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 


http://www.archive.org/details/englishhistorica33londuoft 


iH 


n 


THE   ENGLISH 

{  II)  ^ 

HISTORICAL  REVIEW 


EDITED  BY 

REGINALD  L.  POOLE,  M.A.,  LL.D.,  Litt.D. 

KEEPER  OF  THE  ARCHIVES  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OP  OXFORD 
AND  FELLOW  OF   MAGDALEN   COLLEGE  AND   OF  THE  BRITISH  ACADEMY 


VOLUME  XXXIII 

T918 


LONGMANS,    GHEEN  AND   CO. 

89   PATERNOSTER  ROW,    LONDON 

NEW  YORK,   BOMBAY  AND   CALCUTTA 

1918 


1)1 


CONTENTS  OF  VOL.  XXXIII 


PAGE 

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 


iv      CONTENTS  OF  THE  THIRTY-THIRD  VOLUME 

PAGE 

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  . 

565 


The   English 

Historical   Review 


NO.  CXXIX.— JANUARY  1918 


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 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXIX.  ^ 

*  All  rights  reserved 


2  KING  EDMUND  I  AND  January 

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 
histories. 

*  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. 


1918  THE  DANES  OF  YORK  3 

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 

B2 


4  KING  EDMUND  I  AND  January 

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. 


1918  THE  DANES  OF   YORK  5 

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 
Forked-beard. 

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. 


6  KING  EDMUND  I  AND  January 

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. 


1918  THE  DANES  OF  YORK  7 

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. 


8  KING  EDMUND  I  AND  January 

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 
overlordship. 

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.  '' 


1918  THE  DANES  OF  YORK  9 

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). 


1918  TEE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  11 

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 


12  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  January 

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. 


1918  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  13 

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 


14  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  January 

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- 


1918  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  15 

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 


16  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  January 

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 
death. 

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 


1918  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  17 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIU.  — NO.  CXXIX.  ,  C 


18  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  January 

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 


1918  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  19 

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 


20  THE  MEDICI  ARCHIVES  January 

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 
Newfoimdland 

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 


22  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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 
Wills'. 

^  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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  23 

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. 


24  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  25 

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. 


26  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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 : 

QVODLIBETS, 

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. 

London, 

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 ; 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  27 

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. 


28  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  29 

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. 


30  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  31 

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 
ridiculouslyj 

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 


32 


ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 


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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  33 

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> 


34  ROBERT  HAY  MAN  AND  THE  January 

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 
trade. 

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. 


1918  PLANTATION  OF  NEWFOUNDLAND  35 

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 
remaine 

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 

D2 


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. 


38  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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. 


U)18    AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-8    39 

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, 


40  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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, 
passim, 

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


1918     AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-8    41 

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. 


42  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE      January 

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^. 


1918    AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH y  1763-8    43 

\\  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. 


44  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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. 


1918    AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-8    45 

'  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. 


46  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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. 


1918    AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1768-8    47 

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. 


48  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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. 


1918    AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-8    49 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — ^NO.  CXXIX.  E 


50  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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 
note. 


1 918     AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-^    51 

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. 

E2 


62  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       January 

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. 


1918     AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1763-8    53 

provinces  because  of  the  conflict  between  the  Choctaw  and  the 
Creeks.'* 

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. 


64  BRITISH  POLICY  TOWARDS  THE       Januarj^ 

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. 


1918     AMERICAN  INDIANS  IN  THE  SOUTH,  1768-8    55 

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. 


56    POLICY  TOWARDS  THE  INDIANS,  1763-8    January 

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. 


\ 


58  THE  EARLIEST  USE  OF  THE  January 

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. 


1918  EASTER  CYCLE  OF  DIONYSIUS  59 

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. 


60  THE  EARLIEST  USE  OF  THE  January 

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

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 
celebrandum. 

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. 


1918  EASTER  CYCLE  OF  DI0NYSIU8  61 

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. 


62  THE  EASTER  CYCLE  OF  DION  Y  SI  US    January 

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. 


1918  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  63 

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. 


/ 


64  '  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  Januarj^ 

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. 


1918  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  66 

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 
information.^^ 

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 
wall. 

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.' 

VOL.  XXXIII. ^NO.  CXXTX.  5* 


66  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  January 

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 
bishop. 

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. 


1918  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  67 

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 


68  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  January- 

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. 


1918  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  69 

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 
ferm.34 

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 
hundred.^^ 

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. 


70  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  January 

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.' 


A 


1918  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  71 

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 
discontinued. 

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 
hundred.*^ 

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. 


72  THE  HUNDRED-PENNIES  January 

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, 
1851). 


1918        THE  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  LYONS,  1245  73 

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. 


74  THE  SOURCES  FOR  THE  January 

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. 


1918  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  LYONS,  1245  76 

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 
cited. 

^^  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.  *   ' 


76  THE  SOURCES  FOR  THE  January 

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. 


1918  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  LYONS,  1245  11 

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. 


78        THE  FIRST  COUNCIL  OF  LYONS,  1245     January 

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. 


1918      A  POLITICAL  AGREEMENT  OF  JUNE  1318         79 

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 
legible. 

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. 


80     A  POLITICAL  AGREEMENT  OF  JUNE  1318    January 

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- 
ments.* 

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). 


1918      A  POLITICAL  AGREEMENT  OF  JUNE  1318         81 

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] 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXIX.  G 


82     A  POLITICAL  AGREEMENT  OF  JUNE  1318    January 

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 


1918      A  POLITICAL  AGREEMENT  OF  JUNE  1318         83 

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. 

G2 


84  QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL       January 

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 » 
3455. 

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

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


1918  QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL  85 

(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 
1913. 

"  Archaeologia,  vol.  xii,  p.  372. 

'*  The  Athenaeum,  9  September  1905. 


86 


QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL       January 


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 


Priests. 


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 
1579. 

^*  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- 
trainer. 

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 


1918  QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL  87 

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. 


88  QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL       January 

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. 


1918  QUEEN  MARY'S  CHAPEL  ROYAL  89 

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 '  0  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. 


90         THE  GRAVES  OF  SWIFT  AND  STELLA     January 

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. 


1918        THE  GRAVES  OF  SWIFT  AND  STELLA  91 

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 
gate. 

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. 
Bernard. 

"  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. 


92         THE  GRAVES  OF  SWIFT  AND  STELLA      January 

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 '. 


1918         THE  GRAVES  OF  SWIFT  AND  STELLA  93 

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, 
1917.) 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  95 

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. 


96  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


th™ 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  97 

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. 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXIX.  H 


98  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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, 
1916.) 

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 


I 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  99 

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 

H2 


100  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  101 

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 


102  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  103 

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 


104  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  105 

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. 

A.   KOBERTSON. 


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 


106  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 
presentments. 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  107 

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. 


108  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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; 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  109 

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 


110  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  111 

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. 


112  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  US 

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, 
VOL.  XXXIII. — ^NO.  CXXIX.  I 


114  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


191S  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  115 

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 


116  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  117 

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. 


118  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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, 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  119 

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 


120  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 
horse-dealers.' 

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- 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  121 

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 


122  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 
regularity. 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  123 

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. 


124  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  125 

History  of  the  British  Army.  By  the  Hon.  J.  W.  Fortescue.  Vol.  VIII, 
with  a  supplementary  volume  of  maps.  (London :  Macmillan, 
1917.) 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  127 

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 
reactionary. 

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 


128  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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). 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  129 

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 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXIX.  K 


130  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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'. 


1 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  131 

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 

K2 


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- 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  133 

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. 


134  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  January 

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 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  137 

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. 

K. 

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 


,1 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  139 

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. 
[1906]. 

*  Letters  of  Lord  Acton  to  Mary,  Daughter  of  the  Bight  Hon.  IV.  E.  Gladstone, 
edited  by  Herbert  Paul,  1904. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  141 

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 


X42  SHORT  NOTICES  January 

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. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  143 

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. 


h^" 


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 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  L 

*  All  rights  reserved. 


146  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  147 

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. 

L2 


148  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


i 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  149 

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). 


150  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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- 
chief, 

**  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 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  151 

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 
Malet. 

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 


152  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  153 

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). 


154  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  165 

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). 


156  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  157 

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 


158  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  159 

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). 


160  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NOBMAN  PERIOD  161 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  ^ 


162  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  163 

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. 

M2 


164  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  166 

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)- 


166  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 
default. 

'«»  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. 


I 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  167 

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. 


168  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  169 

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. 


170  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  171 

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. 


172  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  173 

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. 
233). 

"«  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. 


174  THE  OFFICE  OF  SHERIFF  IN  THE  April 

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 
power. 

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. 


1918  EARLY  NORMAN  PERIOD  175 

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 
Naples 

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 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  177 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  ^ 


178  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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. 


41 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  179 

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 


180  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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. 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  181 

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. 


182  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  183 

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. 


184  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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.' 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  186 

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 
notable. 

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  '. 


186  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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. 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  187 

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. 


188  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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- 
bourhood. 

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. 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  189 

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. 


190  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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 
sceptical.^^ 

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 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  191 

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 
arm. 

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. 


192  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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. 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  193 

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 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  O 


J 


194  SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  April 

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.  * 


1918  TRAVELLERS  IN  NAPLES  196 

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 


196     SOME  SIXTEENTH-CENTURY  TRAVELLERS   April 

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 


198  PASQUALE  VILLABI  April 

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 


1918  PASQUALE  VILLARl  199 

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. 


200  PA8QUALE  VILLARI  April 

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 


1918  PASQUALE  VILLARI     '  201 

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 


202  PASQUALE  VILLARI  April 

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 


1918  PASQUALE  VILLARI 

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 


204  PASQUALE  VILLARI  April 

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. 


1918  PA8QUALE  VILLARI  205 

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. 


206  PASQUALE  VILLARI  April 

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 


1918  PASQUALE  VILLARI  207 

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. 


208  PA8QUALE  VILLARI  April 

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  ; 


1918  PASQUALE   VILLARl  209 

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. 


VOL.  XXXIU. — NO.  CXXX. 


210  ApriJ 


Notes  and  Documents 

The  Earliest  Use  of  the  Easter  Cycle  of  Dionysius 

IT 

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. 


1918         THE  EASTER  CYCLE  OF  DIONYSIUS  211 

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 


212  THE  EARLIEST  USE  OF  THE  April 

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. 
16-19. 


1918  EASTER  CYCLE  OF  DIONYSIUS  213 

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 
Langthorne 

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. 


214  CARDINAL  OTTOBONI  AND  THE  April 

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, 

Lambeth  De    ADUENTU    0.    LEGATI    IN    AnGLIAM    ET    DE    QUIBUSDAM    CASIBUS, 

fo^252^'     PROCBSSIBUS,  ET  LITTERIS  IPSUM  ET  ALIOS  TANGENTIBUS. 

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. 


1918    MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE    215 

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. 


216  CARDINAL  OTTOBONI  AND  THE  April 

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 
quinto.^* 

>  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. 


1918    MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE    217 

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. 


218  CARDINAL  OTTOBONl  AND  THE  April 

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. 

Apfellacio. 

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""**. 


1918    MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE    219 

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. 


220  CARDINAL  OTTOBONI  AND  THE  April 

Liberaciones. 

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. 


^ 


1918    MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE   221 

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. 


222  CARDINAL  OTTOBONI  AND  THE  April 

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. 

Ohligacio.^'^ 

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. 


1918    MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE    223 

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. 


224  CARDINAL  OTTOBONI  AND  THE  April 

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. 

Dispensacio. 

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 


1918  MONASTERY  OF  STRATFORD  LANGTHORNE     225 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  Q 


226       MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF     April 

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. 


1918     MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF        227 

<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. 
episcopus. 
<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 

mens. 
<12  Jan.  1519.)     Obiit  Maximilianus  Imperator  ao.  xvc.  xix,  1519,  xvc. 
xix. 

*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. 

Q2 


228       MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF     April 

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. 


1918      MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF        229 

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. 
penden. 
<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. 


230       MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF     April 

(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. 


1918      MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF        231 

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.  0  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. 


232        MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF    April 

(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 
Treslonge. 

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. 


i 


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. 


1918      MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF        233 

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 

thoet. 
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 


234       MEMORANDA  OF  HUGO  DE  ASSENDELFF     April 

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^. 
1507. 

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 

Elizabe 

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 
hands. 

*  Le  Havre. 


1918     ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603       236 

James 

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 
1588.3 

A  comparison  of  the  three  shows  that  they  have  ten  roads 
in  common,  with  slight  variations  in  stages  and  mileage.  These 
are  : 

Berwick 

Cockermouth  or  Carlisle  * 

St.  Davids 

Carnarvon 

S.  Burian 

Bristol 

Cambridge  ^ 

Dover 

Rye 

Walsingham 

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 
haberdasher'. 

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. 


236       ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603    April 

manuscript  has  seven  and  William  Smith  nine  additional  roads, 
as  follows  : 

MS.  AND  William  Smith 
.  Lincoln 
Boston 

Oxford  ^  V  to  London. 

Yarmouth  to  Ipswich  and  Colchester  and 
Yarmouth  to  Norwich  and 

MS.  ONLY 

Carmarthen  to  Worcester  ^  and  ^ 
Nottingham  /  *«  I^^^^^^- 

William  Smith  only 
Worcester  ^ 
Exeter  ^o 
Southampton 
Shrewsbury 

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 


1918     ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603       237 


York  to  London 
Dover  to  London 
Rye  to  liondon 
Bristol  to  London 
S.  Burian  to  London 


MS. 

HARRISON. 

SMITH. 

OGILBY. 

C. 

m. 

14.9 

150 

151 

150 

192 

55 

55 

55 

55 

7r4 

48 

— 

48 

46 

64 

97 

97 

97 

94 

115' 2 

227 

246 

237 

235 

296 

Gladys  Scott  Thomson. 


The  HIGH  WAYES  FROM  ANY  NOTABLE  TOWNE  IN  ENGLAND  TO  THE  ClETIE 

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. 


238       ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603    April 

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. 


1918     ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603       239 

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. 


240       ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603    April 

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. 


1918     ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603       241 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  R 


242        ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1608    April 

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. 


1918      ROADS  IN  ENGLAND  AND  WALES  IN  1603      243 

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, 

1221-1916 

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 


244  PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND  VICARS  OF      April 

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. 
1278. 

(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, 
16.) 
1312-15.     William   of    Castreton,    D.D.      Appointed    by    the    Master- 
General  in  1312.    Absolved  from  office  by  chapter  of  Bologna, 
1315. 
(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 
year. 

{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 
period. 

(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.) 


246  PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND  VICARS  OF     April 

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 
Valencia. 
{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 
Provincial. 

(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, 
Dublin. 

(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). 


248  PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND  VICARS  OF     April 

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.). 


I 

'i 


I 


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. 


250  PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND  VICARS  OF      April 

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, 

1808. 
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. 


•I 


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 

1838. 
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 
Woodchester. 

(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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  263 

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 


254  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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- 
literation. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS 


255 


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,  0  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. 


256  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  257 

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 
king. 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  ^ 


258  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 
intelligible. 

"  Cart.  Sax.,  no.  76.    Cf.  Introduction,  p.  clvi. 

"  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Wollaton  Report,  pp.  199-200. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  269 

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 


260  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 '. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  261 

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. 


262  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  263 

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. 


264  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 
remembrancers. 


■ 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  265 

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. 


266  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  AprU 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  267 

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 
England. 

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 


268  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS 


269 


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 


270  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  271 

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 


272  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  273 

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. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXX.  ^ 


274  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  275 

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 

.T2 


276  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  April 

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 


278  SHORT  NOTICES  AprU 

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 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  279 

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 


280  SHORT  NOTICES  April 

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. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  281 

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. 


282  SHORT  NOTICES  April 

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 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  283 

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 


284  SHORT  NOTICES  April 

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  *. 


286  SHORT  NOTICES  April 

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 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  287 

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. 


^1^ 


The   English 

Historical   Review 


NO.  CXXXI.— JULY  EQ18* 


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. 

VOL.  XXXIIT.  — NO.  CXXXI.  ^ 

*  All  rights  reserved. 


290  CENTURIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN         July 

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. 


1918        OENTVRIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN  291 

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. 

U2 


292  CENTURIATION  IN  BOM  AN  BRITAIN         July 

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. 


1918         CENTURIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN 


293 


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). 


294 


CENTURIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN 


July 


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. 


1918         CENTURIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN  295 


^        \t         ^ 


296  CENTURIATION  IN  ROMAN  BRITAIN         July 

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. 


1 


1918  297 


The  Early  History  of  the  Merchants 
Staplers 

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). 


298  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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. 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  299 

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- 
pendent.io     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). 


300  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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 
advantage. 

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). 


1 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  301 

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. 


302  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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. 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  303 

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). 


304  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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. 


I 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  305 

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 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  ^ 


306  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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). 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  307 

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 


308  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  309 

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). 


310  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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 
Bruges. 

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 
Staple). 

"  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. 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  3ii 

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). 


312  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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). 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  313 

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. 


314  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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 
citizens. 

'^  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. 


e 

1 

11  w 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  315 

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. 


316  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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. 


I 

I 


1918  THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS  317 

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. 


318  THE  EARLY  HISTORY  OF  July 

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. 


1918 


THE  MERCHANTS  STAPLERS 


319 


APPENDIX 

Grants  of  Customs  by  Merchants— Wool,  Hides,  and  Wine 

Grant  by 

1266? 

'  New  aid  '  until 

All  merchants        Farmed  for  6000  M.  a  year.^ 

1267-8 

1274 

'  Ancient  Custom 

'  All  merchants       65.  8(Z.  on  wool ;  13s.  4ci.  on  hides.2 

1294 

'Maltolt'   until 
1297? 

All  merchants       40s.  Od.  on  wool ;  66s.  Sd.  on  hides.^ 

1302 

Wine  prise 

Denizens,  Gas-     2s.  Od.  per  tun  on  wine.* 
cons,  &c. 

1303 

Parva  Custuma 

Aliens                   3s.  ^.  on  wool ;  6s.  Sd.  on  hides.^ 

1303 

English  mer- 
chants refused.^ 

1311 

New  Ordinances 

return  to '  An- 

. 

cient  Custom '.'' 

1317 

*  New  Increment' 

All  merchants        6«.  Sd.  on  wool ;  13s.  M.  on  hides.^ 

(Loan) 

Aliens  (also  the 
Parva   Custu- 
ma) 

1322 

'  New  Increment' 

All  merchants        6s.  6^^.  on  wool ;  13s.  4d.  on  hides.^ 

1322 

'  Parva  Custuma ' 

Aliens                    3s.  id.  on  wool ;  6s.  Sd.  on  hides.^^ 

1323 

Wine  duty- 

Wine  merchants    2s.  Od.  per  tun.^^ 

1327 

Subsidy 

All  merchants        6s.  Sd.  on  wool.^^ 

1332 

Subsidy  (until 
1333) 

All  merchants        6s.  Sd.  on  wool ;  13s.  id.  on  hidcs.^^ 

1333 

Subsidy  (until 
1336) 

All  merchants        10s.  Od.     „          20s.  Od.      „ 

1336 

No  grant  re- 
corded. 

40s.  Of^.      „          SOs.Od.      „ 

1337 

[Subsidy] 

All  merchants        iOs.Od.     „          SOs.Od.      „ 

1340 

Subsidy 

Natives                   40s.  0^.      „          80s.  Ot^.       „ 

1344 

Subsidy 

All  merchants        40s.  O^.     „          SOs.Od.      „ 

1346 

Subsidy 

ofLaHogue          £2              „          £2 

1347 

£2 

1348 

40s.  0^.      „          SOs.Od.      „ 

1350 

'Per  concilium'     60s.  Od^.     „        120s.  Orf.      „ 

1351 

Parliament            40s.  Oc^.     „          80s.  Orf.      „ 

I 

Liber  de  Antiq.  Leg., 

p.  109.                   ==  Pari.  Writs,  i.  i.  (2). 

3 

Ramsay,  Dawn,  pp. 

407,  533.                *  Bordeaux  Litre  rfc  Bouillon,  j).  160. 

5 

London  Liber  Cicst. 

i.  205-11.               ^  Pari.  Writs,  i.  313. 

7 

5  Edward  II,  ch.  11 

«  Pari.  Writs,  11.  ii,  App.  pp.  ll.").  118. 

9 

Ibid.,  p.  193  (167-8) 

"  Ibid.  i.  632  (148). 

11 

Ibid.  n.  ii.  227  ;  i. 

332  (148). 

12 

Ramsay,  Genesis  of 

Lancaster,  ii.  88-91,  and  Table. 

13 

Ibid. 

320  July 


The  Secrecy  of  the  Post 

IN  some  countries  now  the  mails  in  ordinary  times  are  regarded 
as  virtually  inviolable,  but  formerly  they  were  often  subjected 
to  scrutiny  and  seizure  at  the  behest  of  government  officials. 
Such  interference  is  not  surprising  in  Turkey,  but  it  prevailed 
also  in  France  and  in  neighbouring  countries  during  the  old 
regime.  In  England  it  has  never  been  formally  abolished,  but 
lingered  on  in  occasional  practice  until  it  was  almost  entirely 
forgotten.  Here  the  carrying  of  letters  was  at  first  largely  for 
the  convenience  of  the  king,  and  entirely  within  his  power  and 
prerogative.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  II,  for  example,  there  are 
royal  orders  directing  officials  to  detain  letters  and  send  them 
to  court .^  More  numerous  notices  can  be  found  in  later  times. 
In  1637  the  king  ordered  that  the  post  should  carry  only  certain 
letters  allowed  by  the  government .^  After  the  meeting  of  the 
Long  Parliament  frequent  orders  were  given  by  the  houses  for 
the  detention  and  inspection  of  letters .^  On  one  occasion  when 
this  was  done  the  Venetian  ambassador  was  roused  to  furious 
indignation,  and  was  not  appeased  until  a  committee  of  the  lords 
waited  upon  him  expressing  regret  and  promising  that  his  letters 
should  be  restored  to  him,*  Later  on  many  orders  were  issued  by 
the  council  of  state  to  seize  and  examine  correspondence,  the 
government  of  the  Commonwealth  doing  openly  what  had  before 
been  generally  done  in  secret.^  The  practice  was  remembered 
when  in  1657  an  act  for  settHng  the  postage  of  England,  Scotland, 
and  Ireland  stated  that  the  erecting  of  one  general  post  office 
was  not  only  the  best  means  of  maintaining  constant  and  certain 
intercourse,  but  also  of  discovering  and  preventing  dangerous 
designs  contrived  against  the  general  good.^  ^1 

*  Rymer  (new  ed.),  ii.  582,  606,  642,  644,  quoted  in  Refortfrom  the  Secret  CommitteA^^ 
on  the  Post  Office  ;  together  with  the  Appendix  {Parliamentary  Papers,  session  1844,  xiv, 
appendix),  pp.  96-8.    This  report,  which  contains  an  excellent  and  detailed  account 
of  the  history  of  the  post  office,  is  the  authority  for  a  number  of  the  statements  made 
in  this  paper,  and  has  been  used  also  by  some  of  the  other  authorities  cited.  i 

»  Cf.  J.  W.  Hyde,  The  Early  History  of  the  Post  (London,  1894),  p.  109.  ^M 

'  Report  from  the  Secret  Committee,  app.,  pp.  101-5. 

*  Lords'  Journals,  iv,  435-7. 
'^  J.  C.  Hemmeon,  History  of  the  British  Post  Office  (Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  191 2), 

p.  21  ;  Hyde,  pp.  198,  204-6. 

*  Report,  app.,  p.  72  ;  H.  Joyce,  History  of  the  Post  Office  (London,  1893),  p.  28. 


1918  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  321 

After  the  Restoration,  however,  the  king's  power  through  his 
servants  was  restricted  to  his  secretaries  alone.  In  later  times 
some  maintained  that  their  prerogative  was  a  hateful  and  illegal 
innovation,  but  it  was  on  the  contrary  a  distinct  limitation  of 
the  ancient  right  of  the  Crown.  In  1660  parliament  passed  an 
act  for  establishing  a  post  office.^  Henry  Bishop  was  made 
postmaster-general,  and  the  indenture  enrolled  with  the  letters 
patent  provided  that  the  lessee  should  permit  the  secretaries  of 
state  to  inspect  all  letters  at  their  discretion.  Three  years  later 
a  like  provision  was  made  in  the  grant  to  O'Neale.^  At  this  time 
it  was  ordered  by  proclamation  that  no  person  employed  in  the 
postal  service  or  any  other  should  presume  to  stop  the  mail  or 
open  any  letter  except  by  immediate  warrant  of  the  secretaries.^ 
The  statute  of  Charles  II  was  superseded  under  Anne  by  another 
law  which  declared  that  since  abuses  might  be  committed  by 
wilfully  opening,  embezzUng,  or  detaining  letters  or  packets,  any 
person  doing  this  should  be  fined  in  the  sum  of  twenty  pounds, 
unless  it  were  done  by  express  warrant  in  writing  under  the  hand 
of  one  of  the  principal  secretaries  of  state  .^*^ 

In  the  eighteenth  century  many  well-known  examples  illus- 
trate the  exercise  of  this  power.  In  1722-3,  during  the  proceedings 
upon  the  passing  of  a  bill  of  pains  and  penalties  against  Bishop 
Atterbury  and  his  associates,  the  principal  evidence  adduced  was 
that  of  clerks  of  the  post  office  who  had  opened  and  copied  letters 
in  obedience  to  the  secretary's  warrants.  No  one  questioned  that 
these  warrants  were  legal,  though  counsel  for  the  bishop  asked 
what  remedy  there  was  if  a  letter  were  falsely  copied  and  the 
original  then  sent  forward.^i  The  prime  minister  had  even  asked 
to  have  Atterbury's  letters  opened  in  foreign  post  offices.^^  '  gir 
Robert  will  see  every  thing  I  write  to  you  ...  so  I  will  be  extreamly 
careful  what  I  say,'  Pulteney  tells  a  friend  somewhat  later.is  In 
1735  complaint  was. made  in  the  house  of  commons  that  even 
members'  letters  were  opened.  Walpole  did  not  defend  this,  but 
asserted  that  in  times  of  danger,  unless  the  ministry  had  dis- 
cretionary power  of  ordering  letters  to  be  opened  at  the  post 
office,  it  would  be  difficult  to  discover  bad  practices  against  the 
government.  It  was  insinuated  that  he  encouraged  such  doings 
to  obtain  knowledge  of  the  private  affairs  of  merchants,  but  the 
commons  merely  resolved  that  opening  correspondence  of  members 
except  by  warrant  of  the  secretary  was  an  infringement  of  privi- 

'  12  Charles  II,  c.  35. 

»  i?eporf.  app.,  p.  89.  ''  9  Anne,  c.  10.  ^ 

I       "  Rcvort,  app.,  p.  109  ;   Lords^  Jourmds,  xxii.  1G2,  103.  171-3.  ISO.  183,  18o,  180. 
188,  189. 

I      13  state  Papers,  Dom.,  George  I,  xl,  1722. 
t      "  Additional  MS.  27732,  fo.  49. 
1     VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  ^ 


322  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  July 

lege.^*  Some  years  after,  Newcastle  told  the  king  that  in  Sir 
Robert's  time  the  French  minister  and  the  minister  of  the  emperor 
were  in  close  correspondence  with  the  leaders  of  the  opposition, 
and  '  that  we  intercepted  all  their  letters,  and  saw  all  that  had 
passed  between  them  '.^^  After  the  fall  of  Walpole  in  1742  the 
committee  of  secrecy,  which  searched  for  evidence  of  his  mis- 
deeds, gave  a  description  of  the  estabUshment  for  inspecting 
letters  ;  ^^  but  shortly  after,  during  the  rebellion  of  1745,  ministers 
again  issued  warrants  of  a  very  general  and  unlimited  character. 
In  1758,  when  Dr.  Hensey  was  tried  for  treasonable  correspondence 
with  the  enemy,  the  principal  evidence  was  given  by  a  clerk  of  the 
post  office  who  had  opened  his  letters  and  deUvered  them  to  the 
secretary  of  state.  A  generation  later  Home  Tooke's  mail  was 
intercepted  before  his  trial.^'  In  the  latter  part  of  the  century 
information  was  obtained  through  the  post  office  not  only  about 
plots  and  conspiracies  but  also  concerning  opinions  and  plans.^^ 
Numerous  allusions  in  the  correspondence  of  the  public  men  of 
George  Ill's  time  show  that  it  was  known  how  common  the 
practice  was,  and  that  many  letters  were  sent  by  private  hands 
in  the  hope  of  avoiding  this  scrutiny.  In  1790  it  was  admitted 
that  the  delivery  of  letters  from  abroad  was  closely  complicated 
with  a  '  secret  office  '.  It  has  been  conjectured,  however,  that  the 
matter  did  not  arouse  general  interest,  since  the  high  charges 
prevented  the  public  from  making  much  use  of  the  post,  and  that 
there  was  no  effective  opposition  because  pubhc  opinion  was  only 
just  beginning  to  exist.^^  At  all  events,  a  statute  at  the  beginning 
of  Victoria's  reign  continued  the  regulation  which  had  been  laid 
down  in  the  statute  of  Anne.^^ 

A  warrant  of  the  eighteenth  century  may  be  given  as  an 
illustration,  since  the  form  was  little  if  at  all  changed  afterwards.^^ 
A  general  warrant  of  1722  ran  : 

These  are  to  xiuthorize  &  impower  j^ou  to  Open,  &  Detain  all  letters, 
&  pacquets  that  shall  come  to  your  Office  in  the  French,  &  Flanders  Mails, 
from  time,  to  time,  until  you  receive  Orders  to  the  contrary  ;  &  to  cause 
such  of  them  to  be  Copy'd,  wherein  you  shall  find  any  thing  containd  whici 
may  he  for  His  Majestys  service.^ 


**  Report  jrom  the  Secret  Committee,  p.  8;  Tindal,  Histori/  of  England,  xx.  274, 275^ 
Commons'  Journals^  xxii.  464. 

