd^ v^) : 

viii lulii aliqui legunt historiam sancte Barbare translationis, quam ad 
longum inuenies in breuiario meo maiori. 

On f 0. B^ yo. he copies the exclamation with which Christ was 
welcomed by the spirits to be released from Hell ; and on P. II 
y^., at the end, the psalm of David when he fought with Goliath, 
' Pusillus eram ', &c. On f^. II at the end is a partly erased 
inscription which I have not been able to decipher. 

P. S. Allen. 

Roads in England and Wales in i6oj 

A MANUSCRIPT volume in the possession of the Warden of Keble 
College, Oxford, gives at the end ' the high wayes from any 
notable towne in England to the Cietie of London '. Its compiler 
ended his task with the accession to the throne of James I, 
since in a list of the kings and queens of England the last two 
entries run : m 


queene of England begane her raigne the 17 day of Nouember in 
the year of our lorde 1558 to the ioy of all christian hartes : and was 
buried at when she had raigned yeare and in 

the yeare 1561 the towne of newhauen ^ was delivered in to the queenes 

* Le Havre. 



the first kynge of England Scotland france and Ireland was proclamed 
at the age of 36 yeares the 24 of marche : 1602 : blesse his raigne Lorde 
wythe true religion peace and number of yeares to him and his posterity 
for ever and ever a men. 

The volume may then be assigned probably to the early part of 
the year 1603, since there are blank spaces for the date and place 
of the queen's funeral on 28 April, while there is no mention of 
the king's coronation on 25 July.^ 

The itinerary is therefore nearly three-quarters of a century 
earlier than John Ogilby's road-book, the Britannia, which was 
pubHshed in 1675 and gave an elaborate scheme of eighty-five 
roads. Our manuscript has simply a Hst of seventeen highways 
to London and approximates more closely to two lists of roads 
compiled in the previous century, namely, ' Of our Innes and 
Thorowf aires ', by William Harrison in Holinshed, and ' the 
high waies from any notable towne in England to the Cittie of 
London and lykewise from one notable town to another \ by 
William Smith in his Particular Description of England, dated 

A comparison of the three shows that they have ten roads 
in common, with slight variations in stages and mileage. These 
are : 


Cockermouth or Carlisle * 

St. Davids 


S. Burian 


Cambridge ^ 




Harrison « has no roads to London other than these,' but the 

2 In a list of the mayors of London the last entry is ' 1602 John garrad 

3 First printed in 1879. 

* Cockermouth in manuscript and Harrison ; Carlisle in Smith. 

= In Harrison London to Cambridge, with an alternative route by Saffron Walden. 

« The manuscript, Harrison, and Smith all precede their lists of roads by lists of the 
principal fairs held in England, all three differing considerably one from the other. 

' In a paper read at a meeting of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society, 6 December 
1909, Sir George Fordham drew attention to an itinerary of the sixteenth century, 
Le Guide des Chemins d'AngUterre, compiled by Jean Bernard ' secretaire de la chambre 
du Roy', and printed and published by ' Gervais Mallot, marchand, Libraire Jure 
en I'Universite de Paris ', July 1578. His roads are nine of the above ten, the omission 
being the road to Cambridge. 

to London. 

to London. 


manuscript has seven and William Smith nine additional roads, 
as follows : 

MS. AND William Smith 
. Lincoln 

Oxford ^ V to London. 

Yarmouth to Ipswich and Colchester and 
Yarmouth to Norwich and 


Carmarthen to Worcester ^ and ^ 
Nottingham / *« I^^^^^^- 

William Smith only 
Worcester ^ 
Exeter ^o 

In addition to the roads to London Harrison gives two^^ 
and Smith eighteen ^^ cross-country roads, but none are men- 
tioned in the manuscript. 

In 1675 John Ogilby in his great road-book divided the roads 
of England into 14 direct independent roads to London, 19 direct 
dependent roads to London, 32 cross principal roads, and 20 
cross accidental roads. He also gave a double set of distances from 
each town to the next, the first being the vulgar computed dis- 
tance, the second the measured distance. The first is, with slight 
variations, the mileage of our manuscript, Harrison, and Smith. 
The second differs from it considerably, the figures being almost 
invariably much higher, as may be seen by the following com- 
parison of the total mileage of five roads in the four itineraries .^^ 

® In manuscript Oxford-Whatlebrydge 5 — Tetsworth 5 — Stokenchurch 5 — 
Uxbridge 17— London 15. In William Smith Oxford-Tetsworth 10— Wickam 10— 
Beconsfeld 5 — Uxbridge 7 — London 15. » Identical Worcester to London. 

" By way of Burport, Dorchester, Blandford to Salisbury ; an alternative to the 
S. Burian road. i^ Dover to Cambridge, and Canterbury to Oxford. 

" These are : (1) Totnes to Exeter ; (2) Plymouth to Exeter ; (3) Dartmouth to 
Exeter ; (4) Exeter to Barnstaple ; (5) Exeter to Bristol ; (C) Southampton to 
Helford by the coast ; (7) Southampton to Bristol ; (8) Barnstaple to Bristol ; 
(9) Bristol to Oxford ; (10) Bristol to Shrewsbury ; (11) Bristol to Shrewsbury and 
Chester by Gloucester, Worcester, and Bridgenorth ; (12) Bristol to Cambridge; 
(13) York to Nottingham; (14) York to Cambridge; (15) York to Chester; (16) 
York to Shrewsbury ; (17) Coventry to Oxford ; (18) Coventry to Cambridge. 

" Mr. Herbert Joyce in his History of the Post Office points out that the difference 
between the computed and the measured mileage led to difi&culties towards the 
middle of the eighteenth century ; distances were then measured and milestones 
erected along the principal roads. The postmasters, who had hitherto charged 
travellers riding post according to the computed, now began to charge according to 
the actual, distance. The king's messengers fought hard against the innovation but 
without success. The carriage of the mails on the other hand continued for many 
years to be paid for according to the computed mileage. The time allowance for the 


York to London 
Dover to London 
Rye to liondon 
Bristol to London 
S. Burian to London 


























115' 2 






Gladys Scott Thomson. 


OP London. 
From Barwyche ^ to Yorke and so to London, 
from Barwycke to Belford 
from Belford to Anwick 
from Anwick to Morpit 
from Morpit to Newcastel 
from Newcastel to Durham 
from Durham to Darington 
from Darington to Northalerton 
from Northalerton to Topclife 
from Topclife to Yorke.^ 

From YorJce to London.^ 

from Yorke to Tadcaster 7 myle 

from Tadcaster to Wentbridg 12 myle 

from Wentbridg to Doncaster 7 myle 

mails was seven miles an hour in summer and five miles an hour in winter {Early Posts 
in England, by the late Mr. J. A. J. Housden, ante, vol. xviii. 716, 1903). Postal endorse- 
ments on letters at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries 
show that on such roads as the Dover and Bristol roads to London this was often 
attained or nearly attained. On others, more particularly those from the west, but 
also even on the Chester and Berwick roads, where there was a regular post to the court, 
there were constant complaints of slowness and delays. The following endorsements 
are taken from letters addressed to Sir Robert Cecil (Hist. MSS. Comm., Hatfield MSS. ) : 

(i) Dover to London. From Sir Thomas Fane, 24 April 1597. Dover, 24 April, 
1 afternoon, Canterbury 4 afternoon, Sittingbourne past 7 night, Rochester the 24th 
9 night, Dartford 12 night, London 1 in the morning. 

(ii) Bristol to Hounslow. From the Mayor of Bristol, 1 Oct. 1602. Bristol 

1 Oct. 6 morning, Marshfield 8.30 morning, Calne 11.30 morning, Marlboro' 

2 of the clock, Newbury past 5 of the clock, Reading 9 of the clock 1st Oct., 
Hounslow 3 in the night 1st Oct. 

(iii) Chester to Barnet. Mayor of Chester to Lords of the Council, March 1598/9. 
Chester, 23 March, 6 evening, Nantwich 9 night, Stone 1 past midnight, Lichfield 
5 morning, Cosell betwixt 7 and 8, Coventry after 10 morning, Daventry past 1 after- 
noon, Towcester past 3 afternoon, Brickhill 6 afternoon, St. Albans 10 night, Barnet 
12 night. 

* Almost all the proper names are written in the manuscript without capital initials* 

* The mileage here omitted is supplied by William Smith. Belford 12— Alnwick 12 
— Morpeth 12 — Newcastle 12 — Durham 12 — Darlington 13 — Northallerton 14 — 
Topcliffe 7— York 16. 

' The road London- York-Berwick is given by Ogilby with exactly the same stages 
as a direct independent road. Mileage — computed 260, measured 339' 2. 


from Doncaster to Tuxforde 18 myle 

from Tuxford to Newmarke 10 myle 

from Newmarke to Grantham 10 myle 

from Grantham to Stamforde 16 myle 

from Stamford to Stilton 12 myle 

from Stilton to Hungtingdon 9 myle 

from Hungtingdon to Eoiston 15 myle 

from Koyston to Ware 13 myle 

from Ware to Waltham 8 myle 

from Waltham to London 12 myle 
From Yorke to London 149 myle. 

From CoJcermouth to Lancaster and so to London,* 

from Cokermouth to Kyswyck 6 myle 

from Kyswick to Grocenner 8 myle 

from Grocener to Kendale 14 myle 

from Kendale to Burton 7 myle 

from Burton to Lancaster ' 7 myle 

from Lancaster to Preston 20 myle 

from Preston to Wygan 14 myle 

from Wygan to Warington 12 myle 

from Warington to Newcastle 20 myle 

from Newcastle to Lychfeeld 20 myle 

from Lychfeeld to Coventr 20 myle 
and so to London as in way from Coventr 

From Cokermouth to Lancaster and so to London are 148 myle. 

Fr^m Sainte Davids to Glocester and so to London.^ 

from Saint Davids to Axfordes 12 myle 

from Axford to Carmardin 24 myle 

from Carmardin to Newton 12 myle 

from Newton to Lanburi 10 myle 

from Lanbury to Brecknock 16 myle 

from Brecknock to Hay 10 myle 

from Hay to Harford 14 myle 

from Harford to Koso 11 myle 

from Eoso to Glocester 12 myle 

from Glocester to Cicester 13 myle 

from Cicester to Farington 12 myle 

from Farington to Abington 10 myle 

from Abington to Dorchester 5 myle 

* Ogilby has London-Carlisle as a direct dependent road commencing at Darlaston 
Bridge in the Holyhead Eoad. Between Kendal and Carlisle it goes by Penrith and 
Hesketh, instead of by Grasmere and Keswick. Mileage — Carlisle-London, computed 
235, measured 301' 2. 

' Ogilby gives this as a direct independent road, but the roads are only identical 
between London and Gloucester. Between that town and St. Davids, Ogilby's 
road is — Michel Dean-Coleford-Monmouth-Newport-CardifiE-Aberavon-Swansea- 
Llanellthy-Llanffaffon-Haverford West. 


from Dorchester to Henly 12 myle 

from Henly to Maydenhead 7 myle 

from Maydenhead to Colbroke 7 myle 

from Colbroke to Hounslow 5 myle 

from Hounslow to London 10 myle 

From Saynte Davids to Glocester and so to London is 202 myle. 

From Carmarthen to Worcester and so to London.^ 

from Carmarthen to Laundouery 20 myle 

from Laundouery to Belthe 14 myle 

from Belthe to Preston 12 myle 

from Preston to Worcester 26 myle 

from Euesham to Chipping Norton 13 myle 

from Chipping Norton to Islip 12 myle 

from Islip to Wickam 20 myle 

from Wickham to Beconsfeeld 5 myle 

from Beconsfeeld to Uxbridge 7 myle 

from Uxbridg to London 15 myle 

From Carmarthen to Worcester and so to London is 155 myle. 

From Carnarvon to Chester and so to Couentry and to London.'' 

from Carnarvon to Conway 24 myle 

from Conway to Denbigh 11 myle 

from Denbigh to Flynte 12 myle 

from Flynte to Chester 10 myle 

from Chester to Wyche 15 myle 

from Wyche to Stone 15 myle 

from Stone to Ychfeelde 16 myle 

from Ychfeelde to Colesyl 12 myle 

from Colysyl to Coventry 8 myle 

from Coventry to Deyntry 14 myle 

from Deyntry to Tochester 10 myle 

from Tocester to Stony Stratford 6 myle 

from Stony Stratford to Brickhill 7 myle 

from Brickhill to Dunstable 7 myle 

from Dunstable to Saint Albones 10 myle 

from Saint Albones to Barnet 10 myle 

from Barnet to London 10 myle 
From Carnarvon to Chester and to Couentry and so to London is 
197 myle. 

j From Saint Burien in Cornewall to Excetter ^ and so to London, 

from Saint Burien to the Mount 10 myle 

' from the Mount to Truro 12 myle 

' Not in Ogilby, who gives London to Worcester in the Aberystwith road : as 
above to Islip, thence Enston, Morton-in-the-Marsh, Broadway, Pershore. 

' Not in Ogilby, who gives London to Holyhead as a direct independent road : 
as above to Denbigh, thence by Beaumaris to Holyhead. 

* Ogilby gives a direct independent road between Land's End and London. The 
i route to Exeter is Senan-St. Burian-Looe-Fowey-Plymouth-Ashburton-Exeter. 


from Truro to Bodmin 12 myie 

from Bodmin to Launstone 20 myle 

from Launstone to Okhamton 15 myle 

from Okhamton to Crockhorneweli 10 myle 

from Crockhorneweli to Execester 10 myle 

from Excester to Honyton 12 myle 

from Honyton to Charde 10 myle 

from Charde to Crockhorne 6 myle 

from Crockhorne to Sherborne 10 myle 

from Sherborne to Shaftesburye 12 myle 

from Shaftsbury to Salisbury 18 myle 

from Salisbury to Andeuer 15 myle 

from Andever to Basingstoke 16 myle 

from Basingstoke to Hartlerow 8 myle 

from Hartlerow to Bagshot 8 myle 

from Bagshot to Stanes 8 myle 

from Stanes to London 15 myle 
From Saint Burien in Cornewall to London is 227 myle. 

From Bristowe to London.^ 

from Bristow to Maxfeeld 10 myle 

from Maxfeeld to Chipnam 10 myle 

from Chipnam to Marleborowe 15 myle 

from Marleborowe to Hungerford 8 myle 

from Hungerford to Newbery 7 myle 

from Newbery to Eeading 15 myle 

from Keading to Maydenhead 10 myle 

from Maydenhead to Colbrooke 7 myle 

from Colbrooke to London 15 myle 

From Bristowe to London is 97 myle. 

From Lincolne to London}^ 

from Lincolne to Ancaster 
from Ancaster to Bitsfeeld 
from Bitsfeeld to Stamford ^^ 

from Stamford to Stilton 12 myle 

from Stilton to Huntingdon 9 myle 

from Huntingdon to Royston 15 myle 

from Huntingdon Royston to Ware 13 myle 

from Ware to Waltham 8 myle 

from Waltham to London 12 myle 

From Nottingham to Leicester and so to London}^ 

from Nottingham to Lugborough 7 myle 

from Lugborough to Leicester 8 myle 

® In Ogilby a direct independent road ; distances — computed 94, measured 115' 2. 

^0 Cf. below, p. 241, n. 13. 

" Smith gives the mileage : Lincoln to Ancaster 16, Bichfeld 8, Stamford 12 ; 
entire distance 105. 

^2 Not in Ogilby, who gives London to Derby as a direct dependent road, com- 
mencing at Stony Stratford and going by way of Leicester and Loughborough. 


from Leicester to Harborough 12 myle 

from Harborough to Northamton 12 myle 

from Northamton to Stony Stratford 10 myle 

from Stony Stratford to Brickhill 7 myle 

from Brickhill to Dunstable 7 myle 

from Dunstable to Saynt Aubones 10 myle 

from Saynte Albones to Barnet 10 myle 

from Barnet to London 10 myle 
From Nottingham to Leicester and so to London is 93 myle. 

From Boston to London the wayeP 

from Boston to Bourne 22 myle 

from Bourne to Stilton 8 myle 

from Stilton to Huntingdon 9 myle 

from Huntingdon to Koyston 15 myle 

from Eoyston to Ware 13 myle 

from Ware to Waltham 8 myle 

from Waltham to London 12 myle 

From Boston to Lyecester and to London is 97 myle. 

From Cambridg to London the wayM 
from Cambridg to Slow 
from Slow to Barway 
from Barway to Pukrich 

from Pukrich to Ware in all 25 myle 

from Ware to Waltam 8 myle 

from Waltam to London 12 myle 

From Cambridg to London is 45 myle. 

From Oxford to London}^ 

from Oxford to Whatlebrydge 5 myle 

from Whatlebridge to Tetswoorth 5 myle 

from Tetswoorth to Stokenchurch - 5 myle 

from Stokenchurch to Uxbridg 17 myle 

from Uxbridge to London 15 myle 

From Oxford to London is 47 myle. 

From Dover to London the way}^ 

from Dover to Canterbury 12 myle 

from Canterbur to Sittingburne 12 myle 

" Ogilby gives London to Boston as a direct dependent road, beginning at Stilton 
on the Berwick road, with an extension to Lincoln by way of Heckington and Sleaford. 

" Not in Ogilby. He gives, however, London to King's Lynn as a direct dependent 
road, beginning at Puckeridge on the Berwick road and going to Cambridge by 
Bark way and Fowlmere and thence to King's Lynn. 

" Ogilby gives London to Tetsworth (computed 37, measured 44' 6) by way of 
Beaconsfield and High Wickham as part of the direct independent road from London to 
Aberystwith and says thence there is a branch to the city of Oxford (by Wheatley), 
in all 47 computed miles, 55' 6 measured. 

" In Ogilby a direct independent road ; distances— 55 computed, 71' 4 measured. 



from Sittingburne to Rochester 8 myle 

from Rochester to Gravesend 5 myle 

from Gravesend to Darford 6 myle 

from Darford to London 12 myle 
From Dover to London is 55 myle. 

From Rye to London the way?^ 

from Rye to Plymwell 15 myle 

from Plymwell to Tombridg 11 myle 

from Tonbridg to Chepstow 7 myle 

from Chepstow to London 15 myle 

From Rye to London is 48 myle. 

From Yarmouth to Ipswych and to Colchester to London}^ 

from Yarmouth to Lostoffe 6 myle 

from Lostoffe to Blibur 10 myle 

from Blibur to Snapbridg 8 myle 

from Snapbridg to Woodbridg 8 myle 

from Woodbridg to Ipswych 5 myle 

from Ipswych to Colchester 12 myle 

from Colchester to Esterfeeld 13 myle 

from Esterfeeld to Chelmsfoord 10 myle 

from Chelmsfoord to Brentwood 10 myle 

from Brentwood to London 15 myle 

From Yarmouth to London is 97 myle. 

From Walsingham to London the way}^ 

from Walsingham to Peckham 12 myle 

from Peckham to Brandon Ferry 15 myle 

from Brandon Ferry to Newmarket 14 myle 

from Newmarket to Whitfordbridg 10 myle 

from Wytfordbridg to Barkway 10 myle 

from Barkway to Ware 12 myle 

from Ware to Waltham 8 myle 

from Waltham to London 12 myle 

From Walsingham to London is 93 myle. 

From Yarmouth to Norwich and so to London.^ 

from Yarmouth to Ockell 8 myle 

from Ockell to Norwych 8 myle 
from Norwich to Windam 

from Windam to Acleiborough 10 myle 

" In Ogilby a direct independent road ; distances — 46 computed, 64 measured. 

" Ogilby has London to Yarmouth as a direct dependent road, beginning at 
Colchester and going by Beccles and Haddiscoe instead of Lowestoft. 

" In Ogilby this is part of the direct dependent road from London to Wells in 
Norfolk, beginning at Newmarket and going by Walsingham. 

. 2" Not in Ogilby, who has London to Norwich as a direct dependent road beginning 
at Puckeridge and thence by Barkway as above. 


from Atilborough to Thetford 10 myle 

from Thetford to Icklyngham Sands 6 myle 

from Icklingham Sands to Newmarket 10 myle 

from Newemarket to Wytfordbridg 10 myle 

from Wytfordbridg to Barkway 10 myle 

from Barkway to Ware 12 myle 

from Ware to Waltam 8 myle 

from Waltam to London 12 myle 
From Yarmouth to Norwich and so to London is 104 myle. 

Provincial Priors and Vicars of the English Dominicans, 


The first list of the Provincials of the EngHsh Dominicans was 
drawn up by the late Father Raymund Palmer, O.P., and pub- 
hshed in the Archaeological Journal, vol. xxxv (1878). It took 
the shape of a biographical sketch, and the authorities chiefly 
rehed on were the English State Papers and the Register of the 
Master-General. The latter document is preserved in Rome and 
is not yet published. In 1893 Mr. A. G. Little drew up a list 
which appeared in this Review, vol. viii. 519-25. It was not so 
complete as Father Palmer's hst in the Archaeological Journal, 
which Mr. Little does not seem to have met with. He mentions, 
however, a Hst which was then just pubUshed by Father Palmer 
in the Antiquary, but this without references. Since these 
works appeared Father Benedict Reichert, O.P., has edited the 
Acta Capitulorum Generalium (Rome, 1898).^ This had already 
been done to some extent by the two Benedictines, Martene and 
Durand, in their great Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum, vol. iv, 
Paris, 1717. Reichert's work is much more comprehensive, and 
he had the advantage of all the documents of the Dominican 
Order, still preserved in the various convents. The present list, 
therefore, has the advantage of Reichert's work, which has 
proved of immense value in arranging the dates for the various 
periods of office, and has also suppUed a few names hitherto 
unknown. Walter Gumbley, O.P. 

1221. Gilbert de Fresney. Sent by St. Dominic in 1221 to found the 
English Province, of which he became the first Provincial. 

(Acta i. 2 ; Nicholas Trivet, O.P., Annates, ed. Hog, 1845, 
p. 209.) 

c. 1235. Alard, D.D.2 As Provincial he received a letter from Bishop 

* Cited hereafter as Ada. 

* The abbreviation ' D.D.' in this paper stands for the title * Magister in Sacra 
Theologia', which has always been maintained by the Dominican Order. Similarly 
B.D. is used for S.T.B. A title peculiar to the Dominican and a few other Orders is 

E 2 


Robert Grosseteste in 1235. He was formerly Chancellor of 
Oxford in 1215. 

{Epistolae R. Grosseteste, ed. Luard, pp. 59-63 ; Wood's Athen. 
Oxon. ii. 388.) 
c. 1242-54. Matthew.^ In 1242, when Provincial, he received a letter from 
Grosseteste. He was absolved from office by the General Chapter 
of the Order assembled at Buda in 1254.* 

{Epist. R. Grosseteste, pp. 304, 305 ; Acta i. 71.) 
1254-61. Simon, D.D. Elected in 1254, and absolved from office by the 
General Chapter held at Barcelona in 1261, because he had 
refused to receive foreign students at Oxford. 
(Acta i. 110, 111, 117.) 
1261-79. Rohert of Kilwardhy, D.D. Elected in 1261. Released from 
office in May 1272, but re-elected in September. Appointed 
Archbishop of Canterbury by Gregory X, Nov. 1272. Created 
Cardinal Bishop of Porto 1279. Died at Viterbo, Sept. 11, 1279. 
Buried in the Church of S. Maria ad Gradus. 
(Acta i. 156, 165 ; Trivet, p. 278.) 
1273-8. William of Southampton, D.D. Elected in 1273. Died in Dec. 

(Patent Roll, 6 Edw. I, m. 11 ; * Provincials of Blackfriars,' by 
C. F. R. Palmer, O.P., Archaeol. Journ. xxxv. 1878. Reprint, 
p. 7.) 
1279-82. Hugh of Manchester, D.D. Elected in 1279, and released by 
chapter of Vienna 1282. He was ambassador to France in 1294, 
and still living in 1305. 

(Trivet, pp. 302, 303 ; Patent Roll, 10 Edw. I, m. 10 ; Acta I 
220 ; Langtoft, Chron. ii. 205, 207.) 
1282-7. William of Hoiham, D.D. Elected in 1282. Released from 
office and sent to teach at Paris 1287. 
(Acta i. 242.) 
1287-90. William of Hereford. Elected in 1287. Died in 1290. 

(Acta i. 265 ; Patent Roll, 18 Edw. I, m. 18 ; Littera Encyclica 
Mag. Gen., ed. Reichert, Rome, 1900, pp. 150, 155.) 
1290-6. William of Hotham, D.D. Re-elected Sept. 8, 1290. He was the 
favourite minister of Edward 1, and in 1296 became Archbishop 
of Dublin. Died at Dijon, Aug. 27, 1299, and buried in Black- 
friars Church, London. 

(Trivet, p. 364 ; Diet, of National Biography, s. v.) 

that of ' Lector in Sacra Theologia'. This is the first degree, and is obtained after 
a seven years' course of philosophy and theology. The degree of Bachelor is con- 
ferred after seven years of teaching in a theological university, and the Mastership 
after a further course of seven years. 

' A certain Henry, afterwards bishop of Culm, in the lands of the Teutonic Order, 
is said to have been English Provincial about 1240 ; but this is due to an error first 
made by Frederic Shembek, S.J., who published a book on the Saints of Prussia, at 
Thorn, in 1638. 

* During the first centuries of the Order's existence the Provincials seem to have 
had no fixed term of office, but continued until released from their charge either by the 
Master- General or the General Chapter. 

1918 THE ENGLISH DOMINICANS, 1221-1916 246 

1297-1304. Thomas deJorz.BJ). Elected at Oxford in 1297. Absolved 
from office, 1304. Created Cardinal Priest of Sta Sabina, Dec. 
1305. Papal legate to Italy in 1310. Died at Grenoble, Dec. 13, 
1310, and buried at Blackfriars, Oxford. 

(Trivet, p. 406 ; Acta i. 322 ; Diet, of Nat. Biogr., s. v.) 
1304-6. Robert of Bromyard, D.D. Elected in 1304. Released from office 
by chapter of Paris in 1306. Living in 1310. 

{Acta ii. 19 ; Patent Roll, 33 Edw. I, par. 2, m. 15.) 
1306-12. Nicholas of Stretton, D.D. Elected in 1306. Released by 
chapter of Carcassone in 1312, and sent to teach at Paris. Still 
living in 1325. 

{Acta ii. 60 ; Patent Roll, 30 Edw. I, m. 28 ; Palmer, pp. 15, 
1312-15. William of Castreton, D.D. Appointed by the Master- 
General in 1312. Absolved from office by chapter of Bologna, 
(Palmer, p. 16, * Ex tabulario Mag. Gen.' ; Acta ii. 84.) 
1315-17. ... The name of the friar who was elected Provincial in 1316 
is still unknown. He was released from office by the chapter of 
Pampeluna in 1317. 
{Acta ii. 103.) 
1317-27. John of Bristol, D.D. Elected in 1317. Absolved from office 
by the chapter of Perpignan in 1327. 

(Palmer, pp. 17, 18, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Acta ii. 171.) 
1327-36. Simon de Bolaston, D.D. Elected in 1327. Absolved by the 
chapter of Bruges, 1336. He was implicated in the conspiracy 
of the Earl of Kent in 1330, and condemned to perpetual im- 
prisonment, but regained the royal favour. 

(Palmer, p. 18 ; Wilkins, Concilia, ii. 556 ; Acta ii. 240.) 
1336. William de Watisdene, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General of England 
by the chapter of Bruges, 1336. 
{Acta ii. 241-2.) 
1336-9. Richard of Winkley, D.D. Elected in 1336. Released from 
office by the chapter of Clermont in 1339. He was confessor to 
Edward III, who strongly protested against his deposition. He 
was living in 1347. 

(Palmer, pp. 18-20 ; Close Rolls, 14 Edw. Ill, m. 27 d. ; 
Acta ii. 254.) 
1339. Hugh Dutton, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General by the chapter of 
Clermont in 1339. Elected Provincial the same or the following 

{Act^ji ii. 258 ; Palmer, p. 21, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.') 
c. 1360. Simon ofHinton, D.D., is said to have been Provincial about this 

(Quetif and Echard, Scriptores Ord. Praed. i. 648 ; Diet, of Nat, 
Biogr., s. v.) 
Before 1364. Nicholas of Monington, D.D., who was living in 1365, was 
at one time Provincial. 

(Palmer, Guildford Obits, in Reliquary, Jan. 1887, p. 15.) 