*^  A  Narrative  of  the  Changes  in  the  Ministry,  1765-7  (Camden  Society,  1898),  p. 

^*  Commons'  Journals,  xxiv.  331. 

"  Report  from  the  Secret  Committee,  pp.  8,  9. 

"  Cf.  3  Parliamentary  Debates,  Ixxv.  1330. 

"  Sir  T.  Erskine  May,  Constitutional  History  of  England  (London,  1875),  iii.  45 ; 
Joyce,  pp.  Yl\,  268,  269  ;  Hemmeon,  p.  47. 

2«  1  Victoria,  c.  33. 

"  3  Pari.  Deb.,  Ixxviii.  1351,  1352. 

"  State  Papers,  Dom.,  George  I,  xxxi,  23  April  1722. 


1918  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  323 

In  1730  Newcastle  issued  such  a  warrant  to  the  postmaster- 
general  bidding  him  copy  and  transmit  copies  of  all  letters 
addressed  '  to  the  Persons  following  ',  a  list  of  one  hundred  and 
twelve  names  including  the  sovereigns  and  principal  statesmen 
of  Europe.    Similar  orders  are  not  infrequent.^^ 

It  was  not  merely  the  correspondence  of  statesmen  and  diplo- 
matic representatives  which  was  liable  to  be  stopped  and  opened, 
or  even  the  letters  of  suspected  intriguers  or  persons  considered  dan- 
gerous to  the  government.  The  power  of  intercepting  correspon- 
dence and  thus  obtaining  information  otherwise  difficult  to  get  was 
sought  by  other  people  against  ordinary  citizens,  this  power,  of 
course,  being  conferred  only  by  warrant  under  the  hand  and  seal 
of  one  of  the  secret aries.^^  In  1731  Harrington  gives  order  to 
stop  and  open  at  the  post  office  aU  letters  addressed  to  two  persons 
believed  to  be  carrying  on  correspondence  with  some  one  who  had 
fled  from  England  with  jewels,  so  that  his  whereabouts  might  be 
ascertained.25  About  the  same  time  the  governor  and  directors 
of  the  bank  of  England  ask  that  all  letters  addressed  to  a  man 
arrested  for  forgery  may  be  opened,  and  the  secretary  directs 
the  postmaster  to  allow  them  to  read  the  correspondence.^^  On 
another  occasion  Newcastle  signs  the  king's  order  that  all  letters 
for  John  Peele,  merchant,  be  detained  in  order  that  they  may  be 
read  by  the  commissioners  of  the  customs .^^  Again,  a  request  is 
granted  that  all  communications  addressed  to  two  bankrupts  be 
stopped  so  that  the  creditors  may  read  them.^s  In  1735  there 
is  warrant  to  open  all  letters  to  or  from  the  envoy  extraordinary 
from  Portugal,  for  copies  of  them  to  be  laid  before  the  king.  And 
further  : 

As  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  this  Minister's  Correspondence  will 
partly  be  carried  on  by  the  Means  of  some  Merchants  under  whose  Cover 
his  Letters  may  be  conveyed,  whose  Names  not  being  known  they  cannot 
be  particularly"  described,  You  will  open  all  Letters  that  pass  thro'  Your 
Office,  wherein  You  shall  Suspect  the  said  Envoy's  Letters  to  be  inclosed 
till  further  Order.^^ 

A  little  later  we  find  warrant  given  for  the  opening  of  aU  letters 
addressed  to  any  person  in  Falmouth  in  which  other  letters  may 
seem  to  be  enclosed. ^^ 

The  authorities  had  reason  to  apprehend  that  the  practice 

'^  State  Papers,  Dom.,  George  II,  xix.  31  July  1730 ;  xx,  30  September  1730. 

2*  Ihid.  xlvi,  19  December  1738. 

"  State  Papers,  Dom.,  Entry  Books,  cxxii,  13  July  1731. 

-«  Ihid.  16  July  1731. 

"  State  Papers,  Dom.,  George  II,  xxxiv,  28  February  1734/5. 

"  State  Papers,  Dom.,  Entry  Books,  cxxix,  2  December  1738. 

29  State  Papers,  Dom.,  George  II,  xxxiv,  14  April  1735. 

30  Ihid.  xxxTiii,  17  February  1735/6. 

Y2 


324  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  July 

might  be  carried  too  far.  In  1732  Robert  Holt  suspected  certain 
papists  of  designs  to  convert  his  daughter,  and  saw  no  means  of 
preventing  it  unless  the  local  postmaster  opened  letters  to  obtain 
information.  Newcastle  asked  about  the  advisability  of  directing 
the  postmaster  in  Lancashire  to  do  this.  The  postmasters-general 
opposed  the  request,  since  there  was  no  precedent  for  power  to 
be  given  to  a  postmaster  in  the  country  to  detain  and  open  letters, 
either  by  warrant  from  the  secretary  or  from  the  postmaster- 
general.    Moreover,  they  said  : 

We  have  frequently  Complaints  from  the  Country  that  Letters  have 
been  opened,  although  it  is  well  known  that  the  Postmasters  take  an  Oath 
to  the  contrary,  now  if  it  he  known  that  such  a  Power  may  be  given  them 
from  authority,  whatever  they  do  clandestinely  may  be  laid  to  the  Charge 
of  their  Superiors,  and  may  draw  complaints  upon  us,  which  are  best  to 
be  avoided.^^ 

That  such  irregularities  had  given  trouble  is  evident  from  a  com- 
munication of  Newcastle  about  complaints  to  the  king  concerning 
letters  opened  at  the  post  office,  probably  by  under-officials 
without  express  direction,  in.  consequence  of  which  the  king 
ordered  that  nothing  should  be  done  in  future  except  by  warrant 
in  accordance  with  the  statute.^^ 

Like  some  other  things  in  England  the  practice  lingered  on 
with  full  legal  sanction  long  after  it  had  ceased  to  be  noticed,  and 
when  it  was  almost  entirely  forgotten.  In  1844  it  was  said  that 
not  one  out  of  twenty  thousand  knew  of  the  provision  authorizing 
it.^^  But  an  event  occurred  in  that  year  which  attracted 
general  attention  and  aroused  suspicion  and  deep  indignation. 
Sir  James  Graham,  secretary  of  state  for  home  affairs,  caused 
letters  to  be  opened  belonging  to  Mazzini  and  other  refugees  from 
Italy.  The  matter  was  at  once  brought  before  the  house  of 
commons.  One  of  the  members,  Mr.  Duncombe,  asked  for 
a  committee  of  investigation,  and  although  his  motion  was 
defeated.  Sir  James  himself  requested  that  a  committee  should 
be  appointed.  This  was  done,  and  the  question  was  discussed 
angrily  and  at  length  in  parliament  for  some  months.^*  Speakers 
declared  that  the  practice   resembled  the  odious  spy  system  of 

^^  State  Papers,  Dom.,  Entry  Books,  cxxviii,  18  September,  7  November  1732. 

32  State  Papers,  Dora.,  George  II,  xix,  31  July  1730. 

=•3  3  Pari.  Deb.  Ixxv.  896.  In  his  autobiography  Sir  Rowland  Hill  wrote: 
*  Incredible  as  it  may  appear  to  my  readers,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  so  late  as  1844 
a  system,  dating  from  some  far  distant  time,  was  in  full  operation,  under  which  clerks 
from  the  Foreign  Office  used  to  attend  on  the  arrival  of  mails  from  abroad,  to  open 
the  letters  addressed  to  certain  ministers  resident  in  England,  and  make  from  them 
such  extracts  as  they  dcomod  useful  for  the  service  of  Government '  (London,  1880), 
ii.  28. 

"  Spencer  Walpole,  History  of  England  (London,  1912),  v.  378,  note  ;  Hill,  ii.  28 ; 
W.  Lewins,  Her  Majesty's  Mails  (London,  1865),  pp.  214-25. 


1918  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  326 

foreign  countries  ;  that  Englishmen  had  always  boasted  of  their 
letters  being  sacred,  and  going  through  the  post  unexamined  and 
free  ;  that  it  was  against  the  principles  of  the  law  and  the  consti- 
tution to  entrap  men  by  their  secret  communications  ;  and  that 
a  system  of  forging  seals  and  defacing  postmarks  was  '  organized 
and  legaUzed  hypocrisy  '.^s  Macaulay  declared  that  the  power  had 
indeed  been  entrusted  to  the  government  in  cases  of  necessity, 
but  it  was  something  singularly  abhorrent  to  the  genius  of  the 
English  people. 36  Some  disputed  the  right  to  issue  such  warrants 
under  any  act  of  parhament,  and  believed  that  if  one  of  them 
were  brought  before  the  court  of  queen's  bench  its  legaUty  would 
not  be  upheld.  Others  thought  that  an  express  warrant  was  re- 
quired for  the  opening  of  each  letter,  though  the  lord  chancellor  was 
of  the  contrary  opinion.^^  It  was  also  said  that  the  power  could 
be  exercised  only  by  virtue  of  statute  ;  by  the  common  law  letters 
were  sacred.^^  Advocates  of  the  system  affirmed  that  in  early 
times,  when  carrying  letters  was  part  of  the  prerogative  of  the 
Crown,  the  government  did  not  hesitate  to  open  them  ;  that  such 
action  then  was  not  a  legal  offence,  nor  a  misdemeanour,  nor  even 
ground  for  a  civil  action  ;  and  that  the  statute  of  Anne  making 
it  a  misdemeanour  to  open  letters  had  particularly  reserved 
exemption  in  favour  of  the  Crown.^^  Lord  Lyndhurst,  the  lord 
chancellor,  asserted  that  neither  the  statute  of  Anne  nor  the 
ordinance  of  Cromwell  had  created  the  power  of  the  secretary  to 
issue  warrants,  both  of  them  assuming  the  existence  of  this  power 
as  a  matter  of  course.*^ 

A  vast  amount  of  information  was  collected  by  the  committees 
of  the  lords  and  of  the  commons,  who  searched  records  not  easily 
accessible  in  those  days,  and  called  before  them  all  the  officials 
likely  to  be  informed.  From  incomplete  accounts  they  learned 
of  101  warrants  down  to  1798,  before  official  record  was  kept, 
and  of  372  of  later  times.^^  They  found  warrants  which  related 
to  political  libels  and  to  the  enlistment  of  Irish  recruits  for  service 
in  France  ;  and  which  permitted  an  elder  son  to  open  the  letters 
of  his  younger  brother  :  others  concerned  a  robbery  of  bank  bills, 
papers  and  packets  suspected  to  contain  matter  of  dangerous 
tendency  or  treasonable  correspondence,  Lord  George  Gordon's 
correspondence,  all  letters  addressed  to  France,  Flanders,  and 
Holland  during  the  Napoleonic  war,  and  correspondence  of 
certain  suspects  in  industrial  towns  during  the  same  period, 
and  even  in  1842  and  1843  when  the  government  was  alarmed  by 

^'^  3  Pari  Deb.  Ixxv.  895,  974,  1333  ;  Ixxix.  325. 

»«  Ibid.  Ixxv.  1274. 

"  Ibid.  Ixxvi.  76-8  ;  Ixxvii.  917  ;  Ixxix.  205. 

=»«  Ibid.  Ixxv.  977,  978. 

^'  Ibid.  Ixxix.  316,  317,  320.  "  ^^'^-  ^^^''''  ^^' 

"  Ec  port  from  the  Secret  Committee,  pp.  9-11. 


326  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  July 

disturbances  in  the  manufacturing  and  mining  districts."^-  The 
committee  of  the  commons  believed  that  some  of  these  warrants 
had  been  of  service  to  the  state.*-^  The  lords'  committee  reported 
that  for  some  time  the  average  number  issued  each  year  had  been 
small,  and  that  two-thirds  of  them  were  for  tracing  embezzlers 
and  offenders,  application  being  made  usually  by  magistrates  or 
solicitors  conducting  the  prosecution  ;  that  detention  of  corre- 
spondence was  invariably  refused  now  in  cases  where  merely  civil 
rights  were  concerned  ;  that  six  or  seven  warrants  upon  a  circula- 
tion of  more  than  two  hundred  million  letters  could  not  be 
regarded  as  materially  interfering  with  the  sanctity  of  private 
rights  ;  that  the  very  few  warrants  which  were  issued  in  addition 
were  against  persons  who  seemed  to  threaten  the  public  tran- 
quillity ;  and  that  of  late  even  this  power  had  been  very  sparingly 
exercised,  and  not  from  party  or  personal  motives.  The  witnesses 
most  competent  to  judge  declared  that  they  would  be  reluctant 
to  see  the  power  abolished.^*  The  result  of  these  reports  and  also 
of  the  lengthy  debates  was  that  when,  after  a  great  deal  of  speak- 
ing and  complaint,  Mr.  Duncombe  moved  for  leave  to  bring  in 
a  bill  to  secure  the  inviolability  of  letters  passing  through  the 
post  office,  the  motion  was  lost  ;  and  it  may  be  added  that  no 
amendment  to  the  existing  law  had  been  recommended  by  either 
of  the  committees. ^^ 

It  is  the  opinion  of  some  writers  that  since  that  time  never- 
theless such  warrants  have  virtually  or  entirely  ceased  to  be 
issued  ;  ^^  but  the  provision  of  law  which  had  continued  from  the 
time  of  Marlborough  to  the  days  of  Lord  John  Russell  and  Peel 
lingered  on  through  the  period  of  Victoria,  and  was  re-enacted 
in  the  reign  of  her  son.^'  As  time  went  on  the  penalties  for 
interfering  with  the  mails  were  made  greater,  but  in  the  end 
letters  might  still  be  opened  in  obedience  to  an  express  warrant  in 
writing  under  the  hand  of  a  secretary  of  state. 

During  the  attack  upon  Sir  James  Graham  it  was  said, 
erroneously  no  doubt,  that  the  obnoxious  power  existed  in  no 
other  country  ;  and  it  was  particularly  urged  that  it  was  unlawful 
in  the  United  States,  in  Canada,  in  British  colonies,  in  Belgium, 
and  in  France.*^  In  the  United  States,  it  may  be  observed,  the 
Fourth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution,  declaring  the  right  of 
the  people  to  be  secure  in  their  persons,  houses,  and  papers  against 

«  Beportfrom  the  Select  Committee,  pp.  12,  13.  *^  Ibid.,  pp.  18,  19. 

**  Lords'  Journals,  Ixxvi.  641,  642  ;  printed  as  Beportfrom  the  Secret  Committee  of 
the  House  of  Lords  rekitive  to  the  Post  Office  {Parliamentary  Papers,  session  1844,  xiv), 
pp.  1-3. 

^5  3  Pari.  Deb.  Ixxix.  307,  328  ;  May,  iii.  47. 

"  Lewins,  p.  224  ;  May,  iii.  49. 

"  8  Edward  VII,  c.  48,  section  56. 

<«  3  Pari.  Deb.  Ixxix.  309. 


1918  THE  SECRECY  OF  THE  POST  327 

unreasonable  searches  and  seizures,  has  been  explicitly  construed 
to  extend  to  their  letters  passing  through  the  post  office,  so  that 
not  only  have  penalties  been  provided  against  interfering  with 
correspondence,  but  even  government  regulations  excluding 
matter  from  the  mails  cannot  be  enforced  in  the  way  of  examining 
letters  or  sealed  packages  without  warrant  issued  upon  oath  or 
affirmation.^^  Under  no  circumstances  has  any  person  in  the 
postal  service,  unless  employed  in  the  Dead  Letter  Office, 
authority  to  open  or  cause  to  be  opened,  upon  any  pretext,  any 
sealed  letter  or  packet  while  in  the  mails,  except  upon  legal 
warrant  therefor  :  *  that  it  may  contain  improper  or  criminal 
matter,  or  furnish  evidence  for  the  conviction  of  offenders,  is  no 
excuse.'  ^^ 

Edward  Raymond  Turner. 

"  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  1877,  Ex  'parte  Jackson,  96  U.  8,  Reports, 
732-5  ;  Compiled  Statutes  of  the  United  States  (1901),  ii.  2657- 
*»  Postal  Laws  and  Regulations,  section  622. 


328  July 


Notes  and  Documents 

The  Beginning  of  the  Year  in  the  Alfredian  Chronicle 

{866-87) 


I 


The  problem  of  the  date  of  the  commencement  of  the  year  in 
the  English  Chronicle  is  one  which,  in  view  of  its  importance  to 
students  of  Anglo-Saxon  chronology,  has  received  less  than  its 
fair  share  of  the  attention  of  English  historians.  It  is  discussed 
in  a  short  appendix  to  the  Introduction  to  vol.  ii  of  Mr.  Plummer's 
Two  Saxon  Chronicles  Parallel,  published  in  1899,  as  well  as  by 
Mr.  W.  H.  Stevenson^  and  Mr.  Alfred  Anscombe.^  But  the 
whole  literature  of  the  subject  is  slight  in  volume  and  limited  in 
range.  My  object  in  this  paper  being  to  attempt  to  determine 
from  what  day  the  year  was  reckoned  by  annalists  in  the  south 
of  England  at  the  time  of  the  composition  of  the  Chronicle  in  the 
reign  of  Alfred,  I  will  begin  with  a  brief  summary  of  the  con- 
clusions or  conjectures  of  the  writers  whose  names  I  have  men- 
tioned. 

The  opinion  of  the  editor  of  the  English  Chronicle  must  be 
first  considered.  In  Mr.  Plummer's  judgement  *the  only  two 
commencements  (of  the  year)  which  we  have  to  consider  seriously 
in  relation  to  the  Chronicle  are  Easter  and  Christmas  '?  In 
support  of  the  Easter  beginning  Mr.  Plummer  quotes  a  number 
of  examples  drawn  from  the  years  1009-86.  It  has  already  been 
pointed  out  by  Mr.  Poole  that,  with  two  exceptions,  which  can 
be  otherwise  explained,  these  entries  accord  with  the  supposition 
that  the  chronicler  was  reckoning  by  the  Stylus  Florentinus,  which 
began  the  year  with  the  Annunciation  (25  March)  succeeding 
the  1  January  of  the  Julian  year.^  Since  the  practice  of  dating 
the  year  from  Easter  appears  to  have  originated  in  the  chancery 
of  the  kings  of  France  at  a  period  somewhat  later  than  that 

^  Ante,  xiii.  71-7  (January  1898),  and  Asset's  Life  of  Alfred  (1904),  p.  282,  n. 

*  Athenaeum,  22  September  and  10  November  1900  ;  British  Numismatic  Journal, 
series  1,  vols,  iv,  v  (1907-8). 

'  Plummer,  Two  Saxon  Chronicles  Parallel  (1892,  1899),  ii.  cxxxix. 

*  Ante,  xvi.  (1901)  719-21.  The  Stylus  Flore7itinus,TeT^TesGnted  in  England  by  the 
Old  Style,  differed  by  twelve  months  from  the  Stylus  Pisanus,  which  began  the  year 
with  the  Annunciation  preceding  1  January. 


I 


1918       THE  YEAR  IN  THE  CHRONICLE  {866-87)       329 

indicated,  and  since  there  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  it  was  ever 
adopted  in  this  country,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  the 
instances  collected  by  Mr.  Plummer  are  merely  early  examples 
of  the  employment  of  the  Florentine  reckoning,  which  became 
general  in  England  from  the  reign  of  Henry  II.  As  regards  the 
system  in  use  in  Alfred's  day  Mr.  Plummer  holds  that  '  the 
reckoning  from  Christmas  prevails  throughout  the  Alfredian 
Chronicle,  i.  c.  up  to  about  892  '.^  Unluckily  this  view,  which 
denies  that  any  chronological  difficulty  exists,  takes  no  account 
of  a  circumstance  upon  which  Mr.  Stevenson  had  commented 
in  this  Review  before  the  appearance  of  Mr.  Plummer's  volume, 
namely,  that  '  in  the  Chronicle  of  Alfred's  time  we  come  across 
several  instances  where  the  first  events  recorded  in  a  given  year 
happened  late  in  the  autumn  or  in  October  or  November  ',  whilst 
the  foreign  events  from  878  onwards  are  frequently  recorded 
a  year  too  late. 

Mr.  Stevenson's  own  interpretation  of  these  phenomena  is  a 
merely  tentative  one.  After  remarking  that  in  the  case  of  events 
on  the  Continent  the  news  might  sometimes  not  reach  England 
until  after  Christmas,  thus  causing  the  events  themselves  to  be 
entered  in  the  Chronicle  under  the  year  subsequent  to  that  in  which 
they  actually  occurred,^  he  cites  certain  instances,  to  be  noted 
below,  which  are  not  susceptible  of  so  simple  an  explanation. 

'  These  instances  \,  he  says,  '  would  follow  in  the  order  given  in  the 
Chronicle  in  a  year  beginning  25  March,  which  would  have  been  the  proper 
commencement  in  the  era  of  the  Incarnation.  If  the  year  commenced  on 
25  March  preceding  25  December,  and  not  on  25  March  following  that 
date,  we  should  have  an  easy  explanation  of  the  annals  being  in  so  many 
cases  a  year  in  advance  of  the  real  date,  since  9  months  of  the  year  would, 
according  to  our  system,  be  pre-dated  one  year.'  ' 

]VIi\  Stevenson  did  not  commit  himself  definitely  to  the  opinion 
that  English  chroniclers  of  the  ninth  century  employed  the  Styhis 
Pisanus  in  reckoning  their  year-dates  ;  ^  but  the  fact  that  a  writer 
of  his  authority  should  have  been  prepared  to  reject  the  Christmas 
commencement  was  in  itself  no  small  contribution  to  the  study 
1    of  a  problem  the  existence  of  which  was  not  suspected  before 

I  ■'  Two  Saxon  Chronicles,  ii,  p.  cxl. 

^  But  this  would  seem  to  postulate  the  assumption  that  the  annals  were  entered 

I     up  year  by  year,  which  for  this  section  of  the  Chronicle,  at  least,  is  certainly  erroneous. 

I  ''  Ante,  xiii.  75,  76  (1898). 

*  Mr.  Stevenson's  conjecture  has  found  a  supporter  in  Professor  Stenton,  who, 
writing  of  iEthelwerd's  '  probable  dependence  upon  a  chronicle  whicli  began  the  j-car 

I  with  the  Annunciation  preceding  Christmas',  observes  that  'an  original  writer 
towards  the  close  of  the  tenth  century  would  naturally  adopt  the  Slylus  Pisanus  in 
making  his  chronological  indications,  and  there  is  some  evidence  to  suggest  that  even 

I    the  Alfredian  sections  of  the  Chronicle  are  based  upon  a  year  beginning  \<'\ih,  2o  March ' 

I     {ante,  xxiv.  79). 


330  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE   YEAR  IN  July 

Mr.  Stevenson  called  attention  to  it  and  can  scarcely  be  said  to 
be  recognized  even  to-day. 

Shortly  after  the  publication  of  Mr.  Stevenson's  article  and 
Mr.  Plummer's  book  a  letter  from  Mr.  Anscombe  to  the  Athenaeum 
introduced  a  new  complication  into  the  inquiry.  In  this  com- 
munication, in  which  he  was  primarily  concerned  to  justify  the 
accuracy  of  the  date  (673)  assigned  by  Bede  to  the  Council  of 
Hertford,  Mr.  Anscombe  advanced  the  theory  that  '  the  Old 
English  annalistic  year  of  Our  Lord  is  an  indictionary  year,  the 
annuary  numbers  of  which  were  changed  on  1  September  by 
those  chroniclers  who  used  the  Greek  indiction,  and  on  24  Septem- 
ber by  those  who  used  the  Caesarian  one  '.^  According  to  this 
method  of  computation  an  event  which  occurred  between  1  (or  24) 
September  and  31  December  of  the  Julian  year  would  be  dated 
with  the  numeral  of  the  year  which  succeeded  it.  Hence  Mr.  Ans- 
combe suggested  not  only  that  one  year  must  be  subtracted  from 
Bede's  date  for  any  event  which  is  known  to  have  taken  place 
later  than  24  September  in  a  given  year — Bede,  it  is  certain,  used 
the  Caesarian  not  the  Constantinopolitan  (or  Greek)  indiction — 
but  that  the  same  principle  should  be  applied  to  all  similar  dates 
supplied  by  the  English  Chronicle  down  to  as  late  as  the  middle 
of  the  tenth  century.  A  more  elaborate  treatise  upon  '  The 
Anglo-Saxon  Computation  of  Historic  Time  in  the  Ninth  Century  ' 
was  afterwards  contributed  by  Mr.  Anscombe  to  the  pages  of 
the  British  Numismatic  Journal}^  The  obscurity  of  the  writer's 
subject-matter  and  the  nature  of  his  treatment  of  it,  which  is 
technical  rather  than  historical,  have  prevented  Mr.  Anscombe's 
views  from  receiving  that  amount  of  consideration  at  the  hands 
of  historians  which  they  undoubtedly  deserve.  His  original 
letter  to  the  Athenaeum  secured  him  an  important  convert  in 
Sir  James  Ramsay  ;  ^^  but  with  this  exception  his  opinions  have 
been  overlooked,  or  rejected,  by  subsequent  writers  upon  the 
history  of  England  before  IO66.12 

Four  methods  of  beginning  the  year  have  thus  to  be  considered : 
at  the  Annunciation  {Stylus  Pisanus),  at  the  September  indiction, 
at  Christmas,  and  at  the  following  Annunciation  {Stylus  Floren- 
tinus).  Of  another  mode  of  reckoning,  from  1  January,  which 
was  already  in  use  amongst  Irish  annalists,   Mr.   Plummer  is 

»  Athenaeum,  22  September  1900. 

1*  British  Numismatic  Journal,  series  1,  vol,  iv  (pp.  241  fE.) ;  vol.  v  (pp.  381  ff.). 

"  See  his  letters  to  the  Athenaeum,  3  November  and  1  December  1900.  Sir  James 
Kamsay's  Foundations  of  England  was  published  in  1898. 

"  The  dates  in  Miss  Lees,  Alfred  the  Great  (1915),  like  those  in  Hodgkin  {Political 
History  of  England,  vol,  i,  1900)  and  Oman  {England  before  the  Norman  Conquest,  1910), 
appear  to  be  based  upon  the  assumption  tliat  the  3'ear  began  at  Christmas.  No  hint 
of  the  possibility  that  the  year  may  have  begun  in  September  is  to  be  found  either  in 
IVIr.  Plummer's  Life  and  Times  of  Alfred  (1902),  or  in  Mr.  Stevenson's  Asser  (1904), 
both  published  since  the  appearance  of  Mr.  Anscombe's  letter  in  the  Athenaeum. 


1918        THE  ALFREDIAN  CHRONICLE  (866-87)         331 

justified  in  observing  that  he  has  '  found  no  trace  in  the  Saxon 
Chronicles  '.  The  possibiHty  that  English  chroniclers  may  have 
employed  a  different  caput  anni  from  any  of  those  noted^  above 
must  also  not  be  excluded  from  consideration.  In  the  following 
pages  an  attempt  will  be  made  to  arrive  at  a  solution  of  the  pro- 
blem, by  a  study  of  the  internal  evidence  supplied  by  the  Chronicle 
itself,  so  far  as  concerns  that  section  of  it  to  which  the  designation 
'  Alfredian  '  is  specially  appropriate,  namely  the  period  covered 
by  the  annals  866-87.  I  have  chosen  887  rather  than  the  more 
usual  date  892  as  a  halting-place,  because  I  believe  that  the 
original  compilation  of  the  Chronicle  must  be  assigned  to  a  period 
somewhat  earlier  than  is  generally  supposed,  and  that  the  arche- 
type of  our  extant  manuscripts  did  not  at  first  extend  beyond 
the  former  of  these  two  dates. ^^ 

One  feature  of  the  annals  866-87  cannot  fail  to  arouse  attention. 
The  entries  are  almost  exclusively  military  :  they  relate  in  much 
detail  the  annual  movements  ©f  the  Danish  '  host '  from  the  date 
of  its  arrival  in  England  to  the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty  of  Wed- 
more,  and,  more  summarily,  the  subsequent  wanderings  of  that 
section  of  Guthrum's  following  which  decUned  to  avail  itseK  of 
the  permission  to  settle  in  the  Danelaw,  preferring  to  continue 
a  career  of  piracy  at  the  expense  of  England's  neighbours  beyond 
the  Channel.  Thus  from  866  to  878  the  annals  are  concerned 
solely  with  England  :  from  879  to  887  the  interest  is  mainly 
continental.  It  has  not  escaped  notice  that  the  ravages  of  the 
Danes  in  *  Frankland  '  (i.  e.  Germany,  France,  and  Lotharingia) 
are  generally  recorded  in  the  Chronicle  one  year  later  than  that 
to  which  they  properly  belong.  This  led  Earle,  who,  like  all 
his  contemporaries,  assumed  that  the  year  began  at  Christmas, 
to  formulate  the  theory  since  adopted  by  Mr.  Plummer,  that  the 
annals  879-87  are  consistently  one  year  in  advance  of  the  correct 
dating.14  Now  the  peculiarity  of  these  continental  entries  Ues 
in  the  circumstance  that,  with  few  exceptions,  they  refer  to  events 
which  took  place  about  October  or  November,  i.  e.  to  the  annual 
autumn  migration  of  the  Danes  from  one  locality  which  they 
had  *  eaten  up  '  in  the  preceding  summer  to  another  which  they 
destined  for  their  head-quarters  during  the  following  twelve- 
month. Thus  their  coming  to  Ghent,  recorded  in  the  Chronicle 
under  880,  should  rightly  be  referred  to  the  November  of  879  ;  ^^ 
their  ascent  of  the  Mouse  *  far  into  France  ',  given  under  882, 

1=^  Tliis  was  the  view  of  the  German  critic  Grubitz  and  of  the  late  Professor  Earle 
{Tico  of  the  Saxon  Chronicles  Parallel,  p.  xv).  It  rests  chiefly,  though  not  wholly,  upon 
the  fact  that  Asser,  although  he  was  writing  some  years  later,  makes  no  use  of  the 
Chronicle  after  887.    Mr.  Plummer  thinks  the  inference  '  uncertain '  (ii,  p.  cxiii). 