1364. Robert Pynke was mentioned as Provincial in a letter from the 
Mayor of London to Pope Urban V in 1364. 

(Palmer, quoting from Muniments of the Guildhall, MSS. P. 
iii B. 6856, A. 266.) 
?-1370. William de Bodekisham, D.D., presumably succeeded Pynke, 
for he was absolved from office in 1370 by chapter of 
{Acta ii. 416 ; Patent Roll, 44 Edw. Ill, p. 1, m. 14 d.) 
1370. William Andrew, D.D., was appointed Vicar-General by the chapter 
of Valencia 1370. In 1374 he became Bishop of Achonry, and 
of Meath in 1380. He died Sept. 28, 1385. 
{Acta ii. 416 ; Palmer, Guildford Obits, p. 13.) 
c. 1374-8. Thomas Rushooh, D.D., formerly prior of the convent of 
Hereford, appears as Provincial in 1374. In 1378 he was removed 
by the Master-General. 

{Acta ii. 450-2 ; Palmer, pp. 21-3.) 
1378. John Paris, John Empsay, Thomas Nortebe, and William Siwardy 
all Doctors in Divinity, were appointed Vicars successively on the 
removal of Rushook from the Provincialship. 

{Cal. of Entries in Papal Registers, v. 14 ; Acta, ibid,) 
1379-82. Thomas Rushook, D.D., was reinstated in office by Pope 
Urban VI in 1379. He resigned in 1382 in order to accept the 
Archdeaconry of St. Asaph. He became successively Bishop of 
Llandaff 1383 and of Chichester 1385. In 1388 he was impeached 
for high treason by the Parliament and exiled to Ireland. He 
became Bishop of Kilmore, and died about 1390. He was buried 
at Seal in Kent. 

{Cal. of Papal Reg., ibid. ; Diet, of Nat. Biogr., s. v.) 
1383-93. William Siward, D.D., one of the Vicars appointed in 1378, was 
elected Provincial in 1383. He was released from office by the 
Master-General in 1393. He was confessor to Edward III, and 
was living in 1396. 

(Palmer, p. 24, * Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Patent Roll, 50 Edw. Ill, 
par. 2, m. 11.) 
1393. Robert HumbUton, D.D., was appointed Vicar-General by the 
Master-General, 1393. . . 

(Palmer, p. 24, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.') 
1393-6. Thomas Palmer, D.D. Elected in 1393. Absolved from office 
by the Master-General in 1396. Living in 1412. 

(Palmer, p. 25, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Diet, of Nat. Biogr., 
s. V.) 
1396-7. William Bagthorpe, D.D., Prior of Lynn, was appointed Vicar- 
General by the Master in 1396, till the election of the new 

(Palmer, p. 25, ' Ex tab. Mag. Ord.') 
1397. William Pikworth, D.D. Elected at Newcastle-on-Tyne, Aug. 15, 
1397. He was still Provincial in 1403. 

(Palmer, p. 26, * Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Bullarium Ord. Praed. 
ii. 367 ; Rot. Parliam. iii. 502.) 

1918 THE ENGLISH DOMINICANS, 1221-1916 247 

c. 1410. John of Lancaster,^ D.D., is mentioned as Provincial in Aug. 1410. 

(Palmer, 26, quoting Beg. Edm. Stafford, Episc. Exon. i. 101.) 

c. 1422. John o/Redesdale, D.D., is mentioned as Provincial Feb. 7, 1422, 

when he admitted Richard of Burton, Prior of the Charterhouse 

of Beauvale, Notts., to the graces of the order. 

(Palmer, MSS. v. 5204, quoting Court of Augmentations, 
Cart. B. 96, now in the Public Record Office.) 
1427. John Rokill, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General by the Master in 1427, 
and elected Provincial the same or the following year. Living 
in 1448, when he was Prior of London. 

(Palmer, p. 27, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Issue Roll, Mich. 27 
Hen. VI, m. 7.) 
c. 1438. Philip Boydon, D.D., as Provincial attended the convocation of 
prelates at St. Paul's in April 1438. 
(Wilkins, Concilia, iii. 530.) 
c. 1459. Walter Wynhale, D.D., attended as Provincial the General Chapter 
of Nimeguen, 1459. He had been Prior of Oxford in 1427. 
(Acta iii. 268 ; Munim. Academ. Oxon., Rolls Ser., p. 570.) 
c. 1465-73. William Edmundson, D.D., was Provincial about 1465. He 
ceased from office in 1473, and died before 1478. 

(Palmer, p. 28, quoting Issue Roll, Pasch., 6 Edw. IV, m. 2 ; 
Acta iii. 268.) 
1473-83. John Pain, D.D. Elected in 1473. Appointed Bishop of 
Meath in 1383. He was Master of the Rolls in Ireland, and died 
May 6, 1506. Buried in the Dominican convent of St. Saviour, 

(Palmer, p. 29, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Bull. 0. Praed. iii. 648 ; 
Diet, of Nat. Biogr., s. v.) 
1483-95. William Richford,J).I>. Elected in 1483. Implicated in Stanley's 
conspiracy and condemned to death, but pardoned 1495. He died 
in 1501. 

(Palmer, p. 29, * Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Guildford Obits, p. 15 ; 
Baker's Chronicle, ed. Philips, 1660, 242 ; Acta iii. 374.) 
1495-1501. William Beeth, D.D. Succeeded Richford in 1495, and ruled 
the province till 1501. 

(Palmer, pp. 29, 30, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Dodd's Church 
History, ed. Brussels, 1737, vol. i, 234.) 
1501-5. Nicholas Stremer, D.D. Instituted Provincial by the Master- 
General, June 2, 1501. 
(Guildford Obits, p. 15.) 
1505. Robert Felmingham, D.D. Elected in 1505. 

(Palmer, p. 30, * Ex tab. Mag. Ord.') 
c. 1527. Robert Miles, D.D., Prior of King's Langley, was at the same time 
Provincial. He is mentioned as such in 1522 and 1527. A book 

^ John Paris, D.D., constituted Vicar-General in 1378, was continued in office 
during the Great Schism by the Master- General of the Avignon Obedience ; and 
in 1388 the same General declared John of Lancaster, D.D., to be the true English 
Provincial. The English Dominicans as a body adhered to the Roman Pontiif, and 
Paris and Lancaster both submitted (Acta ii. 3, 40). 


of prayers or Collectarium is still preserved which bears his name 
as Provincial at Woodchester Priory, Gloucestershire. 
(Palmer, p. 30, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.') 
1527-34. John Hodgkin, D.D. Elected in 1527. Deposed by Henry VIII 
in 1534, but reinstated 1536.^ He was consecrated Suffragan 
Bishop of Bedford in 1537, and lived till 1560. 

(Palmer, pp. 30-3, ' Ex tab. Mag. Gen.' ; Stubbs, Registr. 
Sacr. Angl, ed. 1897, p. 101.) 
1555-8. William Perin, D.D., was appointed Vicar-General in 1555, and 
also Prior of the Dominicans who were established by Queen 
Mary in St. Bartholomew's in Smithfield. Died Aug. 22, 1558, 
and buried in the church. 

(Palmer, Blackfriars of London, Merry England, Sept. 1889, 
p. 360 ; Diet, of Nat. Biogr., s. v.) 
1558-66. Richard Hargrave, D.D., succeeded Perin in 1558, but was driven 
into exile under Elizabeth. He died in Flanders, 1566. 
(Palmer, ihid., pp. 361-3.) 
c. 1579. Thomas Heshins, D.D., appears as Vicar-General about 1579, for 
Fulke, in reply to Heskins's Parliament of Christ, calls him 
Provincial or General of the English Dominicans. 

(Fulke, Heshins' s Parliament repealed, p. 393, ed. 1579 ; Diet, 
of Nat. Biogr., s. v.) 
It is not certain that there were any Vicars between the death of Heskins 

and 1622. 
1622-55. Thomas Middleton, alias Dade, B.D., was appointed Vicar 
General in 1622. He resigned in 1655. For many years he was 
a prisoner for the faith, first in the Clink and then in Newgate. 
Died in London, May 18, 1662. 

(Palmer, Obituary of the English Dominicans, ed. 1884, p. 2.) 

1655-61. George Catchmay, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General, Nov. 13, 1655, 

and resigned in 1661. Died at Bornhem in Flanders, July 12, 1669. 

(Palmer, ibid., p. 2.) 

1661-75. Phili'p Thomas Howard, D.D. Appointed in 1661. Created 

Cardinal Priest, May 27, 1675. Cardinal Protector of England 

and Scotland, 1684. Died at Rome, June 17, 1694, and buried 

in his titular church, S. Maria sopra Minerva. 

(Palmer, Life of Cardinal Howard, ed. 1868.) 

1675-87. Vincent Torre, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General in 1675. In 

1685 appointed Provincial. Died in office at Bornhem, Aug. 24, 

1687. His successors held the title of Provincial. 

(Palmer, Obit., p. 4.) 

1687-8. Dominic Gwillim (or Williams), B.D. Appointed 1687. Died 

Sept. 11, 1688. 

(Palmer, ibid., p. 4.) 

^ John Hilsey, D.D., prior of Bristol, and later bishop of Rochester, was appointed 
by Henry VIII in 1534 ; but as this was not confirmed by the Master- General, he 
cannot, according to the laws of the Order, be considered true Provincial {Letters 
and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. vii, no. 530 ; Diet, of Nat. 
Biogr., s. v.). 




1918 THE ENGLISH DOMINICANS, 1221-1916 249 

1688-94. Thomas White, D.D. Appointed Nov. 13, 1688. Died in office 

at Eome, Nov. 19, 1694. 
(Palmer, ibid., p. 5.) 
1694-5. William Collins, D.D. Vicar-General from Dec. to March. 

(Palmer, ibid., p. 6.) 
1695-7. Edward Bing, Preacher-General.^ Appointed March 8, 1695. 

Kesigned 1697. Died at Bornhem, Sept. 25, 1701. 
(Palmer, ibid., p. 7.) 
1698-1708. Ambrose Grymes or Graham, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General 

1698 and Provincial 1700.^ Reappointed 1704-8. Died at 

Louvain, Feb. 18, 1719. 
(Palmer, ibid., p. 9.) 
1708-12. Thomas Worihington, Lector in Sacred Theology. Appointed 

1708. Retired from office in 1712. He served three more terms 

as Provincial. 
1712-16. Thomas Dominic Williams, Lector in S. Theology. Appointed 

Feb. 28, 1712. 
1716-21. Raymund Greene, D.D. Appointed April 2, 1716, and held office 

till 1721. Died at Louvain, July 28, 1741. 
(Palmer, ibid., p. 12.) 
1721-5. Joseph Hansbie, Lector in S. Theology. Appointed June 20, 1721. 
1725. Thomas Dominic Williams, D.D. Appointed a second time, July 12, 

1725. Consecrated Bishop of Tiberiopolis by Pope Benedict XIII, 

O.P., Dec. 30. Nominated Vicar Apostolic of Northern District 

of England, June 7, 1727. Died Apr. 3, 1740, and buried at 

Hazelwood, Yorks. 
(Palmer, ' A consecrated life,' from MS. of Fr. Thomas Worth- 

ington, in Merry England, Nov. and Dec. 1887 ; Diet, of Nat. 

Biogr., s. v.) 
1726-30. Thomas Worthington, D.D. Reappointed Jan. 4, 1726. 
1730-4. Ambrose Burgis, D.D. Elected Provincial by the Chapter of the 

Province assembled at London, April 23, 1730. Hitherto the 

appointment had lain with the Master-General. 
1734-8. Jose'ph Hansbie, D.D. Elected for a second term. May 4, 1734. 
1738-42. ^?6eriiove«, Preacher-General. Elected April 24, 1738. Retired 

from office March 17, 1742, and died at London June 1. 
(Palmer, Obit., pp. 12, 13.) 
1742-6. Thomas Worthington, D.D. Elected for a third term. May 10, 1742. 
1746-7. Ambrose Burgis, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General in 1746. Died 

in office, April 27, 1747. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 13.) 
1747-8. Andrew Wynter, Preacher-General. Appointed Vicar-General 

1747 till the election of a Provincial the following year. Died at 

Louvain, March 19, 1754. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 15.) 

' Preacher-General is a title conferred on those who have distinguished themselves 
in preaching. It dates from the thirteenth century. 

8 The Provincials who succeeded Vincent Torre were appointed for a term of four 
years, for this was now the law in the Order. 


174&-50. Joseph Hanshie, D.D. Elected for a third term, April 6, 1848. 
Died in office at London, June 5, 1750. 
(Palmer, Obit., pp. 13, 14.) 
1750. John ClarJcson, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General July 25, 1750. 
1750-4. Thomas Worthington, D.D. Elected for a fourth term as Pro- 
vincial, Sept. 26, 1750. Died in office, Feb. 25, 1754. 
(Palmer, Obit., pp. 14, 15.) 
1754. John Clarhson, D.D. Appointed Vicar-General a second time, 

April 6, 1754. 
1754-8. Antoninus Hatton. Elected Provincial May 21, 1754. 
1758-62. John Clarhson, D.D. Elected May 5, 1758. Died at Brussels, 
March 26, 1763. 

(Palmer, Obit., p. 17.) 
1762-5. Stephen Catterell, Preacher- General. Elected May 5, 1762. Died 
in office at Stonecroft, Northumberland, Dec. 25, 1765. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 17.) 
1766.9 Benedict Short. Elected April 26, 1766. 

1770. Antoninus Hatton, D.D. Elected for a second term, May 7, 1770, 
Died at Stourton, Yorks., Oct. 23, 1783. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 18.) 
1774. Joseph Edwards, alias Tylecote, D.D. Elected April 25, 1774. Die 
at Hinckley, Leicestershire, Sept. 4, 1781. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 18.) 
1778. Benedict Short, D.D. Elected May 12, 1778, for the second time. 
1782. Peter Robson, B.D. Elected April 24, 1782. Died Feb. 4, 1788. 

(Palmer, Obit., p. 19.) 
1786. Benedict Short, D.D. Elected a third time, May 10, 1786. 
1790. Raymund BullocJc, Lector in S. Theology. Elected April 26, 1790. 
1794. Benedict Short, D.D. Elected for a fourth term, May 13, 1794 
Died May 30, 1800. 

(Palmer, Obit., pp. 20, 21.) 
1798. Raymund Bullock, D.D. Elected for a second time, May 1, 1798, 
Died June 25, 1819. 

(Palmer, Obit., pp. 23, 24.) 
1802. Anthony Plunkett, alias Underhill, D.D. Elected May 8, 1802. 
Died at York, Jan. 19, 1810. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 22.) 
1806. Pius Potier, D.D. Elected April 13, 1806. Re-elected April 13, 

1810. Francis Xavier Chappell, D.D. Elected May 14, 1810. Died at 
Bornhem, March 24, 1825. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 24.) 
1814. Lewis Brittain, D.D. Elected May 3, 1814. Died at Hartbury 
Court, Gloucester, May 3, 1827. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 25.) 
1818. Pius Potier, D.D. Elected for third time, April 13, 1818. Died at 
Hinckley, Nov. 18, 1846. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 27.) 

• In the remainder of this list, as the dates are continuous, the year of election 
only is given. 


1918 THE ENGLISH DOMINICANS, 1221-1916 261 

1822. Ambrose Woods, D.D. Elected Provincial April 30, 1822. Appointed 
Vicar-General May 17, 1826. Re-elected Provincial May 4, 1830. 
Died at Hinckley, Nov. 26, 1842. 
(Palmer, Obit., p. 26.) 
1834. Augustine Procter. Elected April 22, 1834. Re-elected Sept. 4 

1842. Thomas Nickolds, Lector in S. Theology. Elected 1838. 
1846. Augustine Procter, Preacher-General. Elected for a third term, 

May 4, 1846. 
1850. Dominic Aylward. Appointed July 20, 1850. 
1854. Thomas Nickolds, P.G., Lector in S. Theology. Re-elected 1854. 
1858. Augustine Procter, P.G. Elected a fourth time, April 28, 1858. 
Died Jan. 8, 1867. Buried at Woodchester, Gloucestershire. 
(Palmer, Obit., pp. 28, 29.) 
1862. Thomas Nickolds, D.D., P.G. Elected for a third term, 1866. Died 
at London, May 22, 1889. Buried at Woodchester. 
(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1866. Dominic Aylward, D.D. Re-elected July 4, 1866. Died at Hinckley, 
Oct. 5, 1872. Buried at Woodchester. 
(Palmer, Obit, p. 30.) 
1870. Vincent King, D.D. Elected 1870. Re-elected 1874 and 1878. 
Appointed Bishop of Juliopolis and Coadjutor of the Archbishop 
of Trinidad 1885. Died Feb. 26, 1886, at Louvain. Buried at 

(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1882. Antoninus Williams. Elected June 19, 1882. Died April 9, 1901. 
Buried at Woodchester. 
(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1886. Gregory Kelly, D.D. Elected May 18, 1886. Re-elected April 29, 
1890. Died at Hinckley, April 10, 1913. Buried at Hawkesyard 
Priory, Staffs. 
(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1894. John Procter, Lector in S. Theology. Elected April 17, 1894. 

Re-elected June 21, 1898. 
1902. Latvrence Shapcote, Lector in S. Theology. Elected April 22, 1902. 
Re-elected May 8, 1906. Resigned 1907. 
(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1907. John Procter, D.D. Elected a third time, Nov. 26, 1907. Died in 
office at London, Oct. 1, 1911. Buried at Woodchester. 
(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
1911. Humbert Everest, D.D. Elected Nov. 8, 1911. 

(Acta Cap. Prov.) 
19 J 6. Bede JarreU, M.A., Lector in S. Theology. Elected Sept. 5, 1916. 

252 April 

Reviews of Books 

Contributions toward a History of Arahico-Gothic Culture. By Leo Wiener. 
Vol. I. (New York : The Neale Publishing Company, 1917.) 

In the year 1915 Professor Wiener published a book (briefly noticed ia] 
this Review, xxxi. 174-5), in which he claimed to have demonstratedj 
that the Gothic Bible was translated not in the fourth century, but, 
at the earliest, near the end of the eighth, and that most of the words! 
which philologists have imagined to belong to the native Germanic vocabu- 
lary are really derived, with extraordinary changes in form and meaning, 
from Late Latin terms of law and designations of official rank. In his] 
preface the author intimated that these wonderful discoveries were onl] 
a small part of the marvels that had been revealed by his researches 
and he promised to show, in a future work, that the Gothic documents! 
of Naples and Arezzo are forgeries, that Gothic and the other Germanic] 
languages have more than two hundred words derived from Arabic, and 
that the whole system of Germanic mythology is of Arabian origin. 

The volume now before us is the first instalment of the fulfilmentJ 
of these magnificent promises. Of the two hundred ' Arabico-Gothic *j 
etymologies only a few specimens are given — ^an appetizing foretaste of what 
is yet to come. Among the English words in common use (mostly founc 
also in other Germanic languages) that are declared to be of Arabic ori^ 
are acorn, iron, beam (from baggam, sappan-wood), sea and its synonyi 
mere, brook, roof, oath, bold, and the verbs buy and sinJc. Hair, a wordl 
common to all the Germanic languages except Gothic, is from the Arabic 
word that has been anglicized as mohair. The Gothic words for hair, 
tagl and skuft, which occur with changed meaning in other Germanic 
tongues (the former is the English tail), are also from Arabic. Other 
English words, now obsolete or uncommon, for which an Arabic source 
has been discovered, are thorp (German dorf a village, Old Norse J^orp, 
a farm, a village, Gothic />aurp, dypos), which is asserted to be the same word 
as turf and to come from the Arabic turb, earth, soil ; the Anglo-Saxon bcBC, 
a brook (Old High German bah, modern bach) ; and the Anglo-Saxon denu, 
a valley, surviving in the many place-names ending in -den. In deriving 
the Anglo-Saxon seod, a purse (Old Norse sj63^r) from caid, ' what is taken, 
captured, a bag of game ', the author seems to have been misled by a lexi- 
cographer who ventured to use bag in the modern sportsman's sense, 
never dreaming that any one would understand it as ' pouch '. There 
are a good many more of these marvellous discoveries in the book, but 
we forbear. 


The received view with regard to the words above mentioned is that 
they represent prehistoric Germanic words which have undergone the 
regular divergent sound-changes which differentiated the original Germanic 
tongue into a number of separate languages. Professor Wiener is of 
another opinion. According to him the Spanish Visigoths, after a. d. 711, 
adopted a multitude of Arabic words, most of which somehow found 
their way from Visigothic into High and Low German, Anglo-Saxon, and 
Scandinavian. One would naturally inquire what mysterious attraction 
there can have been in these words, that most of them should have found 
acceptance alike in Germany, England, and the north, displacing the 
native synonyms— which from the nature of the meanings must have been 
in very common use. But in dreams such questions never give much 
trouble ; if they do suggest themselves a ready answer is always forth- 
coming. The author evidently sees no difficulty here, but he does find 
it necessary to bring down as late as possible the date of the first occurrence 
of the alleged loan-words in Old English and Old High German, and devotes 
much space to proving the spuriousness of documents that seem incon- 
veniently early. So far as the English records are concerned he might 
have spared his pains, for most of the impugned charters are notoriously 
either forgeries or modernized copies. After all he has to admit that 
dorf and bah do occur in High German place-names soon after a. d. 760, 
and become quite common about A. d. 772-4. Even if he supposes that 
the Goths adopted the Arabic words on the morrow of the fatal battle 
by the Guadalete, this leaves only half a century for them to become 
vernacular in distant Germany. The difficulty is ingeniously got over 
by asserting (unfortunately without evidence) that from about a.d. 760 
there were many emigrant Goths in the neighbourhoods to which the 
documents relate. 

The author propounds some new Latin etymologies of Gothic words, 
not less wonderful than those set forth in his former volume. Daupjan, 
to baptize (German taufen, Dutch doopen) comes from dealbare ; and 
from daupjan are derived the adjective deep (common to all the Germanic 
languages) and the verb to dip. Even more remarkable is the derivation 
of hlood from oblatum used as an epithet of the blood of Christ. After 
this it seems quite commonplace when we are told that shilling is the 
Eoman siliqua. With such powerful methods as he is able to employ. 
Professor Wiener need not despair of proving that all the reputed native 
Germanic words are either Latin or Arabic, and that until they came 
in contact with the Romans the Germanic tribes were in the condition 
of Homo alalus. 

Of Professor Wiener's promised revelation of the Arabic sources 
of Germanic mythology we have as yet only a small specimen. Woden 
is Wudd or Wadd, one of the deities of pre-Islamic heathenism. His 
consort Frig is not, indeed, an Arabian goddess, but her name * is apparently 
an Arabic word ' — either far' d'u, ' a woman having much hair ', oTfarrd'u, 
* a woman having beautiful front teeth '. It would be interesting to read 
Professor Wiener's version of the history of the names of the days of the 
week. The Arabic philology in this volume is sometimes peculiar ; it 
will not be generally admitted that the two feminine adjectives just 


quoted are from the same root, or that * 'iqitrahun, petition, grievance ' 
(it should be Hqtirdhun, the nomen actionis of the 8th conjugation of 
qaraha) is from iKtTrjpU. 

Notwithstanding the extensive use which the author makes of Latin 
documents, his knowledge of Latin does not seem to be very accurate. 
On p. 41 we read that * St. Augustine distinctly says that the abecedarian 
psalms of eight syllable lines were also in use in Latin and Punic, although 
not with that perfection as in Hebrew '. The original passage quoted in 
a foot-note says nothing about eight syllable lines. It merely says that 
in Psalm cxviii (cxix of the English Bible), as it stands in Hebrew, all 
the verses of each set of eight (omnes octonos versus) begin with the same 
letter (that is to say, verses 1-8 all begin with alefh, verses 9-16 with 
heihy and so on to the end of the alphabet), whereas in the Latin and Punic 
abecedarian psalms only the first verse of each section begins with the 
proper letter of the alphabet. Professor Wiener goes on to state that 
St. Augustine says that * the Hebrew rhymes were more perfect ' (than 
those of the Latin and Punic psalms). St. Augustine was ignorant of 
Hebrew, but he did not make the blunder of attributing rhyme to the 
abecedarian psalms. 

In presenting his etymological discoveries Professor Wiener abstains 
from argument. His conclusions, he seems to think, must be self-evident 
to every well-regulated mind. The favourite word ' obviously ' con- 
stantly recurs in connexion with statements that most people will consider 
incredible. But he does offer arguments, some of them curiously ingenious, 
in favour of his remarkable theory that the Naples and Arezzo documents 
were fabricated in the eighth century by Spanish Visigoths resident in 
Italy. The accepted views on the subject, however, are in no danger of 
being overthrown. As Massmann's Frahauhtabokos is not accessible to 
every one, we may be doing a service to some scholars by mentioning 
that the full text of the Naples document is reprinted in this volume. 

Professor Wiener devotes many pages to the Hisperica Famina and 
the kindred group of writings. All these works he asserts to have 
been written in Spain near the end of the eighth century, and to show 
abundant traces of Arabic influence. There is great uncertainty about 
the date and place of origin of these curious compositions, except perhaps 
the Lorica, so that there is plenty of room for a new theory ; but it may 
safely be predicted that Professor Wiener's views will find no acceptance 
among scholars. On the other hand, he really has made out a strong 
case for Arabic influence on the writings of the grammarian ' Virgilius 
Maro ', which (agreeing for once with the received opinion) he refers to 
Southern Gaul. Three of the names of classes of metres mentioned by 
* Virgilius ', longUy extensa, and mederia, do strikingly resemble the tawll 
(long), madid (extended), and muddri'^ of Arabian metrists. This is an 
excellent point, and some of the other arguments in this chapter are at 
least plausible. But what are we to say, for instance, of the statement 
* The Arabic word is c.Lu, but Professor Wiener gives it as « Ij^ — a significant 

double blunder. The confusion between hamza and ^ain occurs in several other 
places, and the a of tmoU is miswritten as a both in Arabic characters and in trans- 



that the eccentric numerals given by * Virgilius ' are ' obvious deteriora 
tions ' of the strange words 2 which Pseudo-Boethius attaches to the ten 
digits of the Indian notation ? The two series are as follows : 

Boethiua: 1 igin, 2 andras, 3 ormis. 4 arbas, 5 quinas, 6 calctis, 7 zenis 
8 temenias, 9 celentis, sipos. * 

Virgiliu8 : 1 imin, 2 dun, 3 tor, 4 quir, 5 quan, 6 ses, 7 aem, 8 onx, 9 amin 
10 pie. 

What will be ' obvious ' to any normally constituted mind is that seven 
out of the ten words in the lower row are distortions of the Latin numerals ; 
and I Virgilius ' himself has some claim to be believed when he says that 
pie, ' ten ', is derived from plenitudo. It is only the 5 and the 7 that 
have any likeness to the corresponding words in the Pseudo-Boethius. 
The letter of Aldhelm to Ehfrid, if genuine, proves that ' Virgilius Maro * 
was already known in the seventh century. Of course Professor Wiener 
denounces the letter as a forgery. His arguments, if the early date of 
* Virgilius ' were certain, would not be convincing ; but there is, at any 
rate, sufficient ground for doubt to render desirable a thorough in- 
vestigation, which would probably contribute to the solution of more 
than one interesting problem. 

The volume is extremely amusing, not less by its cleverness than by its 
absurdities, and it contains some quotations and references that may be 
found useful. The chapter on ' Virgilius Maro ' is, as we have gladly 
acknowledged, not destitute of value, and possibly there may be a few 
other instances in which Professor Wiener's unquestionable acuteness and 
industry have not been misapplied. But as a whole the work is a mass 
of wild extravagance, compared with which the writings of Mr. Ignatius 
Donnelly are models of sane and judicious reasoning. Happily for the 
credit of American scholarship this book is not, as was the author's 
former volume, published by the Harvard University Press. 

Henry Bradley. 

The Golden Days of the Early English Church. By Sir Henry H. Howorth. 
(London : John Murray, 1917.) 

The period which Sir Henry Howorth has described under this title extends 
from 633 to 735. In ecclesiastical history the chief interest of these years 
lies in the establishment of metropolitical authority in England by Arch- 
bishops Theodore and Berhtwald : a new phase begins with the grant of 
the pallium to Bishop Ecgberht of York in the latter year. In general 
history the year 735 is of no particular significance. It falls in the middle 
of the reign of ^thelbald of Mercia, and a narrative ended at this point 
cannot describe what is the most remarkable feature of the eighth century 
in England, the development of the power of the Mercian kings. For the 
illustration of the period he has chosen Sir Henry Howorth has brought 

" Professor Wiener is right in saying that arhas and temenias are Semitic. We may 
add that andras looks like the High German ordinal, and that igin, ormis, and celentis 
strangely resemble the Magyar egyen, harmas, and kilenczes, while quinas may very well 
be Latin, and sipos the Arabic ^ifr (whence our cipher). If these coincidences be not 
accidental there remain only calctis and ze7iis to be explained as arbitrary inventions. 


together a great body of material, legal and archaeological as well as literary, 
and has supplemented the narrative of Bede by constant reference to other 
and less familiar sources of information.^ Probably no one has ever sought 
more widely for facts which bear upon the history of this obscure age. 
Nevertheless the age remains obscure, and it may be doubted whether 
the criticism of authorities is sufficiently advanced to justify the trenchant 
judgements which Sir Henry Howorth passes upon the characters who 
appear in his story. 

Sometimes this new material invites a revision of accepted judgements 
which Sir Henry Howorth does not supply. Like other writers he quotes 
from the letters of St. Boniface the familiar passage in which the vices of 
King Osred of Northumbria and his invasion of monastic privilege are 
described. If this were all that is known of Osred it would perhaps be 
just to dismiss him with simple reprobation, as he is dismissed in the 
present book. But Sir Henry Howorth cites at length the verses in which 
the character of this king was described in the early ninth century by 
jEthelwulf in his poem De Ahhatihus : 

Exstitit a primis sed non moderatus in annis, 
Indocilis iuvenis, nescit sensusque petuloos 
Subcurvare animo, contemnens iura Tonantis, 
Armipotens nimiuin, propriis in viribus audax. 
Non proceres veneratus erat ; non denique Christum, 
Ut decuit, colnit ; vacuis sed subdidit omnem 
Actibus, heu ! vitam, mansit cum corpore vita. 
Inde fuit, praesens parvo quod tempore saeclum 
Manserat, atque diu potuit non ducere vitam. 
Hie igitur multos miseranda morte peremit, 
Ast alios cogit summo servire Parenti, 
Inque monasterii attonsos consistere saeptis.^ 

The verses are execrable : it is with good reason that ^thelwulf elsewhere 
describes himself as vilis per omnia scriptor. But they create the impression 
of a young, spirited, and warlike king, formidable to his nobles and by no 
means amenable to the religious — a king who might if he had lived have 
averted the anarchy into which the Northumbrian kingdom was destined 
to fall. Also, while there is no reason to question the substantial accuracy 
of St. Boniface's description of Osred's vices, a protest should certainly 
be made against Sir Henry Howorth's suggestion that Wilfrid, Osred's 
guardian, * who had suffered so much at the hands of the Northumbrians 
for many years, should also have revenged himself upon them by allowing 
the boy who was his protege to become a reprobate ' (ii. 504). For this 

1 In his references to the Vita Sancti Guthlaci of Felix Sir Henry Howorth does not 
adhere to the early texts of this work made accessible by Dr. Birch in the Memorials of 
Saint Guthlac. The saint's father was named Penwalh, not Penwald ; his mother's name 
should be given in the feminine form Tette, not in the Latinized form Tetta ; the abbess 
who sent him his leaden coffin was called Ecgburh, not Eadburh, The early manu- 
scripts agree in recording the dedication of the Vita to a King JSlfwald who can only 
be the East Anglian king of that name who died in 749. In his Introduction (p. cxi) 
Sir Henry Howorth rightly accepts this dedication, but in his second volume (p. 407), 
following an unfortunate suggestion by Mr. Plummer, he states that the work was 
dedicated to ^thelbald of Mercia. 

• Printed in T. Arnold's edition of Symeon of Durham (Rolls Series), i. 268. 


innuendo there is not the slightest evidence, and it is refuted by ail that 
is known of Wilfrid's character. There is no need to invent an immoral 
tutor in order to explain the irregular life of a young eighth-century 

In the course of a long introduction Sir Henry Howorth has discussed 
in much detail the charters which come or purport to come from the sixty 
years preceding the death of Bede. If in this respect his work is an advance 
upon other recent attempts to write the history of this period it cannot 
be said that he has appreciated the principles which should govern the 
treatment of diplomatic evidence. For one thing he continually applies 
to transcripts of charters methods of criticism which are only valid in 
relation to documents which purport to be original. If no authentic 
charter written before the year 725 ^ is dated by the annus Domini nothing 
is more natural than that a copyist should insert an incarnation year in 
a document dated only by the indiction. It is also unfortunate that Sir 
Henry Howorth has taken no account of such recent critical work as has 
been done upon the charters of this age, for this neglect has involved his 
rejection of many documents which present notes of authenticity only 
to be perceived by the application of diplomatic tests. The presence in 
the transcript of a charter of formulas known to have been employed by 
contemporary draughtsmen raises at once a presumption of genuineness 
sufficient to outweigh very serious difficulties of subject-matter. It is, 
for example, formulary tests which suggest that a genuine basis underlies 
most of the early diplomas which come from St. Augustine's, Canterbury. 
Evidence of this sort is often reinforced by the persistence into late copies 
of the early forms of pergonal names written in the original document. 
Sir Henry Howorth devotes six pages of his introduction* to the detailed 
rejection of twelve charters which bear witness to the existence of a seventh - 
century king of the Hwiccas named Oshere. A thirteenth charter,^ not 
cited by Sir Henry Howorth, by which ^thelbald of Mercia grants land 
to iEthelric filio quondam Huuicciorum regis Oosheraes, is proved authentic 
quite conclusively by this combination of early formulas with early name 
forms.6 There is, indeed, no need of diplomatic discussion to show the 
spuriousness of a high proportion of the first two hundred charters in the 
Cartularium Saxonicum ; many of these documents are forgeries so flagrant 
that they can hardly have been ever intended seriously to deceive. But 
Kemble's indiscriminate asterisks should no longer be allowed to prejudge 
the authenticity of early texts. 

It should be added that we do not know enough about the details of 
seventh and early eighth century history to reject without independent 
cause charters which refer to persons of high rank who are otherwise 

3 Throughout his discussion of charters Sir Henry Howorth follows Kemble upon 
this point. The recent demonstration by the Editor of this Eovicw that the year of 
grace might have been introduced into English documents at any time after 664 
{ante, pp. 60 ff.) frees a number of early texts from the suspicion of interpolation. 

* pp. clviii-clxiv. ' (^art. Sax., no. 157. 

« Sir Henry Howorth expresses great doubts about the authenticity of Cart. Sax., 
no. 81 (Cotton MS. Aug. ii. 29), a document written in uncials. The criticism of thie 
charter is a difficult work, but the evidence of its handwriting, if not in itself con- 
clusive, is supported by the succession of early formulas by which its text is composed. 



unknown. We are not entitled to condemn the Kentish texts printed in 
the Cartularium as nos. 35, 40, and 73, simply because they are composed 
in the name of a King Oswine of whom there is no other record.' The 
King Nothhelm who makes a grant in Sussex to his sister Nothgyth in 
a charter which includes primitive formulas is not convincingly explained 
away as bearing a name ' apparently . . . borrowed from that of Bede's 
correspondent at Canterbury '.^ The kings Nunna and Watt who are 
associated in this charter with Nothhelm bear names which are not 
otherwise recorded independently, but belong to well attested types of 
Old English name-formation.^ The pointless invention of royal names is 
not in keeping with the practical motive of supplying a defective title to 
lands or immunities which incited most forgers of diplomas to their evil 
work. Even less consistent with this motive is the invention of place- 
names which could not have been identified in the age of the hypothetical 
forgery. There is no intelligible reason why the monks of Abingdon in 
the twelfth century should forge a charter of Ine granting to Heaha the 
patrician and to Ceolswyth lands at Bradfield, ' Bestle8ford,'and Streatley.^* 
No land in this neighbourhood was claimed by the abbey at any later time. 
And if the identity of the Bestlesford of the charter with the modern 
Basildon may be argued from the fact that each of these names is com- 
pounded with the same unique Old English personal name, it certainly 
does not follow that this argument would have been admitted by a twelfth- 
century judge. 

Nor is an incidental inconsistency of statement in itself sufficient 
reason for the rejection of an early diploma. The charter by which 
iEthelred of Mercia grants land at Fladbury to Bishop Oftfor of Worcester 
for the absolution of the sins of Osthryth, formerly the king's wife, is con- 
demned by Sir Henry Howorth on the ground that Osthryth died in 697 
while the bishop was already dead in 692.^^ That Osthryth was murdered 
in 697 we know from Bede, but for the attribution of Oftfor's death to 
692 there is no earlier authority than Florence of Worcester. As an 
abstract of the Fladbury charter is entered in the Worcester cartulary 
of c. 1000,^2 while an early if not the original text of the charter itself was 
once in the possession of Lord Somers, its testimony altogether supersedes 
the unsupported statement of Florence as to the date of Oftfor's death. 
In other cases the inconsistency may be resolved by external evidence. 
The Shaftesbury Register contains a charter of one Coinred, to whom no 
title is given, granting thirty manentes on the north of the River Fontmell 

' ^ggQ. 3. mnvner^The Black Bookof St. Augustine's, intTodi.,]}. xxiv. ^W 

^ Introduction, pp. cxlviii, cxlix ; Cart. Sax., no. 78. * • 

" The Yorkshire place-name Nunnington probably contains an Old English 
Nunna (D. B. Nunningetune) ; the Northamptonshire Nunton may also be compared 
{Cart. Sax., no. 1128 of Nunnetune). The feminine Nunne occurs in the Liber Vitae 
of Durham (Sweet, Oldest English Texts, p. 559). 

*• Introduction, p. cxlvi. In my Early History of the Abbey of Abingdon I have 
argued that if this grant is in substance authentic the process by which the other and 
spurious texts connected with the origin of this house were fabricated becomes 

" Cart. Sax., no. 76. Cf. Introduction, p. clvi. 

" Hist. MSS. Comm., Wollaton Report, pp. 199-200. 


to the abbot Bectun.^^ g^j, Henry Howorth rejects this text because, 
while it defines the estate as bounded on the south by the land of Bishop 
Leutheri of blessed memory, it is nevertheless attested by the bishop 
himself. This inconsistency disappears when it is observed that the text 
which follows in the same cartulary is a statement by Bishop Cyneheard 
of Winchester to the effect that he has composed the former charter afresh 
in order to end a dispute which had arisen between the abbots Tidbeald 
and Ecgweald.^* Moreover, the form Coinred belongs to the early part of 
the eighth century at latest, and the definition of a site by reference to 
the name of a neighbouring river is characteristic of early diplomas.^^ 
In view of these facts it is reasonable to accept the charter as representing 
an authentic original, and if, as is probable, the Coinred of this text 
should be identified with the man of that name who was Ine's father, we 
obtain a new piece of evidence as to the region in which the branch of the 
West Saxon house to which Ine belonged was seated. 

The ungrammatical, barely intelligible, texts which present the greatest 
difficulty to the modern student are precisely those which deserve the most 
careful scrutiny before their condemnation, for their rejection on inadequate 
grounds imposes an unnecessary labour of rehabilitation on later scholars. 
It is true that a just estimate of the value of the earliest English diplomas 
can only be founded on a survey in detail of the development of pre- 
Conquest charter formulas, and that no one has yet published the results 
of such a survey as a whole. But Sir Henry Howorth has not always 
availed himself of the work of scholars in fields where the preliminary 
labour has been carried out. After the publication of Professor Lieber- 
mann's edition of the Gesetze it is unprofitable to express doubts as to the 
authenticity of Ine's laws, or to reject those of Wihtred. References to 
the pseudo-Asser imply a point of view which has been obsolete since 1904, 
and few students would now deny the existence of a basis of authentic 
tradition in the sections of the Chronicle relating to the years covered by 
the Historia Ecclesiastica. The materials for the reconstruction of early 
English history are sadly insufficient, but they are both more numerous 
and of better quality than Sir Henry Howorth would have us believe. 

The introductory pages which discuss' these materials form the most 
important section of Sir Henry Howorth's work. After its publication 
it may be hoped that no one will again write a detailed history of this 
period without reference to diplomatic sources of information, though it 
may be doubted whether Sir Henry Howorth's judgement of individual texts 
is likely to find permanent acceptance. We may have long to wait for 
an Anglo-Saxon history in which all the available evidence is combined 
as the basis of a narrative. The demonstration of the variety of this 
evidence is the chief merit of the present book. Its criticism awaits the 
co-operation of many hands. F. M. Stenton. 

" Cart. Sax., no. 107. 

" Cart. Sax., no. 186. Sir Henry Howorth refers to this second text as a deed of 
King Cynewulf (Introduction, p. clxxi), but it is draftedj;in the bishop's name, who 
associates the king with himself in the reconciliation of the contesting parties. 

" E. g. Cart. Sax., nos. 57, 148, 154, 157, 182. 

S 2 


Histoirefeodale des Marais, Territoire et Eglise de Dol. Par Jean Allenou. 
(Paris : Champion, 1917.) 

This little treatise is devoted to a document of great interest to Breton 
antiquaries, the sworn inquest into the rights of the episcopal (pseudo- 
archiepiscopal) church of Dol, made in October 1181, by command of 
Henry 11 and his son Geoffrey, styled therein comes Britannie. M. Duine, 
who contributes the excellent historical introduction, explains that it 
is published as a tribute to the memory of the young Breton scholar 
who, after being trained ' aux vraies methodes ' of historical and institu- 
tional research, was devoting himself to their application to the records of 
his own district when cut off by an early death. He appears to have been 
of a type too rare among our own provincial antiquaries, for the combination 
of local knowledge with such a specialist training as is given by the ]ficole 
des Chartes is not easy to attain in this country. Its advantage is seen in 
the careful reconstruction and editing of this document, for which no 
primary source exists. MM. AUenou and Duine found its chief interest 
in the mention of local places and persons at so early a date, but for us it 
is rather to be sought in the method of taking the inquest and in its com- 
parison with those in use in Normandy and among ourselves.^ Sworn oral 
evidence was taken, in each locality, from parish priests, knights, an abbot, 
monks, legates antiqui homines, the burgesses of Dol, and even from a 
woman. In one case two knights and fifteen elders (antiqui homines), 
and in another two priests, two knights, and ten alii antiqui homines give 
their evidence jointly, as do two canons, nineteen priests, and three deacons, 
on the alienation of his church's property by ' Archbishop ' Ginguene 
(c. 1008-39) and ' Archbishop ' Juhel, his successor, a very important 
matter. Evidently, hearsay evidence was accepted ; the first witness and 
the second * hec omnia audiverunt testari ... a tempore Baldrici archie- 
piscopi ', which seems to be rather doubtfully rendered ' les ont entendu 
dire {sic) depuis (sic) le temps que Baudry ', &c. The third witness ' dixit 
quod audivit ex patris sui confessione quod ', &c. Here the rendering 
is again * qu'il avait entendu dire a son pere ', though the Latin is rather 
different. It was again on hearsay (ex communi relatione antiquorum) that 
a monk of Tronchet relied for facts which he stated. 

The historical introduction brings out several points of interest, 
especially with regard to the bishop's vidames, the lords of Dol-Combourg. 
In the inquest the first of these is alleged to have been a brother of ' Arch- 
bishop ' Ginguene, who built for him the castle of Combourg and carved 
for him, out of his see's domains, a fief of twelve knights' fees. It was one 
of this line who held Dol against William and Harold, in the expedition 
depicted on the Bayeux tapestry. John, last of the line, who died in 1162, 
handed over the tower of Dol to Henry II, but left a daughter Yseult, 
whose husband, Hasculf de Soligne, was holding the fief at the time of 
the inquest of 1181, and their son John went over to the French party 
in the duchy. Norman influence had been responsible for the election of 
Roland the sub-deacon (cardinal in 1184) who visited Scotland as papal 
legate in 1182, and who is named as Dolensis electus in the inquest, which 

* Cf. Haskins, Norman Institutions (1918), ch. vi, ' The early Norman jury '. 


Henry II is alleged to have ordered at his request. Of peculiar interest 
to ourselves is the fact that the seneschals or stewards {dapiferi) of Dol were 
the direct ancestors of our royal Stewarts in the male line, as I have else- 
where shown.2 Of this there is no mention in the treatise, though the Dol 
line of the house is traced down to its heiress. Under 'Families Dolo- 
Anglaises ' we read only of the early lords of Monmouth, with whom also 
I have dealt among ' the little group of Dol families ' who settled in 
England.^ As with so many French publications, this treatise has a valu- 
able bibliography (pp. 22-31), though my own Calendar of Documents y 
which has been freely drawn upon, is unfortunately assigned to the ' collec- 
tion du master of the rolls '. The index is excellent. J. H. Round. 

Magna Carta Commemoration Essays. Edited by H. E. Malden, M.A. 
(London : Royal Historical Society, 1917.) 

Of the nine essays comprised in this little volume six are concerned more 
or less directly with the contemporary meaning and history of the Great 
Charter, and the rest with its subsequent history and influence. 

The current controversy over the real character of Magna Carta is 
reviewed on somewhat different lines by Sir Paul Vinogradoff and Professor 
Powicke in two papers on the crucial clause 39, Nullus liber homo ca'piatur, 
&c. They agree in rejecting the extreme feudal interpretation adopted by 
Professor G. B. Adams, which narrows down the phrase liber homo to the 
baron or tenant-in-chief. Both regard all freeholders as sharing in the 
protection given by this clause, but they differ seriously as to the meaning 
of the old stumbling-block, per legale indicium farium suorum vel per 
legem terras ; and while Mr. Powicke's essay is a full answer to Mr. Adams's 
contention, Sir Paul Vinogradoff's main concern is to show how the clause 
in question soon received the broader interpretation which removed its 
feudal limitations. These limitations seem more serious to him than to 
Mr. Powicke because he accepts the * feudalist ' explanation of vel per 
legem terrae, though he rejects their interpretation of liber homo. It is 
' quite clear ', he holds, that vel was employed in a conjunctive and 
not in a disjunctive sense, and he * entirely agrees with Mr. Adams 
that the only sense in which these words can be construed is that of an 
assertion of legality '.^ In other words, what was conceded by clause 39 
was trial by the peers of the accused, and this was granted not merely 
to tenants-in-chief, as Mr. Adams holds, but to all libere tenentes. Such 
a construction of vel goes far beyond the original suggestion of Mait- 
land that it was used sub-disjunctively here, and left open the question 
whether the law of the land always required trial by peers. The point is 
of much more than verbal importance, for if the ' conjunctive ' interpre- 
tation is right the barons of 1215 are convicted of aiming a much less 

^ Studies in Peerage and Family Histoiy, pp. vii, 120-30. 

=» Ibid., pp. 120-3. I there suggested as a possibility that the Butlers of Ireland 
might be descended from the feudal butlers of Dol. 

^ This, he adds strangely, was amplified in some of the confirmations by the ex- 
pression ' legale iudicium '. Of course the expression occurs in Magna Carta itself, 
though not in the Articles of the Barons. 


justifiable blow at Henry II's judicial work than they struck in the 
prohibition of the writ Praecipe. 

In support of his construction of the disputed phrase, Sir Paul Vino- 
gradoif adduces (1) the per legem regni nostri vel per iudicium parium suorum 
in curia nostra of the writ of 10 May 1215, in which John had already 
provisionally offered to the barons {and their men) the precise protection 
given in c. 39, pending a general settlement by a joint committee under the 
presidency of the pope ; (2) the pope's reminder to the barons (24 August) 
that John had offered to do them justice in curia sua per pares vestros, 
secundum consuetudines et leges regni. The latter is described as an 
* authoritative interpretation '. but, unfortunately for this view, the words 
do not refer to suits before the king's court, but to a general reference of 
the petitions of the barons to its decision. This is clearly put by Mr. Adams 
himself in his essay on ' Innocent III and the Great Charter ' (p. 33). As for 
the wording of the writ of 10 May, the reversed order of the two phrases 
connected by vel seems in itself to throw doubt on an interpretation of 
c. 39, which puts the whole emphasis on the iudicium parium^ while the 
limitation of this judgement of peers to the king's court ^ surely requires 
the mention of some other form of legal trial in the case of the homines 
of the barons. The extreme feudal interpretation of c. 39 seems therefore 
to obtain no support, to say the least, from the wording of the writ of 
10 May. 

Returning to the clause itself, it is impossible not to agree with 
Mr. Powicke on the extreme improbability that vel is used conjunctively in 
this pas.^age alone out of some sixty in which it occurs in Magna Carta. He 
has no difficulty, too, in showing that after as before 1215 ' judgement of 
peers ' was by no means the only form of trial even for barons, nor was it 
always the form they preferred. On the other hand, Sir Paul Vinogradoff 
can only produce one case, and that clearly exceptional, in which any one 
below the highest rank of the baronage claimed the judgement of his peers, 
and his theory of the substitution of the verdict of a jury for such a judge- 
ment hardly seems called for. 

If, however, c. 39 did not concede iudicium parium in every case, 
and vel was more or less disjunctive, in what sense could trial by peers 
be described as an alternative to the law of the land ? As an ultimate 
resort in exceptional cases, says Mr. Powicke, a special protection against 
the arbitrary power of the Crown, something superimposed on the ordinary 
law of the land rather than a rigid alternative to it. The distinction may 
sound over refined, but we can perhaps compare the later use of lex terrae 
(la ley de la terre) for the common law as contrasted not only with local ^ 
and sectional law, but with statute law {ley especial) which is clearly 
brought out by Professor Mcllwain in his essay on ' Magna Carta and the 
Common Law '. The parallel would be even more suggestive if in curia 

^ Sir P. Vinogradoff' s suggestion that the omission of m curia nostra in Magna 
Carta was due to the wish of the barons to extend the indicium parium to their own 
courts is hardly consistent with the presence of these words in the Articles of the 
Barons (25, in cases of disseisin 1154-99). 

^ For this reason it may be doubted whether Mr. Powicke is right in bringing 
' varieties of local customs ' under the phrase in c. 39. 


nostra was understood after iudicium parium in c. 39, and the right to 
this form of trial in certain cases was limited to tenants-in-chief, or, as in 
the matter of amercement (c. 21), to earls and barons. 

The two scholars, whose interpretations of c. 39 we have been con- 
sidering, do not seem to differ very widely as to its actual effect in stimu- 
lating resort to a judgement of peers, but their divergence on the meaning 
of the little word vel is vital for the question of the aims of the baronage 
of 1215. It means all the difference between a reactionary attempt to 
reverse the judicial progress of half a century, and a constitutional effort 
to secure adequate protection against abuse of prerogative. 

The third paper which is devoted to the interpretation of the text of 
the Charter does not raise such controversial issues, but it is calculated 
to flutter academic dovecotes. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that 
almost every page of Mr. Round's ' Barons and Knights in the Great 
Charter' upsets some commonplace of the constitutional historians. 
A few of the outstanding ones may be strung together, as they often have 
been in lectures : (1) The tenants-in-chief who composed the Commune 
Concilium as defined in c. 14 of the Charter were either maiores or minores 
barones, who were respectively summoned by special writ and by general 
writ through the sheriffs ; (2) the maiores barones, and they only from 
1215, paid a relief of £100, being identical with the ' barons ' of c. 2 which 
regulated reliefs ; (3) the minores barones were identical with the knights 
of c. 2, who were tenants-in-chief and paid a relief of £5 per fee ; (4) the 
greater barons paid their reliefs direct to the Crown, the lesser barons or 
knights to the sheriff ; (5) when knights ceased to attend the Commune 
Concilium or Parliamentum in the course of the thirteenth century they 
were replaced by representative knights. 

Mr. Round shows beyond possibility of doubt that every one of these 
statements is either wholly or partially erroneous. The root error has been 
the failure to see that the line of division in c. 2 is not the same as in c. 14 
but lower, being drawn under the class of barons, while in c. 14 it is drawn 
through that class, leaving in the lower division not merely knights but 
minores barones above them, and tenants-in-chief by serjeanty and socage 
below them. Stubbs recognizes this in one passage of his first volume, but 
elsewhere shares the general confusion of cc. 2 and 14 of the Charter, and 
allows himself to be misled by Gneist into the statement, totally opposed 
to fact, that the lesser tenants-in-chief paid their reliefs to the sheriff ; a 
mistake due to the unjustifiable extension to the whole country of a custom 
of the ' Danish ' counties of Yorkshire, Notts, and Derby recorded in 
Domesday Book. Two remarkable and unexpected results are elicited by 
Mr. Round's investigation of the reliefs and fines of land actually paid by 
tenants-in-chief : first, that while the holder of a single knight'.s fee from 
the Crown paid a relief of £5 only, a holding of two knights' fees was 
reckoned a barony and paid £100, or conceivably even more before 1215 ; 
secondly, that the extortionate reliefs and fines, of which John has had to 
bear the sole discredit, were already exacted by Henry II. 

In the essay on ' Innocent III and the Great Charter ' Professor Adams 
comes to the conclusion that the pope condemned the Charter not as the 
feudal suzerain of England, but solely in virtue of his ecclesiastical rights. 


The matter is obscure, and the operative words of the bull of 24 August 
1215 certainly contain no reference to the feudal relationship, though 
John's appeals to the iudicium enjoyed by the pope rations dominii are 
recorded in the historical retrospect. Perhaps, as Mr. Adams suggests, 
the difficulties in the way of constituting a lay court of peers for the trial 
of John's appeal were deterrent. However this may be, the words nos 
qui tarn regi quam regno tenemur et sfiritualiter et temporaliter providers, 
with which Innocent introduces his injunction to the barons (25 August) 
to renounce the Charter, are hardly consistent with an intention of resting 
his intervention on a purely ecclesiastical basis. Nor is it quite so clear 
as Mr. Adams assumes that the Charter contained nothing which seriously 
affected John's ability to pay the annual sum which was his service for 
his fief, and so could not call into action the recognized feudal principle 
that anything which might have that effect required the consent of the lord. 
The case could not arise on the financial clauses of the Charter, but it 
might have been raised on the securities clause (61) which contemplated 
the possibility of legalized civil war. 

A knowledge of Spanish constitutional precedents was hypothetically 
attributed to the barons who drew up the Great Charter by Mariehelar 
and Manrique in their Historia de la legislacion de Espana (1861). No 
support for this hypothesis is found by Professor Eaphael Altamira in his 
article on' Magna Carta and Spanish Mediaeval Jurisprudence ', but many 
interesting feudal and constitutional parallelisms in Spanish and English 
development are brought together, as well as some striking divergencies. 

The importance of the financial necessities of the Crown in the struggle 
with the baronage has perhaps not yet been fully realized, and Mr. Hilary 
Jenkinson makes a very useful contribution to the study of the charter of 
liberties by calling attention to the neglected ' Financial Eecords of the 
reign of King John ', and making their extent and nature very clear to 
the future student of the finance of this critical period.* Mr. Jenkinson 
finds no evidence of administrative control over the king's disposal of 
such revenues as he had, and he is inclined to suggest that the * very 
powerful administrative brain ' which these documents seem to reveal at 
work was John's. 

In view of the distinction generally made in the thirteenth and four- 
teenth centuries between the common law and enactment or statutory 
law, a question of much legal and constitutional interest is raised by the 
fact that the Great Charter was placed in both categories. Edward I, in 
the Confirmation of the Charters, ordered it to be observed ' cume ley 
commune' ; yet Bracton, using his civilian term for enactment, had already 
described it as constitutio lihertatis, and it was referred to in a suit of 1291 
as statutum de Ronemede. The resolution of this apparent contradiction 
leads Professor Mcllwain into a valuable inquiry into the medieval con- 
ception of law and legislation, the results of which are useful to others than 
students of Magna Carta, correcting, for instance, the current definition of 

* He seems to be justified in challenging Mr. Poole's suggestion {The Exchequer 
in the Twelfth Century, pp. 119 ff.) that Master Thomas Brown and the archdeacon of 
Poitou in Henry II's time were the predecessors of the king's and lord treasurer's 



ordinance by showing that it was not necessarily passed by the king, or 
the king in council, only, and pointing out that the real distinction between 
ordinance and statute was that the latter was intended ferpetuelment a 
durer. Statutes, however, were in a sense less permanent than the common 
law, which was mainly ancient custom, for statutes could be repealed, 
especially if they were found to violate the common law, which they were 
originally supposed to affirm and amend. But Magna Carta, though 
regarded as a statute, because it was granted by the king with the advice 
and consent of his barons, was not repealable like other statutes, for the 
reason that it embodied such a mass of ancient custom as to be considered 
part of the common law. The common law might be amended or 
added to, but not repealed. After 1225, indeed, no further change was 
admitted into the text of the Charter itself, and this, with the numerous 
confirmations of it by parliament in the thirteenth and fourteenth cen- 
turies, makes it, as Mr. Mcllwain remarks, a closer approach to the ' funda- 
mental law ' or ' written constitution ' than English writers have been 
willing to see in our medieval institutions. 