'*  Ibid.  ii.  95.  ,         .,..■,  t.- 

»^  'Nortmanni .  .  .  mense  Xovembrio  in  Gandao  Monasterio  sedem  sibi  ad  hicman- 
dum  statiiunt '  :  Animles  Vedastini,  a.  879,  pp.  45  f.,  ed.  B.  Simson,  1909. 


332  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  YEAR  IN  July 

when,  as  ^Ethelwerd  tells  us,  they  *  measured  out  their  camp  ' 
at  Elsloo,  belongs  to  the  autumn  of  881  ;  ^^  then-  advance,  noticed 
under  883,  up  the  Scheldt  to  Conde,  where  they  '  settled  one 
year',  took  place  in  the  autumn  of  882 ;i'  whilst  the  winter  men- 
tioned as  a.  884,  which  they  spent  on  the  Somme  at  Amiens,  was 
the  winter  of  883-4.^^  Similarly,  their  taking  up  '  winter  quarters 
at  the  city  of  Paris  ',  noted  by  the  Chronicle  under  886,  refers  to 
the  celebrated  siege  which  began  in  November  885  ^^  and  was  pro- 
longed till  the  November  of  the  following  year.  The  latter,  again, 
is  the  true  date  of  their  *  departure  over  the  bridge  at  Paris  ' 
recorded  in  the  annal  for  887.  All  these  instances,  therefore, 
are  consistent  either  with  the  view  that  the  year  began  at  Christ- 
mas and  that  the  annals  are  all  one  year  post-dated,  or  with 
the  alternative  theories  that  the  English  chronicler  began  the 
year  either  from  the  Annunciation  preceding  Christmas  or  from 
the  September  indiction. 

This  perplexing  ambiguity  is  happily  absent  when  we  turn 
to  those  rare  instances  in  which  the  Chronicle  records  Prankish 
occurrences  which  took  place  earlier  in  the  year  than  September. 
Two  such  instances  must  be  noticed.  Under  881  the  Chronicle 
relates  that  '  the  host  fared  further  inland  into  France,  and  the 
Franks  fought  against  them ' ;  .^Ethelwerd  adds  that  the  Franks 
got  the  victory  and  that  the  '  barbarians  '  were  put  to  flight. 
The  first  half  of  the  entry  is  too  indefinite  to  allow  any  conclusion 
to  be  drawn  from  it ;  but  the  engagement  in  which  the  Danes 
were  routed  can  safely  be  identified  with  the  battle  of 
Saucourt,  which  raised  hopes,  destined  to  be  disappointed,  that 
Louis  III  would  deliver  his  country  from  the  Scandinavian 
peril.-"  The  battle  of  Saucourt  was  fought  in  August  881,  i.  e. 
in  the  same  year  as  that  in  which  it  is  recorded  in  the  Chronicle, 
a  circumstance  which  is  consistent  with  the  view  that  English 
annalists  began  the  year  in  September  or  later,  but  is  not  con^ 
sistent  with  the  Pisan  commencement,  or  with  the  supposition^ 
that  all  the  annals  879-87  are  one  year  in  advance  of  the  true 
chronology.  Again,  under  885  the  Chronicle  states  that  King 
Louis  the  Stammerer,  the  father  of  Louis  III,  died  '  in  the  year 
Avhen  the  sun  was  eclipsed  ',  an  event  which  it  records  under  871 


"  '  Mense  Novembrio',  Regino,  Chronicon,  a.  88l,  p.  118,  ed.  F.  Kurze,  1890. 

"  '  Nortmanni  vero  mense  Octobrio  in  Condato  sibi  sedem  firmant ' :  Ann.  Vedast 
a.  882,  p.  52. 

"  The  Danes  took  up  their  winter-quarters  at  Amiens  '  Octobrio  mense  finiente '  : 
ibid.,  a.  883,  p.  54. 

"  Ibid.,  a.  885,  p.  58. 

-"  Annahs  Fuldenses,  a.  881.  The  writer  adds  that  the  Danes,  after  the  battle  of 
Saucourt,  '  instaurato  exercitu,  et  amplificato  numero  equitum,'  proceeded  to  ravage 
the  dominions  of  King  Louis  the  Saxon  :  this  accords  with  the  statement  in  the 
Chronicle  '  then  was  the  host  mounted  there  after  the  battle '. 


1 


1918        THE  ALFBEDIAN  CHRONICLE  (866-87)  333 

Louis  II  died  on  10  April  879,2i  but  the  eclipse  was  on  29  October 
878.22  Hence,  if  Louis  died  in  the  same  calendar-year  as  the 
eclipse,  it  is  obvious  that  the  English  year  879  must  have  begun 
before  29  October  878  and  ended  some  time  between  April  879 
and  the  following  October.  In  any  case,  as  Mr.  Stevenson  points 
out,23  it  is  clear  from  these  instances  that  we  cannot  correct  all  the 
dates  by  simply  throwing  them  one  year  back. 

Again,  the  annal  for  the  year  885  is  as  long  as  its  six  prede- 
cessors put  together.  It  records  the  siege  of  Rochester  by  a  band 
of  Danes  who  '  in  the  same  summer  departed  over  sea  ' ;  the 
two  sea-fights  at  the  mouth  of  the  Stour  ;  the  death  in  '  that 
same  year  before  mid- winter  '  of  '  Charles,  king  of  the  Franks  ' 
(i.  e.  Carloman,  king  of  France,  whose  death  took  place  on 
12  December  884  24)  ;  an  attack  by  the  Danes  upon  '  Old  Saxony  ', 
with  '  great  fighting  twice  in  the  year  '  in  which  '  the  Saxons 
had  the  victory,  and  the  Frisians  were  there  with  them  '  ;  the 
recognition  of  the  Emperor  Charles  the  Fat  as  king  of  France  ; 
and  the  death  of  *  the  good  Pope  Marinus  '.  The  date  of  the 
last-mentioned  event  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  generally  assigned 
to  15  May  884,  which  would  seem  to  support  the  view  that  the 
annals  are  one  year  post-dated.  On  the  other  hand,  the  death 
of  King  Carloman  '  before  mid- winter  '  is  distinctly  stated  to 
have  taken  place  in  the  same  year  which  witnessed  the  siege 
of  Rochester  and  the  departure  of  the  Danes  '  in  the  summer  ', 
and  it  is  certain  that  these  events  are  correctly  dated  885.2^ 
Since  the  Emperor  Charles  the  Fat  can  scarcely  be  said  to  have 
*  succeeded  to  the  western  kingdom  '  before  June  885, 2^  we  are 
left  with  the  impression  that  the  compiler  of  the  annal  regarded 
12  December  884  and  the  following  summer  as  falling 
within  the  same  annalistic  year  885,  as  indeed  would  be  the 
case  if  the  year  had  begun  in  September.  The  reference  to  '  great 
fighting  '  having  taken  place  '  twice  in  the  year  '  between  the 

^^  Louis  died  on  Good  Friday  :  Ann.  Vedasl.,  a.  879,  p.  44. 

"  For  this  eclipse,  which  is  correctly  dated  in  the  Annals  of  Ulster,  i.e.  s.  a.  877 
(==  878),  and  in  most  of  the  continental  chronicles,  see  Stevenson,  Asser,  pp.  281-6. 

'3  Ibid.,  p.  282,  n. 

2*  So  Lavisse  {Flist.  de  France,  ii.  1,  392).  But  most  of  the  Frankish  Chronicles 
give  6  December. 

"  The  Annales  Vedastini  are  decisive  as  to  the  date.  They  state  that  at  the  end 
of  October  884  the  Danes  burned  their  camp  at  Amiens  and  came  to  Boulogne,  where 
'  pars  illorum  mare  transiit,  atque  pars  Luvanium  in  regno  quondam  Hlotharii,  ibique 
sibi  castra  statuunt  ad  hiemandum '.  This  move  of  a  part  of  the  host  to  Eouvain  is 
also  mentioned  by  vEthelwerd  :  the  Chronicle  merely  states  that  '  one  part  went 
eastwards '.  It  is  clear  that  the  detachment  which  '  crossed  the  sea '  must  have  come 
to  Kent  about  November  884,  and  that  the  relief  of  Rochester  and  the  subsequent 
departure  of  the  Danes  '  in  the  summer '  must  be  placed  in  885. 

28  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  formal  recognition  of  Charles  the  Fat  as  king  of 
France  can  be  placed  earlier  than  June  885,  the  date  when  he  came  to  Ponthion :  Ann, 
Vedast.,  a.  885.    See  also  Bouquet,  Henieil  des  Historiens,  viii.  215  n. 


334  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  YEAR  IN  July 

Danes  and  the  Old  Saxons  supports  this  view.     The  Annales 
Fuldenses,  a.  885,  record  a  battle  in  Old  Saxony  in  which  the 
Saxons  owed  their  victory  to  the  timely  intervention  of  a  Frisian 
force  which  attacked  the  invaders  in  the  rear.^^  Since  the  Chronicle 
expressly  states  that  '  the  Frisians  were  there  with  '  the  Saxons 
it  is  plain  that  this  must  be  one  of  the  two  battles  to  which  the 
annalist  refers.-^    In  the  face  of  this  further  testimony  to  the 
accuracy  of  the  Chronicle's  dating,  it  is  clearly  not  permissible 
to  relegate  the  whole  of  the  annal  for  885  to  the  preceding  year.^ 
On  the  contrary,  from  our  scrutiny  of  the  annals  879-87  one  fact] 
emerges.     With  a  single  exception  (the  obit  of  Pope  Marinus)! 
continental   events    which    occur    earlier    in    the    season  than^ 
September  are  correctly  dated  in  the  Chronicle,  whilst  those 
which  happen  in  the  autumn  are  invariably  entered  one  year 
too  late. 

When  we  turn  from  these  continental  entries  to  those  annals 
which  are  concerned  with  events  in  England  we  note  in  particular 
that  for  871,  Alfred's  'year  of  battles  ',  and  that  for  878,  the 
year  of  Ethandune  and  the  Treaty  of  Wedmore.  The  annal  for 
871  is  rich  in  chronological  indications  which  enable  us  to  ^x 
with  something  approaching  precision  the  exact  date  of  each  of 
the  actions  fought  in  the  course  of  this  campaign.  Five  battles, 
viz.  Englefield,  Reading  ('  after  4  nights  '),  Ashdown  ('  4  nights 
after  '),  Basing  ('  after  14  nights  '),  and  Marton  ('  about  2  months 
afterwards  '),  fill  up  the  interval  between  the  beginning  of  the 
yeay  and  Easter,  which  in  871  fell  on  15  April.  The  date  of  one 
of  these  engagements  can  be  determined ;  the  battle  of  Marton, 
it  would  seem,  was  fought  on  22  March,  that  being  the  day 
assigned  in  the  English  calendar  to  the  obit  of  Heahmund, 
bishop  of  Sherborne,  who  fell  in  this  action.^^  This,  in  turn, 
fixes  Basing  to  about  22  January,  Ashdown  to  8  January, 
Reading  to  4  January,  Englefield  to  31  December,  and  the  coming 
of  the  Danes  to  Reading,  the  first  event  recorded  in  the  annal, 
to  28  December  870.3^  Since  we  are  told  that  '  after  Easter  ' 
(i.e.  the  second  half  of  April)  I^ng  Ethelred  died,  and  that '  about 
one  month  afterwards  '  King  Alfred  '  fought  against  the  whole 
host  at  Wilton ',  it  is  apparent  that  the  chronicler  regarded  the^ 

-^  The  battle  seems  to  have  taken  place  about  May. 

^^  The  other  was  doubtless  the  engagement  fought  at  Norden  in  Friesland  late  in 
884— :Mr.  Stevenson  {Asser,  292)  places  it  '  about  December  '—in  which  the  Danes  were 
defeated  by  Rimbert,  archbishop  of  Bremen. 

'^  Ramsay,  Foundations  of  England,  i.  244.  As  Mr.  Plummer  points  out  {Life  and 
Times  of  Alfred,  92),  tho  date  22  March  fits  in  well  with  the  fact  that  the  battle  of 
Marton  is  the  last  event  recorded  in  the  Chronicle  before  Easter. 

3"  The  dates,  which  are  those  given  by  Mr.  Plummer  {ibid.  p.  93)  and  by  Miss  Lees 
{Alfred  tJie  Great,  pp.  117-27),  must  not,  of  course,  be  regarded  as  more  than  approxi- 
mately accurate. 


1918        THE  ALFREDIAN  CHRONICLE  {866-87)         335 

whole  period  from  28  December  870  to  the  close  of  May  871  as 
falling  within  one  annaUstic  year.  In  878  the  first  event  recorded 
is  the  move  of  the  Danes  to  Chippenham  '  after  twelfth  night ', 
i.e.  about  7  January.  'At  Easter'  (23  March)  King  Alfred 
builds  his  fort  at  Athelney,  and  '  in  the  seventh  week  after  Easter  ' 
(c.  11  May)  he  rides  out  of  his  encampment  to  open  his  cam- 
paign for  the  expulsion  of  the  Danes  from  Wessex.  The  battle 
of  Ethandune  appears  to  have  been  fought  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  14  May.  The  siege  of  Chippenham  lasts  '  14  nights  '  (c.  14-28 
May) ;  the  baptism  of  Guthrum  takes  place  '  three  weeks  after- 
wards '  (c.  18  June)  ;  after  which  the  Danish  chief  stays  '  twelve 
nights  '  with  the  king  at  Wedmore,  thus  bringing  us  approxi- 
mately to  1  July  878.  The  dates  may  be  later,  they  can  scarcely 
be  earlier,  than  those  indicated.  Here,  then,  we  have  conclusive 
proof  that  the  Old  English  year  did  not  commence  at  any  period 
between  1  January  and  1  July.  The  evidence  of  these  two  annals, 
871  and  878,  disposes  finally  of  the  conjecture  that  the  chronicler 
reckoned  either  by  the  Pisan  or  by  the  Florentine  calculus, 
beginning  his  year  on  25  March. 

We  are  left  to  choose  between  a  Christmas  commencement, 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  offers  no  explanation  of  the  difficulty 
with  regard  to  the  continental  entries,  and  an  autumn  beginning 
which  would  bring  them  all  into  agreement.  If  we  examine  the 
annals  866-78  more  minutely  we  shall  find  that  the  evidence 
against  the  Christmas  commencement  gathers  strength.  One 
annal  after  another  opens  with  a  reference  to  the  annual  migration 
of  the  Danes  to  fresh  winter-quarters,  an  event  which  seems 
generally  to  have  taken  place  about  November.^^  In  some  cases 
these  entries  are  succeeded  by  others  which  clearly  relate  to  what 
we  should  regard  as  an  earlier  season  of  the  year.  Thus  in  870 
the  Danish  invasion  of  East  AngUa  is  placed  before  the  death 
of  Archbishop  Ceolnoth,  assigned  by  Stubbs  to  4  February  870  ; 
whilst  in  875  the  wintering  of  the  '  host '  on  the  Tyne  and  its 
ravages  amongst  the  Picts  and  the  Strathclyde  Welsh  are  made 
to  precede  the  king's  putting  to  sea  with  his  fleet,  which  the 
Chronicle  places  in  '  that  summer  '.  Indeed,  it  is  curious  how 
regularly  Alfred's  naval  cruises,  which  we  should  naturally  asso- 
ciate with  summer  weather,  are  the  last  occurrences  recorded  in 
the  annals  to  which  they  belong .^2  These  instances  might  perhaps, 
if  they  stood  alone,  be  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  .that  the 
chronicler    made  a  point  of   relating  the  yearly  movements  of 

"  This  was  certainly  the  case  in  France  {supra,  nn.  17-21).  In  England  the  slight 
variation  of  climate  may  have  led  the  Danes  to  move  somewhat  earlier. 

3»  The  annal  for  885  is  no  exception,  although  the  defeat  of  the  English  fleet  is 
recorded  in  the  middle  of  the  annal.  The  succeeding  entries  relate  to  continental 
events,  e.  g.  the  death  of  King  Carloman,  &c. 


336  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE   YEAR  IN  July 

the  '  host '  before  recording  incidents  which  he  regarded  as  of 
secondary  interest.  But  there  are  other  apparent  inconsistencies 
about  these  annals  which  cannot  be  explained  away  so  easily. 
Thus,  in  868,  we  are  told  that  '  the  host  fared  into  Mercia  to 
Nottingham  and  there  took  up  their  winter- quarters ' ;  but  the 
events  which  followed — the  application  for  aid  by  King  Burhred 
'  and  his  witan  '  to  the  king  of  Wessex,  the  expedition  of  Ethelred 
and  AKred  with  the  fyrd  to  Mercia,  the  siege  of  Nottingham,  the 
West  Saxon  withdrawal,  and  the  subsequent  conclusion  of  peace 
between  the  king  of  Mercia  and  the  Danes — cannot  all  have  taken 
place  in  the  brief  interval  between  October  or  November  and 
Christmas.  If  the  West  Saxon  expedition  and  the  siege  of 
Nottingham  are  rightly  placed  in  868  we  are  almost  obliged  to 
conclude  that  the  Old  English  year  began  before  Christmas,  and 
to  throw  back  the  irruption  of  the  Danes  into  Mercia  and  their 
settlement  at  Nottingham  into  the  autumn  of  our  year  867. 
Again,  under  874  we  read  that  *  the  host  fared  from  Lindsey 
to  Rep  ton  and  there  took  winter-quarters  ',  presumably  not 
earlier  than  October  ;  yet  before  the  close  of  the  year,  apparently, 
they  had  driven  King  Burhred  oversea,  *  subdued  the  whole  land ', 
and  given  the  kingdom  '  into  the  keeping  of  Ceolwulf '.  The 
resistance  of  King  Burhred  was  doubtless  feeble,  but  it  is  hard 
to  beHeve  that  the  collapse  of  Mercia  can  have  been  quite  so 
rapid  as  it  would  appear  to  have  been  if  the  chronicler's  year 
began  at  Christmas.  It  seems  more  reasonable  to  refer  the 
coming  of  the  Danes  to  Repton  to  the  autumn  of  873  and  the  fall 
of  Mercia  to  the  following  year.  That  this  is,  indeed,  the  true 
solution  is  rendered  morally  certain  by  the  fact,^^  that  the  move- 
ment of  the  Danes  to  London,  recorded  by  the  Chronicle  under 
872,  was  made  in  the  autumn  of  871.  If  the  move  to  Repton 
took  place  in  the  autumn  of  874,  we  should  have  to  beheve  that 
the  chronicler  has  somehow  contrived  to  omit  all  record  of  one 
of  the  annual  migrations  of  the  '  host '  between  871  and  874, 
which  is  unlikely. 

The  objections  to  the  view  that  the  year  began  at  Christmas 
become  still  greater  when  we  examine  the  annal  for  870.  In  that 
year,  we  are  told,  '  the  host  rode  (from  York)  across  Mercia  into 
East  Anglia  and  took  up  their  winter- quarters  at  Thetford  ;  and 
that  winter  King  Edmund  fought  against  them  and  the  Danish- 
men  got  the  victory  and  slew  the  king  and  subdued  all  the  land  '. 
Manuscript  E  (Peterborough)  adds  the  further  detail  that  '  they  Mm 
destroyed  all  the  monasteries  to  which  they  came  ',  including  ™1 
that  of  Medeshamstead  (Peterborough).  We  have  no  reason  to 
distrust  the  very  early  tradition  which  assigns  the  martyrdom 

"  See  below,  p.  339. 


1918        THE  ALFREDIAN  CHRONICLE  (866-87)  337 

of  St.  Edmund  to  20  November  ;  34  the  date  camiot,  in  any  case, 
be  far  out,  for  the  Chronicle  tells  us  that  the  battle  took  place  in 
the  winter.  On  the  other  hand,  we  have  seen  that  the  Danes  were 
at  Reading  and  had  begun  their  invasion  of  Wessex  before  the 
close  of  December  870.  Now  the  chronicler  would  hardly  state 
that  the  Danes  '  took  up  winter- quarters  at  Thetford  '  if  they 
moved  on  to  the  south  of  England  before  Christmas  ;  it  is  not 
less  improbable  that  the  Danes  would  make  two  such  migrations, 
one  from  Northumbria  into  East  AngHa  and  another  from  East 
Anglia  into  Wessex,  in  the  course  of  a  single  winter ;  ^s  and  in 
any  case  it  is  impossible  that  they  can  have  '  subdued  all  the  land  ' 
of  the  East  Angles,  committed  the  depredations  lamented  by 
the  Peterborough  chronicler,  and  ridden  across  the  centre  of 
England  from  Thetford  to  Reading  all  in  the  five  weeks  between 
20  November  and  28  December  870.  The  narrative  of  the 
Chronicle  will  only  regain  the  credibility  to  which  it  is  entitled 
if  we  assume  that  the  Old  EngUsh  year  began  at  some  period  in 
the  autumn,  put  back  the  coming  of  the  Danes  to  Thetford  and 
the  martyrdom  of  St.  Edmund  to  November  869,36  and  suppose 
that  East  AngHa  lay  at  the  feet  of  the  marauders  throughout  the 
whole  of  the  twelve  months  between  that  date  and  the  invasion 
of  Wessex.37 

**  The  date  20  November  is  given  by  Abbo  of  Fleury  {Passio  Sancti  Eadmundi),  who 
wrote  little  more  than  a  century  after  Edmund's  death  (c.  985).  It  is  also  the  day 
assigned  to  St.  Edmund  in  Aelfric's  Lives  of  the  Saints. 

»*  The  events  of  the  winter  of  877-8  when  '  the  host  fared  into  the  land  of  the 
Mercians '  in  the  autumn,  and  afterwards  in  January  '  stole  away  to  Chippenham  ' , 
furnish  no  analogy.  iEthelwerd  tells  us,  what  the  Chronicle  omits,  that  the  invaders 
of  Mercia  had  established  themselves  at  Gloucester,  i.  e.  within  easy  striking  distance 
of  Wessex.  The  distance  between  Gloucester  and  Chippenham  cannot  be  compared 
with  that  between  Thetford  and  Reading.  It  is  even  possible  that  the  move  to  Gloucester 
(from  Exeter)  may  have  been  a  deliberate  feint,  designed  to  mislead  Alfred  into  dis- 
banding his  fyrd  on  the  supposition  that  the  Danes  had  settled  in  their  winter-quarters 
and  that  military  operations  were  over  for  the  season.  The  complete  collapse  of 
Wessex  in  the  early  weeks  of  878  can  only  be  explained  upon  the  hypothesis  that 
Alfred  was  taken  unawares  by  the  invasion.  See  Plummer,  Life  and  Times  of  Alfred,  p.  59. 

•*  Florence  of  Worcester,  who  records  the  martyrdom  of  Edmund  imder  870,  states 
that  it  took  place  '  Indictione  ii,  duodecimo  Cal.  Decembris,  die  Dominico '.  Both  the 
Indiction  and  the  day  of  the  week  are  those  of  the  year  869.  Mr.  Stevenson  called 
attention  to  this  discrepancy  in  his  edition  of  Asser,  p.  232,  but  did  not  appreciate  its 
significance.  Again,  Abbo  of  Fleury  tells  us  that  the  leader  of  the  Danes  in  this 
invasion  of  East  Anglia,  by  whose  command  Edmund  was  slain,  was  the  famous 
Ingvar  (or  Ivar),  progenitor  of  the  long  line  of  Scandinavian  kings  of  York  and  Dublin 
in  the  next  century.  But  the  Irish  annals  show  that  Ivar  cannot  have  been  in  East 
Anglia  in  November  870,  though  he  may  have  been  in  November  869.  He  passed  the 
winter  of  870  in  '  Alba ',  where  he  besieged  and  captured  the  fortress  of  Dumbarton, 
afterwards  returning  to  Dublin,  apparently  direct  from  Alba,  in  871  {Annals  of  Ulster, 
a.  869,  870  ;  these  annals  being  consistently  one  year  behindhand  in  their  chronology 
throughout  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries). 

*'  We  may  infer  that  the  chronicler  has  slightly  understated  the  interval  between 
the  coming  of  the  Danes  to  Reading  (c.  28  December,  above,  p.  334)  and  the  battle  of 
Marton  (22  March).  The  end  of  December  would  be  very  late  for  the  Danes  to  shift 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  Z 


338  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  YEAR  IN  July 

There  are  other  entries  which  point  towards  the  same  con- 
clusion.    The  annal  for  866  records  the  first  coming  of  the  '  great 
host ',  adding  that  they  '  took  up  their  winter- quarters  in  East 
Anglia  .  .  .  and  the  East  Angles  made  peace  with  them  '.     Then 
in  867  '  the  host  fared  from  East  Anglia  over  the  mouth  of  the 
Humber  to  York  .  .  .  and  late  in  the  year  they  [the  two  kings 
Osbryht  and  iEUe]  resolved  to  continue  the  war  against  the  host ; 
and  to  that  purpose  they  gathered  a  large  fyrd  and  sought  the 
host  at  York  .  .  .  and  there  was  an  excessive  slaughter  made  and 
both  the  kings  were  slain  '.^^    If  the  year  began  at  Christmas 
it  would  be  natural  to  assume,  from  what  the  Chronicle  tells  us, 
that  the  Danes  spent  the  winter  of  866-7  in  East  Anglia,  that 
they  moved  on  to  York  in  the  autumn  of  867,  and  that  the  battle 
of  York,  which  was  *  late  in  the  year  ',  took  place  about  the 
middle  of  December.     But  the  date  of  the  battle  can  be  fixed  : 
Symeon  of  Durham,^ ^  with  northern  authority  to  guide  him, 
tells  us  that  it  was  fought  upon  the  Friday  before  Palm  Sunday 
(i.  e.  21  March)  867.     Now,  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  the 
annals  for  871  and  878  decisively  disprove  this  hypothesis,  this 
passage  might  be  regarded  as  supporting  the  view  that  the  year 
began  at  the  Annunciation.     On  the  other  hand,  it  is  possible 
to  reconcile  the  adjective  *  late  '  with  the  view  that  the  year 
began  in  September,  for  when  once  the  Danes  had  settled  in  their 
winter- quarters  they  would  probably  regard  the  campaigning 
season  as  closed  until  they  chose  to  reopen  it.     Again,  it  is  clear 
from  the  wording  of  the  Chronicle  that  some  considerable  interval 
must  have  elapsed  between  the  arrival  of  the  Danes  at  York  and 
the  battle  which  followed.     We  cannot,  then,  place  the  invasion 
of  Northumbria  later  than  January  867  ;  and  this,  again,  cannot 
be  harmonized  with  the  assumption  that  the  Danes  spent  the 
winter  of  866-7  in  East  Anglia.     The  only  way  of  reconcihng  the 
annal  for  867  with  that  for  866  is  to  suppose  that  the  chronicler's 
year  began  at  some  period  not  later  than  about  September,  and  that 
he  intended  to  signify  that  the  great  host  came  to  England  in  the 
autumn  of  our  year  865,  spent  the  winter  of  865-6  in  East  Angha, 
passed  on  to  Northumbria  about  the  autumn  of  866,  and  had 
settled  at  York  some  months  prior  to  the  repulse  of  the  EngHsh 
attack  on  21  March  867.^0 

their  winter-quarters.     It  is  more  probable  that  they  moved  from  East  Anglia  in 
November  870,  coming  to  Reading  perhaps  the  same  month,  or  earlier  in  December. 