The superiority of the Great Charter to other statutes in this respect 
may be admitted without accepting the interpretation that Mr. Mcllwain 
puts upon two words in a petition of the commons in 15 Edward III. 
After mentioning the Charter and its confirmations, the petition proceeds : 

* Et puis molt des autres Ordinances et Statutz faitz pur profit du com- 
mune people entendant les pointz de la dite Chartre,' etc. (p. 173). ' Puis 
molt ' has surely no reference to the inferiority of ordinances and statutes 
to the Charter, but must be taken closely with the words that follow : 

* and afterwards many other ordinances,' «fec. Two other corrections that 
seem to be needed in Mr. Mcllwain's article may be noted here. The 
complaint against the sheriffs of London in 1286 for violating Magna 
Carta was not, as stated on p. 174, grounded on their refusal oi judgement 
by peers but of afeerment by peers, quite a different thing. The real 
interest of the record in the Liber Custumarum is that it shows a right 
which was only asserted for earls and barons in the Charter (c. 21) being 
claimed generally. On p. 144 again the writer of the article takes the old 
view of the action of the communitas hacheleriae Angliae in 1259, as that 
of the knightly class in the counties, obviously in ignorance of Professor 
Tout's article in this Review ^ giving evidence that this communitas was 

* no more than a chance number of rash young gentlemen '. 

In the address on the character and influence of the Great Charter, 
delivered in June 1915 to the Royal Historical Society and the Magna 
Carta Commemoration Committee by Professor McKechnie, and now form- 
ing the first article in this volume with the title, * Magna Carta, 1215-1915,' 
the question is posed : ' Whence did the Charter acquu-e the right to be 
described without qualification and without rival as being 'Great?' 
The author or the editor might have recorded in a foot-note Mr. A. B. 
White's discovery, first published in this Review « in July 1915, that it 
was first called Great merely to distinguish it from the separate Forest 
Charter of 1217. 

^ Vol. xvii. (1902) 89. 

• Vol. XXX. 472 ; cf. xxxii. 554 ff. 


Dr. Hazletine's essay on ' The Influence of Magna Carta on American 
Development ', which has already been printed in the Columbia Law 
RevieWi will perhaps be found most novel and interesting in the section 
which deals with the attitude of the early colonial legislators and jurists 
to the Great Charter and the English common law. The colonists and 
the colonial proprietors were generally inclined to take over more or less 
of the Charter, but the Crown representatives in some cases looked askance 
at the adoption of what might prejudice the royal prerogative. On the 
other hand, the Governor and Council of Virginia in 1757 refused their 
assent to an act for the ejection of lawyers from the state until a committee 
reported that such legislation was not forbidden in Magna Carta. 

In concluding this review of a volume which forms a worthy commemo- 
ration of its great subject, we must not omit to mention Viscount Bryce's 
unexpected but well-sustained parallel of the Great Charter and the 
Twelve Tables in the preface, and the editor's little history of Kunnymead 
in the introduction. James Tait. 

Studies in English Franciscan History ; The Ford Lectures delivered 
in the University of Oxford in 1916. By A. G. Little, M.A. 
(Manchester University Press. London : Longmans, 1917.) 

''Most of us who are students of the Middle Ages confine ourselves 
perhaps too much ', says Mr. Little, ' to chronicles and records ; we do not 
read enough of the books which the educated men of the Middle Ages read, 
nor of the books which they wrote.' These six lectures are an admirable 
example of the better method. Not that the lecturer neglects to make 
every possible use of his records. Far from it. In the first lecture, ' On the 
Observance of the Vow of Poverty ', he gives us what must be almost an 
exhaustive examination, so far as records are at present at all accessible, 
of the facts bearing upon the measure of success attained by the English 
Friars Minor in maintaining their principles in this respect. External 
influences, as he shows, whether from popes, kii^s, municipalities, or 
private donors, were almost wholly adverse to the strict observance of 
the rule. Legal fictions could only too easily be invented whereby mendi- 
cant communities or individuals might become for practical purposes 
holders of property ; and the interests of patrons, the vanity of church 
builders, the fears of the dying for their own spiritual welfare, and 
of the surviving relatives for that of the dead, as well as the remorse 
of the living sinner, all these motives conspired to make the friars break ^^ 
their rule. HI 

The analysis of recorded alms and of statistics of the numbers and pro- i 
perty of the English friars tends on the whole to show a surprising amount 
of internal resistance to corrupting influences, and the facts collected testify 
to the real vitality of the founder's spirit within the Order. How widely 
Mr. Little has cast his net may be illustrated from the fact that he gets 
one of his most valuable pieces of evidence on the economics of a friary 
from a fragment in the binding of a Greek psalter, published only in 
a work on New Testament criticism. ' The Failure of Mendicancy ', which 
is the subject of the second lecture, is shown to have been brought about 


by causes which are skilfully analysed:— besides those already noted, the 
process by which begging became an end instead of a means, the excessive 
amount of energy necessarily diverted to it from spiritual work, if the 
friars were to get a living at all, the pressure of popes and kings, who found 
well-endowed chaplains more useful to them than strict observers of the 
rule. The case of friar John Welle in Edward Ill's reign is fully explained, 
not as typical, but as an extreme instance of these abuses. The evidence 
of political tracts and poems and of the writings of the opponents of 
mendicancy is fully considered. Lecture iii gives a brief but sufficient 
account of the relations of friars and parish priests, and the disastrous 
story of papal legislation on this subject. More valuable and original is 
the discussion in Lecture iv of ' Popular Preaching ', with examples from 
that Liber Exemplomm which Mr. Little edited not long ago for the British 
Society of Franciscan Studies, from the Speculum Laicorum, Nicholas 
Bozon's Contes Moralises^ and especially from the still unpublished Fascicu- 
lus Morum. Lecture v, on the ' Education of the Clergy ', is largely devoted 
to the voluminous works of John of Wales, the great popularity of which 
is shown by the survival of nearly two hundred manuscripts, but which 
are very little known to modern readers. The last lecture gives a concise 
history of the Franciscan school at Oxford, bearing out the testimony of 
Father Felder to the high place which Englishmen hold in the history of 
scholarship within the Order. 

Among the useful documents in the appendix Mr. Little prints the 
curious moralization of chess from John of Wales's Communiloquiumy 
which is much less known than that of Jacobus de Cessulis ; but the most 
valuable is the list of Franciscan custodies and houses in the Province of 

In one minute detail Mr. Little seems open to criticism. The evidence 
for the equivalent in thirteenth-century English of Latin titles is scanty 
and needs to be collected, but unless Mr. Little has new reasons to allege, 
it is difficult to understand why he translates dominus as * lord ' in the 
cases of the persons who surely would have been styled by fourteenth- 
century Englishmen Dom (or Dan) Alexander, Master of the Canterbury 
Hospital, and Sir Richard Gobiun, knight. J. P. Gilson. 

Studies in Dante. Fourth Series : Textual Criticism of the ' Convivio ' and 
Miscellaneous Essays. By Edward Moore, D.D. (Oxford : Clarendon 
Press, 1917.) 
Dr. Moore's Studies in Dante have much history in them, even in the 
narrow pedagogic use of the term ; but there is less of history and more 
of scholarship in this last, the posthumous volume, than in some of the 
previous three. Nevertheless, historians will find much here to instruct 
and content them ; the friends of the author perhaps may recognize 
him writing as he used to talk, with less solemnity than in some of his 
work. Mr. Armstrong, in a memoir for the British Academy, has drawn 
the portrait of his old friend and colleague with admirable truth and 
loyalty. These last studies, completed for the press by another friend. 
Dr. Toynbee, will add something not only to the tale of Dr. Moore's 


researches, but to the picture of his life. His good humour finds scope 
where one might hardly expect it, in discussing the BattifoUe letters attri- 
buted to Dante. This paper adds a little to the history of the Emperor 
Henry VII in Italy ; students will value it still more for its acute and quick 
good sense in treating a problem of authenticity and explaining at the 
same time the general rules of the game. The additional note is very 
characteristic of the author, admitting that he had made too much of 
one or two points in his argument. 

Nearly half of this book is taken up with the essay on textual criticism] 
of the Convivio, which will naturally not interest historians immersed in] 
matter. But they should not miss the delightful illustration of the waysTj 
of the scholiast on p. 18, where Dr. Moore exposes the vanity of a Germai 
and an Italian commentator who had sought to improve Dante. Th< 
passage may be quoted as a sample of Dr. Moore's building : 

In his enumeration of the long roll of heroes of Roman history, Dante pauses — HI 
the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in xi. 32 ' Et quid adhuc dicam,' &c. — am 
adds, ' Chi dira de' Decii e delli Drusi che posero la loro vita per la patria ? ' Dr. Witte,i 
thinking that the Drusi were scarcely sufficiently distinguished for such a eulogium( 
calmly proposes to substitute Curzii, ' o qualche altra famiglia celebre ' ! Giuliani^ 
highly approving of the principle of ' cosi assennata conghiettura ', prefers to 
' Fabj ' ! Apart from the monstrosity of thus mangling the text, both the distil 
guished critics appear to have forgotten the lines of Virgil : 

Quin Decios Drusosque procul saevumque securi 
aspice Torquatum et referentem signa Camillum. 

The paper on the Tomb of Dante has an appendix note on the discovei 
in the crypt at Canterbury in January 1888 of the bones of St. Thomas^ 
Dr. Moore thought the probability very strong ; he examines and balances 
the evidence impartially. ' Dante's Theory of Creation ' is a good intro- 
duction to the philosophy of Dante, and so is the lecture on the study o^ 
the Paradiso. This fourth series is as substantial as any of the other three,' 
and it shows everywhere unabated spirit and energy. W. P. Ker. 

Cathay and the Way thither ; heing a collection of Medieval Notices of China. 
Translated and edited by Colonel Sir Henry Yule. New edition revised 
by Henri Cordier, of the Institute of France. 4 vols. (London : 
Hakluyt Society, 1915-16.) 

Professor Beazley's Dawn of Modern Geography is likely to have aroused 
in many readers an interest in those medieval works of travel on the basis 
of which he shows how the fabric of the science came into being. Such 
readers will welcome the new edition issued by the Hakluyt Society of 
Yule's Cathay and the Way thither, brought up to date by M. Henri Cordier. 
Sir Henry Yule's introductions and notes to the documents which he 
collected form a rare monument of learning, indefatigable curiosity, and 
humour ; even his bold experiment of reproducing the letter of an Irish 
bishop of the fourteenth century in modern Hibernian seems to be a com- 
plete success. The idea wherewith the whole work impresses the reader 
is that no pains have been epared to arrive at satisfactory solutions of 
the numerous difficulties which these texts offer, chieflv in the identification 



of geographical names, and at correct assessment of the narrators' credi- 
bility. And the work of the new editor seems to be in every way worthy 
of his predecessor's. 

The two oriental texts included in the volumes are an extract from the 
Travels of Ihn Batuta, according to the translation of Defremery and 
Sanguinetti, and one from the Jdmi' aUawdrikh of Rashid ad-din, according 
to the renderings of Klaproth and D'Ohsson. It must be observed of the 
philological notes to these extracts that they are somewhat old-fashioned ; 
D'Herbelot, whose work was doubtless wonderful for its time, is scarcely 
an authority to be cited now ; and it is rather surprising to see such a note 
as the following left unaltered (iv. 1282). 

The Muwnttah (the name signifies according to Defremery 'Appropriated', but 
D'Herbelot translates it ' Footstool') was a book on the traditions. 

The name of this work, which is familiar to all Arabists, has long been 
correctly rendered ' the Beaten Track '. The source of the French transla- 
tor's suggestion is indicated by Dozy in his Supplement. Still Yule's 
attention was quickly aroused by anything unconvincing in the translations 
which he used, and in such cases he ordinarily goes to the original and 
furnishes some fresh light. 

Considerable interest attaches to a passage of Rashid ad-din (iii. 123) 
which M. Cordier thinks should have been cited in the controversy between 
the late Sir W. Hersche) and a writer in Nature who traversed his claim 
to have discovered the process of identification by finger-prints. The 
passage runs : 

It is usual in Cathay, whsn any contract is entered into, for the outline of the 
fingers of the parties to be traced on the document. For experience shows that no 
two individuals have fingers precisely alike. The hand of the contracting party is set 
upon the back of the paper containing the deed, and lines are then traced round his 
fingers up to the knuckles, in order that if ever one of them should deny his obligation 
this tracing may be compared with his fingers and he may thus be convicted. 

This passage, which belongs to the thirteenth century, is, according to 
M. Cordier, ' peremptory proof of the antiquity of the use of finger-prints 
by the Chinese '. It may be, but not of the finger-prints employed by 
Sir William Herschel, which are not the outlines of the fingers, but the 
lines on the fingers. Whether the method used in Cathay was trustworthy 
may well be doubted ; the marks employed by Herschel, and after his 
introduction of the system by the police, owing to the infinite variety of 
the figures are of undoubted trustworthiness ; and as much originality 
was displayed in classifying these figures as in the notion of utilizing them 
for identification of criminals, which again is not quite the same purpose 
as that indicated in the extract from the Persian historian. 

To one who, like the present writer, is ignorant of Chinese the identifi- 
cation of foreign names in their Chinese dress and that of Chineser names in 
foreign representation would appear to be very difiicult. Thus (i. 42) the 
Chinese name THao chi is identified in the text after Pauthier with 'Tajiks 
or Persians ', but the earliest use of the name Tajik appears to be for Arab, 
and in the note others are quoted as interpreting the name by Egypt or 
Babylonia. On the next page the capital of Ta Ts'in, Antu, is said to mean 
Antiochia. M. Cordier quotes from Barbier de Meynard's translation of 


Mas'udi ' that at the time of the Musulman conquest there remained of the 
original name of the city only the letters Alif, Nun, and Ta {Ant or Anta) ', 
but it is very unlikely that Mas'udi meant this. What he states is that whereas 
its former name was after its founder's Antikhs, the Arabs, who called the 
place Antakiyahy omitted all the letters which followed the t in the original 
name. The latter name of Ta Ts'in (apparently the Byzantine Empire) 
Fu-lin is identified by Yule with IIoXiv, but according to M. Cordier 
phonetically it cannot come from that word ; M. Blochet derives it (it 
would seem, plausibly) from Rum, some one else from Bethlehem. The, 
Arab geneial Mo-i, who was sent to effect the siege of Fu-lin, is identified 
with Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah ; the king of Fu-lin, who sent an embassy to^ 
China in 1081, Mie-li-i-ling-kai-sa/ may have been identical with the^ 
pretender Nicephorus Melissenus '. 

The new edition would have gained somewhat from revision by an expei 
in the Islamic languages, though perhaps the errors and inconsistencit 
which offer scope for criticism are not very serious. A question whicl 
must have suggested itself to the editor is how far accumulations of con- 
jectures such as form the content of some of the notes were worth preserving, 
An example may be taken from one on the Travels of Friar Odoric (ii. 250), 
where the friar states that in the chief city of Tibet ' dwelleth the Abassi^ 
i. e. in their tongue the pope, who is the head of all the idolaters, and wh< 
has the disposal of all their benefices such as they are after their manner '^ 
The copies cited spell the foreign word in thirteen different ways 
Yule, after rebuking some one else for ' a wonderful hotchpotch of miscel* 
laneous erudition on the subject', proposes three solutions from various 
linguistic areas, and ultimately thinks of the ' Abbasid Caliphs. M. Cordiei 
appends what he seems to regard as the true solution : ' Clog bassi 
ulug Bakhshi in eastern Turki and means simply great lama, the chief oi 
one of the large convents visited by Odoric. Bakhshi is the name give] 
by Arabs and Persians to the Chinese Ho-shang, Buddhist priest, and to th< 
Tibetan lama.' We may hope that this is right, though the distanc 
between lo abassi and ulug bakhshi is considerable. Further, wherej 
bakhshi in Persian is said to mean lama, we are told that among th< 
Mongols of Persia and Transoxiana it means secretary of state or physician ; 
and in Pavet de Courteille's Dictionary of Eastern Turki the word is 
rendered Ecrivain qui ne sait pas le persan ; secretaire, chanteur, inspecteur, 
chirurgien, plaie. In the supplementary notes (iv. 269) a Tibetan scholar, 
Laufer, is quoted for an entirely new explanation : the word in Odoric 
stands, according to him, for 'a Tibetan term, variously articulated p^ags-pa, 
p'ag-pa, p'as-pa, p'a'-pa, which is neither a common title, nor a title at 
all, but merely a personal name '. Odoric's ear must in any case have been 
wanting in delicate perception of the difference between sounds if he 
rendered any of these by Abassi. But since of the six etymologies five 
must assuredly be erroneous, the question arises whether they were worth 
recording. Doubtless the book is strongest on the geographical side, but 
even where doubts may occur as to the value of the matter included it 
deserves credit for extraordinary industry and erudition. 

D. S. Margoliouth. 


Registrum Thome Sfofford. Edited by the Rev. A. T. Bannister- 
(Hereford: 1917.) 

Canon Bannister has edited for the Cantelupe Society and the Canter- 
bury and York Society the Register of Thomas Spofford, who was bishop 
of Hereford from 1422 to 1445. In his introduction he gives a short sketch 
of the bishop's career. Spofford had been abbot of St. Mary, York, 
and attended the Councils of Pisa and Constance as one of the English 
delegates. His earlier years were thus the most eventful, whilst the 
twenty-three years of his episcopate were occupied almost entirely with 
the government of a rather troublesome diocese. There were numerous 
abuses, non-resident and negligent clergy, dilapidations of church property 
and ill-ruled monastic houses, which called for correction. Such matters 
naturally fill a good part of the register. But the editor perhaps lays a little 
too much stress on their prominence ; it is needful to remember that in 
such a record all that is amiss is of necessity described in detail, whilst 
much of what was done well is as naturally left unnoticed. The long 
account of the visitation of Wigmore Abbey reveals serious irregularities, 
but it is significant that Spofford removed from his office as Camerarius 
the monk who was foremost in complaining of the abbot. In other respects 
this same visitation suggests that personal jealousies sometimes lay at the 
root of alleged misconduct. An interesting feature of the register is the 
appearance of documents in English. Some of these, like the Ordinance for 
the Sisters of Limebrook Priory in 1432 and a constitution for the coi- 
rection of abuses at Acornbury in 1438, were naturally put in the form in 
which they would best be understood by those for whom they were in- 
tended. But the English Letters of Privy Seal, one of which is dated in 
1433, must be amongst the earliest of their kind. Of a different interest 
is the English abjuration of John Woodhulle, a Lollard clerk of Ameley, 
which is also dated 1433. 

There are some useful references to the bishop's hospice in the parish 
of St. Mary Mounthaunt, London, a building of which only a little 
is known. The rector of St. Mary Mounthaunt had made encroach- 
ments on the premises, and claimed to be entitled to a pension from 
the revenues of the hospice. Eventually the dispute was submitted 
to the arbitration of the mayor, who decided against the rector, but 
in view of the facts that the parish was poor, and the hospice, which 
was the best and largest place in it, would if let to a merchant or good 
layman yield great profit to the church and rector, advised some annual 
allowance. In another document, where the hospice is described as 
commonly called ' the bishop of Hereford inne ' (the only instance I have 
come across), Spofford leased the hospice to Thomas Thorpe, one of the 
king's remembrancers, on condition that he kept it in repair, with provision 
that the bishop might lodge there when he visited London, and have the 
permanent use of a chamber with a chimney by the gate and stabling for 
three horses ; this is a typical example of the way in which the bishops 
often secured the maintenance of their London inns, or even turned them 
to a source of profit. Mr. Bannister justly calls special attention to 
a series of documents providing for the institution of the festival of 
St. Raphael in Hereford Cathedral, as of value to students of the old 


English uses, because they show with unusual clearness what was the 
legitimate procedure in appointing new services, and as the only instance 
in which the actual authorship and appointment of any Hereford Service 
has been recorded. C. L. Kingsford. 

Akbar, the Great Mogul, 1542-1605. By Vincent A. Smith. (Oxford : 
Clarendon Press, 1917.) 

Few only of the great figures in the political history of the Muhammadanj 
world have succeeded in attracting much attention in modern Europe, 
outside the circle of professed orientalists. The personality of Saladin,"] 
it is true, made a lasting impression on the mind of medieval Christendom, : 
and Lessing's drama and Walter Scott's novel later made the name o! 
this chivalrous monarch a permanent possession of European literature, 
Tamerlane's name was better known to readers in the seventeenth than ij 
the nineteenth century, and even Erskine's masterly edition of the Memoii 
of Babur failed to win for this vivid personality the attention that it ma] 
well claim. The political history of the Muhammadan world would appeal 
to be remote from the interest of the majority of historical students, an( 
even in the case of India the number of Englishmen who have worked a1 
the history of the various Muhammadan dynasties in that country hj 
been singularly few, considering how closely the destinies of England anc 
India have been bound up together for over a century. Such a lack o< 
interest is especially strange in the case of the monarch whose biograph] 
has recently been written by Mr. Vincent A. Smith ; though Tennysoi 
wrote a poem on Akbar and Max Miiller made him the subject of one o\ 
the most attractive of his shorter essays, no historian, with an adequat 
equipment of learning, has hitherto attempted to write his life, and the 
English reader has had to wait until now for a biography that at all ris( 
to the dignity of the subject. 

For Akbar was certainly one of the greatest rulers of the second hal 
of the sixteenth century, and neither Philip II nor Elizabeth (she came t< 
the throne two years after Akbar and predeceased him by two years), wh( 
alone among contemporary sovereigns have any claim to greatness, can 
rival him in originality or personal charm, or exhibit such a many-sided 
genius. He was great alike as soldier, administrator, and religious reformer. 
Born while his father was a discrowned fugitive, he inherited merely a small 
strip of country in the Panjab and had to fight for his kingdom against 
powerful rivals, and succeeding years were so taken up with the consolida- 
tion and extension of his conquests that in spite of his keen intellectual 
interests he never found time to learn to read ; he established a system 
of administration which in several respects survives in the principles and 
practice of British officials in India to the present day (Mr. Vincent Smith 
gives the best account of it that has yet been written, illuminated by his 
own practical experience as a revenue officer) ; to Akbar's keen artistic 
feeling India owes a new architectural development and a new school of 
painting ; to all these other activities he added the attempt to establish 
a new religion. 

His contemporaries did not fail to recognize his greatness, and the 


historical sources for his reign are more abundant and more strikingly- 
varied than those for any other Indian prince. Foremost among them is 
the Akbar-ndmah by Abu'l Fazl, his close friend and private secretary, who 
writes of his royal master in terms of flattering eulogy, in striking contrast 
to the unsympathetic record by another of Akbar's ofiicials, Badaoni, who 
entered the state service in the same year as Abu'l Fazl, but whose ortho- 
dox views made Akbar's religious speculations and latitudinarianism so 
abhorrent to him that his history had to be kept secret during Akbar's 
lifetime and even for some years after the succession of Jahangir. These 
two chief contemporary sources are supplemented by a number of other 
Persian histories, of which Mr. Vincent Smith gives a detailed and critical 
account in his bibliography. But in addition to these Muhammadan 
histories we have a mass of valuable material in the works of European 
writers who visited India in Akbar's reign or shortly afterwards, notably 
the Jesuit missionaries, some of whose accounts have only recently been 
made available and have not been used by any previous historian of Akbar's 
reign. With this extensive literature Mr. Vincent Smith deals in a 
scholarly manner, subjecting the varied and often conflicting evidence 
to a close scrutiny, and he has thus cleared up several points in the history 
of Akbar's reign that have hitherto remained obscure, as well as incorporated 
a number of details that previous English writers have failed to notice ; 
he has also devoted particular attention to the chronology of the period, 
which none of his predecessors has succeeded in working out with the 
same careful accuracy. It might be doubted whether such a task could 
fitly be undertaken by an historian who consults the Persian sources through 
the medium of translations only, and Mr. Vincent Smith himself states 
that he has not read the letters of Abu'l Fazl, Akbar's secretary of state, 
nor those of Faizi, his poet laureate (p. 2), no translations of either having 
yet been published. Though such Persian sources as remain untranslated 
may be scanty and of secondary importance, any source of information 
regarding so great an historical figure as Akbar is deserving of attention. 
The version of Asad Beg's memoirs, made by Mr. B. W. Chapman, which 
Mr. Vincent Smith states (p. 462) he has been unable to trace, is in 
the library of the British Museum (Add. MS. 30776), where there is also 
a manuscript of the original Persian text (Or. 1996) ; the materials are 
thus available for the publication of the complete work which Mr. Vincent 
Smith recommends. Another task for the student of this period is the 
preparation of a critical edition of the text of the A'ln-i-Akbarl ; admirable 
as Blochmann's edition of the text and his translation are he was hampered 
by the unsatisfactory condition of the manuscripts available to him, and 
some future editor working on more reliable copies may succeed in clearing 
up the obscurities of the text. 

It is to be hoped that this admirable book will receive the attention 
it merits from the Indian Universities, which would do well to recommend 
it to their students as a pattern of modern critical methods applied to Indian 
history ; they will find much to learn from the author's discriminating 
use of authorities, the wide range of his reading, and his sound and well- 
reasoned conclusions. T. W. Arnold. 



The Divinity Principals in the University of Glasgow, 1545-1654. By the 
Rev. H. M. B. Reid, D.D., Professor of Divinity in the University of 
Glasgow. (Glasgow : MacLehose, 1917.) 

Dr. Reid's work is, as he tells us, biographical not historical. His purpose 
is to make known something of the personal life and work of his prede- 
cessors ; and in the present volume he treats of a group of six who combined 
with the office of professor of divinity the office of principal of the univer- 
sity. Till this purpose is made clear the extreme dates of his title are 
somewhat perplexing. The earlier of the two is the date of the birth of 
the first-born of the six, the later that of the death of the last survivor. 
It may fairly be said that the most interesting parts of his work are those 
which deal with the career of his heroes during those years of their several 
lives in which they were not divinity principals. For it was necessarily 
the fate of a divinity principal to be entangled in the ecclesiastical contro- 
versies of his time in such a way that escape was difficult. With the single 
exception of Andrew Melville, into whose mind the possibility that he 
might be mistaken seems never to have entered, and who was at least 
too honest to say one thing when he knew that he meant another, every 
one of the six seems to have spent a considerable part of his time as principal 
in the process of endeavouring, in one matter or in another, to sit solidly 
upon two stools : and the attitude, even when, as in the latter part of 
the sixteenth and the first part of the seventeenth centuries, it has 
been widely cultivated and carefully practised, is never really attractive. 
The more interesting side of the book is that which illustrates the 
position of the Scottish scholars on the continent, the relations between 
French and Scottish Calvinism, and the occasional attempts made by some 
anima naturaliter Christiana to mitigate the harshness of the theories in 
which he found himself involved. 

The opinions of the six divines, and more especially those opinions 
which they maintained during their sojourn abroad, and the processes 
of reasoning by which they justified their actions, were to a great extent 
set forth in the Latin of their time. Dr. Reid has, in mercy to his readers, 
supplied the place of their discussions by an English paraphrase and 
abridgement. This is readable, and his readers if they are content to take 
the paraphrase as accurate may well be grateful to him. But implicit 
confidence in his powers and in the consequent trustworthiness of his 
paraphrase or abridgement is rendered a little difficult when it appears, 
as on p. 87, that he supposes ampullas (used of the arguments of a rhetor- 
cuius) to be rightly translated by ' crockery ', and that he understands 
that * tickets ' at a price limited to 16 pounds Scots (£1 6s. Sd. sterling) 
were distributed under the name of chirothecae to certain visitors of special 
dignity at university entertainments. But the uncertainty which such 
things beget will probably not much vex those who reflect that the author 
may in spite of them have a thorough knowledge of the more essential 
matters required for paraphrasing and abridging the controversies of 
French Huguenots. And it is perhaps unlikely that any reader will find 
the interest of the discussions so intense as to be driven into the wilderness 
of the original documents. H. A. Wilson. 


The Beginning of English Overseas Enterprise. A Prelude to the Empire, 
By Sir C. P. Lucas. (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1917.) 

This little book is a helpful contribution— none the less welcome because 
of the modesty of its scope— to a much neglected subject. It is, perhaps, 
scarcely accurate to say, as the author does, that the subject has been 
minimized or ignored. It might even be argued that excessive stress has 
been laid on the importance for early commercial history of the Staplers' 
and the Merchant Adventurers' Companies; and that the less officially 
recognized and controlled but more spontaneous and vital forms of com- 
mercial enterprise have been ' minimized or ignored '. But this overstress 
is quite compatible with and is indeed the direct consequence of neglect, 
in the sense of insufficient study of the subject. It is a reproach to British 
scholarship that most of the work in this field has been left to German, 
Dutch, and American scholars, to Professor Schanz, whose Englische 
Handelspolitih (1881) with its excellent collection of materials is still the 
only authoritative source of Early Tudor commercial history, to Drs. 
Lingelbach, Van Brakel, Te Lintum, Ehrenberg, and Hagedorn, to Pro- 
fessor Cheyney of the University of Pennsylvania and his pupils. 

The main aim of the book before us is to give in a succinct and conve- 
nient form an account of the much-discussed origins of the Staplers and 
the Adventurers, and in this it is eminently successful. Sir Charles Lucas 
has made effective use of Professor Tout's recent chapter on the Staple 
under Edward II and of Dr. Lingelbach's studies on the Merchant Adven- 
turers, as well as of the older collections of records. He has not attempted 
to handle the great mass of new materials now accessible in the Calendars 
of Patent and Close Eolls and of other State Papers. To have done so 
adequately would have required many stout volumes ; and within the 
limits he has imposed on himself a substantially accurate account has 
been given of the constitutional history of the Staplers and the Adven- 
turers. In laying claim, as at a later date each of these companies did, 
to the same origins they were both probably right, and in disputing, 
as each of them did, the claims of the other they were both probably 
wrong. The first charter claimed by both — ^that of John II of Brabant 
dated 1296 — was not granted to Staplers or Adventurers as such, but to 
* English merchants and others of whatever realm ' ; but the grant was 
almost certainly associated with the beginnings of the foreign staple, 
which was transferred from Antwerp to Bruges and afterwards in a modified 
form to Calais. On the other hand, it is very probable that the fraternity 
of St. Thomas a Becket, which did not become known as the Merchant 
Adventurers' Company till late in the fifteenth century, had maintained 
a continuous existence since 1296, and that it had played a leading 
part in securing the charter of that date. Not quite so adequate an 
account is given of recent work in the case of the Adventurers and 
of the Eastland Company as in that of the Staplers. Dr. Ehrenberg's 
Hamburg und England and Dr. Hagedorn's Ostfrieslands Handel und 
Schiffahrt might have been consulted on the settlements at Hamburg 
and Emden; and a very full account of the origins of the Eastland 
Company, by Dr. N. R. Deardorff, is to be found in a volume of 



Studies in the History of English Commerce, published by the University 
of Pennsylvania. 

A more serious defect is one not justly chargeable upon the author, 
since it is derived from the authorities on which he had to rely. It lies 
in the want of a really critical estimate of the larger significance for 
economic history of the Staplers and the Adventurers. The raison d'etre 
of the Staplers' Company and of the Adventurers as chartered in 1564 
was fiscal — ^the collection of heavy export taxes and the supply of loans 
in advance of this taxation. The monopoly they enjoyed, which furnished 
at once a condition and a motive for the fulfilment of those functions, 
was totally incompatible with those national objects which it has been 
usual to attribute to these companies. That the Staplers did not expand 
English trade is clear. In their hands the wool export sank from thirty 
thousand sacks per year to three thousand. Of this decline, however, 
monopoly and heavy taxation were not the sole causes. The case of the 
Merchant Adventurers is more striking. At the moment they attained 
monopoly the cloth trade was rapidly expanding, but if it continued to 
expand it was in spite of their persistent and strenuous efforts to restrict it. 
They rigidly limited their membership, set a stint on the trade of each 
member, and repressed the enterprise of younger members who wished to 
open new markets. Believing that foreign trade was a fixed quantity 
they advised the government to enact laws to limit the production of 
textiles. The Adventurers, moreover, became the parent of other com- 
panies which similarly monopolized other fields of commerce hitherto 
free to all Englishmen, and they furnished a fatal precedent for chartered 
monopoly in industry. The statement, therefore, that ' they were linked 
together to uphold a trade . . . and that trade was a national trade — ^the 
greatest industry in England', and that ' they embodied the rise of the 
English merchant, the supplanting of the foreigner ', whilst in full accord- 
ance with mythological tradition is in flat contradiction to the facts. 

Nor is there any reason to suppose that the chartered monopoly 
company is ' a form of co-operation between State authority and private 
enterprise . . . which the English above all nations devised and perfected '. 
Roman puUicani, Genoese exploiters of the Levant, and Portuguese 
man-hunters on the Gold Coast had used it with results not unlike those 
that roused the reforming zeal of Clive and inspired the eloquence of Burke. 
Whatever imperial virtues of a higher kind modern chartered companies 
may have developed in British hands are not due to anything these 
companies have in common with the Merchant Adventurers and the 
Staplers. George Unwin. 

1918 • 277 

Short Notices 

Professor J. P. Postgate's Lucani de Bello Civili Liber viii (Cambridge ; 
University Press, 1917), both as a school-book and as a scholar's com- 
mentary with fuller and better notes than school-books always have, falls 
somewhat outside the scope of this Keview. We notice it because it contains 
also a longish introduction of nearly a hundred pages, dealing in minute 
detail with the last days of Pompey the Great, from the morrow of Pharsalia 
till his murder ten weeks later on the coast of Egypt. This is historical 
matter, and though one may wonder whether the flight of a hopelessly 
beaten general possesses quite the historical importance to justify so long 
a dissertation, it is proper to warn any possible students that they should 
not omit, at need, to consult it. Dr. Postgate has examined Pompey's 
movements with much care, and with a minute comparison of the original 
authorities, and of Lucan's own narrative. I do not know that the result 
tells us much more than Mommsen compressed into four octavo pages 
without any quotation of authorities or discussion of difficulties. Still, 
it is fashionable at this moment to deal with comparatively small matters 
of ancient history — ^the exact circumstances of Caesar's murder ' on the 
bridge ', and so forth — and if they are dealt with minutely, as minute things 
can alone be treated, there is something to be said for Dr. Postgate. One 
point, in spite of his length, he seems to us to have overlooked, the exact 
reason why Pompey, in his flight, chose — ^if he chose at all and did not 
rush headlong — ^the exact route which he took. It was not exactly the 
direct route from a Thessalian por* to his goal, Alexandria, to circum- 
navigate Athos, to wind round the sinuous coast of Asia Minor, till he 
could reach Cyprus, and thence to cross the sea to Pelusium. How far 
were the peculiar winds of the Aegean responsible for this detour ? When 
the Athenians sent ships to Egypt they appear to have sailed direct. 
Geographical possibilities and probabilities are involved here, which 
perhaps no writer on the subject has fully considered. Nevertheless it 
is proper to express gratitude to the professor for his careful study in 
historical miniature, and for the sound and accurate philological scholarship 
which marks all Dr. Postgate's work on classical literature. F. H. 

It is a difficult undertaking to cover the first three centuries of 
Christianity in 150 small pages, and Mr. E. Martin Pope, though there are 
serious faults in his Introduction to Early Church History (London : 
Macmillan, 1918), has done it not unsuccessfully. He does not generalize ; 
in fact, in his effort to say something on every subject and every author, 
he falls at times into the opposite extreme. His avowed aim is to give 
a ' series of impressions ', and no impression can be given by a few meagre 


and colourless details about each of the minor writers and topics. Nor is it 
possible to escape the doubt whether he is really familiar with his subject. 
The ' most useful works of reference accessible to English writers ' form 
his bibliography, and (it is to be feared) his library. No book on Roman 
criminal law is included ; and, since space allows no more, the mischief 
wrought by this lacuna in his presentation of the persecutions shall be 
pointed out. He says that Christians might often escape, for * a local 
magistrate might easily be of a tolerant disposition — a Gallio in fact '. 
No such instance is known, nor was such toleration possible. Save in the 
few years when the central government took action against the Christians, 
and the comparatively rare occasions of popular violence, their sole 
protection was the requirement, regularly enforced, of an individual 
accuser, who was prepared to run the risk of punishment for calumny in 
case the accused denied his faith. If the accusation were brought the 
judge in the ordinary course of his duties had to hear the case, and if the 
Christian were convicted the only sentence he could pass was that of 
death or of a punishment legally equivalent to death. His own tem- 
perament made no difference whatever. Mr. Pope has been misled in this 
and in some other instances by considerations of general probability, 
which specific knowledge would have corrected. But he has written an 
interesting little book, animated by an excellent spirit and showing 
evidence of intelligent though not quite adequate study. E. W. W. 

M. Eugene Pittard, professor of anthropology at Geneva, who has spent 
several years in travel and study in Rumania, and especially in the barren 
Dobrudzha, has given a popular sketch of that kingdom under the title 
of La Roumanie (Paris : Bossard, 1917). A few historical opinions of 
interest are scattered about the volume ; thus the author's special studies 
have led him to the important conclusions that there is very little Roman 
blood in the modern Rumanians, that Dacian and Slav influences were 
considerable, and that the people did not flee in mass before the barbarian 
invasions. He found the purest blood in Little Wallachia, and is enthu- 
siastic about the Dobrudzha, the horrors of which he believes Ovid to have 
exaggerated intentionally. He also makes some interesting remarks about 
the small Rumanian colony in Istria. His fifty photographs are excellent. 

In his admirable study, Benedict IX and Gregory VI {Proceedings of 
the British Academy, vol. viii), Mr. Poole has brought the construction of 
a critical account of the dark Tusculan period of the papacy some way 
nearer completion. The subject is obscure, partly through the scantiness 
of contemporary evidence, partly owing to the rapid growth of partisan 
legend, which has only slowly been cut away. Yet by an intensive cultiva- 
tion of the material fresh results can be won even from the most barren period. 
Mr. Poole shows that the usual version that there were three rival popes co- 
existing at the same time, whom the Emperor Henry III had deposed in 
1046, is a mere popular tale given out, he considers, by the imperial 
entourage, for Benedict IX had abdicated and the anti-pope Sylvester III 
(John Bishop of the Sabina) had abandoned his claims. In fact, at Sutri 


the reigning Pope Gregory VI was deposed for simony, and at Rome the 
ex-Pope Benedict IX was also deposed, presumably because the validity 
of his abdication was considered doubtful. It would be a natural source of 
the tale of the three rival popes, although Mr. Poole doubts the fact, if 
Sylvester III was also, somewhat superfluously perhaps, condemned at the 
Synod of Sutri in order to clinch the proof that he was no pope ; and this 
would explain the new Pope Clement II's expression ex'plosis tribus illis 
with reference to Henry Ill's proceedings. Mr. Poole further makes it 
probable that the Tusculan popes, though no model ecclesiastics, have been 
painted in over-dark colours ; and gives an explanation of the descent of 
Gregory VI and his connexion with Gregory VII, which satisfactorily com- 
bines the available evidence. In an appendix he solves the problem of the 
relationship of the Tusculan house, and hence of the Colonna, to Prince 
Alberic by a slight emendation of a charter from Subiaco, which carries 
conviction with it. An error, however, has slipped into the genealogical 
tree he gives with regard to a subordinate personage. Bertha, daughter 
of the Senatrix Marozia, evidently had Marozia's second husband, Guido 
of Tuscany, for her father, not King Hugh, since Liudprand's verses 
{Antapodosis, iii. 44) prove that issue of Guido by Marozia survived, and 
there is no hint in the sources of any children of Marozia by Hugh. 

C. W. P. 0. 

The Description of Manuscript Garrett Deposit 1450, Princeton Univer- 
sity Library, together with a collation of the first work contained in it, the 
de Area Noe of Hugo de Sancto Victore, by Dr. Charles Christopher 
Mierow (Princeton, New Jersey : reprinted from the Transactions 
of the American Library Institute, 1917), is a painstaking account 
and collation of a twelfth-century manuscript of Hugh of St. Victor's 
treatise, de Area Noe, now in the Princeton University Library, by the 
Professor of Classical Language and Literature in Colorado College. It is 
indeed almost too painstaking, for it was certainly not worth while to 
enumerate the instances on each page of e for ae, ch for h in michi and 
nichil, and of other spellings which, while varying from those which we 
should employ in writing Latin, were in regular use at the date of this 
manuscript. Professor Mierow has also added to his task by using the 
particularly incorrect 1880 reprint of Migne's Patrologia Latina, which 
contains a great many blunders absent from the 1854 edition. Of the 
* self-evident misprints ' given on p. 15 none that we have looked up exist 
in the earlier issue. The following notes may be added. P. 1, dos 1. duos ; 
vi 1. vii ; ohviantihus should not be queried. P. 3, f. 52. 6, repugnamus 
1. pugnamus ; decescit 1. decrescit ; proclamant 1. et amant ; imventus 1. 
iuventus. P. 4, f. 53 a, propter 1. praeter. P. 6, Retractio 1. Retractatio. 
There are only three degrees of humility recognized in the treatise as given 
in Migne ; the additional nine are no doubt put in to make as many degrees 
of humility as of pride. P. 8, f. 122 a, sepuma 1. septima. P. 18, col. 629. 16, 
Jcatectum is of course the right reading ; KaOerov is the regular Greek word 
for ' perpendicular '. P. 23, col. 681. 26, ' Ductoris (1. Doctoris) error ' is 
only the editor's correction of Hugh. But he has misunderstood his text ; 
c here is meant for the last letter of xpc P. 24, col. 687. 20, Linus et 


ceteri. The text followed in Migne writes out, as Professor Mierow notes, 
the list of popes as far as Honorius II, who was probably reigning when the 
book was written. He died in 1130 and Hugh in 1141. The omission of 
Linus in Migne may be a misprint. Professor Mierow does not mention 
any variant from Migne's text in respect of hypotemisa, col. 629, or of 
typo, col. 656 ; but the right readings must be hypotenusa and typho 
respectively. C. C. J. W. 

The Pipe Eoll Society, in issuing the roll for the last year but one — 
the 33rd — of Henry IPs reign (1915), announce that although the roll for 
the 34:th year has been transcribed the printing is postponed * until the 
very high prices prevailing during the war are moderated '. Dr. Round, 
in his introduction to this volume, has given an exhaustive account of 
the contents of the roll. He calls attention to naval and military affairs 
as illustrated by it ; there is information about the king's ships and the 
king's army, and particularly about the sorts of troops the king employed 
and the way in which their services were rewarded. The most important 
feature in the present roll is perhaps the official information it supplies 
about the ' great scutage of Galloway ' and the accompanying tallage 
which had been raised in view of the king's projected expedition against 
Galloway the year before. This enables Dr. Round to correct the published 
text of the Red Book at many points and to add some interesting details 
about scutage in general. Dr. Round has also a good deal to say about the 
royal castles and those temporarily in the king's hands, a subject on which 
we propose to write more at large in a note to be printed in a future 
number of the Review. G. L. 

Mr. R. G. D. Laffan has done well to publish under the appropriate 
title of The Guardians of the Gate (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1918) the 
historical lectures on the Serbs, which he delivered to the companies of the 
Army Service Corps attached to the Serbian army in Macedonia. Although 
the book contains nothing new to students of Serbian history, it gives a very 
clear and accurate summary of that subject from the Turkish conquest down 
to the return of the reorganized Serbian army from Corfii in 1916. The 
author's personal knowledge of, and sympathy with, the Serbians greatly 
enhances the value of his book. For instance, it is interesting to know that 
the historic ballads of the Serbs find a modern parallel in the versified 
letters of the soldiers to-day (p. 24), just as the parliamentary debates 
of 1870 were reported to the villagers in poems.^ Thus, too, the author 
has learnt the modern application of the legend about * the bread of 
Kossovo ' (p. 128). There is an excellent account of the growth of the 
Jugoslav idea, but to pursue that further would bring us into politics. 
The bibliography is full, but there is now a second edition of Yakschitch. 
* July ' (152, 156) should be ' June '. Admiral Troubridge contributes 
a preface. W. M. 

The Sicilian scholar, Signor Giuseppe La Mantia, whose treatise on 
the Greco-Albanian colonies of Sicily was reviewed in these pages thirteen 
^ Madame Mijatovich, Serbian Folk-lore^ p. 23. 


years ago,^ has published with documents an essay on La Secrezia o 
Dogana di Tripoli (Palermo : * Boccone del Povero/ 1917), during the 
Spanish occupation of Tripoli between 1510 and 1530, when Charles V ceded 
it, with Malta, to the Knights of Rhodes. The most interesting fact men- 
tioned in the regulations of the Libyan customs' house is that, during this 
brief Spanish occupation, Tripoli depended on, and formed part of, the 
kingdom of Sicily, then in its turn ruled by a Spanish viceroy, just as, in 
the British Empire, certain colonial possessions depend on one of the great 
dominions. It is also noteworthy that Ferdinand the Catholic considered 
the coast towns of Libya only worth holding if the interior could be 
conquered, the opposite of the opinion now held by some Italian statesmen. 

W. M. 

In a Chronique Latine sur le premier Divorce de Henry VIII (Paris : 
Champion, 1917) M. Bemont has rescued from undeserved neglect a lively 
record of the events of 1528-36. The chronicle is preserved in MS. Lat. 6051 
of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, and was first heard of when it was 
' founde in my house ', according to the note of William Carter, a * papist ' 
printer hanged at Tyburn in 1584, * among doctor Har[ ] writinges '. 
The chronicle is evidently by a determined opponent of the proceedings 
of Henry VIII ; and, from internal evidence, is assigned by the editor to 
May or June 1557. There were two ' doctors ' of that date and that party 
whose names began with ' Har ' : Dr. Thomas Harding (f 1572), chaplain 
to Gardiner and afterwards the opponent of Jewel, and Dr. Nicholas 
Harpsfield (f 1575), archdeacon of Canterbury. M. Bemont has no 
difficulty in assigning the chronicle to Harpsfield, not least, because much 
of it was afterwards embodied in Harpsfield' s lengthier and more prosaic 
Treatise on the pretended Divorce (edited in 1878 by N. Pocock for the 
Camden Society). M. Bemont gives us the Latin text, and a French trans- 
lation, accompanied by valuable notes. There is also an introduction of 
no less value. It first treats of the manuscript, its date and authorship, 
and then gives a useful account of the larger "material now accessible for the 
study of the critical part of the reign of Henry VIII— from archives and 
more or less contemporary chronicles, to Fox, Sanders, Burnet, Strype, 
and their modern and more critical successors. This part is brief but well 
done : it contains some valuable judgements on the events, together with 
exact appreciations of the point of view of the various writers. Nevertheless, 
the period is a very difficult one for a continental scholar, however dis- 
passionate and well-informed, to follow. The technicalities of our con- 
stitutional history must be obscure to him ; and, accustomed as he is to 
countries where there are only two forms of the Christian religion, catholic 
and protestant, he is apt to assume that the same violent contrast, as 
between white and black, prevailed here. This, of course, is the view of the 
chronicler, and the events he describes invite our sympathy with his view 
of them. But the opposition, in those days, was not between ' catholic ' 
and * protestant' ; ' protestant' was the opposite of ' papist' and 'catholic' 
of * heretic ' : so that it is misleading to describe the events of the Chronicle 
as * les evenements qui ont conduit I'Angleterre au protestantisme '. 

» Ante, XX. 192. 


Similarly misleading is it to speak of ' tlie Act of Supremacy ' when what is 
meant is ' the Act of Supreme Head ' ; the Crown was always supreme, 
and what was new and short-lived was Henry's Headship. John Strype 
too was not a ' pasteur ' but a priest. B. J. K. 

Dr. J. Spinoza Catella Jessurun's Kiliaen van Rensselaer van 1623 tot 
1636 (The Hague : Nijhoff, 1917) is a study of the aims pursued by that 
statesman in his scheme of North American colonization, the methods 
which he followed, the means of which he disposed, and the difficulties 
with which he had to contend, difficulties which at one time threatened 
to overwhelm the whole undertaking, but which in the end, thanks to his 
steadiness, tact, perseverance, and sanguine disposition, he triumphantly 
surmounted. The author deals in detail with both sides of the enterprise, 
that in Holland and that in America, showing in detail how colonists were 
recruited and efforts made to encourage agriculture and to increase the 
numbei of his stock. The latter was a very difficult matter, not facilitated 
by the right of the West India Company in whose ships his beasts were 
transported to throw them overboard or eat them in case of necessity : 
in 1631 of eight calves shipped to New Netherlands two died on the passage 
and two more on arrival. The arrangements for administering the colony 
are described, and stress is very properly laid on the justice and good sense 
of Van Renpselaer in insisting that the Indians must be fairly treated. 
But he was, in fact, though an energetic, a concilatory man, for he was 
equally insistent on the need for his people keeping on good terms with the 
Company's servants, and for their rendering each other assistance. Special 
attention is devoted to Van Rensselaer's relations with the Company, 
which were not always very happy, for while he was set on colonization 
the Company and their supporters in Amsterdam cared for little but 
dividends. The book is clearly written, and is evidently based on a careful 
examination of original documents. It is Dr. Jessurun's view that there 
is considerable scope for a more extensive investigation of the original 
documents left by Van Rensselaer than is possible in the limited study here 
presented. H. L. 

Professor Firth contributes to nos. 7 and 8 of History (October 1917 and 
January 1918) a valuable analysis of the sources of our information as to 
the expulsion of the Long Parliament on 20 April 1653. A close comparison 
of the evidence leads him to reject the conclusions arrived at by Professor 
Wolfgang Michael. There are important criticisms of the value of the 
different authorities, especially of the limitations on that of Whitelocke's 
Memorials, 0. 

The first volume of Dr. Arthur W. Calhoun's Social History of the 
American Family from Colonial Times to the Present (Cleveland, U.S.A. : 
Arthur H. Clark, 1917) covers the colonial period, and the second and third 
volumes are to cover the period from independence to the Civil War and the 
last fifty years respectively. One approaches with some diffidence a work 
which the author assures us is * the most complete, fundamental, and 
authoritative treatment of the field that it covers ', and could wish that 


to these merits had been added a little more succinctness in treatment 
and a clearer focussing of conclusions. The results are hardly proportionate 
to the matter accumulated. But the subject is interesting and the author 
has worked through a good deal of material, though it is difficult to tell 
from his bibliography what he regards as ' source materials ' and what 
as secondary authorities. His general conclusion is that the colonial family, 
both in New England and the South, was * a property institution dominated 
by middle-class standards, and operating as an agency of social control in 
the midst of a social order governed by the interests of a forceful aristocracy 
which shaped religion, education, politics, and all else to its own profit '. 
He suggests that the liberty of the modern American girl is inherited from 
the freedom of colonial conditions, which prevented the seclusion of girls ; 
and that the scarcity of capital iij the colonies favoured the growth of 
a tendency to mercenary marriage. It seems clear that the conditions 
favoured marriage and early marriage, large families, and a high and free 
position for women, but the colonial family does not seem to have differed 
much from the English family at the same time. Social history requires an 
insight and discrimination in the selection and use of materials which we do 
not find in this work. We should have expected a careful study of colonial 
legislation on marriage, divorce, and inheritance, and of the growth of popu- 
lation, but we do not find these ; and though the author collects informa- 
tion of interesting customs, and quotes freely to show the state of opinion on 
marriage and sex questions, he has not approached his subject, or handled his 
material, very scientifically, and he leaves the reader in the end in some doubt 
as to what are the results of his extensive researches. E. A. B. 

It is generally believed that the principles of warfare are almost 
constant, while its technique is always changing. In England, however, 
military history is taught in as concrete a form as possible. No great value 
is attached to generalizations as to the qualities required in an ideal 
commander of men. They are apt to be truisms. In France and Germany 
they loom much more largely in the soldier's literature, which quotes 
copiously from text-books on the military spirit. Thus the editor of 
Le Traite de la Guerre en general (Paris : Bossard, 1917) attaches a topical 
importance to his reprint of an interesting volume written by ' an Officer 
of Distinction ' on the duties of all ranks in the army, and first published 
in 1742. It contains admirable advice as to the need to maintain the men's 
health and enjoyment of life, while explaining the necessity of strict 
discipline among the troublesome levies of that age in France. Of its 
observations, those treating on the utility of games before an offensive, 
on the certainty of punishment, and on the impossibility of expecting 
a general to control an action when once it has been launched, are of the 
most practical value. The writer commented on the inimitable docility 
of German armies. Cr. B. H. 

M. A. Perroud explains in his introduction to La Proscription des 
Girondins (Toulouse : Privat, 1917) that he has not attempted to discuss 
the cause which led to the fall of the party, but simply to trace the stages 
in the proscription of the 191 individuals whom he includes as belonging 


to the group, from 15 April 1793, when the first list of 22 names was 
laid before the Convention, down to the recall of the 23 survivors on 
8 March 1795. The book, therefore, is little more than a series of dates and 
nominal lists, though M. Perroud permits himself a digression of one 
chapter to discuss the delay during the winter of 1793 to 1794 in the 
execution of the Seventy-five, while Robespierre used them as pawns in 
his game against the Hebertists. The lists are compiled with great care, 
and the ultimate fate of every Girondin is shown, but the effect is some- 
what bewildering, and the changes in the lists appear unaccountable. 
M. Perroud says that, as he was unable to work in Paris, he had to rely on 
M. Tuetey's monumental work, and not on the original documents in the 
Archives Nationales. The book, in fact, is a rearrangement and restate- 
ment of published material, and though useful to the student for purposes 
of reference will not add to his knowledge. M. A. P. 

In the second volume of Germany, 1815-1900, by Sir Adolphus William 
Ward and Professor Spenser Wilkinson (Cambridge : University Press, 
1917), the joint authors have dealt with a period (1852-71) covered 
by the recollection of persons now living and with events grander and 
more impressive than any recorded in the former volume. The Master 
of Peterhouse confines himself to political history, leaving Mr. Wilkinson 
to describe the three wars which prepared the union of Germany under 
Prussia. The Master's narrative is perhaps the most striking example 
in historical literature of that serene detachment, of that absolute impar- 
tiality so often praised and so rarely attained. From first to last we have 
not found a single reference to the present war or a single phrase coloured 
by the fact that Germany is at this moment the mortal enemy of Great 
Britain. Bismarck's career is sketched as calmly as though he had lived 
two thousand years ago, and the incident of the Ems telegram is told with 
an equity verging upon indulgence. As in the former volume, so in this, 
the writer's wealth of knowledge makes itself felt on every page. And 
with the two great virtues of knowledge and impartiality certain little 
failings reappear. As before the Master seems now and then to forget 
how little his public knows about persons and movements with which he 
is perfectly familiar. The style is somewhat drowsy and the reader 
occasionally finds an effort necessary to maintain his attention. The 
account of the scheme for the reorganization of the Prussian army (pp. 56-7) 
might have been made clearer. ' Art. Ill established a common indigenate 
in the whole Federal territory ' (p. 358) may perplex persons acquainted 
only with the English tongue. We have noted hardly any slips. But the 
gates of the temple of Janus were, we believe, closed on the return of 
peace and not, as an allusion on p. 227 seems to imply, on the approach 
of war. Mr. Wilkinson has done his work admirably. The account of 
the Franco-German war, in particular, is a model of terseness and lucidity. 
The maps, it is true, are too small for their purpose ; but adequate maps 
could scarcely have been provided in this volume. F. C. M. 

The Life and Letters of Thomas Hodgkin (London : Longmans, 1917) 
give a picture of a man of great nobility of character and of rare personal 

1918 8E0RT NOTICES 286 

charm ; and Dr. Hodgkin's many friends will be thankful to Mrs. Creighton 
for the skill and judgement with which she has arranged her materials. 
To some it may perhaps seem that the domestic letters are given in too 
great abundance ; for, beautiful as they are, they necessarily repeat 
a good deal. It might have been thought that Hodgkin's power of observa- 
tion, his fondness for comparing historical sites, his keen interest in life 
and action, would have come out specially in the letters and journals 
written during foreign travel. But of these Mrs. Creighton has made 
sparing use. It seems to have been a visit to Rome in 1870 that determined 
the future course of his main historical studies (p. 82), though there is 
a hint of it in the previous year (p. 100). In 1873 he proposed to write 
a history of Italy from Theodosius to modern times in nine volume^ (p. 101). 
This vast design was actually carried out so far as the number of volumes 
is concerned ; ^ but Italy and her Invaders, the publication of which began 
in 1880, stopped short at the death of Charles the Great. Mrs. Creighton 
tells us that the first volume did not escape criticism, but she rightly 
dwells on the way in which Hodgkin gave life and colour to a history in 
many respects far remote from modern interests. She might have added 
that when Villari many years later wrote his Barbarian Invasions of Italy 
he mentioned his obligations to the works of various modern historians, 
* and, above all, of Hodgkin '. Excellent as it is throughout, we think 
that the chief attraction of the Life is the picture which it gives of the 
Quaker society of the nineteenth century in its best form. Hodgkin, 
though at first not altogether happy in his relations to the communion 
in which he was born, grew to be the staunchest and most active of Friends, 
and his untiring work in this capacity was that probably by which he 
would have desired most of all to be judged. P. 