^*  This  translation,  like  others  in  this  paper,  is  taken  from  Gomme's  Anglo-Saxon 
Chronicle  (1909).  _^ 

^*  Historia  Begum,  i.  lOG.    The  Danish  victory  at  York  is  recorded  by  the  AnnalsmM 
of  Ulster,  a.  866  (=  867).  ^ 

*»  This  conclusion  bears  out  the  view  expressed  above  (p.  336)  that  the  first  Danish 
invasion  of  Mercia  took  place  in  the  autumn  of  867,  not  that  of  868.  If  868  were  the 
true  date  we  should  have  to  conclude  that  the  chronicler  has  omitted  to  record  where 
the  Danes  spent  the  winter  of  867-8. 


1918        THE  ALFREDIAN  CHRONICLE  (866-87)         339 

The  argument  is  clinched  by  the  short  entries  for  the  years 
872  and  879.  The  annal  for  879  relates  that  *  the  host  fared 
to  Cirencester  from  Chippenham  and  settled  there  one  year  '. 
The  same  annal  records  the  eclipse  of  29  October  878.  The  move 
to  Cirencester  must  also  be  assigned  to  the  autumn  of  878,  not 
to  that  of  879  ;  for  it  is  out  of  the  question  to  suppose  that  the 
host,  which  had  come  to  Chippenham  in  January  878,  would  have 
spent  two  successive  winters  in  the  same  locaHty,  lingering  at 
Chippenham  for  fifteen  months  after  the  conclusion  of  the  treaty 
of  Wedmore,  an  essential  stipulation  of  which  was  that  they 
should  depart  from  King  Alfred's  dominions.  This  is  recognized 
by  Mr.  Plummer,  who,  however,  believes  that  the  date  879  is 
simply  a  mistake  :  '  it  is  this  mistake  ',  he  says,  '  which  throws 
the  chronology  of  the  Chronicle  a  year  wrong  from  this  point 
up  to  897  (896).'  ^i  We  have  already  seen  that  the  dating  of 
the  Chronicle  for  the  years  879-87  is  less  inaccurate  than  has  been 
supposed  ;  moreover,  it  appears  to  have  escaped  Mr.  Plummer's 
notice  that  an  exact  parallel  to  what  has  happened  in  the  annal 
for  879  is  to  be  found  in  the  annal  for  872.  In  that  year,  we  are 
told,  *  the  host  fared  from  Reading  to  London  and  there  took 
up  their  winter-quarters,  and  the  Mercians  made  peace  with  the 
host '.  Reading  had  been  the  head- quarters  of  the  Danes  through- 
out the  campaign  of  January-May  871,  and  it  is  incredible  that 
they  should  have  remained  there  until  nearly  the  close  of  872. 
The  move  to  London  must  therefore  be  assigned,  as  Mr.  Plummer 
himself  assigns  it,  to  the  autumn  of  87 1.*^  It  is  idle  to  imagine 
that  this  is  simply  another  mistake  ;  the  analogy  with  the  annal 
for  879,  which  likewise  records  the  events  of  the  preceding  autumn, 
is  too  remarkable  to  be  lightly  set  aside.  These  two  annals, 
indeed,  are  decisive,  since  they  furnish  convincing  evidence  that 
the  author  of  this  section  of  the  Chronicle  changed  his  year- 
numbers  at  some  season  of  the  year  posterior  to  that  which 
witnessed  the  close  of  the  campaigns  of  871  and  878,  yet  anterior 
to  the  autumn  departure  of  the  Danes  into  other  winter-quarters. 

Can  we  determine  the  precise  date  at  which  he  changed  them  ? 
It  has  been  seen  that  there  is  not  a  single  entry  in  the  Chronicle 
between  866  and  887,  if  we  except  that  of  the  death  of  Pope 
Marinus,  which  conflicts  with  Mr.  Anscombe's  theory  that  the 
year  had  its  beginning  in  September.  On  the  contrary,  the 
annals  871-2  and  878-9,  taken  in  conjunction,  make  it  perfectly 
plain  that  the  commencement  of  the  year  did  not  fall  between 
1  January  and  1  July,  but  that  it  did  fall  between  1  July  and 
29  October.  It  is  possible  still  further  to  contract  this  '  neutral 
zone  '  between  the  old  year  and  the  new.     The  annal  for  877 

"  Life  and  Times  oj  Alfred,  p.  104,  n.  3. 
*■'  Ibid.,  p.  99. 

Z2 


340  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  YEAR  IN  July 

concludes  with  the  words  '  and  afterwards  in  the  autumn  the  host 
fared  into  the  land  of  the  Mercians  '  ;  the  context  showing  that 
this  must  refer  to  the  autumn  of  877,  not  that  of  876.  The 
official  date  of  the  beginning  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  '  haerfest '  was 
7  August,  but  it  is  probable  that  in  common  practice  it  was  looked 
upon  as  beginning  at  Lammas  (1  August).  Hence  it  follows 
that  the  composer  of  the  annal  for  877  did  not  regard  the  year 
as  closing  before  1  August  at  the  earliest.  We  are  left  to  select 
some  date  between  1  August  and  29  October  ;  and  in  the  absence 
of  any  alternative  suggestion  which  will  accord  with  the  evidence 
we  have  no  choice  but  to  conclude  that  Mr.  Anscombe's  supposi- 
tion is  correct,  and  that,  at  least  throughout  the  period  which 
is  covered  by  this  article,  the  chronicler  dated  his  years  by  the 
indictions,  changing  their  numerals  on  24  September.*^ 

How  far  does  our  conclusion  affect  the  chronology  traditionally 
associated  with  the  most  strenuous  phase  of  Alfred's  career  ? 
The  sacrifice  of  important  dates  is  less  sweeping  than  might  be 
supposed.  The  landing  of  the  great  host  in  East  Anglia  must 
be  put  back  to  the  autumn  of  865  ;  so,  too,  apparently,  must  the 
death  of  King  Ethelbert,  not  because  the  annalist  records  the 
accession  of  Ethelred  I  before  chronicling  the  arrival  of  the  Danes, 
but  because  he  assigns  to  Ethelbert  a  reign  of  only  five  years'  dura- 
tion, although  placing  his  accession  in  860  and  his  death  in  866. 
The  first  attack  upon  Northumbria  must  be  relegated  to  the 
closing  months  of  866,  the  irruption  into  Mercia  to  the  autumn 
of  867,  and  the  martyrdom  of  St.  Edmund  and  the  conquest 
of  East  Anglia  to  the  winter  of  869-70.  Similarly,  a  year  should 
be  struck  off  each  of  the  other  dates  assigned  by  the  Chronicle 
to  the  taking  up  of  winter- quarters  by  the  Danes,  whether  in 
England  or  in  France.  On  the  other  hand,  the  dates  of  Alfred's 
naval  expeditions  of  875,  882,  and  885  are  not  affected  ;  neither, 
happily,  are  those  of  his  great  campaigns  of  871  and  878. 

A  word  must  be  added  as  to  the  date  of  Alfred's  recovery 
of  London.     The  episode  is  recorded  by  the  Chronicle  under  886, 

*'  There  is  nothing  in  the  annals  866-87  to  show  whether  1  or  24  September  was 
the  starting-point  of  the  Old  English  annalistic  year.  Mr.  Anscombe,  whilst  holding 
that  Bede  'undoubtedly  used  the  Caesarian  indiction',  assumes  that  Theodore  of 
Tarsus,  archbishop  of  Canterbury  668-90,  used  the  Greek  one,  and  that  in  the  south 
of  England,  in  contradistinction  to  Northumbria,  the  year  began  on  1  September. 
But  Mr.  Anscombe  has,  I  think,  overlooked  the  circumstance  that  many  of  Bede's 
dates,  especially  those  in  which  the  reckoning  from  24  September  is  most  apparent, 
are  derived  from  a  southern  source,  namely,  those  Canterbury  records  which,  as  he 
tells  us  in  his  preface  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History j  were  placed  at  his  disposal  by  Abbot 
Albinus.  In  the  absence  of  any  textual  evidence  that  the  Constantinopolitan  system 
was  ever  employed  in  this  country  it  is  safe  to  conclude  that  Canterbury  chroniclers 
from  the  seventh  to  the  tenth  century  made  use  of  the  Caesarian  Indiction,  beginning 
their  year  at  the  harvest  equinox,  i.  e. '  mid-autumn  ',  just  as  their  successors  began  it 
at  '  mid- winter  '. 


1918        THE  ALFBEDIAN  CHRONICLE  (866--8T)         341 

side  by  side  with  the  entry  relating  to  the  siege  of  Paris ;  but 
there  is  nothing  in  the  annal  to  show  whether  the  event  occurred 
before  or  after  1  January.  Certain  conclusions  may,  however, 
be  drawn  from  a  passage  which  is  to  be  found  in  manuscripts  B, 
C,  D,  E  (but  not  in  A),  s.  a.  883,  to  the  effect  that '  the  same  year 
Sighelm  and  Aethelstan  carried  to  Rome  and  also  to  India  .  .  . 
the  alms  which  the  king  had  vowed  thither  when  they  took  up 
their  position  against  the  host  at  London  '.  This  passage  has 
excited  much  discussion,  partly  because  of  the  reference  to  India, 
with  the  significance  of  which  we  are  not  concerned,  and  partly 
because  of  the  difficulty  of  identifying  the  occasion  on  which 
Alfred's  vow  is  said  to  have  been  made.  The  latter  has  been 
assumed  to  refer  either  to  the  events  of  *  872  '  (871)  when  '  the 
host  fared  from  Reading  to  London  ',^4  qj.  to  those  of  '  879  ' 
(878)  when  we  are  told  that '  a  band  of  vikings  assembled  together 
and  took  up  a  position  at  Fulham  on  the  Thames  '.  But  on 
neither  of  these  occasions  are  we  offered  the  sUghtest  hint  that 
the  movements  of  the  Danes  were  in  any  way  obstructed  by  the 
English.  In  87 1 ,  moreover,  the  fate  of  London  would  be  a  Mercian, 
not  a  West  Saxon  concern  ;  whilst  in  878  Wessex  must  have 
been  too  much  exhausted  by  three  years  of  hard  fighting  for  Alfred 
to  be  in  any  position  to  pursue  the  war  beyond  the  boundaries 
of  his  own  dominions.  Again,  if  the  vow  was  made  upon  either 
of  the  occasions  suggested,  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  so  pious 
a  king  as  Alfred  would  have  postponed  its  fulfilment  till  883, 
especially  since  the  years  878-83  were  years  of  peace.  On  the 
other  hand,  we  learn  from  Asser,  who  may  well  have  been  present, 
that  the  recovery  of  London  in  '  886 '  was  a  considerable  miUtary 
operation  involving  much  slaughter  and  destruction  of  property  ;*^ 
in  other  words,  that  it  was  a  crisis  of  sufficient  magnitude  to 
justify  the  Chronicle's  statement  that  '  they  (i.  e.  King  Alfred 
and  the  fyrd)  took  up  their  position  against  the  host  at  London  '.^^ 
If  we  might  assume  that  the  passage  in  the  annal  for  883  has 
become  misplaced  and  that  its  true  date  should  be  886 — an 
assumption  which  it  is  less  than  usually  hazardous  to  make, 
since   no   mistake   was   more   common   amongst   tenth-century 

"  This  is  the  view  of  Mr.  Plummer,  Life  and  Times  of  Alfred,  p.  99. 

*^  '  Post  incendia  urbium  stragesque  populorum '  :  Asser,  p.  69.  Asser  appears, 
from  his  own  narrative,  to  have  come  to  court  about  April  885,  but  the  chronological 
indications  which  he  supplies  are  too  indefinite  to  allow  us  to  fix  the'  date  with 
certainty. 

"  According  to  ^thelwerd  the  occupation  of  London  was  preceded  by  a  regular 
siege  ('interea  obsidetur  a  rege  Aelfredo  urbs  Lundonia')  :  this,  however,  may  be 
simply  ^thelwerd's  interpretation  of  the  'gesette  Aelfred  cyning  Lundenburg '  of  the 
Chronicle.  The  ambiguity  of  the  phrase  '  gesette '  has  led  some  to  suppose  that  Alfred 
merely  restored  and  garrisoned  a  town  which  was  already  in  his  possession  ;  but  the 
testimony  of  Asser,  writing  within  a  few  years  of  the  event,  seems  decisive  against 
this  view. 


342  THE  ALFEEDIAN  CHRONICLE  (806-87)       July 

scribes  than  the  confusion  of  the  figures  in  and  ui,  and  since  the 
absence  of  the  passage  from  the  Parker  manuscript,  from  Asser, 
and  from  ^thelwerd  proves  it  to  be  an  interpolation  inserted, 
probably  by  the  author  of  the  annals  888-91,  at  some  period 
later  than  the  transcription  of  manuscript  A — ^it  would  then  be 
possible  to  connect  this  journey  to  Rome,  the  first  of  which  we 
are  cognizant,  with  the  subsequent  missions  of  a  similar  nature 
recorded  in  the  annals  for  887,  888,  and  890.  The  whole  story 
would  thus  gain  in  credibility.  In  that  case  we  should  have  to 
assign  the  occupation  of  London  to  the  autumn  of  885,  so  as  to 
allow  time  for  the  mission  to  Rome,  which  would  naturally  start 
in  the  spring  or  early  summer,  to  be  included  in  the  same  annalistic 
year  886.  This  interpretation,  again,  would  lend  point  to  the 
final  entry  in  the  long  annal  for  885,  that  '  in  the  same  year  the 
host  in  East  Anglia  broke  peace  with  King  Alfred  '.  It  seems 
probable,  therefore,  that  the  spectacle  of  the  siege  of  Rochester 
in  the  spring  of  885  and  of  the  defeat  of  the  English  fleet  at  the 
mouth  of  the  Stour  the  same  summer  encouraged  the  East  Anglian 
Danes  to  *  break  the  peace  '  about  August  or  September,  and 
that  the  capture  of  London  in  the  closing  months  of  885  represents 
Alfred's  effective  reply  to  an  unprovoked  aggression.  The  treaty 
known  as  '  Alfred  and  Gut  brum's  frith  '  and  the  handing  over 
of  London  *  to  the  keeping  of  Aethelred  ealdorman '  may,  with 
the  mission  to  Rome,  be  assigned  to  some  period  in  886. 

Murray  L.  R.  Beaven. 


f! 


A  Charter  of  Canute  for  Fecamp 

The  English  possessions  of  religious  houses  abroad  form  a 
significant  phase  of  the  relations  between  England  and  the 
Continent  before  the  Conquest,  and  the  charters  relating  thereto 
still  offer  problems  for  the  student  of  diplomatic  and  of  local 
history .1  Not  the  least  important  of  these  houses  was  the  Norman 
abbey  of  Fecamp,  a  favoured  foundation  of  the  Norman  dukes 
which  early  enjoyed  the  liberality  of  EngHsh  kings.  In  Domesday  - 
Fecamp  holds  of  the  king  three  manors,  '  Rameslie  ',  Steyning, 
and  Bury,  all  in  Sussex.    Of  these,  Steyning  had  been  granted  by 

^  The  list  of  these  houses  in  Ellis,  Introduction  to  Domesday,  i.  324-6,  is  by  no  means 
complete.  See  particularly  W.  H.  Stevenson's  discussion  of  the  forged  Old  English 
charters  for  Saint-Denis,  ante,  vi.  736-42 ;  and  Miss  Helen  Cam's  note  on  Saint- 
Riquier,  ante,  xxxi.  443-7.  On  the  supposed  grant  of  the  Confessor  to  Mont-Saint- 
Michel,  see  ante,  xxxi.  265,  267.  A  study  of  the  early  charters  for  St.  Peter's,  Ghent, 
undertaken  as  part  of  a  history  of  the  early  relations  between  England  and  Flanders 
by  one  of  my  students,  Captain  R.  H.  George,  remains  for  the  present  in  manuscript 
in  the  library  of  Harvard  University. 

»  fo.  17  b. 


1918       A  CHARTER  OF  CANUTE  FOR  FECAMP        343 

the  Confessor  in  a  charter  of  which  the  text  is  preserved  ;  3  taken 
away  by  Harold,  it  was  restored  by  the  Conqueror,  less  certain 
tenements  in  Hastings  in  exchange  for  which  he  gave  the  monks 
Bury.4  The  extensive  holding  of  *  RamesUe ',  *  including  Rye, 
Winchelsea,  and  at  least  part  of  Hastings  ^  with  five  churches 
and  a  hundred  salt-pans,  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been 
likewise  a  gift  of  the  Confessor.^  It  appears,  however,  from  the 
documents  published  below,  that  the  grant  goes  back  a  generation 
earUer,  having  been  planned  by  Ethelred  II «  and  actually  made 
by  Canute.  This  is  not  surprising  when  we  remember  that  their 
queen,  iElfgifu-Emma,  witness  to  all  three  of  the  transactions 
here  recorded,  was  a  daughter  of  Richard  I,  the  restorer  of  the 
monastery,  and  a  sister  of  Canute's  contemporary  Richard  II, 
to  whom  it  owed  its  principal  charters  of  endowment. 

Among  the  careful  copies  from  the  abbey's  archives  made 
before  the  Revolution  by  Dom  Jacques  Lenoir  and  now  preserved 
in  the  Collection  Moreau  of  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  we  find 
(xxi.  18)  the  following  extract  from  a  cartulary  of  the  twelfth 
century  now  lost : 

{a)  Ego  Chanut  Dei  gratia  Anglorum  rex,  non  immemor  human^ 
fragilitatis  inmo  vero  accensus  et  compunctus  desiderio  sempitern§  felici- 
tatis,  ad  contegendam  anim§  me§  nuditatem  elegi  mihi  aJiquo  modo 
promereri  sanctam  et  individuam  Trinitatem.  Quare  unam  terram  qu^ 
Bretda  ^  vocatur,  alia  vero  qu§  Rammesleah  dicitur  cum  portu  suo  omni- 
busque  rebus  ad  se  pcrtinentibus,  eiusdem  Sancte  Trinitatis  monachis  in 
c^nobio  Fiscannensi  sacrosancto^  nomini  regulariter  mancipatis  perpe- 
tualiter  obtinendam  contradidi  et  ut  nostrum  beneficium  inviolabile 
permaneret  regali  gravitate  roboravi,  quatinus  ipsi  me  suis  meritis  ad 
cglestia  indesinenter  studeant  elevare  quos  ego  in  terren§  necessitatis 
onere  aliquo  modo  studeo  relevare.  Sicut  ergo  rex  Aethelredus  prgdictam 
terram  eisdem  Dei  servis  se  daturum  promisit  sed  morte  pr§ventus  minus 
hoc  adimplevit,  ita  ego  eis  iure  perpetuo  eam  subicio  et  sine  ulla  contradic- 
tione  in  posterum  possidendam  regali  auctoritate  decerno.  Insuper  ego 
predictus  rex  Chanut  dono  tribuo  et  concedo  duas  partes  telonei  in  portu 
qui  dicitur  Wincenesel  pr§dicto  monasterio  Fiscannensi  in  manu  domni 
abbatis  lohannis.  Ego  Aelveva  regina  huic  dono  consensi.  Ego  Aeffie 
episcopus  subscripsi.  Ego  Leoffie  episcopus  signavi.  Gaudium,  pax,  et 
karitas  huic  libertati  consentientibus  amen.  Ego  quoque  Hartcanut  filius 
pr^scripti  Chanut  regis  Danorum  et  Anglorum  huic  patris  mei  donationi 

»  Kemble,  Codex  Diplomaticus,  iv.  229,  no.  890 ;  cf.  Du  Monstier,  Niuatria  Pia, 
p.  223  ;  Freeman,  Norman  Conquest,  ii.  545  (1877). 

*  Chevreux  and  Vernier,  Les  Archives  de  Normandie  et  de  la  Seine-Inferieure, 
plate  8  ;  Round,  Calendar  of  Documents  preserved  in  France,  no.  115  ;  Davis,  Regesta 
Begum  Anglo-Norvmnnorum,  no.  206  ;  Victoria  History  oj  Sussex,  i.  375  f. 

*  Victoria  History  of  Sussex,  i.  375. 

*  Compare  in  Neustria  Pia,  p.  213,  the  story  of  his  visit  to  Fecamp  at  the  time 
of  his  exile  in  Normandy. 

i  '  The  fourth  letter  of  this  word  is  doubtful.  •  MS.  sacroaancti. 


344        A  CHARTER  OF  CANUTE  FOR  FECAMP      July 

subscribere  iussi  et  manu  propria  firmavi  firmandamque  fidelibus  meis 
mandavi,  quorum  nomina  asscribere  rogavi.  +Ego  Aeleva  regis  mater 
banc  donationem  firmavi.  Ego  Goduinus  comes  huic  donationi  libentissime 
consensi.+  Signum  Sewardi  comitis,  Ansgoth,  Clapp,  Stigan  capellanus, 
Etwolth,  Herman,  Alwinesmelt,  Spiritus,  Osbert,  Acchiersum,  Bricsih, 
Geron,  Aizor,  Turcbil,  Swen,  Theustul,  Eusten,  Tovi,  Turgil. 

(b)  Ego  Cbanut  Dei  gratia  rex  Anglorum  pro  emolumento  in  celestibus 
nanciscendo  terram  qu§  Rammesleab  dicitur  cum  portu  suo  omnibusque 
rebus  ad  se  pertinentibus  Sanct§  Trinitatis  monasterii  monachis  sicut  rex 
^thelredus  se  daturum  promisit  sed  morte  preventus  minus  hoc  adimplevit 
perpetualiter  subicio,  ut  interventores  habeam  quos  huiusmodi  relevo 
solatio.  Ego  Aelfgivu  regina  huic  dono  consensi.  Ego  Aelfie  episcopus 
subscripsi.  Ego  Leofsie  episcopus  signavi.  Gaudium,  pax,  et  karitas 
huic  libertati  consentientibus  amen. 

Although  all  this  appears  as  a  single  charter  in  the  copy,  it 
is  clear  that  we  have  two  distinct  documents  recording  three 
different  transactions.  The  last  paragraph  (h)  evidently  belongs 
first  in  order  of  time  ;  the  bishops'  signatures  do  not  aid  in  fixing 
the  date,  which  was  probably  soon  after  Canute's  marriage  to 
Emma  in  July  1017.  Then  comes  the  amplification  (a),  repeating 
the  same  witnesses  and  phrases  but  adding  the  preamble  and  the 
important  further  grant  of  two-thirds  of  the  toll  of  Winchelsea  ; 
the  name  of  Brede,  the  manor  to  which  '  E-ameslie  '  seems  later 
to  have  corresponded,^  also  makes  its  appearance.  The  expanded 
donation  is  then  presented  to  Harthacanute  for  his  confirmation 
and  signature.  There  seems  no  occasion  for  questioning  the 
original  grant  of  Canute  or  the  confirmation  by  his  son,  but  we 
may  well  doubt  whether  the  expanded  charter  as  brought  to 
Harthacanute  is  really  authentic.  It  must  have  been  subsequent 
to  the  accession  of  Abbot  John  in  1028,^^  yet  the  witnesses  are 
exactly  the  same  as  in  the  earlier  charter.  The  record  of  the 
monks  of  Fecamp  is  not  free  from  forgeries,^^  and  the  toll  of 
Winchelsea  furnished  a  sufficient  motive. 

Charles  H.  Haskins. 


Sokemen  and  the  Village  Waste 

The  establishment  in  the  north  and  east  of  England  of  the  new 
monasteries  which  distinguished  that  region  in  the  twelfth  century 
must  often  have  given  urgency  to  a  question  which  no  one  in 
earlier  times  had  normally  been  concerned  to  raise.    Under  what 

"  Victoria  History  of  Sussex,  i.  391. 

"  On  the  abbot's  visit  to  England  in  1054,  see  Neustria  Pia,  p.  223. 

^^  See  the  study  of  the  early  ducal  charters,  with  facsimiles,  in  my  Norman  Institu- 
tions (1918),  appendix  B  ;  and  for  the  charters  of  the  Conqueror,  Davis,  RegesUi, 
nos.  112,  253  ;  Round,  ante,  xxix.  348. 


1918       SOKEMEN  AND  THE  VILLAGE  WASTE         345 

conditions  could  a  man  of  rank,  the  lord,  for  example,  of  one  of 
the  small  manors  characteristic  of  the  Danelaw,  make  grants 
from  the  common  waste  of  a  village  in  which  he  had  an  interest  ? 
In  a  great  part  of  this  region,  in  Lincolnshire  and  Nottinghamshire, 
to  say  nothing  of  East  AngUa,  the  villages  subject  to  a  single 
lordship  in  the  twelfth  century  were  exceptional.  In  most 
villages,  when  a  lord  had  obtained  the  consent  of  his  own  tenants 
to  such  a  grant  he  had  still  to  reckon  with  the  possible  resistance 
of  the  men  of  other  lords.  The  position  was  comphcated  by  the 
personal  freedom  enjoyed  by  a  powerful  element  among  the 
Danelaw  peasantry  :  the  sokeman's  right  to  turn  his  beasts  on 
to  the  village  waste  was  certainly  not  derived  from  any  seignorial 
grant.  The  bestowal  of  a  parcel  of  waste  upon  a  reUgious  house 
meant  the  restriction  of  the  area  within  which  the  sokeman's 
beasts  might  common,  and  his  consent  was  essential  to  the 
peaceable  enjoyment  of  the  gift.  We  should  expect  that  clerks 
would  now  and  then  find  a  place  for  an  assertion  of  this  consent 
somewhere  in  the  unstereotyped  formulas  of  a  twelfth-century 
deed  of  gift.  Nevertheless  such  assertions  are  rare  ;  the  consent 
of  the  freeholders  of  a  village  to  alienations  from  its  waste  was 
apparently  taken  for  granted  by  draughtsmen.  But  there  has 
been  preserved  in  a  seventeenth-century  transcript  a  set  of  three 
charters  in  which  the  assertion  is  made  with  singular  precision. 
Among  his  collections  relating  to  the  history  of  Lincolnshire 
Gervase  Holies  of  Grimsby  copied  in  1639,  unfortunately  with 
some  abbreviation,  a  cartulary,  no  longer  extant,  of  the  Gilbertine 
priory  of  Haverholme.^  In  this  cartulary  there  were  entered  the 
charters  by  which  Ralf  de  Aincurt  granted,  and  Walter  his  son 
and  John  his  grandson  successively  confirmed  to  that  house, 
265  acres  of  the  waste  of  Kirkby  Green  and  Scopwick  and  common 
pasture  in  the  fields  and  wastes  of  Kirkby  Green,  Scopwick,  and 
Blankney.    The  text  of  these  charters  may  be  given  at  length  : 

(1)  Radulfus  de  Eincurt  omnibus  Christifidelibus  salutem.  Sciatis  me 
prece  et  petitione  .  .  .  Alexandri  Lincolniensis  episcopi  et  concessione 
Walteri  filii  mei  et  lieredis  et  de  sokemans2  de  Kirkebi  et  de  Scapewie  et 
de  Blankeneie  dedisse  etc.  deo  et  sanctimonialibus  de  Haverholm  quas  ibi 
congregavit  magister  Gilebertus  de  Sempringliam  sub  protectione  predicti 
Alexandri  episcopi  ducentas  acras  et  sexaginta  quinque  in  brueria  de 

1  Lansdowne  MS.  207a.  The  cartulary  was  then  in  the  possession  of -Edmund 
Lynold,  rector  of  Healing,  Lincolnshire.  It  may  still  reappear,  as  a  considerable  por- 
tion of  the  Liber  Niger  of  Newhouse  Abbey  has  recently  reappeared  at  Brocldesby.  iiut 
from  the  gaps  in  HoUes's  transcript  it  is  evident  that  the  Haverholrae  cartulary  was  in 
a  bad  state  in  1639,  and  would  be  hardly  likely  to  add  to  the  information  which  he 
has  preserved.  The  King's  Remembrancer's  Memoranda  Rolls  of  the  last  years  of 
Henry  IV's  reign  contain  exemplifications  of  many  charters  of  Gilbertine  houses,  but 
those  relating  to  Haverholme  are  represented  by  little  beyond  a  detailed  continuation 

issued  by  Edward  I.  j      t>  *  t  •  ooo 

»  The  form  socUrmns  is  used  for  the  more  usual  sochermnm  inDomesday  Book,  i.  -UU. 


346  80KEMEN  AND  THE  VILLAGE  WASTE       July 

Kirkebi  et  de  Scapwic  ad  nutriendum  sibi  oves  unde  possint  vestiri  per 
annum  et  communem  pasturam  ovibus  suis  per  totos  campos  et  per  totam 
brueyiam  de  Kirkebi  et  de  Scapwic  et  de  Wlangheneia  (sic)  etc.  Hanc 
predictam  brueriam  et  pasturam  dedi  eis  et  feci  Walterum  filium  meum 
dare  eis  in  puram  et  perpetuam  elemosinam  etc.  anno  incarnationis  domini 
Mo  C'o  trigesimo  nono  etc.  Testes  Robertus  de  Cauz.  Radulfus  Hanselin. 
[1139.]    (Lansd.  207a,  fo.  115  b.) 