Professor Firth's Creighton Lecture for 1917 has been published under 
the title of Then and Now, or a Comparison between the War with Napoleon 
and the present War (London : Macmillan, 1917). It gives an impressive 
description of the dangers which surrounded England in the early years 
of the nineteenth century and of the strongly expressed distrust of govern- 
ment. At the same time Mr. Firth points out how the great increase of 
taxation during those years was made possible by an immense development 
of manufactures and trade. The fluctuations of opinion about the war in 
the peninsula are strikingly illustrated, and the importance of Wellington's 
triumph in establishing ' an almost universal dread of any pretended peace 
with Bonaparte' (quoted from Lord Colchester's Diary) is given full 
emphasis. Our ancestors, Mr. Firth says, * were tried by fiercer extremes 
of good and evil fortune than we have known, the burdens and perils 
which we have borne for three years they endured for seven times as many, 
and did not lay down their arms until they had attained the ends they 
fought for.' Q- 

A series of lectures on The Constitution of Canada in its History and 
Practical Working (New Haven : University Press ; London : Humphrey 

1 They are nominally eight, but vol. i in the second edition was expanded into two 
substantial ' parts *. 


Milford, 1917) by Dr. W. R. Riddell, a justice of the supreme court of 
Ontario, cannot but be of value and interest. It must, however, be con- 
fessed that the historical sketch contained in them adds little to our know- 
ledge. The Proclamation of 1763 is considered without reference to Pro- 
fessor Alvord's convincing view with regard to its origin. By an unfortunate 
misprint Lord Grenville appears as Lord Granville. It is hardly as * an 
inexhaustible well of fact ' that we should have described the main value 
of Lord Durham's Report. It is curious to find a lawyer asserting that 
responsible government was granted by the Union Act, and it is perhaps 
a little out of date still to talk about the * Ashburton Capitulation '. The 
lectures on ' The Constitution in its actual working ' and on ' a Comparative 
View' (of the Canadian and American Constitutions) will be found of more 
importance. H. E. E. 

The Historical Register of the University of Cambridge, being a Supple- 
ment to the Calendar, with a Record of University Offices, Honours, and 
Distinctions to the Year 1910 (Cambridge : University Press, 1917) contains 
the older tripos lists now excluded from the annual Calendar and a great 
deal more. It gives us, for instance, the ordo senioritatis, a rudimentary 
honours' list, which runs from 1498-9, and a full catalogue of officers 
beginning, in the case of the chancellor, so early as 1412. There is also 
an admirable historical introduction, the notes to which furnish both 
instruction and entertainment : we only regret that it was necessary 
to print these in such small type. The revision of the work and in 
particular the identification of the names must have cost enormous 
labour. It has been most successfully performed, and all students of 
university history will be grateful to Dr. J. R. Tanner, the editor, and to 
those who have assisted him in his task, for the accuracy and completeness 
with which they have executed it. R. 

The Publications of the Thoresby Society for 1915 and 1916 (vol. xxiv, 
parts i and ii. Miscellanea) contain much that is of interest for the history 
of Leeds and its district, in particular a Rental of Leeds in 1425 very 
carefully edited by Mr. W. T. Lancaster. Some correspondence relating 
to the Maudes of Hollingshall from 1594 to 1599 printed in part i furnishes 
a text for a long and well-documented paper on the same family by 
Mr. Baildon in part ii. The most interesting contribution to English 
history is the paper by Canon A. Beanlands on The Claim of John de Eston 
to the Albemarle inheritance in 1276 which enabled Edward I to secure 
the estates very cheaply. In part i are continued the Wills of Leeds and 
district, of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and the not less interesting 
series of extracts from the Leeds Mercury for the years 1729-37. S. 

The issues of the Lincoln Record Society, 1917, comprise the Parish 
Registers of Grantham, 1562-1632, and of Alford, 1538-1680, and of Rigshy 
(chapelry), 1561-1679 ; and The Visitation of the County of Lincoln, 1666. 
The records in the Parish Registers are of the most meagre type. At Grant- 
ham, in baptisms, only the child's name is given down to 1572 ; after- 
wards, only the father's name is added. At Alford, the child's name and 


the father's are given down to 1634, but afterwards the mother's name also 
appears. In marriages, only the names of the persons married are given. 
In burials, no note is made of the age of the deceased ; but the father's 
name is generally given in the case of a child, and the husband's name in 
the case of a wife. The Eegister of Grantham appears to be in English 
throughout ; that of Alford, only (as usual) during the Commonwealth 
period, 1652-60. Occurrence of plague in 1604 has a bare note at Grant- 
ham. Heavy mortality from plague, July to October 1630, is recorded 
at Alford. The existing Registers have been collated with, and their gaps 
filled up from, contemporary official transcripts, now in the Lincoln 
Diocesan Registry. The 1 666 Visitation by Sir Edward Bysshe, Clarenceux 
King of Arms, is from the manuscript in the Heralds' College Library. 
It contains the descent, for four generations, of 79 of the gentry of the 
county. In many cases the arms claimed are not given. Anthony Wood 
has noted (Life and Times, ii. 152) that Bysshe's Visitation was * a trite 
thing ', carelessly conducted and incomplete. The volumes are edited in 
a most scholarly manner, with full indexes, and with introductions which 
sum up clearly, and amplify, the points of interest in them. They are 
admirable in respect of paper, type, and binding. A. C. 

The eleventh volume of the London Topographical Record issued by 
the London Topographical Society (17 Baker Street, 1917) includes a 
continuation of Mr. C. L. Kingsford's very valuable * Historical Notes on 
Mediaeval London Houses '. We only regret that, no doubt by rule, he 
has accumulated his references at the end of each Note, instead of placing 
them separately at the points for which they supply evidence. Mr. W. W. 
Braines's paper on the site of * the theatre ' in Shoreditch satisfactorily 
settles a question about which there has been a good deal of dispute. The 
illustrations of buildings which have been recently demolished form an 
interesting feature in the Record, which might well be copied by other 
local societies. T. 

Mr. F. Heywood Summer's book on The Ancient Earthworks of the 
New Forest (Chiswick Press, 1917) is a companion volume to his 
work on the earthworks of Cranbourne Chase, and is carried out on the 
same lines. The author has made himself well acquainted with his material 
by personal visits of inspection, sometimes supplemented by slight excava- 
tions. The majority of the earthworks are naturally of prehistoric or 
Roman date, but the later examples have afforded an opportunity for 
bringing together a considerable amount of interesting documentary 
evidence of enclosures for plantations and the like within the limits of 
the Forest during the Middle Ages. The whole forms a useful compendium 
on the earthworks, which in each case are accompanied by a plan or sketch 
or both, in a style at once attractive and clear, from the author's own pen. 

E. T. L. 

The third volume of the Rev. H. E. Salter's Cartulary of the Hospital 
of St. John the Baptist (Oxford : Univeisity Press, 1917) completes a piece 
of solid and conscientious work which is a good model for the imitation of 

288 SHORT NOTICES April 1918 

local societies. It cortains a preface to the whole book giving a history of 
the hospital compiled largely from the Patent and Close KoUs and from 
Twyne's MSS., which have preserved some writs of which there is no other 
known record. The text of the volume is devoted to the rule of the 
hospital, a list of the gifts of property to the hospital before 1246, an 
account of receipts and expenses for 1340, a magnificent series of 
Kentals from about 1287 to 1680, and the Fine Books from 1660 to 
1870. There is also a survey of 1791. The appendixes contain 
lists of the Oxford deeds in the Cartulary and in the Magdalen College 
muniment room respectively and a most interesting paper on the archi- 
tectural remains of the hospital by Mr. K. T. Gunther, based on the rough 
notes and drawings of J. C. Buckler, supplemented by the results of recent 
original observations. From a remark in the preface (p. xxiv) it seems 
as though the editor had not consulted the manuscript Calendar of Close 
Rolls of Henry III at the Public Record Office which fills up the interval 
between the printed Close Rolls and the Calendar beginning in 1272. The 
lack of information as to Corrodies is due to the fact that the requests 
for them being of a formal nature ceased to be enrolled. There are, 
however, at the Record Office a number of letters of excuse from religious 
houses which do not seem to have been examined. The rentals and fine 
books have been used to prepare a careful estimate of the fluctuations 
in the value of house property in Oxford, but this takes no account of 
changes in value of money due to the debasement of the coinage. The 
explanation of the system of fines and beneficial leases (pp. 329-37) is 
especially valuable, as this system, usually in conjunction with leases for 
three lives, was in general use at one time on most ecclesiastical estates 
and in the duchy of Cornwall. The appendix on the architecture is illus- 
trated from Buckler's drawings and from Agas's map and an old picture 
of the college. It contains some curious details as to medieval sanitar} 
arrangements. The index, though good, might have included a few more 
subject-entries, and it would have been well to give the modern as well as 
the ancient names of the streets mentioned. It is curious to observe that 
the garden of St. William's Hall (occupied by Exeter College) had already 
been lost by 1480. C. J. 

The patriotic piety of its inhabitants has furnished the sinews of war 
for Mr. J. C. Andersen to produce a Jubilee History of South Canterbury 
(Auckland, New Zealand : Whitcombe & Tombs, 1916) which contains a 
mass of information regarding the past of that small community. Un- 
fortunately South Canterbury began its life more than a year later than 
the parent settlement, so that the book contains nothing regarding the 
romantic story of the Canterbury pioneers. It is the misfortune not the 
fault of Mr. Andersen that the great amount of material that he has col- 
lected refers, almost exclusively, to the bypaths of New Zealand history. 

H. E. E. 


The English 

Historical Review 


Centurtation in Roman Britain 

REGULARLY owned and regularly surveyed land in the 
Roman Empire was, at least in theory, divided into rectangu- 
lar (square or oblong) plots marked off by roads, paths (limites), or 
other visible signs. The plot unit was the centuria, an area con- 
nected by tradition with the infancy of Rome ; but the tradition, 
like most traditions, has been cumbered with bad professional 
theory. To put it shortly, it seems that the centuria was in 
general a plot of 200 iugera, which formed 100 heredia in the 
earliest Roman division of land ; land thus divided was called 
ager limitatus, or perhaps more commonly ager centuriatus (often 
plural, agri centuriati), by Roman writers on land-surveying. 
No specific directions seem to have been laid down as to what 
kinds of land ought to be ' limitate ' or * centuriate ', but it is 
pretty plain that lands held under a proper Roman tenure or 
lands allotted formally by the Roman government to citizens 
must have been thus divided. It would follow that the terri- 
torium of, say, a provincial colonia — ^land originally set aside 
by the government as the estate of a town which was to 
possess municipal status and to be administered under a definite 
charter — would be centuriated when first surveyed and laid out.^ 
For the rest, we must have recourse to archaeology, to provide 
examples illustrating the actual nature of the land-division and 
the extent of its survivals. Of these survivals some remarkable 
cases have been detected in Mediterranean countries, in which 
the boundaries of the Roman limitatio have survived sweeping 

* I venture the caution here that Londinium was not a colonia ; and wo cannot 
assume for it a territorium with agri centuriati. There is no evidence that Romano - 
British towns, other than municipia or coloniae, had territoria apart from the 
cantons to which they belonged. Most towns in the Graeco-Roman world had ' terri- 
tories ' ; whether the Celtic cantonal towns had, is not so clear. 


* All rights reserved. 


changes of race, civilization, law, and government. The limites, 
or paths, which bounded the individual plots, seem to have been 
public paths, and, perhaps for that reason, have survived in some 
cases almost beyond belief. In Africa Proconsularis (Tunis), 
despite a Mohammedan conquest, despite complete changes in 
language, race, and civihzation, many of the boundary paths 
made for the Roman land-divisions can still be traced on the 
actual soil, and there are there vestiges also, mainly epigraphic, 
of two great base-lines, cardo and decumanus, crossing at right- 
angles, on which the detailed land-surveying of the province, as 
a whole, was based. There was, in short, in Roman Tunis, a more 
or less systematic survey, which served as a basis of taxation, 
while the two base-lines formed a guide for subsequent Umitatio 
of any special neighbourhood in it.^ 

In Italy survivals of Roman land-centuriation are naturally 
not rare. Among the most striking examples is the ' Graticolato ' 
in the Po valley, which can (or could) be seen from the upper 
slopes of the Apennines, as you look out from them north-east 
over the flat Emilian plain. For instance, the modern map shows 
(Fig. 1) some 5 miles north-east of Padua a roughly square 
patch, about 6 miles broad and long, where the present roads 
and tracks offer the pattern of a singularly regular chessboard. 
Another, less perfect patch Hes 6 or 8 miles east of Modena, on 
the north side of the Via Aemilia, in the same Po valley. Traces 
are also visible in Italy much further south, in the rich plain 
round Naples, Capua, and Caserta. In the rest of Europe they 
are rare ; an inscription at Orange, in Provence, indicates ^ that 
there, doubtless in the territorium round the colonia of Arausio, 
the land was centuriated, but no one seems to have detected any 
survivals of the ancient boundary paths or marks of Umitatio. 
Nor do traces seem to have been detected elsewhere in Gaul, 
though Southern Gaul was thoroughly romanized and full of 
coloniae, and the continuity between Roman Gaul and modern 
France is very close. In Germany the only case yet noted seems 
to be a supposed survival of limites at Friedberg, in the Wetterau, 
which was adduced by Meitzen over twenty years ago ; the 

2 This has been worked out for Roman Africa by (amongst others) Adolf Schulten 
(Lex Manciana, Berlin, 1897 ; &e.), by W. Barthel — whose death in war is no small loss 
to Roman historical studies — {Bonner Jahrbucher, cxx, 1911), as well as by the French 
scholar M. J. Toutain {Le Cadastre Eomain d' Afrique, 1908, and other works); their 
views do not altogether agree in detail, but the differences do not here concern us. 
For Umitatio near Capua (mentioned below in the text) see J. Beloch's Campanien 
(Berlin, 1879), and generally Schulten's Romische Flurteilung und ihre Bested and his 
maps (Berlin, 1898). A complete map of the Po plain in Roman times would re- 
semble the U.S.A. geological survey maps of many American States, save that the 
units involved are in the U.S.A. very much larger than those in Lombardy. 

» See my Ancient ToiLm- Planning (Oxford, 1913), p. 107, fig. 21 ; or H. Stuart Jones, 
Cotnpanion to Soman History (1912), p. 22, fig. 5. 


evidence for it is, to my mind, not at all convincing, though it 
has been accepted by the Reichs-Limeskommission.^ 

Fig. 1. Traces of Centtjriation between Venice and PADtrA. 

It will be noted that the centuriation north of the Musonc stream is differently 

oriented from that south of it. 

Numerous attempts have been made to detect centuriation, 
or something Hke it, in Britain. The old controversy, as to the 

* A. Meitzen, Siedelung und Agrarwesen der Germanen (Berlin, 1895), iii. 157 ; 
E. Schmidt, Kastell Friedberg {Der Obergerm.-raetische Limes, Lfg. 39, 1913), p. 10. 



continuity between Roman Britain and Saxon England, has 
naturally made some antiquaries keen to detect such traces — 
though, in reality, as I have pointed out, they prove little as to 
continuity of civilization. Mr. H. C. Coote, who died in 1885, 
in a treatise of which ingenuity and ignorance are about equally 
characteristic, tried to collect evidence, particularly from inscrip- 
tions, which he misinterpreted wholesale. For instance, a stone 
found at Manchester ^ states that ' the century of Candidus ' — 
i.e. a company commanded by a centurion Candidus — built 24 ft. 
of the wall (a stone wall, as excavation has shown) round the 
Roman castellum there. It is an ordinary Roman military text, 
with hundreds of parallels, and it is simply a record of building 
work achieved by soldiers. In Mr. Coote 's hands it becomes 
a record of ' the " centuria " or plot of Candidus, situated on the 
twentieth decumanal and the fourth cardinal line '.^ Since he 
wrote, many scattered attempts have been made to trace remains 
of centuriation in various parts of England. The late Liverpool 
antiquary, Mr. W. Thompson Watkin (1836-88), was particularly 
fond of discovering botontini (earthen mounds, marking 
boundaries) in his own district, Cheshire and Lancashire, although, 
according to Mommsen, these botontini were a local African 
peculiarity, which would not be expected in Britain.'' Ten or 
twelve years ago, Mr. H. T. Croft on again tried to point out 
' agrimensorial remains ' round Manchester ; so far as I can 
judge, few of these remains are Roman, and none can properly 
claim to be ' agrimensorial '. About the same time, Mr. Montagu 
Sharpe, now chairman of the Middlesex Quarter Sessions and 
County Council, issued two works, ^ in which he tried to trace 
centuriation in his own county, near London. I do not think 
that he succeeded better than his predecessors ; certainly his 
arguments on this point seem to me far less convincing than his 
attractive earlier theory concerning Coway Stakes and the place 
where Caesar may have crossed the Thames, and I cannot con- 
sider that he has detected real traces of centuriation surviving 
in modern Middlesex. ^ The position, therefore, is that 
we have, so far, no trustworthy evidence for centuriation in 
Britain. So well as I can judge, all these attempts fail because 
they furnish no traces of roads laid out accurately straight, 
running in direct lines or at right angles. They unquestionably 
approximate to that, but they do not reach it and yield no more 

* Corpus Inscri'ptwnum Latinarum, vii. 215. Found before 1607, now lost. First 
copied by Camden, Britannia, ed. 1607, p. 610. 

• Archaeologia, xlii. 151 (1867) ; Romans oj Britain, 1878. 

' Roman Lancashire. (1883), pp. 223 ff., &c. For Mommsen's view, see his Oesam- 
mtltt Schriften, vii. 479. 

» Antiquities of Middlesex (Brentford, 1905) ; Roman Centuriation of the Middlesex 
District (Brentford, 1908). » See above, p. 289, p. 1. 



than can be explained by chance. The straight Hne and the right 
angle are the marks which sunder even the simplest civilization 
from barbarism. 

I wish here to put forward a suggestion as to a possible trace 
of the practice in Essex. I do not claim it as a clear proof, but 
merely as a possibility which I cannot explain otherwise, which 
needs an explanation, and which has, I think, not been hitherto 
adduced by any writer. It is, however, a mere fragment, a waif 
or stray from an older order which has otherwise perished. 
English history since about a.d. 400 has not been such that we 
could hope to find here any coherent survival from Roman days 
and ways. While, then, I beheve that it is sufficiently distinct to 
justify my hypothesis, I warn the reader that it has not what 
might be called the rhetorical force of the survivals shewn in Fig. 1. 
I merely claim that unless we assume that, in the region in 
question, there once existed some such road-scheme, the traces 
visible to-day are not intelligible. 

In Essex and the region of East Anglia, the main Roman 
centre was the municipality Colonia Victricensis,^^ Camulodunum, 
situated where Colchester now stands. From this town a Roman 
road ran inland, due west for about 30 miles to the Hertfordshire 
border near Bishop's Stortford ; it is traceable in the still-used 
highway called * Stane Street '. About 15 miles west from 
Colchester, this road traverses the little town of Braintree, which 
has yielded a few rather insignificant Roman remains (coins, 
pottery, burials, &c.). Here another road running from north- 
east to south-west impinges on it from the north, and crosses it 
obliquely, running on south-westwards in the same straight line. 
This oblique road follows its straight line with almost mathe- 
matical precision. It starts 4 miles north of Braintree near 
Oosfield, passes through Braintree, and continues southwards, 
preserving the same straight direction for 7-| miles more, near 
Beddalls End and the group of Leigh villages, to Little Waltham. 
It is difficult not to think that the whole straight line, nearly 
12 miles in all, is perhaps Roman. Unfortunately, at each end, 
this straight line ' stops in air '. No Roman remains of signifi- 
cance are recorded as having been found near Gosfield, or near 
Little Waltham, nor can the straight section of road be traced 
further south or north. Yet a stretch of straight road 12 miles 
long requires explanation in England : unless other reasons for 
its straightness be discoverable, one has some right to consider 
it as likely to be Roman. In our island, straight roads of other 
than Roman origin seem to occur only in flat districts, such as 
the Fens, especially where a large tract of unenclosed or unoccu- 
pied land has been all in one ownership, and has been enclosed 

i» CIL. xiv. 3955 (Dessau 2740). 




or developed all at one moment, so that extensive roadmaking 
on a definite scheme might be required. Round Braintree, there 
is no record of any such activity, nor is the country here so flat 
as to have tempted English road-makers of any date to have 
constructed a long, direct road across it. Nor, again, does the 
road connect any two points of such modern importance that 
a piece of specific modern road-making might be expected here.^* 

Moreover, the puzzle is not confined to this particular road. 
Eight miles west of Braintree, along Stane Street, is the little 
* town ' of Great Dunmow. Here again a road running from 
north-east to south-west impinges on, or perhaps rather, diverges 
from, Stane Street ; from Dunmow it runs south-west through 
the district known as ' the Rodings ', then, climbing out of the 
valley of the river Chelmer, it descends finally into the valley of 
the river Roding. All this lies south-west of Dunmow ; but 
probably the road also ran north-east from Dunmow, towards 
Great Bardfield and Clare, and is connected with a medieval 
English road, or route, known to map-makers as Suffolk Way. 
But its traces here are dim and indistinct, and by no means 
accurately straight, and do not justify conjectures of Roman 
origin ; in any case, this part is likely to have been, not a Roman 
but a medieval thoroughfare for monastic use, leading, perhaps,, 
from London and its neighbourhood to the abbeys at Clare and 
Bury St. Edmunds. 

However, the section south of Dunmow is clear to-day, in the 
form of a modern road, which for 5 miles, between the valleys 
of the Chelmer and the Roding, follows a true straight line. 
A straight stretch of 5 miles is hardly long enough to justify us in 
assuming without other evidence a Roman origin ; but this 
stretch is not only straight ; it is parallel with the other NE. and 
SW. road, which I have mentioned above as running from near 
Gosfield through Braintree to near Little Waltham. The distance 
between the two straight roads is, as I have said, about 7 J miles 
(measured perpendicularly to each road). The parallelism of 
these two roads can hardly be accidental. A large landowner, 
laying out a considerable area on a great scale, might conceivably 
wish to construct two roads 8 miles apart, running mathematically 
parallel, the one straight for 5 miles, the other for 12. That would 
be done in accordance with a general road-scheme, applying to H 
a whole area. Without such general scheme, the chances against 
parallelism occurring between two roads of the specified lengths 
and distance seem to be overwhelming. Now if the Braintree 
road be Roman, it would seem to follow that the Dunmow road 

" See OIL. xii. 531, and pp. 65, 84. The Gosfield-Braintree-Little Waltham road 
is as old as 1602, as it is shown correctly in the map by Hans Woutneel, of that date. 
The Dunmow road appears correctly on the same map. 


^ \t ^ 


belonging to the same road-scheme would also be Roman. 
Braintree is 15 miles, Dunmow 23 miles, west of the colonia at 
Colchester. I suggest that, when Claudius founded this munici- 
paUty, he provided it with an ample territorium, which stretched 
westward to Dunmow or even perhaps as far as the Stort at 
Bishop's Stortford, on the western limit of modern Essex .^^ 

The territorium of Roman Colchester clearly cannot have 
stretched far to the east, for the sea is near, and an extension 
of 30 miles inland to the Stort does not seem an unreasonable 
allowance for a town to which its imperial founder, Claudius, 
attached much importance. Many Roman provincial munici- 
palities seem to have had territoria as large as an average English 
county .^^ If Colchester's territorium was bounded on the west 
by the Stort, the whole of northern Essex, at least as far south 
as Little Waltham, would have fallen within it, and would have 
been surveyed and centuriated on one general scheme. This 
would naturally give parallel limites ; and two of these might 
easily survive the chances of time, and remain as waifs and strays 
in modern Essex. No one who has worked on the subject will 
deny the possibility of such sporadic survivals. The scantiness 
of our knowledge constantly forbids us to guess in detail why a 
road has survived in one place and vanished in another. In such 
cases, chance, the interaction of uncounted imponderable forces, 
works very freely, and we can seldom hope to analyse the result. 
We can only note what has happened. I here claim simply that 

(a) the parallelism of the roads noted above can only be ex- 
plained if we assume some special process to have been at work ; 

(b) the existence of the neighbouring colonia, ' Camulodunum ', is 
indisputable ; (c) the centuriation of its land within a reasonable 
distance of it would provide a quite possible reason for the 
paralleHsm of roads ; and lastly, {d) that such centuriation of its 
land is what we should otherwise expect. 

If this be so, do any conclusions follow respecting Roman 
Britain ? I cannot affirm that they do. As I have said above,^* 
the boundaries of Roman centuriate land have in modern 
Tunis survived all manner of violent historical changes. No one 
would allege that the civilization of modern Tunis has real con- 
nexion with that of Roman Africa Proconsularis. And the 
fact, if it be a fact, that in one part of England a singular survival 
remains, does not prove that the people of eastern Essex have 
any special continuity with Rome. F. Haverfield. 

*" I have no archaeological evidence to support this guess. I select the Stort since 
it is the first natural boundary which would confront any one journeying due west 
from Colchester along Stane Street. 

" See CIL. xii. 531, and pp. 65, 84, &c. ^* See p. 290. 


1918 297 

The Early History of the Merchants 

THE Company of the Staple was the oldest trading company 
in England. In the time of Mary and EUzabeth, when the 
great London regulated companies dealt with sovereigns almost as 
equals, the merchants of the staple were among the richest in 
London. After the loss of the staple port of Calais, however, 
the company could hardly maintain itself ; and as a consequence 
it soon lost ground before its still prosperous rivals, the Merchant 
Adventurers. Although existing in name at least down to our 
own days, the Company of the Staple ceased to have any influence 
upon trade after the civil war. But before that there were three 
or four centuries when the merchants of the company were the 
most powerful in the kingdom, when they helped to determine 
matters of national policy, and laid the foundation for England's 
future greatness in foreign trade. The history of the Company 
of the Staple thus belongs to the period of transition between 
medieval and modern times, when it was one of the forces helping 
to mould the economic life of the nation. 

In spite of its manifest importance and of the fact that every 
writer dealing with the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries must 
continually acknowledge the influence of the company, our 
knowledge of the history of the merchants of the staple is still 
very imperfect. A chapter of Georg Schanz's Englische Handels- 
politik is devoted to its later history and describes the bitter 
losing struggle with the merchant adventurers in the time of 
Henry VII .^ This account followed another history of the earher 
period by W. von Ochenkowski.^ But in both cases more 
attention was paid to the- development of trade than to the 
organization of the company. Charles Gross dealt with this 
latter phase of the subject in a section of very great value .^ 
But he did not answer the questions which he himself raised 
as to the relation of the" staplers to their rivals, the merchant 

» Englische Handelsjxilitik gegen Ende dts Mitklalters, i. 327-51 (Leipzig, 1881). 
^ Englands wirthschaftliche Entwickdung im Ausgange dcs Mittdallcrs, pp. 187 ff. 
(Jena, 1879). 

3 The Gild Merclmnt, i. 140-8 (Oxford, 1890). 


adventurers, or to the older organizations of the gild merchant. 
The relation of the company to the home staples is another 
interesting problem on which his discovery of contemporary rolls 
has thrown some light."* A recent dissertation by Miss A. L. 
Jenckes has also brought together facts and documents valuacle 
for a more complete history of the company.^ All these accounts, 
even that of Gross, dwell chiefly on the history of the staplers 
and the development of the company after the middle of the 
fourteenth century, when it was already of national importance 
and had assumed its mature form. But the events and forces 
that brought it into existence, shaped it to the later characteristic 
semi-official duties, and gave it the monopoty of the woollen 
trade, have not been so clearly worked out. 

The Company of the Staple, by its first known charter of 
1313, was given control over all export of staple wares, chiefly 
wool, hides, and tin, to the Netherlands.^ All goods exported 
from England were to go from an English staple port to a mart 
town on the Continent. The collection of the king's customs on 
staple wares was to be made at these ports, the royal collector 
acting with the representative of the merchants. For the greater 
part of the fourteenth century the foreign staple was at Bruges, 
although it was frequently transferred for short periods of time. 
But after the capture of Calais in 1347, the advantages of the older 
staple were less obvious. Being on the Continent, yet under 
English government, Calais did not suffer from divided interests 
in trade and could offer greater convenience for the collection of 
customs than a foreign city. After several experiments, therefore, 
the staple was finally fixed at Calais in 1373, and remained there 
until the loss of the city in 1558. Meanwhile the merchants of 
the company, mostly rich Londoners, under stimulus of the 
demands of Flemish weavers, saw their trade increase to national 
importance. But the growth of the English woollen manufacture 
by the end of: the fourteenth century began seriously to threaten 
their business, and as the merchant adventurers' trade in manu- 
factured cloth improved, the trade in raw wools diminished. An 
attempt of the staplers to secure part of this new trade, alleging 
an earlier right, brought on a long struggle between the two 
companies in which the staplers were finally worsted. This 
struggle and the defeat of the staplers was largely decided during 
the reign of Henry VII. It was, therefore, to a company of already 
decaying fortunes that the loss of Calais dealt almost a final blow. 
Although the merchants claimed a certain pre-eminence in trade 
down to the time of the civil war, their importance had long been 
a thing of the past. 

* The Gild Merchant, p. 141, note 2. 

* The Staple of England (Philadelphia, 1908). « Printed ibid., pp. 61 f. 


The history of the merchants of the staple is therefore one 
of a long decKne. The great Statute of the Staple, passed in 
1353, shows the organization in its prime, more powerful than 
it ever was afterwards, when its trade was not yet seriously 
threatened by the merchant adventurers and the latter company 
had hardly more than taken shape. This statute is a landmark 
in the company's history : it settled the power and functions 
of local staple ports, of officers, and of courts, and was therefore 
authoritative whenever staple regulations were in force. From 
that time also the position of the company was fixed and stable 
and its organization was to a large extent settled. But what was 
the history of the company before the statute ? Did the organiza- 
tion then show growing functions and increase of powers ? 

The Statute of the Staple, representing the early maturity 
of the company, consists of twenty-seven chapters, and is 
full of instructive detail.' Originally issued by Edward III 
as an ordinance, it was accepted by parliament, so that 
later documents usually refer to it as a statute. It is the first 
privilege issued to the company which in any way defines or 
describes its powers. Before this in 1341 a partial declaration 
of the company's rights and privileges was made by the king,^ 
and still earlier there is what has been called the first charter of 
the company, of 1313. In addition there are numerous grants 
of privilege at Bruges ; the longest, almost contemporaneous 
with the statute, agrees with it in many points word for word.^ 
In order to avoid anachronisms and to trace out the earUer 
history of the company before the statute, this latter document 
has been used as a starting-point, to be illustrated almost entirely 
from documents of the previous half- century, and, where the 
material requires, from the reign of Edward I. 

The Company of the Staple had, from the beginning, a double 
character. First, there existed in each of the chief ports of the 
kingdom a local organization : this was the home staple. There 
was also a larger and more or less federated body consisting of 
merchants from all parts of England. Home staples, or staple 
ports, it must be understood, were the principal places for the 
export of wares, and these remained staples even while there 
was a foreign mart, although for the time they were less inde- The king might occasionally create a staple port, 

' Statutes of the Realm, i. 373 £f. (Record Commission, 1810-28). 

* Printed bv Miss Jenckes, p. 62. 

« Cartulairede VAvcienne Estaple de Bruges, i. 226-32 (Bruges, 1904) in the Becueil 
rfe Chroniques published by the Societe d'fimulation de Bruges. 

»» Gross found local staple rolls during the time when there was a foreign staple, 
thus proving that the local staples were not abolished at such a time. Miss Jenckes 
also recognizes this fact, although in other places she writes as though foreign and home 
staples alternated (pp. 8f.). See also Sir J. H. Ramsay, The Genesis of Lancaster, 
ii. 89-91 (Oxford, 1913). 


but that was probably a small town to which he was showing 
some special favour.^^ There were also many other towns which 
were sometimes included among the staple ports and sometimes 
not.^^ If any towns were thus excluded from participation in 
such valued privileges and rights, it is strange that we hear of 
few complaints on this score. Medieval boroughs were tenacious 
of their rights and never took easily the abolition of privileges 
once secured. We may conclude therefore that there was some 
reason for this lack of complaint ; possibly there was a general 
understanding as to which ports should enjoy staple rights. 
Much was probably determined by the fact whether trade was 
active or not. Thus wherever trade was active, there was a staple 
port. Bristol, Newcastle, and London are always mentioned when 
ports in their vicinity are spoken of ; other towns, where trade 
w^as small and not well known, might be included or omitted 
from a list without intentional injury or the loss of any real 

The local staple had a strong individuality of its own as a 
member of a more general organization of all the ' merchants of the 
realm '.^^ The general society, however, does not seem to have con- 
sisted of a mere combination of the local bodies. It was almost as 
distinct as they were, and it included merchants from every part of 
England. We can see it in two different forms. First, it appears in 
a group of merchants gathered for business in the foreign staple. 
Whenever merchants from any recognized staple port were in the 
mart town, they attended meetings of this association. At first 
it probablj^ included all English merchants there ; but as time 
passed, it became more exclusive. The general court, as we may 
call it from analogy to the later merchant adventurers,^* was 
therefore a composite and more or less fluctuating body. But 
thus it was all the more representative of various parts of England, 
although Londoners, we may suppose, were greatly in the majority. 
The home staples and the foreign mart constituted the permanent 
institutions of the company. But at intervals, sometimes it 
seems almost yearly, there was a meeting of merchants from all 
parts of England in London to determine questions of great 
moment, such as the removal of the staple from one foreign port 
to another, the election of the head of the company, or important 

" As at Queenborough, when merchants of Sandwich were directed to go there 
instead of to Canterbury, since the king had removed the staple : Calendar of Close 
Bolls, 1S64-5, p. 479. 

" See Miss Jenckes, pp. 53- 5. Lists of staple ports are to be found attached to 
almost every document dealing with the trade in wool as well as with the staple in the 
Close Rolls, Patent Rolls, statutes, and writs. 

^* This is the term most frequently used, especially between 1313 and 1320. The 
charter of 1313 was granted to the ' mayor and merchants of the realm \ 

" See W. E. Lingelbach, The Merchant Adventurers of England, their Laws and 
Ordinances, Introd., p. xv (Philadelphia, 1902). 



business with the king. Of this association we shall speak more 
fully later. 

There was not much centraHzation. The general association 
probably had little power to regulate the conduct of the members, 
but it could help in distributing information and in securing 
uniformity of definition and of action. In this way it was especially 
useful to the king. Whenever he wished to obtain information, 
to change details of administration, or to reorganize mercantile 
practice, he could do so through one or the other of these central 
bodies. Probably for this reason the Company of the Staple has 
been regarded as a mere creature of the government. Through- 
out the later middle ages the king was gradually assuming 
functions which had formerly belonged to the towns. Uniformity 
of local practice made this process easier, and this, without doubt, 
the staplers helped greatly to promote. Already before the 
definite organization of the company, much had been done by 
the towns themselves in adopting similar customs and enacting 
similar laws and in co-operating through similar bodies of town 
and foreign merchants. After the opening of the fourteenth 
century the process was greatly facilitated. The staplers seem 
to have acted as intermediaries between the towns and the king, 
and took their part in the general movement for centralization. 
But the force making for uniformity exerted by this central body 
was to some extent outweighed by the overpowering influence 
exerted by the London merchants. Sometimes it is difficult 
to tell whether a measure is carried out by Londoners alone, or 
whether merchants from all the ports participate and are there- 
fore bound by it. 

As to the functions of the company, these can best be studied 
from the same two points of view. The local court of the staple 
had a strong and persistent individuality, shown in the many 
names for societies and members and in their widely different 
local practices and customs. It was the local court of the staple 
which determined what were the old customary privileges of 
the townsmen, and what the disabiUties of aliens. All merchants 
of the staple were organized in this court for local administration.^^ 
From the statute we know that the members included all mer- 
chants from the town, whether native or alien. It would seem 
that the assembled suitors took an active part in it, for their 
consent is usually recorded. The court was presided over by an 
elected officer, called, after the time of the statute, the mayor of 
the staple.16 There were also two constables and two representa- 
tives of the alien merchants, besides attendants, porters, and 
others. A body of twelve sworn men was summoned to give 

^* SM. of the. Realm, i. 332 f. 

»« Statute of the Staple (27 Edward III), ch. 8. 


judgement ; ^^ and if an alien was concerned^ it included country- 
men of his nation. The court regulated local trade, legislating 
when necessary and upholding especially the town's immemorial 
privileges. These varied considerably from place to place, but 
some popular ones Avere found in every borough of importance ; 
such as the gild merchant, the hanse, freedom from toll throughout 
England in all cities and ports, and the like. 

The merchants, as the most active class in the town, were 
continually attempting to secure further privileges for themselves, 
and so were in frequent conflict with other authorities both in 
the town and in its neighbourhood. As their wealth increased, 
they claimed more and more power, and the tendency of the 
time was to allow it. Once a privilege or right Avas recognized 
the merchants claimed it as of ancient custom. The Statute of 
Acton Burnel in 1283, enlarged two years later by Edward's] 
Statute of Merchants,^^ had given to the local merchants con- 
siderable authority in dealing with mercantile affairs. The] 
New Ordinances expressly limited those powers ' to cases betweeaj 
merchant and merchant ' or in connexion with ' merchant] 
burgages 'P The first charter of the staplers of 1313 granted) 
to the ' mayor and merchants of the realm ' only the power toj 
administer staple regulations and to fine and punish offendersj 
abroad. At home they were to assess the goods of those wh( 
broke the staple regulations, sharing the profits with the kingij 
They also had the right to determine which should be the staple 
mart abroad. These powers With details on the collection oi 
the customs were also granted in the privilege of 1341, and noj 
others. Yet in the Statute of the Staple of 1353 their powers j 
were very great. The judicial power of the merchants thei 
included the settlement of all such cases as were granted by] 
Edward I to merchants throughout the realm (ch. 8). Their 
jurisdiction was declared to be * of people and of all manner of] 
things touching the staple ; and that all merchants coming to 
the staple [which, it should be noted, included all the principal 
ports of the kingdom ^^], their servants and meiny in the staple 
shall be ruled by the law merchant ' (ch. 8). Such regulation 
of the w^hole trade of a neighbouring district is a most charac- 
teristic feature of the administration of a medieval borough ; 
but here it is placed in the hands of the merchants of the staple. 

Like most medieval documents, the statute leaves out much 
that we particularly want to know. It enumerates changes, but 
only indirectly shows the principles on which they were founded. 

^' This body is much like the early scabini in France, the later echevins. 

^8 Stat, of the Realm, i. 53-5 and 98. 

^9 5 Edward II, ch. 33, Stat, of the Realm, i. 157. 

2" See list of staple ports in Appendix, below, p. 319. 


Thus we learn that trade might be carried on at wholesale but 
might not be forestalled (oh. 11). Ordinary town regulations 
prohibited both, especially to aliens. The difference may perhaps 
be due to a desire to favour the aliens, or possibly it was a matter 
of good sense : the volume of trade was already considerable, 
and some wholesale trade must have been necessary. In several 
instances we find the company managing in the^ king's name 
matters only recently under the fullest control of the local 
authorities. For instance, they were to secure the king's weights 
and measures (ch. 10). Local determination of weights and 
measures was very slowly giving way before the king's authority. 
There was constant complaint that townsmen bought by one 
measure and sold by another,^! and people appUed the varying 
custom for their own advantage, wherever they could. The London 
Liher Horn, a little earHer, in reciting the Assize of Weights and 
Measures, shows that, while the stone of fourteen pounds as required 
by the ordinance was becoming common, London still used one 
of twelve and a half pounds ,"^2 ^ good thing for a seller if he could 
at the same time buy at fourteen pounds to a stone. Again, while 
EngUsh towns did not coin their own money, they had from Anglo- 
Saxon days been the seats of the king's mints, with the regula- 
tion of exchange.2^ Edward I probably is responsible for taking 
this into his own hands .^^ Possibly the search for gold and 
silver being carried out of the realm is a rehc of the older and 
fuller right. Both of these were placed by the statute (ch. 13) 
in the hands of the staplers. 

Recognizances of debt, another matter of prime importance 

*' Pegolotti, in Tm Pratica delta Mercatura, frequently (?omjjlain8 of this abuse, 
and tells us what weights were used in different cases. As he was probably in London 
as a member of the Florentine company of the Bardi during the first decade of the 
fourteenth century, and wrote his treatise twenty years later, his information is of 
more value than the vague complaints of Englishmen who might perhaps be trying 
to secure advantages for themselves. His treatise is published in vol. iii of Ddla 
Deci'ma [by Pagnini] (Lucca, 1765). The part relating to England will also be found 
in an appendix to Dr. W. Cunningham's Growth of English Industry and Coinmcrc% 
i, 5th ed. (Cambridge, 1910). 

^2 The Assize of Weights and Measures, assigned in the tStalutcs of the Realtn, 
i. 204, note 4, to an uncertain date of Edward I or Edward II, is almost certainly of 
the time of Edward I, if not earlier. Its traditional date of 1266 seems plausible in 
the light of the commercial reorganization of that year. 

^^ According to the Laws of Aethelstan, there were khig's moneyers in Canterbury, 
Rochester, London, AVinchester, Lewes, Hastings, Chichester, Hampton, Wareham, 
Exeter, Shaftesbury, and other places not named: Aethelstan, ii. xiv. 2, in laeber- 
mann's Gesetze der Angelsachsen, i. 158. 

^* Edward at least entirely reorganized the mints and exchanges, placing them in 
the hands of two merchants, one of them an Italian. In London Orlandino de Podio 
of the Riccardi of Lucca was associated with Gregory de Rokesle of London, one of 
the principal merchants of the city. The mint was finally put in charge of a Gascon, 
William de Turnemire, but the exchange continued to be managed by the merchants. 
See Crump and Hughes, 'English Currency under Edward I' {Economic Journal, 
V. 50-67 ; vii. 185-98). 


to merchants, had been regulated for the kingdom by Edward I. 
The Statute of Acton Burnel mentioned only London, Bristol, and 
York, but the Statute of Merchants extends the system to all 
the ports. These recognizances of debt form the foundation of 
the London letter-books and seem to have led to the production 
of written records in many other towns . Originally they were to be 
made before the mayor and his clerk, that is, before the borough 
authorities. The New Ordinances again suggest, in this connexion, 
a wider extension of the practice than was originally planned ; 
and taking recognizances was, therefore, limited to twelve 
towns .2^ This important function also was placed by the Act of 
Edward III (ch. 9 ) in the hands of the staplers. These were all ad- 
ministrative duties, as to which the merchants may be considered 
in the double light of representatives of the town merchants, 
and hence as interested in securing advantages for the local body, 
and also as officials of the king in maintaining uniform procedure 
in all the ports. 

The mayor and constables as a court had also distinct judicial 
functions. They decided all questions relating to the staple, 
including all those arising within the staple limits, or concerning 
staple goods anywhere. They had jurisdiction over all persons 
engaged in staple business, native and foreign merchants, as 
well as their servants .^^ In the case of foreigners there were, 
however, many restrictions .^^ The Law Merchant was the law 
of the staple. Its courts were also the characteristic mercantile 
courts, sitting 'from day to day ' and administering swift justice, 
just like the pie-powder courts of the fairs ,^8 which were closely 
akin to them. In pleas of land and in cases of felony the plaintiffs 
were under the common law. But in other matters appeal to 
the chancellor was permitted. This process of appeal is perhaps 
foreshadowed by the regulation of the Statute of Acton Burnel, 
empowering the chancellor to record recognizances of debt.^^ 
Being entered on the chancery rolls, we find them forming a 
considerable element in the close rolls of Edward I. Foreigners 
frequently had their debts recorded there, instead of on the local 
rolls, perhaps because they could expect fairer treatment from 
the king than from local authorities. Englishmen also frequently 
used the same method, especially when the debtor and creditor 
were from different towns. While the power of local courts was 
gradually extending, there was more confidence in the king's 
power to distrain on the goods of a delinquent debtor. The 

*» The statute 5 Edward II, ch. 33, names Newcastle, York, Nottingham, for 
counties beyond Trent ; Exeter, Bristol, Southampton, for counties of the south and 
west ; Lincoln, Northampton, London, Canterbury, Shrewsbury, Norwich. 

" 27 Edward III, ch. 8, 16, 19. '■' Ibid., ch. 2, 8, 17, 20, 24, 26. 

" Ibid., ch. 8, 20. 29 13 Edward I, Stat of the Realm, i. 53. 



Statute of 1285 permitted recognizances before the justices of 
the bench, the barons of the exchequer, and the justices itinerant ,^0 
but the method was not often used, certainly not at the time of 
the Statute of the Staple. 

Cases arising on the sea were also in the hands of the merchants 
of the staple in their local court.^i Maritime law and the law 
merchant are very slowly separated in medieval courts. Here 
again we find traces of the moulding influence of Edward I. It 
is not clear when or how the Rolls of Oleron were established 
as the law of the English ports. Whether they were known or 
extensively used before Edward's time remains to be proved, 
but it is very probable. A number of coincidences in England 
about 1266, while amounting to Uttle in themselves, indicate 
as a whole some definite change in regard to maritime affairs. 
First, the young Edward was made lord of Oleron by Henry III 
in 1259,^2 just about the time when he spent two years inGascony.^^ 
While he was still there, the king wrote him a sharp letter regarding 
his alienation of the lordship of Oleron and resumed the grant. 
Secondly, Edward's wife, Eleanor of Castile, was the sister of 
Alfonso the Wise of Castile, and it is remarkable that one of the 
oldest copies of the Rolls of Oleron extant in England has been 
traced to a Castilian source, dated in 1266.^* Thirdly, in that year 
the king gave Edward authority over all merchants of England, 
whether coming to the realm or leaving it,^-^ and required them to 
obtain licences from him. Fourthly, this same year saw also 
the first attempt at a general duty on all goods leaving the realm.^* 

2" 15 Edward I, Stat, of the Realm, i. 100. It is added that the execution of recog- 
nizances made before them (i. e. the justices, barons of the exchequer, &c.) 'shall 
not be done in the form aforesaid [by the law merchant ?], but by the law and in the 
manner provided in the statutes '. " 37 Edward III, ch. 8, 22. 

^* The condition of his lordship was that ho should never alienate it from the 
crown. The anger of the king's council, when they heard that he was about to transfer 
it to one of the hated Lusignans, shows the great value placed on the lordship : Cal. of 
Pat. Bolls, 1258-66, pp. 41 and 141. 

=»» Edward was in Gascony in 1259 and again from 1260 to 1262. The Gascon Rolls 
illustrate his activity there. 

3* Pardessus, Ilistoire des Lois Maritknes, ii. 283 f. (Paris, 1829-30). In the 
introduction to the Oak Book of Southumpton, ii, pp. xxix-xxxvii (Southampton 
Record Society, 1913), the editor, IVIr. P. Studer, gisres reasons for thinking the copy 
of the Rolls at Southampton still older than that used by Pardessus. In this South- 
ampton copy the law of 1285 is also included, but as number 27. 

'5 Foedera, i . 468 ; Cnl. of Pat. Rolls, 1258-66, p. 575. 

^® All foreign and oversea merchants wishing to come to the realm and. carry on 
business there must have a licence from Edward the king's son, and when required 
must leave the realm [perhaps after 40 days], paying ' a reasonable portion on imports 
and exports ' : Foedera, I. c. ; Cal. of Pat. Rolls, I. c. Later documents show that this re?- 
sonable portion of imports and exports took the form of the ' new aid ' agreed upon by 
the merchants and the prince, for which collectors were appointed throughout the 
realm. Hugh Pape, of the Florentine company, was one of the collectors : Cal.^ of Pat. 
Rolls, 1258-66, p. 580 ; 1266-72, p. 142. This ' new aid' was assented to by ' all the 
merchants on this side and beyond seas bringing merchandise to and from the realm V 



The ' New Aid ' was apparently intended to override all local 
j)rivileges and exemptions, but the immediate outcry from 
Englishmen as well as foreigners caused Henry III to withdraw 
it Avithin a year. How much Edward valued its enactment, and 
the revenue he obtained through this means, is shown by the fact 
that it was one of the first measures carried through in his own 
first parliament, when the so-called ' Ancient Customs ' on wool, 
hides, and tin were once for all established.^^ These coincidences 
seem to indicate a consistent policy ; pieced together they must 
have some bearing on maritime matters, on the adjudication of 
maritime cases, and on the organization of the English ports. 
Edward took a great interest in these questions. His first and 
second parliaments both dealt with the question of wrecks at 
sea ; ^^ he was the first to issue a charter to the Cinque Ports 
as a whole, instead of to the individual towns, as had hitherto 
been done.^^ In that dispute, men of the Ports protested against 
a regulation of the Londoners, which they claimed was new. 
Now this regulation is the chapter numbered 35 in the copy 
of the Rolls of Oleron in Liber Horn. In the Castilian copy of 
1266 there were only the first twenty-four chapters, so that it 
looks as though ten new chapters were subsequently added. 
Without going into the vexed question of the early history of 
the Rolls of Oleron and their adoption as the law of the ports, 
the significance of the dated manuscript remains the same.*^ 

Maritime cases, by Edward I's two statutes, were to be decided 
before the mayors and their clerks. Such cases are not mentioned 
in either of the earlier privileges of the merchants staplers ; but 
in the Statute of the Staple (ch. 13) they are assigned as a matter 
of course to the local court, without any suggestion that this was 
a new arrangement. It looks as though they had judged such 
cases before. But very shortly afterwards a change is indicated. 
The beginning of the admiral's jurisdiction has been traced back 
to two grants to the ' captain of the king's ships * in 1357, and to 
the * admiral ' in 1361, of power to hear pleas of the sea.*^ But 
in spite of this, it is probable that the local courts did not lose all 
power, since the statute continued to be confirmed and enforced. 
Moreover a statute of 1414 enacts that ' conservators of the 

^' The first record of it is the writ to the collectors in the ports : Pari. Writs, i. 1 (-)*—. 
38 3 Edward I, ch. 4 ; 4 Edward I, ch. 4 ; Slat, of the Realm, i. 28 and 41. ■■ 

»» In 1.278 : Foedera, i. ii. 588. ^^^ 

*» For the introduction of the Rolls of Oleron see the Black Book of the Admiraltij, 

Rolls Series, i, pp. Ixii-lxx; ii, pp. xxxvi-xxxviii. See also Pardessus and Studer, 

above cited. 

*^ John Pavely was appointed ' capitaneus et ductor ' of the king's ships, with 

power to hear pleas of the sea ' secundum legem maritimam': Foedera, iii. i. 479. 

In 1361 John Beauchamp was made admiral, with similar powers : Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 

1858-61, p. 516. See also T. I.. Mears, 'Admiralty Jurisdiction', in Select Essays in 

Anglo-American Legal History, ii. .320 (Cambridge, 1908). 


Truces ' shall be appointed in every port, to act as deputies of 
the admiral in deciding maritime cases.^s Residing at the ports, 
these officers probably soon fell under local control ; for there 
were in 1835 fifteen ports still claiming to have their own inde- 
pendent admiralty courts, which were then abohshed>'' 

Another important function of the merchants had to do with 
the customs. To the government this was probably the most 
important. The ' Ancient Customs ' of 1275 were assigned for 
collection to two merchants, one from tlie town and another 
from the great Italian firm of the Riccardi of Lucca. This 
plan was continued throughout Edward I's reign and until 
1311, when the New Ordinances required that customs should 
be collected not by aliens, but by Englishmen only.** Probably 
an important reason for using the Italian companies in this 
capacity had been because of their wide ramification, and the 
consequent easy exchange of money. After the organization 
of the staplers in all the ports, they could take the place of the 
ahen merchants. The bulk of the customs were now royal, since 
the great boroughs and many of the smaller ones had already 
secured exemption from older local dues, and the same was true 
of many aliens. It is therefore likely that the Company of the 
Staple began to collect customs in 1313, if they had not already 
done so before. This function, fully described in the Ordinance 
of 1341, is mentioned first in the statute, and was apparently 
regarded as the most important. But the customs collected by 
them were the ' Ancient Customs ' on wool, hides, and tin 
especially. The staplers do not appear to have had much to do 
with the later impositions ; therefore, as duties on other goods 
tended to replace those of the staples, their function assumed 
the form of a control over this particular branch of commerce, 
and hence of a monopoly of the wool-trade. That belongs, 
however, to a later period. 

Meanwhile another tax of somewhat similar nature was 
contributing to the formation of the second great company, the 
merchant adventurers. During the early period of the Company 
of the Staple, its members traded in a number of wares, the list 
[varying from time to time. Tin is sometimes included, but special 
[staples for tin developed and that trade came to be managed by 
[the tinners' parliament.*^ But the staplers dealt chiefly in wool 
land hides ; and these were known as staple wares, for most of our 

i « Stat, of the Realm, ii. 180-1. 

I " In 1835 the courts of the following boroughs, still claiming exemption from 

ladmiralty jurisdiction, were abolished : Aldestowe, *Boston, ♦Bristol, *Dunwich, 

Harwich, *Ipswich, Kingston-on-Humber, *Lynn, Maldon, *Newca8tle-on-T5W, 

Newport, Poole, Southwold, *Southampton, *Yarmouth : Hears, uhi supra, p. 329, 

jiote 5. Staple ports are marked with an asterisk. 

i " 5 Edward II, ch. 4,5,21. 

j *^ See G. R. Lewis, TJie. Stannaries (Boston, U.S.A., 1908). 

' X 2 


period the chief exports of the country. Very early in the four- 
teenth century, however, the manufacture of cloth began to 
assume considerable importance. The king saw an opportunity 
for a new tax and promptly made use of it. This was at first 
only another way of taxing the wool, but it was applied to the 
wool used in domestic manufacture and afterwards exported as 
cloth. Sir James Ramsay has called it rather of the nature of 
an excise than a custom, ^^ but a little later it was certainly a true 
customs duty.*"^ For a long time there was no distinction between 
the merchants dealing in wool and those dealing in cloth. In 
the first half of the fourteenth century both were regarded as 
staple goods, and regulations for trade named the two together. 
The first notice of a tax on ' cloth made in the country ' deals 
with a small ' alnage ' of a penny a cloth for dealing those of 
the approved length and breadth. Sir James Ramsay has found 
accounts from 1328 to 1334 which seem to relate to this ' alnage '. 
After the capture of Calais in 1347 the king saw an opportunity to 
induce merchants to resort there, and he accordingly established 
a separate staple for cloth, feathers, &c., at Calais, while the staple 
for wool still remained at Bruges. ^^ When the staple at Bruges 

*^ The Genesis of Lancaster, ii. 90-1. A petition in parliament speaks of the tax 
as existing in the time of Henry III {Rot. Pari. i. 28). In Sir J. Ramsay's table of 
customs it appears from 1328 to 1334 and again after 1347. 

" Two quite different duties on cloth are apparently represented here. One of these 
is the ' alnage ' , a small payment for sealing cloths of the approved length and width ; 
the other is a true export duty on cloth. An order of 1367 says : ' And after, for 
that the wool growing within the realm, whereof it had been taken over to foreign 
parts, the custom and subsidy ought to have been paid to the king, was worked into 
cloths within the realm, and the cloths taken to foreign parts in no small quantity, 
it was ordered by the king and council, that for every cloth made within the realm 
and so taken out, there should be taken to the king's use, for every cloth of assize from 
natives 14(?. and 2\d. from aliens ; for every cloth of scarlet or other whole grain, 
from natives 2*. 4rf. and 3.s. 6i. from aliens ; and for every other cloth of half-grain,. 
... a moiety' : Col. of Close Rolls, 1364-9, pp. 334-5. Possibly for a short time after 
the staple was placed at Calais both kinds of taxes were collected. In 1362, however, 
and again in 1364, and later, the king let these subsidies on exported cloth to mer- 
chants in the various ports, who seem entirely distinct from the merchants dealing 
in staple wares, and whose names never occur in the same lists with these. In the 
indentures to the farmers of this subsidy on cloth the king specifically exempts them 
from payments for ' alnage' : Cal. of Close Rolls, 1360-4, pp. 432-3, 517-21. 

** After 1340, when the king promised to keep the English staple at Bruges for 
fifteen years {Cartvl. de Bruges, i. 191 ), it remained there until Michaelmas 1348. Then 
for a year it was removed to Middelburg {Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 1348-50, p. 6), but was 
perhaps restored to Bruges at the end of that time, as a treaty between Edward III 
and the Count of Flanders indicates, in December 1348 {Foedera, in. i. 178). The 
staple was, however, in Middelburg in November 1352 and in February 1353 {Cal. 
of Pat. Rolls, 1350-4, pp. 454 and 530), so that it may not have gone back to Bruges. 
Meanwhile in November 1347 the king appointed his butler, J. de Wesenham, to take 
< ustom on all woollen cloths exported from the realm. This was assigned for col- 
lection to the butler's deputies in the ports, and writs to these deputies in Ipswich, 
Colchester, Maldon, and Harwich for the ports of Norfolk and to Hull are extant 
{Gal. of Pat. Rolls, 1345-8, pp. 434-5). The appointment of these deputies reads like 
the first grant of the custom, and gives full details of the amount and the method 


was abolished in 1353, at tlie time of the statute, the staple at 
Calais still continued perhaps without interruption. The staple 
for Avool was re-established at Bruges in 1359, but only for a short 
time. Then in 1363 the foreign staple for wool was placed at 
Calais, while it seems possible that staples for cloth were held only 
in England. The word staple now begins to be connected ex- 
clusively with the woollen trade, so that while we hear of a foreign 
mart and of a collection of a subsidy on cloth at certain ports, 
they are not after this time called staples. Probably the delinite 
separation of two classes of merchants began soon after the staple 
for cloth was placed at Calais in 1347. Only two or three years 
later we hear of tumults at Calais, and an Englishman was placed 
in the Tower of London for inciting to hold ' meetings, assemblies 
and other unlawful conspiracies ', such as usually attended new 
organizations."^^ While the merchant adventurers did not obtain 

of collection. This duty was not an excise but a customs duty on exports. The 
following April the king erected at Calais a staple for ' tin, lead, feathers, woollen 
cloth made in the kingdom, and worsteds ' {Foede.ra, ni. i. 158). He did this, as he 
says, in order that ' merchants and others should go to the city ' of Calais, and he 
established it for seven years. The staple of cloth was still in Calais in July, in 
September, and on 15 November 1348 {Col. of Close Bolls, 1S45-8, pp. 476, 560, 597). 
In the meantime the staple for wool had been removed at Michaelmas 1348, from 
Bruges to :Middelburg {Cal. of Close Rolls, 1348-51, p. 6). Sir J. Ramsay gives 
returns from the customs on cloth for each year after 1347. The erection of this 
second staple at Calais was received with hostility by some at least of the English 
merchants, probably by those who had been dealing in both wool and cloth. The king 
speaks of ' damages and injuries ' arising from it (Foedera, in. i. 178). 