(2)  Walterus  Deincurt  omnibus  fidelibus  Christi  Francis  et  Anglis 
salutem.  Notum  sit  vobis  me  dedisse  sanctimonialibus  et  fratribus  de 
Haverholm  ducentas  acras  et  sexaginta  quinque  in  brueria  de  Kirkeby  et 
de  Scapewic  et  communem  pasturam  de  Scapewic  et  de  Kirkebi  et  de 
Wlangkeneie  (sic)  in  longum  et  in  latum  usque  ad  Felebrige  tam  in 
brueriis  quam  in  campis  in  perpetuam  elemosinam  etc.  Hanc  donacionem 
dedi  concessione  Oliveri  filii  mei  et  concessione  sochamans  predictarum 
villarum  quorum  predicta  terra  f  uit  Testes  Ricardus  presbiter  de  Scapewic. 
Rogerus  villanus.    [1139-41.]     (Lansd.  207a,  fo.  114  b.) 

(3)  Cunctis  etc.  lohannes  Deincurt  salutem.  Notum  sit  vobis  quod 
concessi  etc.  sanctimonialibus  et  fratribus  de  Haverholm  terram  quam 
pater  mens  Walterus  de  Eincurt  eis  dedit  et  confirmavit  carta  sua  conces- 
sione Oliveri  fratris  mei  et  des  sochemans  de  Kirkebi  et  de  Scapwic  scilicet 
ducentas  acras  terre  et  sexaginta  quinque  in  brueria  harum  villarum  de 
Kirkebi  et  de  Scapwic  et  volo  ut  integre  et  plenarie  hanc  terram  habeant 
libere  et  quiete  teneant  et  possideant  in  perpetuam  elemosinam  etc.  Con- 
cessi et  ego  Johannes  predictis  sanctimonialibus  et  fratribus  communem 
pasturam  predictarum  villarum  et  de  Blancheneie  etc.  Testibus  Alexandro 
Malebuse,     Radulfo  de  Eincurt.  [temf.  Hen.  11.]^     (Lansd.  207a,  fo.  115.) 

The  second  of  these  charters  must  have  been  written  within 
two  years  of  the  first ;  perhaps  it  is  strictly  contemporary.^  Its 
wording  is  remarkable,  for  it  asserts  with  as  much  emphasis  as 
was  possible  to  a  twelfth-century  clerk  that  the  actual  soil  of  the 
waste  in  question  belonged  to  the  sokemen  whose  consent  was 
obtained.  No  phrase  at  the  disposal  of  a  draftsman  of  this  age 
could  well  be  stronger  than  the  quorum  predicta  terra  fuit  which 
concludes  the  second  charter.  Speculation  as  to  the  exact  force 
which  attached  to  these  words  in  the  mind  of  the  man  who  wrote 
them  would  be  fruitless  :  they  stand  for  a  quality  of  possession 
no  less  and  no  more  than  that  denoted  by  phrases  like  terra  que 
fuit  lohannis  filii  Wulmari,  which  were  already  commonplace  at 
this  date.  But  this  uncertainty  does  not  affect  the  fact  that  to 
the  writer  of  this  charter  the  wastes  in  question  belonged  not  to 
the  lord  in  whose  name  the  charter  was  issued  but  to  the  sokemen 
of  the  villages  of  whose  territory  the  waste  formed  part.  ' 

The  adjacent  villages  of  Kirkby  Green  and  Scop  wick  lie  rather 
more  than  ten  miles  south-east  of  Lincoln,  between  the  fens  which 

*  Walter  de  Aincurt,  John's  father,  died  in  1168,  but  the  present  charter  may  have 
been  granted  before  that  event. 

*  Oliver  de  Aincurt,  Walter's  son,  whose  consent  is  recorded,  was  killed  at  the 
battle  of  Lincoln. 


1918       SOREMEN  AND  THE  VILLAGE  WASTE         347 

border  the  Witham  and  the  belt  of  rising  ground,  barren  until 
the  eighteenth  century,  which  culminates  in  the  Lincoln  Edge. 
Blankney  is  the  neighbouring  village  immediately  to  the  north. 
The  name  of  the  modern  parish  of  Temple  Bruer  preserves  a 
memory  of  the  brueria  ^  of  these  charters.  In  each  village  the 
sokemen  of  1139  represent  predecessors  who  were  registered 
under  that  name  in  1086.  The  whole  village  of  Blankney  formed 
part  of  the  fief  of  Walter  de  Aincurt ;  its  population  comprised 
22  sokemen,  10  villeins,  and  6  bordars.  The  tenurial  condition 
of  Kirkby  Green  and  Scopwick,  which  were  surveyed  together  in 
Domesday,  was  more  interesting.   It  may  be  set  out  in  a  table  :  « 

Sokeland   of   Branston,       7  Car.  4  Bov,  14  sokemen,  0  villeins,  2  bordars 

Walter  de  Aincurt 
Manor,  Walter  de  Aincurt  10  Car.  0  Bov,  32  sokemen,  7  villeins,  2  bordars 
Manor,  Norman  de  Arci  6  Bov,    1  sokeman,  0  villeins,  2  bordars 

Manor,  Heppo  Balistarius    5  Car.  6  Bov,  13  sokemen,  3  villeins,  2  bordars 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  these  two  villages  were  rated 
together  at  the  round  sum  of  24  carucates,  and  contained  a  popu- 
lation of  no  less  than  60  sokemen,  10  villeins,  and  8  bordars,  the 
men  of  three  different  tenants  in  chief  and  annexed  to  four 
separate  estates.  In  general  in  this  region  the  peasant  classes 
whose  unfreedom  is  usually  assumed,  the  villeins  and  bordars, 
are  numerically  insignificant  in  comparison  with  the  sokemen. 
At  Rowston,  immediately  to  the  south  of  Kirkby  Green  and  Scop- 
wick, there  were  32  sokemen,  no  villeins,  and  2  bordars  ;  Digby, 
the  next  village  southwards,  was  inhabited  by  35  sokemen  only  ; 
the  recorded  population  of  Bloxholme  and  Dorrington,  the 
villages  bordering  Digby  on  the  south,  consisted  of  20  sokemen, 
2  villeins,  and  no  bordars,  and  28  sokemen,  no  villeins,  and  8 
bordars,  respectively.  The  preponderance  of  sokemen  is  main- 
tained in  the  villages  to  the  north  of  Blankney.  Metheringham, 
the  next  village,  it  is  true,  contained  only  12  sokemen  to  28  villeins 
and  26  bordars  ;  but  at  Dunston,  the  next  village,  there  were 
31  sokemen  to  3  villeins  and  13  bordars,  and  at  Nocton,  north- 
wards again,  there  were  26  sokemen  to  10  villeins  and  3  bordars. 
It  is  a  fortunate  chance  which  has  preserved  in  the  charters  that 
have  been  printed  here  evidence  adequate  to  prove  the  survival 
of  the  free  peasantry  of  this  region  in  their  independence  through 
the  dark  half -century  that  follows  Domesday. 

F.  M.  Stenton. 

*  The  word  brueria,  representing  the  Old  French  bruiere,  is  frequently  used  in  the 
twelfth  century  to  denote  heath  or  untilled  rough  land  in  general.  Cf.  Godefroi, 
Complement,  i.  388. 

«  Domesday  Book,  i.  361,  3G1,  361  b,  369.  The  last  folio  contains  an  entry  of 
li  geldable  carucates  in  Scopwick  occupied  by  one  sokeman  and  belonging  to  the  fief 
of  Heppo  Balistarius.  Probably,  this  holding  is  included  in  the  fourth  entry  summarized 
in  the  table. 


348  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

Some  Castle  Officers  in  the  Twelfth  Century 

The  military  institutions  of  England  in  the  twelfth  century 
rested  upon  a  double  foundation,  namely  feudal  tenure  and 
money  payment,  and  this  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  economic 
conditions  then  prevailing.^  The  tendency  of  course  was  to 
consoHdate  the  two  and  place  the  whole  military  system  upon 
a  financial  basis.  The  duahty  of  the  existing  system  comes  out 
very  clearly  in  the  measures  taken  for  garrisoning  and  main- 
taining the  royal  castles.  It  is  probable  that  the  same  arrange- 
ments were  made  in  connexion  with  the  baronial  castles,  and 
this  is  distinctly  suggested  by  what  is  known  of  these  castles 
when  they  came  temporarily  into  the  king's  hands. 

The  personnel  of  a  royal  castle  fell  into  two  groups,  the  first 
chiefly  miUtary,  the  second  chiefly  ministerial  in  character. 
The  first  group  consisted  of  a  certain  number  of  fully  armed 
knights  and  a  certain  number  of  Serjeants,  men-at-arms  less 
expensively  or  elaborately  equipped.  All  these  troops  were 
either  supplied  for  the  king's  use  as  a  result  of  feudal  obliga- 
tion, or  else  were  hired  at  a  fixed  rate  per  diem  and  placed 
in  the  castle  during  the  king's  pleasure.  The  duty  of  ward  at 
a  given  castle  was  imposed  upon  one  or  more  of  the  surrounding 
baronies,  but  that  only  meant  that  the  caput  of  the  barony 
adjoined  the  castle,  its  members  might  be  scattered  over  many 
counties,  and  its  tenants  might  have  to  make  long  journeys 
in  the  discharge  of  their  duty.  The  tenure  was  either  by  knight- 
service  or  serjeanty,  and  it  was  beginning  to  be  compounded  for 
money  payments  in  the  early  years  of  Henry  II,  but  it  will  be 
remembered  that  in  the  Great  Charter  the  barons  stipulated 
that  those  who  preferred  to  discharge  their  duty  in  person  might 
be  allowed  to  do  so.^  The  parallel  system  of  hiring  knights  and 
Serjeants  to  supply  or  supplement  the  garrison  is  attested  by  the 
evidence  of  the  pipe  rolls.  Three  or  four  entries  arranged 
chronologically  will  sufiice  to  illustrate  the  point.  It  would  be 
easy  to  multiply  them,  but  that  is  not  worth  while  in  the  case  of^ 
well-indexed  and  readily  accessible  documents. 

In  liberatione  militis  et  seruientium  .  .  .  castelli  de  sancto  Briauel 
xiiii  1.  V  s.  et  vii  d.  ob.^  ^H 

In  liberatione  militum  et  seruientium  de  Doura  Ixxv  1.  xxii  d.*  ^™ 

Et  XX  militibus  et  ii  seruientibus  equitibus  et  xx  seruientibus  peditibus 
.  .  .  residentibus  in  castello  de  Waletona.^ 

^  Cf.  Delbriick,  Kriegskunst,  iii,  166  ff. 

*  See  Round,  Commune  of  London,  pp.  278  jBf. ;  ArchaeologicalJourncd,  lix,  144  ff. ; 
The  Ancestor,  vol.  vi,  pp.  72  ff. 

3  Pipe  Roll  (hereafter  cited  as  P.  R.),  31  Hen.  I  (Record  Commission),  p.  76. 

*  P.  R.,  7  Hen.  II,  p.  61.  ^ 
**  P.  R.,  20  Hen.  II,  p.  37.    See  a  similar  entry  in  regard  to  Porchester,  in  the  same  • 


1918  THE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  349 

The  second  group  of  the  castle  stafiP  comprised  clerks  of  the 
works,  porters,  watchmen,  and  the  artisans,  smiths,  masons 
carpenters,  and  such-like  as  were  required  to  keep  the  fabric  in 
repair.  Both  groups  are  brought  together  in  a  charter  which 
I  proceed  to  quote,  premising  that  although  it  is  of  much  later 
date,  its  substantial  provisions  may  be  attested  from  twelfth- 
century  evidence.  This  document  comes  from  the  twelfth  year 
of  Edward  I,  and  records  the  king's  grant  of  the  guardianship 
of  Harlech  Castle  to  Hugh  de  Longslow,  to  be  held  during 
pleasure.  Hugh  is  to  have  annuaUy  £100  at  the  exchequer  of 
Carnarvon,  and  the  conditions  of  his  tenure  are  as  follows  : 

Ita  tamen  quod  continue  habeat  in  munitione  castri  illius  ad  custum 
suum  triginta  homines  defensabiles,  de  quibus  sint  decern  balistarii,  unus 
capellanus,  unus  attilliator,  unus  faber,  unus  carpentarius,  et  unus 
cementarius,  et  de  ahis  residuis  fiant  ianitores,  vigiles,  et  alii  ministri  qui 
necessarii  sunt  in  castro.^ 

The  maintenance  in  the  twelfth-century  castles  of  the  artisans 
mentioned  in  this  text  (with  the  exception  of  the  arrow-maker) 
may  be  easily  attested  from  the  pipe  rolls.''  But  the  functionaries 
to  whom  I  would  call  particular  attention  are  the  clerk,  janitor, 
and  watchmen.  These  seem  to  have  been  an  indispensable  part 
of  the  castle  staff,  often  there  were  several  of  each.  The  names 
appear  to  have  been  pretty  loosely  used,  and  it  will  clear  the 
field  to  examine  some  of  the  senses  that  were  attributed  to 
them. 

As  for  the  capellanus,  every  castle  seems  to  have  contained 
a  chapel  and  chaplain,  and  often  indeed  these  were  estabUshed 
on  a  liberal  scale,  as  at  Richmond,  where  there  was  a  sort 
of  college  of  six  chaplains  provided  under  the  terms  of  a  special 
agreement  (1275)  by  the  abbot  and  convent  of  Eggleston.^ 
It  is  not  with  these,  however,  that  we  are  concerned.  The 
capellanus  of  our  text  was  a  clerk  of  the  works,  as  may  be  shown 
from  his  functions,  and  in  some  later  documents  he  is  described 
as  such.    A  capellanus  was  kept  in  the  honour  of  Eye,  where  he 

year,  p.  125.  These  both  refer  to  advances  of  the  wages  of  the  troops  :  cf.  Dawson, 
Hastings  Castle,  i,  pp.  86,  91. 

•  Piinted  from  Rotulus  Walliae,  12  Edw.  I,  in  Archaeologia  Cambrensis,  Ist  series, 
i.  p.  246  ;  on  the  name  of  the  keeper,  see  p.  263.  Compare  the  grant  of  Beaumaris 
in  5  Ric.  II,  ibid.,  4th  series,  ii,  p.  x. 

'  P.  R.,  11  Hen.  II,  p.  5  ;  ann.  13,  p.  35,  ann.  6,  pp.  25-6,  ann.  27,  p.  135,  ann. 
28,  p.  150,  ann.  25,  p.  109,  ann.  16,  p.  134.  Some  of  the  later  Castle  account  rolls  are 
instructive  in  this  connexion :  see  Essex  Arch.  Soc.  Trans.,  new  series,  i.  101  flf.,  187 
(Hadleigh,  38,  45  Edw.  Ill) ;  Arch.  Cambr.,  4th  series,  ii,  pp.  xix  ff.  (Beaumaris,  9-10 
Edw.  III). 

•  Gale,  Registrum  Honoris  de  Richmond,  pp.  95-7.  Richard  II's  grant  of  Beaumaris 
cited  above  provides  that  the  beneficiary  inueniat  ad  custos  suos  proprios  unuvi 
capellamim  diuina  in  capella  nostra  infra  castrum  nostrum  predictum  celebratiirum. 


350  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

was  paid  one  mark  a  year.^    The  presence  of  such  an  officer  is 
also  attested  at  Southampton,  Worcester,  Banbury,  Trentham, 
Shoreham,   Hertford,  and  Walton.^^     Their  fee  seems  to  have 
varied :  at  Eye,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was  135.  4(?.  ;  at  Banbury  it 
was  205.,  and  the  same  at  Trentham  ;  at  Hertford  and  Walton 
it  cannot  be  determined,  as  only  the  lump  sum  of  a  number  of 
payments  is  given  ;  at  Worcester  it  was  305.  5d.,  and  this  seems 
to  have  been  the  normal  rate  for  officers  of  the  sort  in  a  royal 
castle.    The  proper  function  of  the  capellanus  would  seem  to  have 
been  the  supervision  of  the  work  done  on  the  fabric  of  the  castle. 
When  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Henry  II  considerable  repairs, 
were  undertaken  on  the  castles  of  Eye  and  Orford,  they  were 
carried  on  under  the  supervision  of  three  persons,  one  of  whom 
was  Wimarus  capellanus}'^    And  in  the  seventeenth  year  work] 
carried  on  in  the  castle  of  Hertford  and  the  king's  houses  in  the! 
castle   was   under  the   superintendence  of   Henry  capellanusp] 
The  custody  of  the  castle  of  Eye  was  several  times  committed] 
to  Wimar.13 

Now  all  these  functions   are  discharged  in  other  cases  byj 
officers  described  as  clerici,   and  there  would  seem    thereforej 
to  be  good  reason  for  supposing  that  the  clerk  of  the  worl 
might  be  either   a  capellanus  or  a    clericus.     This  distinction] 
would  be  an  ecclesiastical  one  ;  the  capellanus  would  have  definitej 
duties  in  the  chapel,  and  the  clericus  would  be  a  clerk  of  ani 
sort  without  such  duties.     But  the  administrative  work  in  con- 
nexion with  the  fabric  of  the  castle  would  be  the  same.^*    A1 
Bridgenorth  we  find  the  '  works  '  accounted  for  carried  on  undei 
the  supervision  of  three  persons,  one  of  whom  is  described  as 
Hulgar  clericus}^    Stone  and  lime  were  brought  to  Hastings  for 
building  purposes  under  the  direction  of  Peter  clericus  and  two 
others,  and  the  works  on  the  castle  of  Chilham  were  supervised  by 
Walter  clericus,  and  of  Hereford  by  Nicholas  clericus}^    In  later 
documents  this   official  describes   himself  as  clericus  operumP 
We  may  fairly  assume  then  that  a  clerk  of  the  works,  whether 

"  P.  R.,  10  Hen.  II,  p.  35,  and  thereafter  regularly.  In  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  there  is 
the  record  of  a  payment  to  a  capellanus  and  two  clerici,  thus  distinguishing  the 
two  terms,  p.  23. 

^«  P.  R.,  2  Hen.  II,  p.  53;  ann.  9,  p.  4  ;  ann.  13,  p.  58  ;  ann.  14,  pp.  59,  77;! 
ann.  15,  pp.  68,  69  ;  ann.  17,  pp.  118-19,  129  ;  ann.  20,  p.  37. 

"  P.  R.,  13  Hen.  II,  pp.  18,  33-5. 

"  P.  R.,  17  Hen.  II,  pp.  118-19. 

»  P.  R.,  15  Hen.  II,  p.  95  ;  ann.  16,  p.  3. 

^*  No  doubt  there  was  a  difference  in  dignity ;  we  hear  of  a  chaplain  and  his  clerk  at 
Chepstow,  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  II,  p.  10. 

»*  P.  R.,  15  Hen.  II,  pp.  107-8;  cf.  ibid.,  p.  137. 

^«  P.  R.,  18  Hen.  II,  pp.  130,  135  ;  ann.  20,  p.  121. 

"  Hadleigh  Account  Roll,  38-9  Edw.  Ill ;  in  Essex  Arch.  Soc.  Trans.,  new  series, 
i,  p.  101  ;  C.  W.  Martin,  Leeds  Castle,  app.  no.  xviii  (Account  Roll,  16  Hen.  VI). 


1918  TEE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  351 

described  as  clericus  or  capellanus,  was  to  be  found  in  the  twelfth - 
century  castle,  and  that  it  was  his  business  to  supervise  the 
fabric,  and  probably  to  keep  account  of  all  expenditures  in 
connexion  with  it.  As  far  as  I  am  aware,  this  office  was  never 
feudalized  in  the  sense  that  it  was  never  held  as  a  serjeanty  or 
rewarded  with  a  grant  of  land. 

We  find  capellani  or  clerks  accounting  at  the  exchequer  for 
the  issues  of  a  castle  or  an  honour.  Thus  Wimar  capellanus 
occasionally  had  charge  of  the  castle  of  Eye,  and  accounted  for 
the  honour.is  In  the  sixteenth  year  WilHam  clericus  accounts  for 
the  issues  and  debts  of  the  honour  of  the  constable .^^  Two  years 
later  Robert  clericus  accounts  for  the  abbey  of  Thorney.^^  Then 
in  the  London  account  in  the  twenty-first  year  there  is  a  payment 
to  a  group  of  clerks  who  are  described  as  custodes  civitatis  et 
comitatusP-  Capellani  appear  to  have  been  used  for  adminis- 
trative purposes  of  this  sort  at  least  in  the  great  ecclesiastical 
baronies,  and  we  hear  of  them  at  Hereford  22  and  Lincoln,  where 
they  form  part  of  a  list  of  ministri  episcopatus,  and  are  described 
as  constituti  per  maneriaP  Then  we  find  a  capellanus,  whom  we 
have  already  met  with  as  a  clerk  of  the  works  of  the  castle  of 
Eye,  one  of  those  who  accounted  at  the  exchequer  for  the  counties 
of  Norfolk  and  Suffolk .^^  Then  in  the  eighteenth  year  Robert 
capellanus  is  one  of  those  who  account  for  the  scutage  of  the 
knights  of  the  Earl  of  Leicester.^^ 

It  is  to  be  supposed  that  one  or  more  porters  were  kept  in 
every  castle  in  England,  but  as  many  of  them  were  not  in  the 
king's  hand  the  point  cannot  be  fuUy  illustrated  from  the  pipe 
rolls.  What  they  do  show  is  the  payment  of  porters'  wages 
annually  at  a  certain  number  of  castles,  increasing  shghtly  during 
the  reign,  and  similar  payment  in  the  case  of  castles  temporarily  in 
the  king's  possession.^^  There  are  some  puzzling  exceptions.  There 
are  no  payments  to  porters  either  at  the  Tower  or  at  Windsor, 
although  a  porter  appears  at  the  Tower  in  Henry  I's  pipe  roll,^^ 

**  P.  R.,  12  Hen.  II,  p.  35  ;  ann.  16,  p.  3  ;  at  other  times  the  work  was  done  by 
Oger  dapifer,  see  ann,  10,  p.  35  ;  ann.  15,  p.  95. 

^'  P.  R.,  16  Hen.  II,  pp.  154-5  ;  cf.  ann.  31,  p.  27,  two  persons  are  accounting  for 
the  honour,  and  there  is  an  entry,  in  victu  et  mercede  dericorum  et  seruientum  suorum 
qui  eustodierunt  predictum  honorem, 

^'>  P.  R.,  18  Hen.  II,  p.  115.  "  p.  r.^  21  Hen.  II,  p.  16. 

"  P.  R.,  16  Hen.  II,  p.  59.  "  P.  R.,  15  Hen.  II,  p.  45. 

2*  P.  R.,  16  Hen.  II,  p.  3  ;  ann.  17,  p.  1. 

"  P.  R.,  18  Hen.  II,  p.  109. 

^^  In  the  subjoined  list  I  note  simply  the  first  year  in  which  the  porters'  wages  are 
entered  ;  they  appear  regularly  after  that,  and  can  easily  be  referred  to  by  means  of 
the  indexes :  Southampton,  ann.  2,  p.  53 ;  Hereford,  p.  51 ;  Canterbury,  p.  65 ;  Rocking- 
ham, p.  40  ;  Shrewsbury,  p.  43  ;  Bridgenorth,  p.  43  ;  Worcester,  ann.  9,  p.  4  ;  Dover, 
ann.  11,  p.  102  ;  Honour  of  Peverell,  ann.  5,  p.  52  ;  Honour  of  Eye,  ann.  22,  p.  76  ; 
Honour  of  Lancaster,  ann.  22,  p.  89. 

"  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  p.  143. 


352  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

and  in  the  castle  of  Eye  (the  caput  of  the  honour  of  that  name), 
which  was  in  the  king's  hand  from  the  tenth  year  onward,  pay- 
ments are  made  to  a  capellanus  only.^s  It  is  quite  possible  that 
in  the  case  of  these  castles  and  others  which  were  in  the  king's 
hand,  although  there  is  no  record  of  porters  there,  these  officers 
were  supplied  and  paid  in  virtue  of  some  special  arrangement 
with  the  keeper  of  the  castle  ;  as  in  the  later  case  of  Harlech 
dealt  with  above.  In  Henry  II 's  time  the  porters  of  royal  castles 
received  an  annual  fee  which  represented  a  wage  of  a  penny 
a  day.  Thus  at  Hereford  in  the  second  year,  and  regularly  there- 
after, we  have  the  entry  : 

In  hberatione  portarii  castelli  .  .  .  xxx  s.  et  v  d.^® 

As  a  rule,  however,  the  payments  of  several  people  are  accounted 
for  together,  so  that  the  rate  would  be  hard  to  discover  without 
some  clue.  Take  the  case  of  the  castle  of  Oswestry,  which 
formed  part  of  the  honour  of  William  FitzAlan.  In  the  thirteenth 
year  £36  lOs.  was  paid  in  respect  to  the  wages  of  one  knight,  two 
porters,  and  two  watchmen  for  two  years .^^  If  we  assume  the 
porter's  fee  to  have  been  £1  10s.  5d.  (as  at  Hereford),  and  the 
watchman's  the  same,  we  obtain  a  total  of  £6  Is.  Sd.  for  the  four 
men  ;  deducting  this  from  £18  5s.,  the  aggregate  for  one  year,  we 
have  left  £12  3s.  4:d.  This  sum  is  exactly  the  pay  of  one  knight 
at  Sd.  a  day  for  three  hundred  and  sixty -five  days.^^  Like  results 
may  be  obtained  at  Dover,  where  after  the  tenth  year  £6  Is.  86?. 
was  paid  to  the  porter  and  watchmen  of  the  castle,  and  the  same 
fee  seems  to  have  been  allowed  even  when  several  people  dis- 
charged the  duty  of  each  office.^^  But  turning  to  the  castle  of 
Rocldngham  we  get  again  the  rate  of  a  penny  a  day  ;  year  after 
year  we  find  the  entry  : 

In  liberatione  constitute  portario  .  .  .  et  ii  vigilibus  U.  lis.  3d.^ 

It  may  be  assumed  that  this  was  the  established  rate, 
but  there  are  a  number  of  exceptions  which  ought  to  be  men- 
tioned, though  it  is  not  easy  to  account  for  them.    Thus   at 

"  P.  R.,  10  Hen.  II,  p.  35.  From  the  22nd  year  onward  the  sum  of  £10  6^.  8c?., 
charged  on  '  Seechebroc ',  is  paid  to  Engelram  Janitor  and  Roger  de  Sancto  Albino.  The 
same  pair  were  receiving  £40  a  year  from  the  honour  of  Lancaster,  beginning  in  the 
same  year  and  charged  on '  Crokeston ' .  These  sums  are  greatly  in  excess  of  the  porters' 
rate  of  wages,  and  this  and  the  manner  in  which  they  are  charged  suggest  that  they 
constitute  a  pension.  There  is  nothing  to  show  that  Engelram  was  doing  the  ordinary 
work  of  a  porter  or  janitor,  though  it  is  possible  that  they  were  helping  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  honour.  See  P.  R.,  22  Hen.  II,  pp.  76,  89 ;  thereafter  the  entries  recur 
regularly. 

"»  P.  R.,  2  Hen.  II,  p.  51.  »<>  P.  R.,  13  Hen.  II,  p.  72. 

•^  See  Round,  in  Arcliaeological  Journal,  lix,  pp.  144  ff. 

»-  P.  R.,  10  Hen.  II,  p.  39;  ann.  22,  p.  205;  ann.  31,  p.  223.  The  number  of 
vigiles  is  not  stated,  but  at  Irf.  a  day  it  works  out  at  three. 

»  P.  R.,  2  Hen.  II,  p.  40. 


1918  THE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  353 

Worcester  no  porters'  fees  are  entered  until  the  ninth  year,  but 
after  that  the  payment  appears  regularly  as  455.  Id?'^  This  sum 
is  just  half  as  much  again  as  the  regular  fee  bating  the  halfpenny, 
and  seems  to  be  reckoned  therefore  in  terms  of  the  established 
rate.  Several  other  cases  are  more  difficult  to  understand.  At 
Carisbrooke  the  porter  seems  to  have  been  paid  at  the  rate  of 
205.  a  year .3^  When  in  the  thirty-first  year  the  castle  of  Chepstow 
was  in  the  king's  hand,  175.  were  paid  to  three  watchmen  and 
a  porter,  which  works  out  to  45.  M.  apiece.^^  It  is  just  possible 
that  in  both  these  cases  the  officers  in  question  were  holding 
lands  in  return  for  their  services  ;  for  this,  as  we  shall  see,  was  not 
uncommon.  Alternatively  it  may  be  suggested  that  the  rate 
estabHshed  by  the  king  did  not  extend  to  the  baronial  castles, 
but  this  seems  less  probable.  Again,  in  the  fourteenth  year  at 
Banbury  the  porter  was  paid  175.  M.  ;^'  this  is  little  over  one- 
half  the  regular  rate,  and  may  perhaps  have  been  reckoned  in 
the  same  terms — possibly  for  a  period  of  service  less  than  a  year.^^ 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  case  in  the  baronial  castles,  it  seems 
clear  enough  that  the  king  paid  his  porters  at  the  rate  of  \d. 
a  day. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  porters'  services  were  rewarded  in 
land  as  well  as  money,  and  the  point  may  now  be  illustrated. 
Entries  in  the  pipe  roll  of  Henry  I  account  for  the  ferm  of  the 
lands  of  the  porter  and  watchmen,  but  we  gather  no  further 
details  from  this  record.^^  StiU  the  fact  that  we  find  sums  of 
money  paid  for  the  office,  and  in  one  case  by  a  man  whose  father 
had  held  it  before  him,  would  suggest  that  feudal  land  was 
annexed  to  it.^^  In  the  reign  of  Henry  II  we  find  the  lands  of 
Richard  portarius  in  Sussex  appearing  frequently  in  the  pipe 
rolls.  The  sherilBE  accounts  for  the  ferm,  which  varied  with  a 
tendency  to  increase.*^  As  the  land  paid  one  mark  towards  the 
aid  pur  fille  marier  in  the  fourteenth  year,  the  tenure  must  have 
been  miHtary.*^  j^  jg  ^ot  always  possible  to  be  sure  that  in  these 
cases  we  have  to  do  with  the  ordinary  porter  or  janitor  of  a  castle, 

"  P.  R.,  9  Hen.  II,  p.  4.  '-  P.  R.,  25  Hen.  II,  p.  109. 

=»«  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  II,  p.  8.  "  P.  R.,  14  Hen.  II,  p.  77. 

3«  It  is  tempting  to  suppose  this,  particularly  as  the  payments  work  out  so  neatly — 
Chepstow  at  51  days  and  Banbury  at  212.  Unluckily  the  Chepstow  entry  seems  to 
;  make  this  impossible.  The  account  of  the  honour  is  rendered  '  de  anno  integro  '.  The 
I  ferm  is  stated  at  £20  ;  when  it  figures  the  next  year  it  is  described  as  the  old  ferm, 
I  and  stated  at  £22  2^.  Ud. :  P.  R.  32  Hen.  II,  p.  203.  On  the  other  hand,  the  see  of 
\  Lincoln  fell  vacant  on  26  January  in  the  fourteenth  year,  and  if  the  payment  were 
made  up  to  some  period  shortly  before  the  Michaelmas  account  the  rate  would  bo 
normal.  The  account  is  rendered  '  de  anno  preterito',  which  need  not  necessarily 
imply  the  full  year. 

=»»  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  pp.  133,  142.  "  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  pp.  45,  143,  156. 

«  P.  R.,  11  Hen,  II,  p.  93  ;  ann.  13,  p.  37  ;  ann.  14,  p.  192. 

*-  P.  R.,  14  Hen.  II,  p.  195. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  A  a 


354  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

and  not  the  ostiarius  or  usher  whose  serjeanty  was  a  well-known 
form  of  tenure.*^  Still  in  the  case  of  Bamborough  the  service  at 
least  is  quite  clear  :  there  Robert  portarius  held  half  a  carucate  of 
land  per  serianteriam  custodiendi  ianuam  castriM  The  case  of  Osbert 
janitor  and  his  wife  is  less  precise.  In  the  thirteenth  year  the 
king  had  granted  them  ten  librates  of  land  pro  seruitio  suo.  This 
was  made  up  of  various  parcels  of  land  and  certain  payments 
chargeable  on  a  mill  near  Oxford.  The  land  passed  to  their  son, 
and  seems  to  have  been  held  feudally.^^  The  connexion  between 
the  actual  service  and  the  fief  is  illustrated  at  Hereford.  From  the 
first  to  the  fifth  year  inclusive  payments  at  the  rate  of  a  penny 
a  day  are  recorded  to  Caperun,  porter  of  the  castle.  Then  in  the 
Red  Booh  we  read  Agnes  Caperun  tenet  per  serianteriam  custodiendi 
portam  castri,  et  habebit  singulis  diebus  i  denarium.^^  It  would 
seem  that  in  these  cases  the  first  holder  of  the  land  had  been  an 
ordinary  porter  whose  services  were  rewarded  in  this  way,  and  as  At 
the  land  descended  the  service  might  become  formal,  the  actual  ™^ ' 
work  being  done  by  deputy. 

Beyond  the  obvious  duty  of  keeping  the  gate,  the  ordinary  | 
functions  of  a  castle  porter  do  not  appear  to  be  specified.  We 
have  some  indications,  however,  that  porters  were  sometimes 
employed  in  business  which  it  is  very  hard  to  connect  in  any  way 
with  the  gate.  Thus  Faringdon,  in  Berkshire,  was  in  the  king's 
hand  during  the  greater  part  of  the  reign — the  issues  were 
accounted  for  in  the  early  years  by  the  sheriff,  but  later  the 
account  is  rendered  by  a  certain  William,  styled  indifferently 
porter  or  janitor.*'  Again,  towards  the  close  of  the  reign  the 
honours  of  Eye  and  Lancaster  were  in  the  king's  hand.  A  certain 
Engelram,  described  either  as  janitor  or  porter,  received  an  annual 
payment  of  about  five  pounds  from  Eye  and  twenty  from  Lan- 
caster, and  this  was  charged  every  year  upon  the  same  manor. 
Roger  de  Sancto  Albino  is  associated  with  Engelram,  but  neither 
of  them  accounts  for  the  issue  of  the  honour.  If  these  payments, 
so  much  in  excess  of  the  normal  stipend  of  a  porter,  were  not 
pensions,  it  must  be  supposed  that  they  were  made  in  respect  of 
some  service  rendered,  probably  in  connexion  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  honours.*^ 

x\t  Canterbury  there  was  a  ianitor  civitatis,  who  in  Henry  II' 


*^  Cf,  Round,  The  King  s  Serjeants,  pp.  98-112. 

**  Bed  Book  of  the  Exchequer,  ii.  466,  where  the  references  to  the  Testa  de 
Neville  are  given.     Cf.  Blount,  Tenures,  ed.  Hazlitt  (1874),  pp.  14-15. 

«»  P.  R.,  13  Hen.  II,  p.  11  ;  ann.  14,  pp.  204-5  ;  ann.  21,  p.  10. 

"  P.  R.,  2  Hen.  II,  p.  51  ;  ann.  3,  p.  93  ;  ann.  4,  p.  144  ;  ann.  5,  p.  49 ;  Bed 
Book  of  the  Exchequer,  ii.  452. 

"  P.  R.,  5  Hen.  II,  p.  36  ;  ann.  26,  p.  47  ;  ann.  27,  p.  145  ;  ann.  28,  p.  107. 

*«  P.  R.,  22  Hen.  II,  pp.  76,  89  ;  thereafter  the  entries  recur  regularly.  This  case 
has  already  been  mentioned  above,  n.  28. 


I 


1918  THE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  355 

time  regularly  received  twenty  shillings  a  year  quia  facit  iustitiani 
comitatus.^^  The  terms  of  the  entry  varied  slightly  from  year  to 
year  ;  thus  porter  is  more  common  than  jamtor,^^  and  the  last 
clause  occasionally  runs  facere  iustitiam  civitatis,  suggesting  that 
he  performed  the  same  office  for  town  and  county.^^  The  Dorset 
accounts  mention  a  Godefridus  portarius  who  occasionally  takes 
a  payment  of  five  shillings  in  Dorset,  by  the  king's  writ,^^ 
and  he  seems  to  have  belonged  properly  to  the  town  of 
Dorchester,  for  in  the  thirtieth  year  it  is  said  of  the  payment 
quos  liahuit  hoc  anno  in  Dorseta,^^  and  two  years  later  the  entry 
Dor  seta  is  altered  to  Dorcestria.^"^  Of  course  there  were  castles 
both  at  Canterbury  and  Dorchester,  but  it  does  not  necessarily 
follow  that  these  porters  were  connected  with  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  the  porter  of  a  town  should  be 
charged  with  the  duty  of  executing  capital  sentences. ^^  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that /acere  iusticiam  bears  that  sense  in  Henry  II 's 
pipe  rolls  ;  an  entry  for  the  thirtieth  year  makes  that  clear  : 

Pro  iusticia  facienda  de  Wilekan  et  sociis  suis  xiii  s.  et  iiii  d.  pro  catena 
scilicet  qua  suspensus  fuit.^^ 

The  sheriff,  at  the  direction  of  the  justices,  was  responsible  for 
the  execution  of  sentences  of  death  or  mutilation,  and  was 
authorized  to  employ  suitable  persons  to  carry  out  the  execu- 
tions. One  or  two  instances  of  this  may  suffice,  as  Madox  has 
brought  together  a  good  many  of  them.  Thus  the  sheriff 
accounts  for  IO5.  2d.  : 

pro  iusticiis  faciendis  precepto  iusticiarum.^' 

Then  here  is  an  entry  in  the  London  account  which  is  typical,  in 
the  sense  that  it  recurs  frequently  : 

In  iusticiis  et  iudiciis  faciendis  per  totum  annuum  xxii  s.  et  i  d.^^ 

But  this  does  not  exclude  payment  for  special  services  of  this 
kind,  as  conducting  a  counterfeiter  who  had  abjured  the  realm 
to  the  sea-coast,  mutilation,  ordeals,  and  hangings. ^^  There  is, 
however,  a  suggestion  that  this  duty  might  be  incumbent  on 
a  local  community.  Thus  in  1176  the  sheriff  accounted  for  two 
marks  from  the  Somerset  hundred  of  '  Charinton  '  (Carrington  ?)  : 

quia  non  misit  qui  iusticiam  faceret  de  quodam  latrone.*° 

"  P.  R.,  2  Hen.  II,  p.  65. 

^«  P.  R.,  5  Hen.  II,  p.  58  ;  ann.  11,  p.  102 ;  ann.  18,  p.  134. 

"  P.  R.,  29  Hen.  II,  p.  154  ;   ann.  32,  p.  185.  '^  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  II,  p.  173. 

''  P.  R.,  30  Hen.  II,  p.  122.  -*  P.  R.,  32  Hen.  II,  p.  135. 

°*  See,  however,  Poole,  T?ie  Exchequer  in  the  Twelfth  Century,  p.  157. 

"«  P.  R.,  30  Hen.  II,  p.  130.   Madox,  Exchequer,  i.  373,  takes  the  phrase  in  this  sense. 

"  P.  R.,  30  Hon.  II,  p.  95  ;   cf.  p.  80.  ^8  P.  R.,  24  Hen.  II,  p.  128. 

"  P.  R.,  4  Hen.  II,  p.  112  ;  ann.  12,  p.  131.  «"  P.  R.,  22  Hen.  II,  p.  157. 

Aa  2 


356  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

With  this  may  be  compared  the  case  of  the  village  of  West 
Sleckburn  in  Durham,  of  which  it  is  recorded  : 

Westlikeburna  .  .  .  portat  brevia  domini  episcopi  usque  ad  Tuedam.®^ 

It  is  obvious  that  the  whole  village  would  not  carry  the  bishop's 
writ.  Now  if  the  analogous  duty  of  executing  the  sentence  of  the 
court  were  incumbent  on  a  city,  it  is  not  at  all  improbable 
that  it  should  in  practice  be  discharged  by  such  a  minor  official 
as  the  porter,  and  in  time  be  permanently  attached  to  his  office. 
If  this  were  the  case,  our  evidence  still  leaves  open  the  question 
as  to  whether  the  porter  at  Canterbury  and  Dorchester  was  he 
who  kept  the  gate  of  the  town  or  the  castle. 

There  was,  of  course,  a  regular  staff  of  ushers  (ostiarii)  in  the 
household  and  exchequer  who  were  sometimes  employed  for 
delivering  writs  and  summonses,  and  one  is  tempted  by  the 
similarity  of  the  words  portarius,  ianitor,  and  ostiarius  to  see  some 
original  connexion,  of  which  the  Canterbury  and  Dorchester  cases 
would  represent  a  survival.^^  But  there  seems  to  be  no  evidence 
that  the  ostiarii  were  employed  on  anything  but  civil  business. 

Then  we  know  that  there  was  a  host  of  minor  local  officials, 
servienteSy  garciones,  baillivi,  some  royal,  some  feudal,  and  some 
representing  the  local  communities.  Thus  the  sheriffs  had 
baillivi  and  ministri  under  them  who  held  haillivae  of  different 
sorts,  and  these  were  from  the  administrative  point  of  view 
paralleled  by  the  senescalli  et  ministri  of  the  great  feudatories, 
and  we  hear  further  of  the  haillivi  regis  qui  per  terram  suam 
erraverunt  pro  negotiis  regis  faciendis.^^  In  the  famous  dispute 
over  the  sheriff's  aid,  Becket  could  speak  of  the  vicecomites  and 
servientes  vel  ministri  provinciarum,  and  we  hear  in  the  same  text 
of  the  ministri  regis  qui  vicecomitum  loco  comitatus  servahant.^^  The 
pipe  rolls  supply  a  good  many  details  about  the  minor  local  officers. 
They  go  mounted  to  serve  summonses  and  writs,  and  can  be 
described  as  garciones  as  well  as  servientes. ^^  There  are  servientes 
who  are  regular  officers  of  the  hundred,  and  answer  for  its  defaults, 
murder  fines,  and  such-like,  but  in  some  cases  these  officers  are 
described  as  praepositi.^^  Perhaps  there  were  several,  of  whom 
one  was  chief,  for  a  somewhat  later  record  speaks  of  a  tenure  at 
the  service  of  being  capitalis  serviens  de  hundredo  de  Derby,  while 

**  Boldon  Book,  ed.  Green  well,  Surtees  Soc,  p.  38. 

«2  p^  ^^  IX  Hen.  II,  p.  31  ;  ann.  27,  p.  67  ;  ann.  28,  pp.  104,  159  ;  Dialogus  de 
Scaccario  (ed.  Hughes,  Crump,  and  Johnson),  pp.  73,  92  ;  Bed  Book  of  the  Exchequer, 
ii.  524,  531,  564,  620 ;  Madox,  Exchequer,  ii.  271  ;  cf.  Round,  The  Kind's  Serjeants, 
pp.  83,  108-12. 

«3  Inquest  of  SherifiEs,  §§  1,  3,  5,  in  Stubbs,  Charters,  ed.  Davis  pp.  175-6. 

«*  Grim,  Vit.  »S.  Thomae,  ibid.,  p.  152. 

«  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  II,  pp.  5,  6  ;  cf.  ann.  13,  pp.  2,  3. 

««  P.  R.,  16  Hen.  II,  pp.  115,  117,  153  ;  ann.  17,  pp.  109,  111. 


1918  THE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  357 

another  held  land  jpro  eodem  servitio  sub  eoP  Similar  servientes 
occur  in  connexion  with  ecclesiastical  fiefs.  The  bishop  of  Ely  had 
a  serviens  at  Ditton  quifacit  summonitiones  militum  episcopatus.^^ 
With  a  crowd  of  minor  officials  of  this  sort,  of  diverse  origin 
and  authority,  but  all  as  it  would  seem  under  the  control  of  the 
sheriff, ^^  it  is  not  difficult  to  suppose  that  the  porter  of  a  town 
might  be  reckoned  one  of  the  group  and  employed  for  the  purpose 
of  executions ;  we  must  understand  that  certainly  the  Canterbury 
porter,  and  probably  the  Dorchester  one  also,  were  officers  of 
the  town  and  not  the  castle,  therefore  they  would  fall  outside 
the  scope  of  these  notes,  which  are  chiefly  concerned  with  the 
minor  officials  of  the  castle  ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  case  is  curious 
and  puzzling,  and  some  measure  of  irrelevance  in  the  discussion 
of  it  may  therefore  perhaps  be  forgiven. 

We  come  now  to  the  third  functionary  in  our  group,  namely, 
the  vigil  or  watchman.  As  he  occurs  very  regularly  in  connexion 
with  the  porter,  much  of  what  has  been  said  of  the  one  may  be 
taken  to  apply  to  the  other.  In  the  Gonstitutio  Domus  Regis 
the  watchman  appears  in  the  department  of  the  marshalsea, 
and  his  chief  business  was  to  guard  the  treasure,  and  this  is 
corroborated  by  what  the  Dialogus  has  to  say  about  him.*^^  In 
Henry  I's  pipe  roll  there  is  record  of  a  payment  in  Oxfordshire  : 

in  perdona  .  .  .  lohanni  vigili."^ 

And  the  accustomed  pair  of  officers  also  occur  in  the  record  in 
connexion  with  the  castle  of  St.  Briavel.'^^  Henry  II's  pipe  rolls, 
as  we  have  seen,  show  frequent  payments  to  porters  and  watch- 
men both  in  royal  and  baronial  castles. "^^  There  is  abundant 
evidence  of  an  annual  fee  which  worked  out  at  the  rate  of  \d. 
a  day. "^4  Then  too  we  find  watchmen  holding  land.  In  Henry  I's 
pipe  roll  there  is  an  entry  of  certain  payments  for  clothes  to  four 
watchmen  of  Exeter  Castle  which  concludes  with  these  words  : 

Et  ii  ex  his  vigilibus  xxv  s.  vii  d.  numero  pro  defectu  prebende  sue.'^ 

It  may  be  doubted,  of  course,  whether  the  prebenda  in  question 

"  Red  Book  of  the  Exchequer,  ii.  570.  «»  P.  R.,  16  Hen.  II,  p.  96. 

®*  Except,  of  course,  the  stewards  and  bailiffs  of  the  feudal  lords,  who  are  cited 
merely  by  way  of  analogy. 

'"  Bed  Book  of  the  Exchequer,  iii.  812-13  ;  Dialogus  de  Scaccario,  pp.  62,  65. 

"  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  p.  4  ;  cf.  pp.  74,  76.  '"  Ibid.,  p.  76. 

"^  e.  g.  ann.  9,  p.  4  (Worcester) ;  ann.  12,  p.  53  (the  Peak) ;  ann.  8,  p.  73  (bishopric 
of  London). 

"*  e.g.  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  IT,  p.  215  (Southampton),  £4  Us.  3d.  to  a  clerk,  porter,  and 
watchman.  As  in  the  case  of  the  porter's  fee  discussed  above,  there  are  some  puzzling 
exceptions,  cf.  ann.  25,  p.  109  (Carisbrooke),  where  it  is  difficult  to  say  on  what  basis 
the  payment  was  calculated.  On  the  other  hand,  the  traditional  fee  is  found  in  use 
at  Norham  as  late  as  the  fifteenth  century,  though  there  was  an  additional  payment 
for  the  long  winter  nights  ;  see  the  extracts  from  the  Durham  Receiver's  Roll  given 
in  Raine,  North  Durham,  p.  286.  "^  P.  R.,  31  Hen.  I,  p.  152. 


358  SOME  CASTLE  OFFICERS  IN  July 

was  a  daity  allowance  of  food  and  drink,  or  lands  assigned  to 
produce  such  an  allowance.  But  in  the  next  reign  it  is  quite  clear 
that  vigiles  were  holding  land  feudally.    We  hear  of  the  issues : 

de  terra  escaetta  vigilum  de  Peuensel  "'^ 

in  Kent,  and  of  the  terra  vigilum  de  Monte  Acuto  '"  in  Sussex  and 
Dorset.  These  were  the  vigiles  of  the  honour  of  Montacute.  Then 
in  the  twentieth  year  there  is  an  entry  of  land  in  Oxfordshire  to 
the  value  of  70<s.  granted  to  Turold  vigili  regisJ^ 

The  duties  of  the  castle  watchman,  though,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  porter,  they  are  not  minutely  described,  may  readily  be 
conjectured.  But  the  staff  could  on  occasion  be  reinforced  by  addi- 
tional watchmen.  These,  however,  seem  to  have  rather  a  military 
character.  Instructive  examples  of  this  may  be  cited.  All  through 
Henry  II 's  reign  the  payment  of  wages  to  the  porter  and  watch- 
men of  Southampton  Castle  recur  from  year  to  year,  but  in  the 
twentieth  year  there  is  an  additional  charge  for  the  payment  of  five 
knights  and  one  watchman."^ ^  In  the  same  year  there  is  a  pay- 
ment to  a  certain  number  of  knights  and  four  watchmen  who  were 
with  the  sheriff  in  the  castle  of  Northampton  from  Easter  until  the 
Feast  of  the  Assumption.^^  In  the  twenty-first  year  an  additional 
watchman  and  porter  were  placed  in  Worcester  Castle. ^^  These 
measures  were  no  doubt  due  to  the  young  king's  rebellion.  Then 
in  the  twenty-eighth  year  there  was  a  payment  for  a  porter  and 
watchmen,  quos  accreverunt  ad  custodiam  castelli  de  Doura,  for  the 
half-year.  ^2  \Yith  this  may  be  compared  what  Mr.  Round  has  to 
say  about  the  hired  Serjeants,  light-armed  troops  (servientes)  who 
are  distinguished  from  tenants  by  serjeanty  and  the  smaller 
tenants  by  knight  service. ^^  The  porters  and  watchmen  who 
had  been  added  to  the  garrison  of  Dover  Castle  must  be  regarded 
as  belonging  to  this  class  of  troops.  We  know  that  in  the  next 
century  servientes  receiving  wages  were  kept  in  a  southern  castle 
for  garrison  purposes. ^^  At  Dover  it  appears  that  the  garrison 
watchmen,  while  keeping  their  distinctive  name,  became  as 
a  matter  of  fact  tenants  by  serjeanty,  bound  to  a  garrison  duty 
at  the  castle  in  some  way  inferior  to  castle  guard  incumbent  on 
tenants  by  knight  service. ^^  However  this  may  be,  the  main 
point  would  seem  to  be  clear.    The  watchmen  were  combatants. 


'«  P.  R.,  11  Hen.  II,  p.  109. 

"  p.  R.,  13  Hen.  II,  pp.  37,  149  ;   ann.  15,  pp.  2,  5G. 


'«  P.  R.,  20  Hen.  II,  p.  78.  "  P.  R.,  20  Hen.  II,  p.  134. 

«»  P.  R.,  20  Hen.  II,  p.  55.  «i  P.  R.,  21  Hen.  II,  p.  127. 

»2  P.  R.,  28  Hen.  II,  p.  150. 
**  P.  R.,  33  Hen.  II,  introd.,  pp.  xxiii-xxiv. 

®*  See  the  documents  given  in  Dawson,  Hastings  Castle,  i,  pp.  86  ff. 
*^  This  seems  to  be  a  reasonable  inference  from  some  rather  obscure  talk  in  Lyon's 
Dover,  ii.  89,  95,  103,  118,  123. 


1918  THE  TWELFTH  CENTURY  359 

and  reckoned  part  of  the  castle  garrison,  in  which  they  would  be 
counted  as  Serjeants  or  light-armed  troops,  and  this  would  be 
true  of  the  porters  as  well.  Perhaps,  in  view  of  the  evidence 
produced,  in  connexion  with  the  porter,  the  term  serviens  was 
used  in  a  general  rather  than  a  special  sense,  but  even  so  it  would 
seem  to  be  clear  that  both  the  porter  and  watchmen  would  be 
regarded  as  combatants.  Gaillard  Lapsley. 


Friar  Malachy  of  Ireland 

On  26  April  1518  there  issued  from  the  press  of  Henri  Estienne 
the  elder  at  Paris  a  small  quarto  volume  of  twenty-five  leaves, 
bearing  on  f .  1  a  the  title, 

F.  Malachi^  Hibernici,  ordinis  minorum,  doctoris  theologi,  strenui 
quondam  diuini  verbi  illustratoris  necnon  vitiorum  obiurgatoris  acerrimi 
Libellus,  septem  peccatorum  mortalium  venena  eorumque  remedia 
describeus  :  qui  dicitur  Venenum  Malachiae.  Parisiis  in  Officina  Henrici 
Stephani, 

and  on  f .  25  b  the  colophon, 

F.  Malachi§  Hibernici.  ordinis  minorum,  doctoris  theologi  ac  insignis 
diuini  verbi  praedicatoris,  qui  anno  domini  1300  vigebat,  hbelli,  qui 
venenum  peccatorum  seu  Malachie  dicitur,  finis.  Impressum  Parisiis  in 
officina  Henrici  Stephani.  .  .  .  Anno  Domini  1518,  Aprilis  26  die. 

The  following  page  (f .  1  b)  is  occupied  by  an  index  of  the  sixteen 
chapters  into  which  the  tract  is  divided  : 

i.  Quod  triplici  ratione  onme  peccatum  veneno  comparatur.  ii.  Triplex 
remedium  contra  peccatum  in  generali.  iii.  De  primordial!  veneno  peccati 
et  principali,  scilicet  superbia.  iv.  Triplex  superbi§  remedium.  v.  De 
veneno  inuidie.  vi.  De  triplici  remedio  inuidiae  et  quibus  inuidia  com- 
paretur  et  quanta  mala  ex  ea  sunt  orta,  vii.  De  veneno  irae.  viii.  Reme- 
dium contra  iram.  ix.  De  veneno  acidi§.  x.  De  remedio  acidi§.  xi.  De 
auariti§  veneno.  xii.  De  remedio  auaritiae.  xiii.  De  veneno  gul§.  xiv.  De 
remedio  gul§.    xv.  De  veneno  luxuri§.    xvi.  De  remedio  luxuriae. 

This  volume  is  excessively  rare,  and  to  my  knowledge  there  is 
no  copy  to  be  found  in  any  librarj^  in  Ireland.  I  have  had  before 
me  that  belonging  to  the  British  Museum  (697.  h.  17),  There 
are  also  a  copy  in  the  Bodleian  and  two  in  Cambridge  University 
Library. 

Malachy's  tract  begins  with  the  words  (f.  2  a): 

De  peccato  in  generali.  Quod  triplici  ratione  omne  peccatum  veneno 
comparatur.  Ratio  veneni  potissimum  conuenit  peccato  prioritate 
originationis. 


360  FRIAR  MALACHY  OF  IRELAND  July 

It  ends  (f.  25  b), 

II§c  igitiir  dicta  sufficiant  secundum  mei  tenuifcatem  ingenii  de  prae- 
dictis  ad  aliqualem  instructionem  simplicium  qui  habent  populum  infor- 
mare  :  pro  quibus  sit  mihi  Cliristus  premium  et  merces  qui  cum  patre  et 
spi'ritu  sancto  viuit  et  regnat  in  saecula  saeculorum.    Amen. 

The  most  interesting  things  in  this  curious  work  are  perhaps 
several  passages  in  which  reference  is  made  to  Ireland.  These 
passages  are  worth  quoting  in  full : 

f.  15  b.  Huic  insulf  Graeci§  [i.  e.  Crete]  conformis  est  Maior  Scotia,  scilicet 

Hibernia.     Scotia  enim  est  vocabulum  Gr§cum  secundum  Philosophum. 
[i.e.  Aristotle]  Lib.  de  AnimaUbus  16.^     Etiam  Hibernici  sunt  Graeci 
origine.     Sed  ultra  Cretam  deus  dedit  ei  virtutem  ut  nullum  venenui 
admitteret  nee  in  aranea  nee  in  aliquo  animali,  et,  ut  credo,  salua  melioriJ 
oppositione,  quod  est  proprietas  consequens  terram.    Quod  patet  per  hooj 
quod  terra  eius  portata  ad  alias  terras  repellit  venenum,  sicut  dicit  Bedaj 
de  Gestis  Anglorum  ^  et  alii  historiography    Sed  proth  dolor  !   venenum] 
quod  negauit  ei  deus  in  aranea  bestiali  et  in  terra  permisit  regnare  inj 
humana  natura.     Nam  ultra  omnes  terras  abundat  in  triplici  arant 
superius  dicta  spiritualiter  tantum  intellecta.    Habet  enim  sphalangiam,' 
id  est  predones,  quia  omnes  fere  terrae  natiui  sunt  tales. 

f.  16  a.  Sic  ergo  prgdo  rapax  et  adulator  mendax  indiuiduam  habent  societatei 

in  dicta  Hibernia,  quae  bene  conuenit  in  conditionibus  cum  Greta,  quij 
Cretenses  semper  mendaces,  ad  Titum  i  [12].  Habet  etiam  Hibernij 
tertiam  araneam,  scilicet  formicoleonem  *  multiplicem,  scilicet  balliuos  et 
officiales,  quibus  in  dicta  terra,  ut  videtur,  innata  est  astutia  venenata  ac 
destruendum  pauperes  et  innocentes. 

f .  17  a.  Iste  cruciatus  multum  regnat  in  Hibernia,  cuius  gens  natiua  histrionibi 

et  adulatoribus  carmina  mellita  sed  venenata  componentibus  omnia  sui 
distribuebant ;  et  ideo  veneno  vanae  et  falsae  laudis  semper  inflati  erant^ 

f.  18  b.  ]g^  credo  quod  h§c  liberalitas,  licet  de  aliena  substantia  multos  disponi^ 

ad  gratiam  in  Hibernia  ubi  fures  et  predones  consueuerunt  de  rebus  alieni^ 
esse  hospitales. 

f.  19  a.  Exemplum  narratur  quod  in  Hibernia  erat  quidam  diues  et  hospitali^ 

et  largus  valde.  Hie  ad  mortem  propinquans  adiuratus  fuit  ab  amico  sue 
ut  sibi  reuelaret  statum  suum.  At  ille  post  magnum  tempus  apparuit 
amico  suo  qui  requisitus  de  statu  respondit  quod  damnatus  fuit.  Et 
amicus  '  ubi '  inquit  *  sunt  elemosyn§  tu§  multae,  pupilli  et  orphani  quoa 
nutristi  ?  '  At  ille  '  omnia  '  inquit '  propter  gloriam  mundi  et  extoUentiai 
iactanti§  feci,  et  ideo  totum  perdidi.' 

f.  22  b.  Tamen  nota  dictum  Isidori  ^  de  murena,  quod  tantum  est  foeminei 

sexus,  non  habere  veritatem  in  Hibernia  ubi  nmrena  est  in  utroque  sexu. 
Qui  cum  sequuntur  illam  opinionem  dicunt  quod  uno  mense  anni  nulla 

^  Malachy  is  perhaps  confusing  Scotia  with  Scythia,  which  is  mentioned  several 
times  in  the  Historia  Animalium. 
^  Hist.  Eccl.  Gentis  Angl.  i.  1. 