*® There were ' meetings, associations, and tumults ' in Calais, which apparently 
involved only a part of the townsmen there, and in which an English echevin of Calais 
was implicated. He was afterwards imprisoned in the Tower of London until security 
was given that he would keep the peace and refrain from seditious action. He 
was Richard atte Wood, a king's serjeant-at-arms and, it would seem, an 
important man. His mainpernor was William atte Wood, another king's serjeant- 
at-arms of Yorkshire {Cal. of Close Bolls, 1849-54, p. 196). The French echevin 
corresponds nearly to the English 'jurat', usually a substantial merchant in an 
English port, and closely connected with the government of the town and the organi- 
zation of the local staple. Thus the meetings in Calais look like an attempt to organize 
a similar staple in Calais under certain of the merchants. It may be remembered 
that Louis X had invited the English merchants to establish their staple port at 
Calais in 1318. There is abundant evidence that trade in wool, hides, &c., was distinct 
from that of other goods both before and after the permanent settlement of the staple 
for wool at Calais in 1373. The subsidy on cloth, replacing the earlier ' alnage ', was 
farmed to merchants of the ports for three or four years, and in the case of London 
for one year, yet we do not find the word staple used (see above, note 47). In 
several cases later evidence shows that these merchants have no dealing in wool, 
and do business only in the export of cloth. In September 1362, and again on 15 May 
1364, a number of the indentures between the king and these merchants are enrolled 
on the Close Rolls. In these indentures the merchants were exempted from rendenng 
account of their receipts, and were excused from payment of ' alnage ' (Cal. of Close 
BoUs, 1S60-4, pp. 432-3 and 517-21). As we have seen, the ' staples ' were placed in 
Calais in 1363 ; yet a year before this export of cloth, lead, tin, mill-stones, sea-coals, 
felt, woad, butter, cheese, &c., was prohibited [ibid., p. 436), and again in 1367 
(ibid. 1864-9, p. 376), while the staple for wools still remained at Calais, where it 
is found in October 1366 {ibid., p. 247), and in January 1367 {ibid., p. 363). 


a charter until February 1406/7, they were already fully formed 
and active before that time.^^ 

Another function of the staplers lay in making grants to the 
king, but this was coimected chiefly with the central organization. 
This, as we have seen, appears in two forms. The general court 
was the organization at the foreign mart. It was presided over 
by the highest officer of the company. Before the statute he was 
called the mayor ; ^^ but when that enactment named local mayors 
in each English staple port, a new name was necessary for the 
head of the general court, and thenceforward he was called 
governor, as was stated in 1360, ' of the liberties of English 
merchants in Bruges '.^- Several times for a short interval the 
staple was at Antwerp,^^ at St. Omer,-^* or at Middelburg.^^ 
Usually this was due to some local mercantile dis^jute between 
the merchants and the townsmen, or to political influences on 
the king. At least twice between 1313 and 1353 all foreign staples 
were abolished, and they were held only in England and Ireland. ^*^ 
But for most of the time the staple was at Bruges, so that we 
shall look to that city for evidence of the merchants' activity. 
Among the numerous grants of privilege to foreign merchants 
there, those to Englishmen were frequent and ample. ^^ The longest 
grant is a few years later than the English Statute of the Staple, 
with which it frequently agrees word for word. It was made in 
1359, when the English staple after an interval of six years was 
re-established there. ^^ As the statute was originally enacted just 
when the staple at Bruges was abolished in 1353, this charter of 
1359 represents almost exactly contemporary conditions in 

English merchants in Bruges formed a distinct community, 
with all the valued privileges usually granted to foreign mer- 
chants in a medieval city. Among these, of vital importance to 
its continuance, w^as the right of assembly. Rumours of secret 

5" Foedera (ed. 1727), viii. 464-5. Gross says that later merchants adventurers 
never quote or cite any earlier charter than this one of 1407, although they claimed 
that their society was founded by Edward III : Gild Merchant^ i. 149, note 5. 

^^ In 1325 the mayor was ordered to betake himself to Bruges and to hold staple 
there {Cal. of Close Rolls, 1S23-7, p. 378). The first mayor of the staple, Richard de_ 
Bury of Salisbury, was probably also elected in Bruges. 

*- Cal. of Close Bolls, 18G0-4, p. 10. 

^ In 1310 {Cal. of Close Bolls, 1807-13, p. 193) and in 1316 {ibid. 1313-18, p. 315). 

" Cal. of Close Bolls, 1818-18, p. 219 ; ibid. 1818-28, pp. 186-7. 

*5 In 1348 {Cal. of Close Bolls, 1846-9, p. 568). 

" That is, in 1326 {CaL of Close Bolls, 1828-7, p. 378) and in 1353 (Statute of the 

" A document in the Cartid. de Bruges, i. 37, no. 54, purports to confirm privi- 
leges to the ' Merchants of the Staple of Calais ' in 1251, but the error in date is 
obvious. Not only was there no Company of the Staple then, but the document 
mentions ' Richard lately king of England the second after the Conquest ' : the refer- 
ence is to 26 Henry VI, i. e. 1458. ^^ Carhd> de Bruges, i. 226 f. 


meetings are frequently our first indication of the formation of 
new organizations. Local jealousy was quick to feel the danger. 
Therefore the full recognition of the right of English merchants 
to hold ' assemblies, courts, and congregations ' is a clear sign 
of English organization. ^9 Possibly the wording of the phrase 
implies two kinds of meetings, regular courts for jurisdiction over 
Englishmen, and larger assemblies when regulations for the general 
conduct of business were made or changed. Both these powers 
were expressly stated. The merchants might meet to settle their 
own affairs as they chose ; they could make and amend regula- 
tions. As a court they could try any case involving their own mem- 
bers, unless it involved life or hmb. The same privilege, word for 
word, is granted to them in England by the Statute of the Staple. 
Their purely trading privileges need not detain us here. 

While the general court at Bruges was the head of the company 
in all matters of trade, while the mayor was elected there, and in 
its later history the company even came to be called by the name 
of the staple mart, the Company of the Staple of Calais, yet in the 
early fourteenth century another body was the real head of the 
company. This was a sort of house of merchants, usually meeting 
in London, formed of representatives from the cities and boroughs 
of the realm. Bishop Stubbs has called it the Sub- Estate of 
Merchants,^o and Sir James Ramsay has fully recognized its 
influence. Its meetings w^ere apparently not at fixed times, but 
whenever the king called them. The merchants w^ere commonly 
summoned at the time of parliament, and as such they formed 
an organic part of parliament. Often they were assembled 
shortly after the general meeting, ^^ apparently to provide ways 
and means. Sometimes they were summoned when there was no 
meeting of parliament at all, and when the business transacted 
was almost purely mercantile. But their most frequent function 
was to make the king grants on the customs. 

A study of this system brings us immediately to the question 
of the origin of the English customs and to the authority by which 
grants on the customs were made. The earliest general customs 
of the modern type, as shown by Mr. N. S. B. Gras, were the 
so-called ' Ancient Customs ' of 1275 on wool, hides, and possibly 
tin.62 The writ to the local collectors states that this grant was 

'*» A decision in the magistrates' court at Bruges in 1360 {ibid. i. 211) is worded in 
this respect exactly like the Bruges privilege of 1359, and like the English Statute of the 
Staple. Probably all three were quoted from an earlier privilege, or used common forms. 

«» Stubbs, Const. Hist. ii. 200 f. ; Ramsay, Genesis of Lancaster, ii. 88-90. 

«^ In 1305 parliament was summoned to meet on 28 February, but the writs to 
the towns were not dated until 30 March : Pad. Writs, i. i. 140 (3) and 157 (47). 

«2 ' The Origin of the National Customs Revenue of England ', in the Qxiarlerly 
Journal of Economics, xxvii. 107-49 (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1912). 


made by the community of the merchants, although it was ap- 
parently accepted later by the magnates. ^^ From that time and 
down to 1351, the rates on these goods were continually increased 
with greater and greater frequency.^* In 1294 Edward I seized 
all. the wool in the ports, and in order to redeem their wool the 
merchants granted the infamous ' mal-tolt ' of that year, an 
almost confiscatory tax of three marks on the sack of wool, and 
five marks on the last of hides. ^^ It was suggested (according to 
the Annals of Dunstable) by Lawrence of Ludlow, an important 
London merchant, who was later repaid for his advice by his 
fellow citizens, for he was suhmersus in mari.^^ Nevertheless, 
the ' mal-tolt ' was collected until 1297, and was then renew^ed by 
the merchants. But now the magnates intervened, and Edward 
in the Confirmation of the Charters promised that he would exact 
nothing beyond the ' Ancient Customs ', that is, those of 1275. 
In 1302-3 the king, again in need of money, called the merchants 
together in small bodies. The wine merchants from Gascony 
granted a tax of 2s. a tun on wine, apparently in commutation 
of the ancient wine-prise. Alien merchants, largely those from 
Italy, of whom two representatives were summoned from each 
society, granted an additional quarter mark on the sack of wool, 
half a mark on hides, and a duty ad valorem on imports.®^ This 
was the so-called Parva Custuma. When however, soon after- 
wards, parHament assembled, it rejected the grant,^^ and the 
king had to content himself with the tax on aliens. 

This separate tax on aliens w^as most unpopular with English 
merchants, and seems to mark an epoch in their growing jealousy 
of foreigners. After this the Parva Custuma kept alive the 
distinction between natives and aliens. It made Englishmen 
grasp, as they never had before, that they had certain interests 
in common with men from neighbouring towns, and entirely 
distinct from those not ' of the king's allegiance '. Henceforth, 
when foreigners are mentioned as trading in England, they are 
usually foreigners in our sense of the word, and not merely men 
from another town, even an English town, as appears in earlier 
documents. The first objection which English merchants took 
to the Parva Custuma arose from the additional security assured 
to aliens by the Charter of 1303. In 1309 Edward II promised to 

« Pari Writs, i. i. 1 (2). 

•* See Sir J. Ramsay's customs accounts, Dawn of the Constitution, London, 1908 ; 
and Genesis of Lancaster, i. 177 and ii. 91. See also the table of customs granted 
by merchants in the appendix to this article, p. 319. 

•* Stubbs, ii. 200. This was about half the value of the wool. 

" Ann. Monastici (Rolls Series), iii. 389. 

•' The two charters are given, one in Liber Custumarum of London {Munimenta 
Gildhallae, Rolls Series, i.), 205, and the other to the Gascons in the Livre de Bouillon 
of Bordeaux, p. 160. «« Pari. Writs, i. 135 (5). 


suspend part of the customs for a year ' as an experiment ',^^ and 
in 1311 they were completely abolished by the New Ordinances.'® 
But when the ordinances were repealed in 1322, the Parva Cus- 
tuma was again granted by the alien merchants and was continued 
thereafter. In 1332 it was finally recognized by parliament,'^ 
and from that time there is no question of its withdrawal, nor of 
the distinction drawn between natives and aliens. Englishmen 
had now learned to regard these additional customs paid by aliens 
as a burden on aliens' trade, while the special privileges secured 
to aliens were less regarded. In 1317 and the following year 
Edward II had obtained an additional sum of half a mark on the 
sack of wool and a mark on the last of hides, but clearly distin- 
guished it as a ' loan '.'^ But when he secured the repeal of the 
ordinances, he called together the Gascon merchants to grant him 
their 2s. on the tun of wine, the aliens to grant again the still 
hated Parva Custuma, and the native merchants to grant him 
a ' new increment ' on wools and hides, the same amount as that 
of the ' loan ' of 1317.'^ The king's proposals were all accepted 
by the merchants. Thereafter he levied all these three customs, 
and they were continued by his son. 

The system once started by Edward T and Edward II was 
extended by Edward III. Sir James Ramsay mentions ten grants 
of additional customs made ' by the merchants ' between 1327 
and 1350, besides one made ' per Consilium ', which he takes in 
the ordinary sense ' by the Privy Council '.'^ ParUament had often 
protested against this method of obtaining additional revenue, 
and finally in 1351, at the price of confirming the current rate, 
almost extortionate as it was, the king promised not to take grants 
on the customs except at the hands of parliament.'^ This grant 
was made at first for two and afterwards for six years. From this 
time the right of parliament to make all grants on the customs 
was not seriously questioned, but not until the time of the Tudors 
were the grants made for life. 

It is possible that a grant on the customs may have been 
made even earlier than the 'Ancient Customs'. Simon deMontfort's 
parliament of 1265 is famous for the summons of representatives 
from cities and boroughs ; and it is well known that Londoners 

«» Ibid. n. ii. 22. 

'» 5 Edward II, ch. 11. 

'^ Ramsay, Genesis of LancMster, ii. 88-91. 

'- Pari Writs, n. ii. App. 115 and 118. ^ . , « t looo 

" Writs directing the collection of the ' new increment ' were dated 6 June 16^^ : 
Pari Writs, i. 193 (167, 168. 169). This was paid by all classes, natives as well as 
aliens. Writs for the collection of the Parva Custuma by aliens only were dated 
20 July : ibid. n. ii. 214 (265). Writs for the collection of the wine duty were dated 
6 June 1323 : ibid. i. 632 (148). 

'* Genesis of Lancaster, ii. 89. See also the appendix to this article, p. dlM. 

" Genesis of Lancaster, I e. See also Hot. Pari ii. 229. 


were strongly on the earl's side."^^ There are indications that 
about that time the merchants began to take concerted action 
to consider their trading interests."^' It ma}- be that next year, 
in the general pacification of the realm, the young Prince Edward 
recognized the value of their association. In 1266, too, Henry III 
gave Edward authority over all the merchants of the realm, ' both 
those coming to the realm and those leaving it 'P^ Either in 1265 
or 1266 also was granted what is called a ' new aid ' on wools and 
hides,^^ which, like the subsequent ' Ancient Customs ' of 1275, 
did not recognize local exemptions. This ' new aid ' was farmed 
for a while by a company of Italian merchants for 6,000 marks 
a year,8o which may represent the price paid by the merchants of 
England for securing the prince's recognition of their new organi- 
zation. It is significant that in 1267 English merchants obtained 
a new grant of privileges at Bruges, ^^ and that Italian merchants 
acted as collectors of the royal customs until 1311 ; ^- and also 
that the older traditional date for the Assize of Weights and 
Measures and the Assize of Ale was 1266. There was immediate 
protest against the ' new aid '. The bishop of Durham and the 
countess of Al))emarle tried to prevent its collection within their 
liberties. ^^ In answer to a protest by Louis IX of France King 
Henry i^romised to withdraw it after little more than a year.^* 
That the young prince did not agree with his father is evident, 

" All goods of Londoners were granted to Prince Edward in 1266 {Focdera, i. 468) 
and it was probably from this specific part of the ' new aid ' that the Londoners 
bought themselves free for 200 marks in 12G8 {Liber de Antiquis Legibus, 1846, p. 109), 
although London had long been freed by repeated charters from all ordinary payments. 
Among those who paid the ' new aid ' were merchants from France, Bruges, Hamburg, 
Lubeck, and Cologne {Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 1266-72, pp. 141, 52, 5, 20, 23). 

" It is also probable that there was an organization among the merchants com- 
pleted some time earlier, perhaps in 1259 or soon after. The complaints of Matthew 
Paris, directed against foreigners because they did not pay their share in the 
expenses of the citizens, seem to indicate general discussion on the subject at that 
time: Chronica Maiora, ed. H. R. Luard, iii. 328-31 ; iv. 8, 422; v. 404-5. One 
distinctive feature of the staple organization was the inclusion of aliens and other 
non-resident merchants in an association that shared in 'scot and lot' with the 

'^ See above, p. 305. 

'* Collectors were appointed throughout the realm: Cal. oj Pat. Bolls, 1258-66, 
p. 580; 1266-72, p. 142. 

«» Lib.r di Antiq. Leg., p. 109. 

®^ English privileges at Bruges in 1267 were included in general privileges for all 
those frequenting the Flemish fairs, dated 27 June 1267. A number of others are 
included in Varenbergh, Histoire des Relations Diplomatiques entre Flandre et V Angle- 
terre aw Moyen Age, Bruxelles, 1874. 

^^ Several Italian companies acted as collectors at various times during the reign 
of Edward I, and most of them succeeded in getting into trouble, either over their 
accounts, as did the Riccardi of Lucca, or through their unpopularitj'- with the 
English, as was the case with the Frescobaldi of Florence. The latter were collectors 
when Edward II was obliged to agree to the New Ordinances in 1311, where Emeric 
do Frescobaldi is mentioned by name : 5 Edward II, ch. 8. 

«« Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 1266-72, p. I. " Ibid., p. 14. 



11 w 


since almost his first public action after returning from the 
crusade was to obtain from the merchants a renewal of the same 
sort of grant, in this case the famous ' Ancient Customs '. How 
unimportant the magnates' consent to the grant was thought 
may be inferred from the fact that writs appointing collectors in 
the ports were issued before parliament met. In this parHament 
again there were present two citizens from every city, and two 
burgesses from every borough. 

When we consider how important assemblies of representatives 
from the toAvns became in making additional grants on the customs, 
we can hardly escape the conclusion that the earhest meetings of 
the merchants and the first collection of general customs are 
necessarily connected. This would make us place the beginning 
of the Company of the Staple at latest in 1266. Reciprocal 
treaties between Flanders and England point in the same direction : 
several of these date from 1258 to 1260 ; and privileges to Ghent, 
Douai, Ypres, and Bruges were granted by Henry III between 
1259 and 1261.85 Moreover, in the great suit between the mer- 
chants of the staple and the merchant adventurers in the time 
of Elizabeth, the former company asserted that Henry III had 
originally recognized their company, and the adventurers acknow- 
ledged their claim.^^ Yet it would hardly be right to think of 
a formal incorporation of the Company of the Staple in 1266. 
If we call them the merchants of the staple, a title often used 
quite as formally, we should not be far wrong. Probably at that 
time the association was one of all ' merchants of the realpi ' 
trading to Flanders, as the charter of 1313 still called them. 
Possibly the tendency to exclusiveness began with that charter, 
although it is more probable that it was obtained in order to 
secure the adherence of aliens to the regulations of the 
English merchants. In a suit before the chancellor in 
1319-20, the merchants claimed that there had long been 
a foreign staple, but that only recently had there been a fine 
for disregarding it. 

The connexion between this federal association of merchants 
and the body of citizens and burgesses summoned to parliament 
is another matter on which we need more light. Under Edward I 
we get few indications of their activity. In addition to the 

^'^ See above, note 7G. 

^^ This report of about 1580 is entitled, ' The effect of the allegations of the staplers 
for their Challendge in trade with wollen cloth, as the same arc reported to the com- 
mittes with awnswer of the merchauntis adventurers, to the same. Article 1. 
Article primo ys shewed that a° 51 Henry III there was a wollen staple, wolle shipped, 
and officers belonging to yt' : Schanz, Englische Haridelspolitik, ii. 598, no. 135. The 
wording of the report, except in mentioning the officers, does not necessarily mean 
ao organization of the staple as it was later known ; but the mention of officers, to- 
gether with the date of 1266-7, seems more than a chance coincidence. 


instances already mentioned, merchants were summoned to meet 
the two provincial councils of 1283, and a result of that meeting 
was the first purely mercantile statute, that of Acton Burnel. The 
fuller Statute of Merchants of 1285 was merely an enlargement and 
a confirmation in full yjarliament of what had been organized two 
years before. Mr. Hilary Jenkinson inclines to mark a distinction 
between burgesses summoned by writs directed immediately to 
their mayors and bailiffs, and those by writs to the sheriffs. ^^ 
Writs were directed to the mayors and bailiffs in 1265, in 1296, 
in 1300, and in 1303 ; to the sheriffs in 1275, 1283, 1295, 1298, 
1299, 1300 (to all those who had appeared in the earlier parliament 
of that year, for which the writs had been issued to the mayors 
and bailiffs), in 1302, 1305, 1306, 1307. While this distinction 
might show a difference between the merchants meeting as a 
trading association and as part of parliament, it is neither clear 
nor sharply drawn. Both sorts of writs continued to be issued in 
the reign of Edward II. There are, however, many instances in 
which mercliants could not have formed part of parliament. In 
1294, when there was no general parliament, Edward I clearly 
states that the ' mal-tolt ' was granted by the * merchants of 
England \^^ The second grant in 1297 was quashed in parlia- 
ment.^^ In 1317, again when there was no parliament, the 
merchants consented to a ' loan ' on wools and hides. ^^ In 1318 
writs were directed to the mayors and bailiffs to send representa- 
tives to London to consider the removal of the staple to Calais,^^ 
and again in 1326 to the sheriffs, to send representatives to London 
to elect a mayor of the staple, since the foreign staple had just been 
abolished. ^2 While the assembly of merchants did not make 
grants on the customs after 1351, yet this federal body still 
occasionally met to transact the business of the staple. In 1361 
representatives from the cities and boroughs were summoned to 
York to consider matters of the staple. ^^ About a year later the 
staple for wool was transferred to Calais, perhaps as a result of 
the York meeting. After that, while the staple for wool remained 
at Calais with short interruptions, the staple for cloth was fre- 
quently changed. 

To recapitulate : the merchants of the staple formed a federal 
organization of merchants from all the chief cities and boroughs 
of the realm. It was probably first organized in 1265 or even a 
few years earher, and gained the recognition of Prince Edward 
in 1266, at the price of a general custom on wools and hides. This 
duty was withdrawn during the last years of Henry III, but it was 

" The First Parliament of Edward /, ante, xxv. (1910) 231-42; especially p. 233. 
«8 Cal. of Fine Rolls, 1272-1807, p. 347. »» Stubbs, Const. Hist. ii. 201. 

»» Pari. Writs, ii. ii, App., p. 115. ^^ Foedera, n. i. 378. 

*2 Cal. of Close Rolls, 1328-7, p. 564. "^ Foedera, in. ii. 617-18. 




at once re-enacted by Edward and accepted by the merchants. 
Their organization included a local body at each port and a general 
one in the foreign mart, which was apparently Bruges from the 
beginning. But because the association was at first voluntary, it 
was not thought necessary to protect it by penalties. Ahen'as 
well as native merchants were members of the association, because 
all must share in the customs and perhaps in certain local dues.^^ 
Trade grew rapidly, and it soon became unprofitable, especially 
for aliens, to carry all their wares to the staple at Bruges. This 
was still more true after the Genoese and Venetian galleys began 
to make regular voyages by sea to England and Flanders and back 
again. They therefore evaded the regulations. As a consequence 
the English merchants sought to draw the lines closer. They 
accordingly obtained the first charter of 1313, which established 
penalties for all infractions of staple regulations. Probably at 
the same time, if not before, the federal association of merchants 
took charge of the customs at the ports, a duty which had been 
performed by the Italians before the time of the New Ordinances. 
Authority became more centraUzed, and the merchants, in- 
stead of the king, began to appoint collectors at the ports. The 
fact that representatives from the towns were frequently called 
to parliament enabled them to discuss other matters related 
purely to trade, and sometimes they might meet for such purposes 
even if parliament was not summoned. The merchants made 
grants on the customs both in and out of parliament, that is 
whether they attended alone, or in association with the knights 
of the shires. Probably the note of exclusiveness begins to be 
sounded as early as 1313. But when the staple for cloth was 
separated from that of wool, and a special body of merchants 
dealing in cloth began to form, we find among the merchants of the 
staple tendencies towards monopoly characteristic of the later 
company. The wording of the Statute of the Staple of 1353 
indicates this, as does the subsequent election of a mayor in each 
staple port. The later history of the company is outside the scope 
of this paper. It is possible that divided interests among the 
merchants of the federal organization, which must have included 
both staplers and those who will later be called adventurers, 
tended to hinder joint action. Therefore the desire for cen- 
tralization and for the general oversight of each company's trade 
would be realized at the court of the foreign mart, while meetings 
of the association of merchants in England would no longer 
necessarily coincide with those of parliament, and would 
therefore be held less and less frequently. But there were also 
representatives from many of the EngHsh ports constantly in the 

** One reason, therefore, for organizing the merchants was to compel all merchants 
to bear their part in the citizens' burdens. See above, note 77. 


staple mart, and while the interest of London was always very 
strong, there would be an opportunity for some general co- 
operation in the general court. This would also explain the 
conspicuous position in the later companies, like the merchant 
adventurers, of the association in the mart town. 

In the home staple the mayor and merchants of the staple 
settled local requirements and looked after the collection of the 
customs and the shipment of wools and hides to foreign parts. 
Their courts dealt with all purely mercantile matters, and with 
all cases involving merchants, alien or native, except of felonies 
and pleas of land. Recognizances of debt were recorded in their 
rolls. Suits were determined by the law merchant, or, in mari- 
time cases, by the practice of the ports, that is, by the Rolls of 
Oleron. From one point of view the organization of the foreign 
staple was that of the home staples, but it was magnified in im- 
portance so as to include trade from all parts of England. The 
merchants there were also members of the local staples, and so 
served to linl^ together the parts of the organization. 

While the Company of the Staple was originally an organization 
of merchants for trading purposes, yet it always had a quasi- 
public character. It was formed, however, not on the king's 
initiative, but by English towns themselves, in order to preserve 
uniformitj^ in trade and to secure greater advantages for their 
business both at home and abroad. ^^ But the king could easily 
make use of a great federated body of merchants trading to foreign 
lands to collect customs on their goods, and still more to share 
their profits with him by making grants of customs. While, 
therefore, the merchants of the staple from the beginning were 
acting for a federation of English towns, yet very early they became 
also a semi-official body acting in many ways for the king through 
their central organization. This combined public and semi-official 
character they never entirely lost until after the loss of Calais, 
when their importance rapidly declined. 

Grace Faulkner Ward. ' 

^^ The relation of the local staple to tho local town government is a question which 
needs further study, but it will perhaps not be going too far to suggest the probability 
that the organization of the local staple was identical with that of the local gild 
merchant, at least in the early part of the fourteenth century. 





Grants of Customs by Merchants— Wool, Hides, and Wine 

Grant by 


' New aid ' until 

All merchants Farmed for 6000 M. a year.^ 



' Ancient Custom 

' All merchants 65. 8(Z. on wool ; 13s. 4ci. on hides.2 


'Maltolt' until 

All merchants 40s. Od. on wool ; 66s. Sd. on hides.^ 


Wine prise 

Denizens, Gas- 2s. Od. per tun on wine.* 
cons, &c. 


Parva Custuma 

Aliens 3s. ^. on wool ; 6s. Sd. on hides.^ 


English mer- 
chants refused.^ 


New Ordinances 

return to ' An- 


cient Custom '.'' 


* New Increment' 

All merchants 6«. Sd. on wool ; 13s. M. on hides.^ 


Aliens (also the 
Parva Custu- 


' New Increment' 

All merchants 6s. 6^^. on wool ; 13s. 4d. on hides.^ 


' Parva Custuma ' 

Aliens 3s. id. on wool ; 6s. Sd. on hides.^^ 


Wine duty- 

Wine merchants 2s. Od. per tun.^^ 



All merchants 6s. Sd. on wool.^^ 


Subsidy (until 

All merchants 6s. Sd. on wool ; 13s. id. on hidcs.^^ 


Subsidy (until 

All merchants 10s. Od. „ 20s. Od. „ 


No grant re- 

40s. Of^. „ SOs.Od. „ 



All merchants iOs.Od. „ SOs.Od. „ 



Natives 40s. 0^. „ 80s. Ot^. „ 



All merchants 40s. O^. „ SOs.Od. „ 



ofLaHogue £2 „ £2 




40s. 0^. „ SOs.Od. „ 


'Per concilium' 60s. Od^. „ 120s. Orf. „ 


Parliament 40s. Oc^. „ 80s. Orf. „ 


Liber de Antiq. Leg., 

p. 109. == Pari. Writs, i. i. (2). 


Ramsay, Dawn, pp. 

407, 533. * Bordeaux Litre rfc Bouillon, j). 160. 


London Liber Cicst. 

i. 205-11. ^ Pari. Writs, i. 313. 


5 Edward II, ch. 11 

« Pari. Writs, 11. ii, App. pp. ll."). 118. 


Ibid., p. 193 (167-8) 

" Ibid. i. 632 (148). 


Ibid. n. ii. 227 ; i. 

332 (148). 


Ramsay, Gen