^  This  is  apparently  for  pJialangium,  a  venomous  spider. 
*  For  this  word  see  Isidore,  Etymol.  xii.  3.  10. 
^  Etymol.  xii.  0,  43. 


1918  FRIAR  MALAGHY  OF  IRELAND  361 

murena  posset  inueniri  in  Hibernia,  eo  quod  oportet  eas  adire  viperas 
ultra  mare  ad  concipiendum.  Sed  hoc  est  falsum.  Illud  ergo  intelligatur 
dictum  spiritualiter  quia  adulterium  multuin  ibi  regnat.  et  quod  est 
contra  naturam  murenae,  id  est  viduae,  cursitare  per  terras  ad  prouo- 
candum  viros  ad  peccandum.  Et  valde  mirabile  est  quod  in  dicta  insula, 
cum  sit  frigida  et  liumida,  et  dieta  eius  ut  in  pluries  sit  frigida,  unde 
homines  eius  sunt  fornicarii  et  adulteri,  ita  quod  nee  sententia  excommuni- 
cationis  nee  verba  pr^dicationis  possunt  ligare  eos  vinculis  matrimonii. 
Dicatur  ergo  quod  tales  sunt  satyri. 

Similiter  [i.  e.  to  Babylon]  regnum  Hiberniae  finem  habuit  in  Rodico  ^ 
rege  libidinoso,  qui  dixit  quod  sex  uxores  non  dimitteret  propter  regis 
coronam  '  et  ideo  regnum  translatum  est  .  .  .  et  nota  quod  ecclesia  hodie 
potest  comparari  domui  Sardanapalli,  quia  greges  scortorum  commisti 
sunt  gregibus  sacerdotum  quorum  luxuria  multo  excedit  incontinentiam 
laicorum. 

Unde  narratur  de  sancta  Columba  ^  filia  regis  Scotiae,  puella  nimis 
pulchra,  ut  magis  in  rege  incitaretur  libido  fuit  coram  ipso  tota  denudata, 
qui  stanti  ad  banc  triplicem  meditationem  recurrit  dicens,  *  pulchra  es,  sed 
mortalis  et  de  mortali  genita  et  ad  mortem  parata,  ideo  deum  qui  est  vita 
mea  propter  eam  non  dimittam. 

The  author  shows  a  not  inconsiderable  range  of  reading.  The 
following  books  and  writers  are  quoted  by  name  :  The  Bible, 
Augustine,  Phny's  Historia  Naturalise  Latin  translations  of 
Aristotle's  de  Animalibus  and  Ethics,  Isidore  Papias,  *  Com- 
mentator super  Boetium  de  Disciplina  Scholarium  \^  the  Epistolae 
of  Seneca,  Gregory's  Moralia  and  Pastorale,  Anselm's  Liber  de 
Similitudinihus,^^  Jerome,  Orosius,  Aesopi  Apologi,  Avicenna, 
Hesychius  in  Leviticum,  Gcero  de  Officiis  and  de  Tusculanis 
Quaestionihus,  Martianus  Capella,  Boetius,  Historia  Alexandri 
Magni  de  Proeliis,  and  Aristoteles  in  Epistola  ad  Alexandrum, 
St.  Francis,  Ambrose  in  Hexaemeron,  Fulgentius'  Liber  Mytholo- 
giarum,  Beda  de  Gestis  Anglorum  and  super  Lucam,  Solinus, 
Alexander  Nequam's  Liber  de  Naturis,  Latin  versions  of  Dios- 
corides,  of  Galen  super  Aphorismos,  of  Chrysostom  super  Mat- 
thaeum,  of  '  Sorath.'  in  lib.  8  de  AnimalibusP^  Valerius  Maximus, 
Physiologus,  Bernardus  Epistolae,  Constantinus  Africanus. 

As  to  the  author  of  this  tract,  we  have  seen  that  in  the  title 
and  colophon  of  the  Paris  edition  he  is  called  '  Malachias  Hiber- 

®  Roderic  O'Connor. 

'  This  remarkable  story  is  told  in  the  Annah  of  Loch  Ce,  ed.  Hennessy,  i.  1871. 
p.  315  ;   of.  p.  xlii. 

^  I  do  not  know  to  what  personage  Malachias  is  here  referring. 

«  Cf.  Manitius,  Oesch.  lut.  Lit.  des  Mittelalters,  i,  1911,  p.  36. 

^"  This  is  the  work  of  Eadmer,  which  may  be  read  in  Migne,  Patrol.  Lat.  clix. 
605  ff. 

"  Possibly  the  compendium  of  Aristotle's  de  Animalibus  in  nineteen  books  by 
Avicenna,  which  was  translated  by  Michael  Scottus;  cf.  Steinschneider,  Sitz.  der  Wiener 
Akad.,  Phil-Hist.  CI.  cxlix.  1905,  Abh.  4,  p.  57. 


362  FRIAR  MALAGHY  OF  IRELAND  July 

nicus  ',  and  is  stated  to  have  been  a  Franciscan  preacher  who 
lived  in  the  year  1300,  '  a  doctor  of  theology,  a  strenuous  ex- 
pounder of  the  Scriptures,  and  a  most  zealous  rebuker  of  vices  '. 
John  Bale  in  his  Index j^^  written  between  1549  and  1557,  merely 
repeats  these  statements  from  the  printed  edition,  but  in  the 
Catalogus  ^^  he  adds  the  details  that  Malachias  *  was  accorded 
great  praise  at  home  and  abroad  and  was  much  esteemed  at 
Oxford,'  ^*  that  he  was  thought  fit  to  be  chosen  '  to  preach  before 
princes  and  primates  ',  that  in  addition  to  the  De  Peccatis  he 
had  written  Condones  Plures,  lib.  i,  as  well  as  '  other  works 
which  have  perished  ',  and  that  he  flourished  in  1310  in  the  reign 
of  Edward  II.  Bale's  account,  more  or  less  distorted  and  ampli- 
fied, has  been  reproduced  by  succeeding  writers.  Thus  Stani- 
hurst^^  makes  him  specifically  a  student  of  the  University  of 
Oxford,  and  Wadding  ^^  states  that  having  become  B.D.  at  Oxford 
he  preached  before  Edward  II  and  was  not  afraid  to  rebuke  the 
king  to  his  face.  In  his  De  Scriptoribus  Hiberniae  ^^  Ware  repeats 
Bale,  but  gives  us,  without  stating  any  authority,  the  additional 
information  that  '  Malachy  flourished  at  Oxford  in  1310  and 
afterwards  at  Naples  '.^^ 

It  was  stated  by  Sbaralea  ^^  that  Malachias  was  a  member  of 
the  Franciscan  convent  of  Limerick,  who  during  the  reign  of 
Pope  Nicholas  III  (1277-80)  was  elected  archbishop  of  Tuam  by 
one  part  of  the  electors.  Sbaralea  did  not  mention  his  authority 
for  this  statement,  but  it  can  be  traced  to  a  bull  published  by  him 
in  his  great  collection,  Bullarium  Franciscanum}^  The  identifica- 
tion of  the  author  of  the  De  Veneno  with  this  Malachias  of 
Limerick  seems  to  me  highly  probable .^^  Besides  the  bull  just 
referred  to,  the  only  documents  which  mention  this  personage 
seem  to  be  :    (a)  A  letter  of  Nicholas,  archbishop  of  Armagh,  to 

12  p.  286,  ed.  R.  L.  Poole,  Oxford,  1902. 

"  Pars  ii,  Basel,  1559,  pp.  242-3. 

1*  It  will  be  observed  that  Bale  does  not  actually  say  that  he  was  a  student  at 
Oxford. 

i»  In  Holinshed,  Chronicle,  ed.  London,  1808,  vi,  pp.  61-2. 

1®  Annales  Minorum^  ed.  2,  vol.  vi,  Romae,  1733,  p.  176,  and  Scriptores  Ordinia^ 
Minorum,  ed.  Romae,  1806,  p.  168. 

"  p.  65,  Dublinii,  1639. 

1^  More  recent  writers,  e.  g.  Dupin  {Nouvelk  Bihl.  des  Auteurs  eccles.,  2nd  ed.,  1700, 
t.  xi,  p.  61),  Fabricius  {Bibl.  Lai.  Med.  Aet.,  ed.  Florence,  1858,  v.  11),  H.  Wharton 
(in  Cave,  Script.  Eccles.  Hist.  Lit.  ii,  1743,  Appendix,  pp.  13-14),  Tanner  {Bibl.  Brit.- 
Hih.y  1748,  p.  502),  Little  {Grey  Friars  in  Oxford,  1892,  p.  223,  and  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr., 
1893,  art.  'Malachy  of  Ireland'),  and  Mrs,  J.  R.  Green  {Making  of  Ireland,  1908, 
p.  289),  have  added  nothing  to  our  knowledge  of  Malachy.  Some  authorities  had 
included  him  in  the  list  of  Dominican  preachers,  but  erroneously,  as  was  pointed  out 
by  Quetif  and  Echard  {Script.  Ord.  Praed.  i,  1719,  pp.  742-3). 

"  Supple mentum  ad  Scriptores  Trium  Ordinum  S.  Francisci,  1806,  p.  507. 

2»  Vol.  iii,  Romae,  1763,  p.  573. 

*i  He  is  not  the  same  person  as  Malachy  MacAedha  (MacHugh),  who  was  arch- 
bishop of  Tuara  from  1312  to  1348,  for  the  latter  was  not  a  Franciscan. 


1918  FRIAR  MALACHY  OF  IRELAND  363 

ICing  Edward  I,  dated  1279  (about  June),  stating  that  the  church 
of  Tuam  having  lately  become  vacant,  the  dean,  archdeacon,  and 
some  canons  of  that  church  had  postulated  as  archbishop  Brother 
Malachy  of  the  order  of  the  Franciscans.  The  archbishop  prays 
the  king  to  pity  the  poverty  of  the  church,  and  to  extend  the 
kingly  favour  to  Brother  Malachy,  who  is  in  the  flower  of  his 
youth  and  is  provident  and  discreet .^^  (h)  The  king's  reply,  dated 
22  April,  1280,  giving  his  assent  to  the  election  of  Brother  Malachy 
as  archbishop  of  Tuam.  This  election  is  to  be  signified  to  the 
pope  for  ratification.^^  (c)  A  letter  of  Pope  Honorius  IV,  dated 
12  July  1286,  addressed  to  Stephen,  bishop  of  Waterford,  transfer- 
ring him  to  the  archbishopric  of  Tuam.  It  appears  that  on  the 
death  of  Thomas,-^  the  former  archbishop,  the  dean  and  chapter 
having  aiDpointed  seven  canons  to  elect  a  successor,  five  of  them 
chose  Master  Nicholas  de  Machin,  canon  of  Tuam,  the  dean  and 
two  others  electing  Friar  Malachy  of  the  Minorite  convent  of 
Limerick.  When  the  matter  was  brought  before  Pope  Nicholas  III, 
who  was  petitioned  to  confirm  the  election  of  Master  Nicholas,  it 
was  examined  by  three  cardinals,  and  on  that  pope's  death 
(22  August  1280)  Friar  Malachy,  though  he  had  appeared  before 
them,  left  the  Roman  Curia  without  leave,  and  no  more  prosecuted 
the  cause  of  his  election,  on  which,  at  the  request  of  Master 
Nicholas,  Pope  Martin  ordered  the  examination  to  go  on.  Some 
opposition  to  the  election  of  Nicholas  was  made,  and  the  proctor 
of  the  dean  and  chapter  of  Tuam  prayed  that  Malachy 's  election 
might  be  annulled.  The  cardinal  appointed  to  inquire  into  the 
matter  advised  that  this  should  be  done,  and  Stephen,  bishop  of 
Waterford,  was  finally  appointed  to  the  post.^^ 

From  the  De  Veneno  there  is  little  to  be  learned  of  the 
personality  of  the  author.  He  mentions  St.  Francis,  and,  as  we 
have  seen  above,  inveighs  in  violent  terms  against  the  mis- 
government  of  Ireland  in  his  time,  and  against  the  degradation 
and  corruption  into  which  the  people  and  church  of  that  island 
had  sunk.  His  description  of  the  immorality  of  both  laymen  and 
clergy  is  particularly  characteristic.  His  book  he  describes  as 
being  written  '  for  the  instruction  of  simple  men  who  have  to 
teach  the  people  '  (f .  25  b).  What  authority  Bale  had  for  stating 
that  Malachias  was  '  much  esteemed  at  Oxford  ',  or  Wadding  and 
his  successors  that  he  was  actually  a  student  there  or  at  Naples, 
and  had  preached  before  King  Edward  II,  I  do  not  know. '  Judging 

-^  Sweetman,  Calendar  of  Documents  relating  to  Ireland,  ii,  1877,  pp.  311-12. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  340. 

-*  He  died  in  June,  1279  ;  Eubel,  Hierarchia  Catholica  Medii  Aevi,  1,  ed.  2,  1913, 
p.  500. 

-^  Theiner,  Vetera  Monumenta  Hibernorum  et  Scotorum,  Romae,  1864,  pp.  135-6, 
and  Bliss,  Calendar  of  Papal  Letters,  i,  1893,  pp.  487-8.  Mr.  A.  G.  Little  has  kindly- 
called  my  attention  to  these  sources. 


364  FRIAR  MALACHY  OF  IRELAND  July 

by  the  books  with  which  he  shows  acquaintance  in  the  De  Veneno, 
a  connexion  with  the  university  of  Oxford  would  not  be  improb- 
able, and  this  may  perhaps  find  some  confirmation  in  the  fact 
that  the  tract  appears  to  have  enjoyed  some  popularity  in  England 
during  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  whereas  there  is  no 
evidence  that  it  was  ever  known  in  Ireland. 

By  a  confusion  possibly  arising  from  the  fact  that  our  tract 
frequently  occurs  in  manuscripts  containing  moral  treatises  by 
Robert  Grosseteste  (d.  1253),  notably  the  De  Oculo  Morali,  it  also 
came  to  be  circulated  under  the  name  of  that  famous  bishop,  and 
consequently  manuscript  copies  of  it  are  fairly  numerous — more^ 
so  apparently  than  those  of  the  printed  edition. 

The  following  list,  which  cannot  claim  to  be  a  complete  one,| 
enumerates  thirty-six  manuscripts.  Of  these,  three  only  havej 
preserved  the  name  of  Malachias  ^^  as  that  of  the  author  ;  in 
fifteen  the  tract  is  anonymous^^*^  and  in  eighteen  ^^  it  is  attributed^ 
to  Grosseteste  : 

Cambridge,  University  Library,  Dd.  10.  15,  ff.  1  a-12  b,  s.  xvl 
[anonymous]  ;  li.  1.  26,  pp.  138-73,  s.  xv  [attributed  to  Grosseteste] :] 
Pembroke  College  239,  ff.  240a-254b,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste]:  Peter-] 
house  237,  ff.  122  a-131  a,  s.  xiv/xv  [anonymous] :  Sidney  Sussex  Coll. 
85,  fE.  81  a-94a,  s.  xiv  [anonymous] :  Trinity  Coll.  370,  if.  251  b-256aJ 
s.  xiv  [to  Grosseteste]:  Queens'  Coll.  10,  ff.  62b-67b,  s.  xiv  [toj 
Grosseteste]. 

Dublin,  Trinity  College,  A.  5.  3,^9  £F,  186  a-196  b,  copied  in  or  about 
the  year  1375  at  Cambridge,  by  a  certain  Adam  de  Stocton,  lector  in  th( 
Augustinian  convent  there.  The  treatise  is  anonymous  and  bears  no  tith 
It  is  divided  into  twenty -four  chapters.  On  ff.  78  b-80  b  we  have  th< 
Tabula  Tractatus  de  Veneno  ;  C.  2.  18,^**  ff.  15  b-17  a,  merely  a  summar} 
of  the  headings  of  our  text  entitled  in  the  index  at  the  beginning  of  ihi 
volume  Lincolniensis  de  speciebus  vii  peccatorum  mortalium?^  The  manuj 
script  proper  is  a  quarto  volume  written  on  paper  in  various  hands  of  th< 
latter  part  of  s.  xv.  It  consists  of  one  unnumbered  leaf  containing  an" 
index  of  the  contents  of  the  manuscript,  and  171  numbered  leaves.  The 
index  has  been  carelessly  reproduced  by  Abbott,  who  gives  the  second 
last  article  as  *  Epp.  a  Synodo  Basil,  ad  haereticos  in  Hibernia  et  in 
Anglia ',  whereas  the  manuscript  has  cum  dudbus  epistolis  quarum  una 

2®  A  fourth  must  have  been  that  from  which  Estienne  printed  the  tract.  Possibly 
it  was  at  Paris.  Quetif  and  Echard  {Script.  Ord.  Praed.  i,  p.  743)  mention  a  Paris  MS., 
'  Regia  D.  1135',  but  I  have  not  succeeded  in  tracing  it  in  any  of  the  printed  catalogues 
of  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale.  ^ 

2'  In  one  of  these  a  scribal  oversight  has  entitled  the  tract  Liber  Soliloq.  S.  Augusiini.  Hi 
2^  One  of  these  is  a  mere  summary  of  the  work.  ' 

2"  No.  115  in  T.  K.  Abbott's  Catalogue,  p.  14,  where  it  is  very  badly  described. 
^°  No.  281  in  the  Catalogue,  p.  43,  where  it  is  inaccurately  described.  ' 

^*  This  manuscript  also  contains  various  ecclesiastical  treatises  and  extracts.    At        ^ 
the  beginning  are  four  unnumbered  parchment  leaves  with  religious  matter  in  a  hand 
of  s.  xvi,  and  at  the  end  also  are  four  parchment  leaves  and  four  paper  leaves  with 
further  religious  notes  in  hands  of  s.  xvi. 


1918  FRIAR  MALAGHY  OF  IRELAND  365 

missafuit  hereticis  in  Bohemia  altera  in  Anglia  a  Sinodo  Basiliensi.  This 
index  ends  with  the  words  \Hic  liber]  est  domus  lohannis  de  Bethleem 
ordinis  Cartusiensis  de  Skene.  The  Carthusian  Priory  of  Shene  in  Surrey 
was  founded  in  1414:.'2 

Durham,  Cathedral  Library,  B.  2.  4,  s.  xiv  [anonymous]. 

Lincoln,  Cath.  Libr.,  C.  3.  2  [to  Grosseteste]. 

London,  British  Museum,  Cotton,  Vitellius  C.  xiv,  a  folio  volume  of 
212  leaves  measuring  about  25  cms.  by  19  cms.,  vellum,  written  in  double 
columns  with  large  initials  in  red  and  blue  in  a  hand  of  s.  xiv.  Much 
damaged  by  fire,  especially  in  the  upper  part  of  the  page,  where  the  top  few 
lines  of  text  have  been  frequently  destroyed  or  rendered  illegible.  No 
indication  of  provenance.^^  Our  tract  commences  on  f.  57  a  without  any 
title,  Racio  veneni  'potissime  conuenit  peccato  prioritate  originis.  ...  It  ends 
on  f.  65  a,  aliis  derelictis.  TJtinam  sic  esset  inter  christianos  suas  xxores 
dimittentes  , . .  pro  quibus  sit  mihi  Christus  premium  et  merces  qui  cum  patre 
et  spiritu  sancto  viuit  et  regnat  deus.  Amen.  Explicit  tractatus  qui  dicitur 
venerium  Malachie  editus  afratre  MalacJiia  de  ordine  minorum  et  prouincia 
Ybernie  ;  Eoyal,  7.  C.  1,  ff.  82  a-92b,  s.  xiv,  from  Ramsey  Abbey  [anony- 
mous] ;  Royal,  7.  F.  ii,  fP.  1  a-9  b,  s.  xiv,  from  Westminster  Abbey  [anony- 
mous] ;  Sloane,  1616,  ff.  1  a-32  a,  s.  xiv  [to  Grosseteste] :  Gray's  Inn 
Libr.,  18,  £f.  220a-229  b,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste] ;  23,  ff.  181  b-190a,  s.  xv 
[anonymous] :  Lambeth  Palace,  483,  fE.  77a-llla,  s.  xiv,  from  St.  Cuth- 
bert's  Abbey,  Durham  [anonymous],  some  folios  misplaced  in  binding  ; 
523,  ff.  88a-113a,  s.  xiv,  without  title,  but  onf.  113  a  after  the  closing 
words  aliis  derelictis  a  hand,  very  probably  the  original  and  certainly 
of  the  same  period,  has  added  Explicit  Malachias.^ 

MUNICH;  manuscript  in  possession  of  J.  Halle  (Ottostrasse  3  a),  a  paper 
quarto  of  35  leaves  containing  only  the  De  Veneno,  The  colophon  is  as 
follows  :  Explicit  tractatus  de  veneno  viciorum  traditus  afratre  Malachia  de 
prouincia  Ybernie,  scriptus  per  me  dominum  Mathiam  Hueber  monachum  in 
Ochsenhusen.    Anno  Domini  1459. 

Oxford,  Bodleian,35  Laud  Misc.  206,  fi.  1  b-55  a,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste] ; 
Laud  Misc.  524,  ff.  llla-126a,  s.  xv  [anonymous,  a  later  hand  has  added 
the  attribution  to  Grosseteste] ;  Laud  Misc.  645,  ff.  57  b-66  b,  s.  xv  in., 
the  scribe  has  entitled  the  tract  Liber  Soliloq.  S.  Augustini,  but  a  second 
hand  has  added  Lincoln,  de  Venenis.  This  copy  is  imperfect,  it  breaks  off 
at  the  fourth  remedy  ;  Digby  163,  ff.  1  a-20  b,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste] ; 
Bodley  122,  ff.  91  a-133  b,  s.  xiv  [anonymous] ;  Bodley  798,  ff.  127  b-138  a, 
s.  xiv  ex.  [anonymous] :  University  Coll.  36,  pp.  261-99,  s.  xiv  [to  Grosse- 
teste] ;  60,  pp.  236-61,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste] :  Merton  Coll.  43,  ff.  27  a- 
53b,  s.  xiv  [to  Grosseteste];  68,  ff.  64b-74b,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste]: 
Magdalen  Coll.  6,  ff.   133b-160a,  written  in  1393  [anonymous];    48, 

»2  Dugdale,  Monastkon  Anglicanum,  new  ed.,  vi.  i.  1830,  pp.  29-34  ;  Martene, 
Thes.  Nov.  Artec,  1717,  i.  1773  ;  Lefeburo,  Chartreux,  ii.  1883,  p.  335. 

=»'  For  a  list  of  contents  see  Planta,  Catat.  of  3ISS.  in  the  Cottonian  Librart/,  1802, 
p.  427. 

^*  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  J.  P.  Gilson  and  the  Rev.  Qaude  Jenkins  for  information 
about  the  British  Museum  and  Lambeth  MSS. 

»»  I  have  to  thank  the  Rev.  Dr.  H.  M.  Bannister  for  a  kind  communication  relative 
to  the  Bodleian  MSS. 


366  FRIAR  MALACHY  OF  IRELAND  July 

if.  225b-241b,  s.  xv  in.  [to  Grosseteste]  ;   200,  ff.  29b-40a,  s.  xv  in. 
[anonymous] ;  202,  if.  220b-233b,  s.  xv  [to  Grosseteste]. 

Toulouse,  230,  if.  156-75,  s.  xv  [to   Grosseteste];    232,  if.  29-39, 
s.  XV  [to  Grosseteste]. 

The  catalogue  of  the  ancient  library  of  Syon  Monastery,  Isle-, 
worth  (ed.  M.  Bateson,  1898,  p.  234),  mentions  under  the  name 
Lincolniensis  no  less  than  five  copies  of  the  tract.  Those  of  the 
above  manuscripts  which  I  have  been  able  to  inspect  agree  in  the 
main  with  one  another  and  with  the  printed  text,  but  there  are 
very  many  verbal  and  orthographic  diiferences. 

M.  EspOsiTO. 


Robert  Bruce's  Rebellion  in  ip6 

The  history  of  Robert  Bruce's  movements  between  the  murder 
of  Comyn  on  10  February  1306  and  his  coronation  at  Scone  on 
27  March  following  appears  to  rest  mainly  on  the  evidence  of 
Barbour.  This  is  confirmed  by  a  document  which  appears  to  have 
escaped  notice,  though  printed  by  H.  T.  Riley  in  1873,  in  his 
edition  of  Registra  lohannis  Whethamstede,  Willelmi  Albon,  et 
Willelmi  Walingforde,  ii.  347-53,  in  the  RoUs  Series,  from  the 
Cotton  MS.  Tiberius  E.  vi,  f.  201  b.  It  is  a  letter  written  from 
Berwick,  some  time  in  March,  before  the  26th,^  possibly  to  John 
Maryns,  abbot  of  St.  Albans.  It  is  dated  by  Riley  as  1297  or  1298, 
but  it  occurs  between  a  document  of  about  August  1304^  and  a 
letter  dated  April  1306.  From  internal  evidence  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  it  is  of  the  date  which  I  have  assigned  to  it.  Richard 
Siward,  who  is  mentioned  as  being  imprisoned  by  Bruce,  was 
captured  at  the  fall  of  his  castle  of  Tibbers  on  the  day  of 
Comyn's  murder.^  Bruce  is  in  possession  also  of  Comyn's  castle 
of  Dalswinton,  and  the  king's  castles  of  Dumfries  and  Ayr.  He 
is  transferring  all  the  stores  to  his  own  castles  of  Loghmaben  and 
'  Ananorby  ',  the  latter  of  which  he  has  obtained  from  Malcolm 
Coyllan,  who  held  it  for  the  king,  by  exchange  for  another.  The 
king  holds  Berwick,  Jedburgh,  Both  well,  Kirkintullagh,  Edinburgh, 
Linlithgow,  and  Stirling.  Rothesay  has  been  taken  by  stratagem, 
on  the  pretext  of  victualUng  it.  Adam  Gordon  is  besieged  at 
Inverkip.  Bruce  has  unsuccessfully  attempted  to  raise  Galloway 
and  has  been  to  Glasgow,  where  the  bishop  is  his  chief  councillor 
and  gave  him  absolution  the  Saturday  before  the  date  of  the  letter. 
He  then  set  out  to  cross  the  Forth  and  sent  Alexander  de  Lindsay 
to  Sir  Walter  Logan  to  summon  the  castle  of  Dumbarton,  and 

'  Sir  Robert  Fitz  Roger  is  mentioned  as  being  on  his  way  to  Berwick.    He  was 
there  on  the  26th  (Bain,  Calendar  of  Documents  relating  to  Scotland^  ii,  no.  1751). 
2  See  Calendar  of  Patent  Rolls,  1301-7,  pp.  278,  281,  285. 
*  Bain,  ii,  no.  1811. 


1918        ROBERT  BRUGE'S  REBELLION  IN  1306  367 

induce  Sir  John  Menteith  to  come  out  and  parley.  Sir  John  has 
refused  and  decHnes  to  surrender  the  castle  without  letters  from 
the  king.  Among  the  leaders  on  the  king's  side,  most  of  whom 
are  mentioned  by  Bain's  Calendar  as  serving  against  Bruce,  are 
the  earl  of  Athol  and  Sir  Simon  Frazer,  who  both  subsequently 
joined  him.  Bruce  is  represented  as  having  replied  to  the  council 
of  Scotland  and  to  John  de  Sandale  the  chamberlain  that  he 
intended  to  persist  in  his  rebelhon  until  the  king  granted  his 
demands  for  the  crown  of  Scotland.  On  the  day  on  which  the 
letter  was  written  news  had  come  from  Menteith  that  Bruce  had 
crossed  the  *  Sea '  with  60,000  men. 

The  letter  is  much  mutilated,  but  enough  remains  to  justify 
its  attribution  to  1306,  and  it  seems  strange  that  it  should  not 
have  found  its  way  into  any  of  the  more  recent  histories  of 
Scotland.  Charles  Johnson. 


William  Morice  and  the  Restoration  of  Charles  II 

A  West  Country  man  by  birth  and  upbringing,  William  Morice 
was  allied  by  marriage  with  the  families  of  Grenville  and  Monk. 
By  both  he  Avas  loved  and  trusted:  Sir  Bevill  Grenville^  be- 
queathed to  him  the  care  of  his  wife  and  family,  and  into  his  sole 
charge  Monk  committed  the  management  of  his  Devon  estates .^ 
Nor  was  he  lacking  in  public  sjjirit :  he  served  his  county  of  Devon 
as  justice  of  the  peace  (1640)  and  as  sheriff  (1651),  and  in  1648  he 
was  elected  to  represent  it  as  knight  of  the  shire.^  But  he  never 
sat  in  the  Long  Parliament,  and  his  presbyterian  opinions 
involved  his  expulsion  by  Pride's  Purge.  He  was  re-elected  both 
in  1654*  and  in  1656,  but  was  excluded  from  the  latter 
parliament  on  the  ground  that  his  choice  was  not  approved  by 
the  Protector's  council.^  When  Richard  Cromwell  summoned 
parliament  for  January  1659  Morice's  recent  purchase  of  the 
Werrington  estate  secured  his  election  ^  by  those  *  Vianders  and 
free  Burgesses  of  the  Borough  of  Newport  in  Cornwall '  who  in 
1648,  '  without  his  Privitie,  SoUicitation  or  good  liking  ',  had 
*  unanimously  elected  for  their  Burgess '  the  redoubtable 
William  Prynne."^  Prynne,  however,  as  he  himself  relates,  had 
been  '  forcibly  secluded,  secured,  and  now  twice  re-secluded  by 
the  Army  officers  ' ;  ^  and  Newport  remained  unrepresented  until 

^  Letter  of  Sir  B.  Grenville  to  W.  Morice,  15  May  1639  :  Thurloe  State  Papers,  i.  2. 

*  Clarendon,  Great  Rebellion,  bk.  xvi.  160  (vol.  vi.  192,  ed.  Macray). 
'  lAst  of  Jieturns  of  Memhers  of  Parliament^  p.  487. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  499. 

°  JoiLrnal  of  the  House  of  Commons,  vii.  425. 

*  Courtney,  History  of  Parlinmentary  Eepresentation  in  Cornwall,  pp.  379-80. 
'  See  Prynne's  True  and  perfect  Narrative,  -1659.  '  Ibid. 


368  WILLIAM  MORIGE  AND  THE  July 

1659,  when  Morice  and  Sir  John  Grenville  were  returned.^  In 
the  elections  for  the  convention  parliament  Morico  was  returned 
both  for  Newport  and  for  Plymouth  ;  ^°  when  he  took  his  seat 
it  was  as  the  representative  of  the  freemen  of  the  port. 

Morice  was  not  merely  the  country  squire  of  business 
ability ;  he  was  also  a  scholar  with  a  genuine  love  of  learning, 
inherited  perhaps  from  his  father,  Dr.  Evan  Morice,  who  had 
been  chancellor  of  the  diocese  of  Exeter,  and  deepened  by  his 
education  at  Exeter  College,  Oxford.  Clarendon  ^^  describes 
him  as  '  a  person  of  a  retired  life,  which  he  spent  in  study,  being 
learned  and  of  good  parts,  while  Price,^-  Monk's  chaplain,  says, 
'  He  was  one  that  much  conversed  with  Books,  and  had  lately 
written  one  against  the  Practice  of  Independent  Teachers.' ^^ 
In  later  years  John  Evelyn  loved  to  dine  with  him,  for  then 
'  We  had  much  discourse  about  bookes  and  authors,  he  being 
a  learned  man  and  had  a  good  collection  '.^*  Even  Burnet 
admitted  that  '  he  was  very  learned  ',  though  he  unkindly  added, 
'  full  of  pedantry  and  affectation  '.^^ 

But  Morice  need  not  be  judged  solely  by  the  verdict  of  his 
contemporaries,  for  the  recent  discovery  of  a  series  of  his  private 
letters  enables  him  to  speak  for  himself.  These  letters  are  forty- 
three  in  number ;  they  have  been  preserved,  bound  in  two 
volumes  marked  '  Old  Letters  ',  in  the  library  at  Prideaux  Place, 
Padstow,  the  same  Elizabethan  manor-house  in  which  they  were 
received.^^  They  were  all  addressed  by  Morice  to  his  brother-in- 
law,  Edmund  Prideaux  ;  the  first  is  dated  5  April  1660,  and  the 
last  to  the  same  '  eldest  and  best  friend  '  is  written  on  28  October 
1676,  a  few  short  weeks  before  the  writer's  death.  They  are 
written  on  single  sheets,  in  a  minute  but  legible  hand  ;  each  is 
carefully  dated,  and  the  greater  number  are  endorsed  '  For  my 
much  honored  brother  Edmund  Prideaux,  Esq:  at  Padstow  in 
Cornwall '.  The  manuscripts  have  suffered  little  from  the  passage 
of  time  ;  bound  up  with  other  letters  of  the  Prideaux  family, 
they  have  been  carefully  preserved,  but  they  have  not  been 
numbered,  nor  are  they  arranged  in  strict  chronological  order. 

In  these  letters  Morice  shows  himself  a  shrewd  kindly  man, 


»  Courtney,  pp.  379-80. 

•"•  Returns  of  Members  of  Parliament,  p.  513. 

"  Bk.  xvi,  p.  160. 

"  Price,  Mystery  and  Method  of  the  Restoration ,  1680,  p.  118. 

"  Coena  quasi  Koivq,  The  New  Inclosurcs  broken  down,  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
laid  forth  Comm.on  for  all  Church  Members,  1657. 

"  Diary,  ii.  162  (ed.  1879). 

^'  Burnet,  History  of  my  Own  Time,  ed.  Airy,  1897,  i.  i.  179. 

"  To  these  original  letters  I  have  lately  had  access  through  tho  kindness  of  their 
owner,  Colonel  Prideaux- Brune,  of  Prideaux  Place,  to  whom  I  am  also  indebted  for 
the  permission  to  transcribe  them.  My  thanks  are  also  due  to  the  Hon.  Mrs.  Prideaux- 
Brune  for  much  information  aa  to  the  families  of  Prideaux  and  Morice. 


Jl 


1918  RESTORATION  OF  CHARLES  II  369 

prudent  in  temperament,  puritan  in  tendency,  with  a  strong 
sense  of  duty  towards  the  state,  a  deep-seated  affection  for  his 
family,  and  a  genuine  love  of  learning.  He  describes  himself  in 
one  letter  as  '  a  true  Englishman  and  subject  of  England  ',i' 
while  in  another  he  urges  on  his  brother-in-law  the  unwelcome 
office  of  sheriff  by  arguing  '  Your  station  exposinge  you  to  it, 
and  your  country  requiring  it  '.^^  His  love  for  his  family  is  evident 
throughout  the  letters,  and  his  efforts  to  further  its  interests  were 
unwearying.  Two  people  stand  out  prominently  in  the  family 
circle  :  his  favourite  niece  '  Sweet  Admonition  '  Prideaux,  whose 
only  fault  was  her  '  affecting  of  solitude  ',  and  her  brother 
'  Humfry  ',  the  future  dean  of  Norwich.  In  the  letters  '  Humfry  ' 
is  the  '  eagre  and  impatient '  pupil  of  Busby,  the  boy  for  whom 
his  scholarly  uncle  procured  by  royal  mandamus,  from  *  a  sullen 
and  severe  '  dean,  a  studentship  at  Christ  Church.  Morice's 
letters  are  also  interesting  in  their  references  to  local  government 
in  Cornwall,  and  to  general  public  events,  but  his  treatment 
of  such  subjects  is  regrettably  fragmentary. 

In  the  first  four  letters  of  the  series,  written  in  the  critical 
spring  and  summer  of  the  Restoration,  Morice's  reticence  is 
particularly  unfortunate,  for  he  does  not  explain  exactly  how  he 
contributed  to  the  return  of  the  king.  At  first  sight  it  seems  a 
strange  turn  of  fortune's  wheel,  which  raised  the  west  country 
squire  to  be  secretary  of  state,  and  the  question  at  once  arises : 
what  services  did  he  render  that  he  received  so  conspicuous 
a  reward  ?  As  one  of  the  secluded  members,  Morice  had  thrown 
in  his  lot  with  Sir  Thomas  Stukely  i^  and  Sir  Hugh  Pollard,2o  the 
leaders  of  the  royalists  in  the  west,  and  with  them  he  had  seen 
with  regret  the  collapse  of  their  schemes  in  the  summer  of  1 659. 
The  autumn  witnessed  the  temporary  triumph  of  Lambert,  and 
finally  the  restoration  of  the  '  fag  end  of  a  parliament  '  on 
26  December.21  In  the  opinion  of  the  Devonshire  royahsts,  the 
only  hope  lay  in  the  recall  of  the  '  secluded  '  members  of  1648,  and 
to  this  end  they  presented  a  petition  to  parliament  demanding 
their  readmission.^^  This  step  forced  the  pace,  in  a  fashion  most 
unwelcome  to  an  opportunist  like  Monk,  whose  chief  ally  was 
time.  He  promptly  wrote  to  Morice,  urging  him  to  use  his  influ- 
ence in  persuading  the  petitioners  to  remain  loyal  to  the  status  quo. 
In  this  letter  from  Harborow,  written  23  January  1659/60, 
during  the  critical  days  of  his  march  to  London,  he  also  invited 
I  his  kinsman  '  to  doe  mee  both  the  honour  and  favoure  as  to  meete 
jmee  att  London,  where  more  freed ome  may  be  used  then  can 
jwell  with  conveniency  bee  exprest  by  Letter '.^^ 

'       "  Letter  2.  "  Letter  15.  "  Skinner,  Life  of  3fonk,  ip.  98. 

»•»  Price,  p.  19.  "  Ibid.,  p.  72. 

"  13  January  1659/60 ;  Guizot,  Richard  Cromwell,  ii.  85. 
"  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixix.  3. 
VOL.  XXXm. — NO.  CXXXI.  B  b 


370  WILLIAM  MORICE  AND  THE  July 

On  the  readmission  of  the  secluded  members  on  21  February, 
Monk  dispatched  another  invitation  to  Morice,  this  time  at  the 
suggestion  of  his  brother  Nicholas,  who  knowing  Morice 

to  be  a  Prudent  Person,  and  well  disposed  for  this  Prince's  Service  and  the 
good  of  his  Country,  writ  to  Clarges,  to  put  the  General  in  mind  of  sending 
for  him,  that  being  near  him,  he  might  be  assistant  to  him  in  his  Counsels. 
To  this  the  General  was  easily  persuaded,  having  a  good  Opinion  of  his 
Abilities  and  Worth.^* 

Monk  was  peculiarly  in  need  of  a  confidant ;  both  the  military 
republicans  and  the  parliamentary  oligarchs  watched  him  with 
suspicion,  and  dogged  his  footsteps  with  emissaries,  who  were 
spies  in  all  but  name.^^  His  friends  were  hardly  less  dangerous  ; 
he  must  often  have  feared  that  his  wife's  royalism  would  bring 
him  into  difficulty,  while  the  indiscretions  of  his  chaplain,  John 
Price,  drew  down  the  rebuke,  '  I  can  be  undone  by  none  but  you 
and  my  wife  '.^^  Hence  he  turned  with  relief  to  the  prudence  and 
integrity  of  Morice,  on  whose  arrival  in  London  he  retained 
him  '  as  a  domestick  Friend  in  his  Quarters  at  8t.  James  'P 
Morice 's  activities  were  now  manifold.  As  Monk's  *  Elbow 
Counsellor  and  State  Blind  \^^  it  was  his  business  '  to  keep  the 
expiring  Session  of  Parliament  steady  and  clear  from  inter- 
meddling with  the  change  of  the  government,  in  which  cause  he 
did  excellent  Service  '  ;  ^9  and  nightly  he  acquainted  the  general 
with  the  temper  of  the  house.^^  In  the  army  debates,  his  recent 
appointment  as  governor  of  Plymouth  gave  Morice  an  unwelcome 
seat,  for  having  '  spent  his  time  in  the  Silence  of  his  Books  and 
Studies,  it  rendered  him  uneasy  in  the  Company  of  such  rude  and 
clamorous  Conventions  '.^^  But  if  he  found  the  work  uncongenial, 
he  performed  it  satisfactorily,  for  '  there  were  frequent  Meetings 
of  Officers,  and  one  of  so  good  Judgment  and  Elocution  as  he  could 
not  but  persuade  much  '.^'^ 

By  the  royalists,  the  intimacy  between  Monk  and  Morice  was 
watched  with  a  sense  of  relief.  Monk  was  an  enigma  ;  his  words 
and  actions  were  so  contradictory,  his  reserve  so  impenetrable, 
that  men  like  Hyde  and  Mordaunt  had  to  admit  themselves 
baffled.  '  He  is  a  black  Monk,  and  I  cannot  see  through  him,'  wrote 
Mordaunt  to  the  king,^^  and  Broderick  in  a  letter  to  Hyde  on 
13  January  expressed  the  same  opinion  :  '  Monk's  designs  are 
so  unknown,  it  is  vanity  to  guess  at  them.'  ^*  Monk  delighted  in 
his  perversity  ;  to  lull  the  suspicions  of  the  republicans  he  would 
violently  assert  that  '  he  would  spend  the  last  drop  of  his  blood 

==«  Baker's  Chronicle,  cd.  1674.  p.  712.  "  price,  p.  86. 

2«  Ibid.,  p.  54.  27  Skinner,  Life  of  MonTc,  p.  246. 

2»  Price,  p.  49.  ^^  Ihid.,  p.  131.  ^^  Skinner,  p.  262. 

^1  Ibid.,  p.  255.  «  Baker,  p.  716. 

^  16  January;  Clarendon  State  Papers,  in.  651.  "  Ibid.,  p.  645. 


i 

i 


1918  RESTORATION  OF  CHARLES  II  371 

rather  than  the  Stuarts  should  ever  come  into  England  ','^'  while 
at  the  same  time  he  skilfuUj^  secured  that  the  engagement  to 
be  faithful  to  a  con^monwealth  should  be  expunged  from  the 
records  of  the  house.^^  In  their  perplexit3%  the  royalists  reflected 
with  relief  on  the  sympathies  of  Morice  with  their  cause,  and  it 
is  not  surprising  if  they  attributed  to  his  influence  the  subsequent 
actions  of  Monk.  In  a  letter  to  the  king  dated  9  March  1660, 
Lady  Mordaunt  expressed  the  general  opinion  of  the  royalist 
party  : 

This  Mr.  Morris  will  be  doubtlesse  found  Monck's  greatest  confident  and 
will  most  certainly  be  very  instrumental  in  Your  restoration,  having 
all  ready  imbosomed  himself  to  one  of  the  Trust,  and  engaged  to  persue 
the  directions  of  your  Majestys  Commissioners.^^ 

Monk's  long  dissimulation  was  nearing  its  end ;  men  like  Prynne 
and  Whitelocke,  with  varying  emotions,  saw  the  Restoration 
approaching,  and  the  republicans  made  a  last  and  futile  attempt 
to  prevent  it,  by  offering  the  sovereignty  to  Monk.  To  one  who 
had  seen  the  difficulties  of  Cromwell  the  oiBPer  presented  no 
attractions,  and  Monk  refused  it  unhesitatingly. 

No  longer  could  the  parliament  resist  the  will  of  the  nation, 
and  on  17  March  it  dissolved  itself  by  its  own  act,  after  issuing 
writs  for  the  meeting  of  a  new  house  on  25  April.  Two  days  later 
Monk  at  last  agreed  to  yield  to  the  persistence  of  Sir  John  Gren- 
ville,  and  granted  him  a  private  audience.  This  concession  had 
only  been  won  through  the  intercession  of  Morice,  and  when 
Monk  and  Grenville  met,  it  was  at  night,^^  in  Morice's  room,  and 
with  him  to  guard  the  door.^^  In  that  historic  interview^  Monk 
at  last  received  the  king's  letter  and  consented  to  open  up 
negotiations  with  him. 

I  hope,  he  said,  the  King  will  forgive  what  is  past,  both  in  my  words 
and  Actions,  for  my  heart  was  ever  faithful  to  him,  but  I  was  never  in 
a  condition  to  do  him  service  till  this  present  time.*° 

Nor  was  this  all.  Through  Morice,  Monk  gave  verbal  instructions 
to  Grenville,  and  it  was  on  the  basis  of  these  that  the  declaration 
of  Breda  was  framed.^^ 

Morice's  share  in  the  negotiations  did  not  pass  unnoticed, 
and  a  royal  letter  of  thanks  was  dispatched  to  him  on  27  March, 
through  the  hands  of  Lord  Mordaunt. ^^    In  his  letter  the  king 

»'  Barwick  to  the  king,  10  March  1659  ;  ibid.,  p.  697. 

»«  Guizot,  Richard  Cromwell,  ii.  159.  "  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixx.  118. 

38  Baker,  p.  717.  ^9  p^ce,  p.  135.  "»  Ibid.,  p.  137. 

"  Clarendon,  bk.  xvi.  166,  171. 

"  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixx.  186  ;  Thurloe  State  Papers,  vii.  858.  A  copy  of  the  letter 
is  found  among  the  family  letters  preserved  at  Prideaux  Place,  Padstow,  where, 
together  with  the  forty-three  letters  of  Morice  to  Edmund  Prideaux,  are  the  transcripts 

B  b  2 


372  WILLIAM  MORICE  AND  THE  July 

commented  on  Morice's  '  more  than  ordinary  affection  '  to 
promote  his  service,  and  assured  him  it  would  not  pass  unre- 
warded. The  reward  came  quickly  ;  for  at  the  request  of  Sir 
John  Grenville  ^^  the  king  empowered  Monk  to  *  bestow  the  ofl&ce 
of  one  of  the  Secretaries  of  State  upon  Mr.  Morrice,  who  was  as 
well  qualified  for  it  as  anj^  man  who  had  not  been  versed  in  the 
knowledge  of  foreign  affairs  '.  In  a  second  letter  to  Morice  on 
6  April,^*  the  king  repeated  his  thanks  for  '  the  many  obligations 
I  have  to  you,  and  the  great  power  you  have  to  do  me  service  and 
your  greate  partes  which  you  have  manifested  in  severall  occa- 
sions ',  and  assured  him  of  his  continued  favour.  Morice's  letter 
to  the  king  accepting  the  seals  of  office  is  still  extant  among  the 
Clarendon  MSS.,"^^  and  displays  a  strange  mixture  of  the  deference 
of  the  new  minister  and  the  plain  speech  of  the  puritan.  It  runs 
as  follows  : 

Most  excellent  maiesty. 

Since  my  laste  I  have  receaved  from  you  by  the  handes  of  your  General 
(for  so  now  your  maiesty  hath  made  him)  the  earnest  of  so  greate  an  honor 
as  casts  me  under  the  more  astonishment  by  how  much  it  was  beyonde 
my  expectation.  I  doe  in  all  truth  and  humility  confesse,  that  I  am 
altogether  unworthy  of  so  greate  a  truste,  and  doe  suspect  my  selfe  to  be 
no  lesse  incompetent  to  discharge  the  duty,  but  as  I  shall  not  wish  to  live 
one  day  after  I  shalbe  found  unfaithful  to  your  maiesty,  so  I  shall  not 
desire  to  be  continued  in  any  employment,  which  I  shall  appeare  to  be 
uncapable  of,  having  too  greate  an  affection  to  your  maiesty  and  your 
service  as  to  seeke  any  advantage  to  my  selfe  to  the  preiudice  of  them. 
I  am  assured  that  your  very  faithful  servant  Sr  John  Grenvile  hath  already 
given  your  maiesty  an  account  of  the  delivery  of  all  your  letters  and  how 
thinges  have  rather  falne  out  then  beene  carried  on,  by  so  wonderful 
a  providence  inclininge  heartes  and  disposinge  events,  and  one  successe 
leading  on  and  finked  with  another  in  such  manner  as  if  God  would  render 

of  seven  letters  from  the  originals  in  the  Morice  library  at  Werrington.  These  copies 
were  made  in  1716,  by  a  later  Edmund  Prideaux,  and  each  is  endorsed  to  that  effect. 
They  are  three  letters  from  Charles  II  to  William  Morice  dated  27  March,  6  April,  and , 
20  May  1660  ;  one  from  Hyde  to  Sir  John  Grenville,  dated  from  Breda^  23  April  1660 ; 
another  from  the  same  writer  to  Morice,  27  May  1660  ;  an  undated  letter  from  Ormonc 
to  Morice  ;  and  lastly  one  from  Lord  Mordaunt  to  Morice,  dated  Lisbon,  6  April,  an^ 
written  apparently  in  1 661.  Of  these  all  except  the  last  two  are  printed  in  the  Thurl 
State  Papers,  vol.  vii,  while  a  copy  of  the  first  may  also  be  found  among  the  Clarendoi 
MSS.,  Ixx.  188,  in  the  Bodleian.  Where  the  originals  are  preserved  is  unknown.  Ii 
the  Thurloe  Stale  Papers  they  are  stated  to  be  in  the  possession  of '  Hugh  Gregor,  Esq.*j 
According  to  Hals,  the  Gregor  family,  which  owned  the  manor  of  Trewarthenike  in 
the  parish  of  Cornelly,  became  connected  with  the  house  of  Prideaux  by  the  marriage 
of  Francis  Gregor,  sheriff  under  Charles  II  (1669),  with  one  of  the  coheirs  of  Prideaux 
of  Gurlyn.  It  is  clear  that  in  1716  the  original  letters  were  in  the  library  of  Sir  Nicholas 
Morice  at  Werrington,  for  the  transcripts  are  all  endorsed  by  Edmund  Prideaux  to 
that  effect ;  but  at  what  date  they  passed  into  the  possession  of  the  Gregor  family 
I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain.  *'  Clarendon,  bk.  xvi.  180. 

**  Thurloe  State  Papers,  vii.  858;  manuscript  copy  at  Prideaux  Place  (see 
note  42).  «  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixxii.  222. 


1918  RESTORATION  OF  CHARLES  II  373 

it  conspicuous  that  his  immediate  hande  had  donne  the  worke  beyond  the 
power  of  the  meanes  used  for  effectinge  thereof.  With  great  unammity 
thinges  passed  in  the  parliament,  was  manifest  in  that  none  of  the  votes 
had  the  least  contradiction  of  any  one  person  and  with  what  reioycinge 
they  were  entertained  by  the  people,  was  evident  by  their  acclamations 
and  triumphs.  God  hath  already  given  you  livery  of  the  heartes  of  your 
peple  before  you  have  taken  actual  possession  of  your  dominions,  which  will 
not  longer  be  deferred  then  until  thinges  may  be  prepared  for  your  recep- 
tion. God  hath  done  greate  thinges  for  you,  and  we  cannot  doubt  but  he 
will  by  you  doe  great  thinges  for  your  kingdome,  and  to  that  ende  hath 
so  miraculously  preserved  your  person  amidst  so  many  dangers,  confirmed 
you  in  the  truth  of  religeon,  notwithstandinge  so  greate  temptations  of 
friendes  and  enimyes,  and  restored  you  to  your  iust  rights  maugre  the 
subtilty  and  power  of  your  mutinous  opposites. 

The  confidence  the  nations  have  in  you  layes  a  stronger  obligation  on 
your  maiestye  then  by  any  conditions  they  could  have  donne,  and 
infinitely  greater  then  the  parliament  is  like  to  doe,  who  seeke  their  cheifest 
security  in  your  maiestyes  iustice  and  goodnesse. 

I  assure  you  they  can  truste  you  rather  then  the  houses  and  however 
those  looking  towardes  the  risinge  sunne  may  be  biassed  by  selfe  endes 
or  interests  and  make  variation  from  that  poynte  which  they  ought  to 
respecte,  yet  they  hope  your  maiesty  wilbe  immoveably  fixt  in  a  resolution 
to  performe  what  you  have  by  your  letters  offered,  and  grante  all  other 
thinges  which  shalbe  iust  and  necessary  for  your  honor  and  safety  and 
the  peace  and  happinesse  of  the  kingdome,  and  if  your  maiesty  shall  by 
a  seconde  letter  let  the  parliament  knowe  that  as  it  hath  beene  your  offer 
to  assente  to  such  thinges,  so  it  is  your  desire  that  the  parliament  should 
propounde  them  to  you  ;  it  will  bringe  you  hither  by  a  conquest  of  heartes 
as  wel  as  by  the  right  of  inheritance,  and  make  your  empire  more  safe  by 
beinge  lesse  absolute.  Though  the  ill  humors  in  the  army  and  nation 
have  beene  hindred  from  gatheringe  into  a  greate  heade,  and  breakinge 
out  into  a  disease,  yet  they  are  not  purged  out,  and  any  violent  motion 
or  distemper  may  irritate  them  againe,  and  neither  you  nor  the  nation 
can  take  any  perfect  contentment  in  the  peace  and  settlement  thereof 
if  it  be  diminished  by  feare  of  change  or  disturbance. 

Havinge  no  cypher  I  am  enforced  to  refer  som  thinges  to  be  represented 
to  your  maiesty  by  Sir  John  Grenvile  which  I  could  not  truste  with  common 
characters,  and  I  beleive  your  maiestyes  experience  of  his  fidelity  may  well 
frustrate  my  humble  request  that  your  maiesty  will  give  him  credence. 
For  myselfe  I  shall  humbly  begge  your  pardon  of  my  boldnesse  and  though 
I  wante  wordes  to  expresse  my  thankefulnes  yet  I  can  better  make  knowne 
my  hearte  to  you  in  those  praiers  which  are  dayly  offered  up  for  your 
maiesty  by 

Your  Sacred  Maiestyes  most  loyal  subiect  and  most  humble  and 
faithful  servant.  Will.  Morice.^^ 

May  5. 
60. 

"  The  letter  is  endorsed  by  Morice :  '  For  the  sacred  maiesty  of  Kinge  Charles 
my  gracious  soveraigne.* 


374  WILLIAM  MORICE  AND  THE  July 

That  the  king  did  not  resent  Moriee's  plain  speech,  though  it 
may  have  amused  him,  is  evident  in  his  reply  dated  20  May, 
for  in  this  he  reassures  his  new  secretary  '  I  find  cause  enough  to 
reioyce  ...  in  the  choice  I  have  made  of  you  for  so  neer  a  trust 
which  I  am  sure  you  will  discharge  with  full  ability's  as  well  as 
fidelity  to  me  '.^7 

Moriee's  misgivings  for  the  future  were  no  conventional 
expressions,  for  in  his  letter  to  Edmund  Prideaux  on  17  May 
he  writes  : 

I  distrust  myself  to  be  able  to  bear  up  at  courte,  yet  I  will  fall  for  nothinge 
of  dishonesty  and  so  true  to  that  interest  which  I  have  espoused  as  a  true 
Englishman  and  subject  of  England,  and  I  can  never  much  feare  to  loose 
what  I  never  had  great  desire  to  obtaine.*^ 

Moriee's  appointment  as  secretary  was  not  formally  ratified  until 
the  king's  return.  In  the  interval,  the  new  parUament  was 
elected  and  Morice,  as  we  have  seen,  took  his  seat  for  Plymouth, 
where  his  position  as  governor  and  his  property  at  Stoke  Damerel 
gave  him  a  powerful  position.*^  Everywhere  the  elections  had 
turned  in  the  king's  favour.  '  Northamptonshire  hath  resolved 
to  chuse  none  of  the  long  ParHament,'  wrote  Morice  to  Pri- 
deaux,^^  and  this  case  is  typical  of  many.  The  parliament  met 
on  25  April,  but  the  delivery  of  the  king's  letters  by  Sir  John 
Grenville  was  deferred  until  1  May,  to  allow  of  the  attendance  of 
Morice,  whose  double  election  return  caused  delay  in  his  present- 
ing his  writ. 

On  1  May  the  king's  letters  were  read  to  a  crowded  and 
enthusiastic  house.  On  their  conclusion  Morice  rose  to  his  feet 
and  '  in  a  very  eloquent  oration  '  ^^  spoke  for  the  king's  restoration, 
proposing  a  letter  of  acknowledgement  and  a  grant  of  money, 
both  suggestions  being  adopted  nemine  contradicente.  In  the 
subsequent  debates  in  the  house,  he  was  careful  that  no  faulty 
wording  of  the  various  proclamations  should  imply  that  the 
king's  reign  began  with  his  restoration, ^^  ^^^  j^\^q  same  prudence 
led  him  to  decline  the  invitation  of  the  house  to  wait  upon  the 
king.  With  true  public  spirit  he  decided  '  contrary  to  his  inclina- 
tions ...  to  carry  on  his  Maiesties  service  here,  least  the  same 
should  be  neglected  or  prejudiced  '.^^  The  Journals  of  the  House 
of  Commons  ^^  show  Morice  busy  on  numerous  committees  for 

*'  Printed  in  Thurloe  State  Papers,  iii.  912,  and  Biograpkia  Britanmca,  iv.  2333. 
There  is  a  manuscript  copy  of  it  at  Prideaux  Place  (see  note  42). 
*•  Morice  Letters,  no.  2. 

*'  Otho  Peter,  The  Manor  of  Werrington,  p.  9. 
^°  5  April  1660,  Morice  Letters,  no.  1.    See  below.  Appendix  I. 
"  Sir  John  Grenville  to  the  king,  2  May  1660 ;  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixxii.  140. 
"  Grenville  to  Hyde,  4  May  1660 
»  Ibid.,  p.  175. 
"  vii.  11,  26. 


I 
I 


1918  RESTORATION  OF  CHARLES  II  375 

the  king's  reception,  while  behind  the  scenes  he  was  no  less 
active  in  removing  misunderstandings  between  Monk  and  Hyde.^^ 
At  last  all  was  completed,  and  on  17  May  Morice  could  write  to 
his  brother-in-law  at  Padstow  : 

I  am  to-morrow  setting  forth  to  waite  uppon  the  Kinge,  who  will  arrive 
hither  towarde  the  ende  of  the  week,  and  be  received  with  more  grandor 
and  celebrity  than  ever  any  king  of  England  was.^^ 

By  the  king's  special  request  Morice  accompanied  Monk  to 
Dover, 5'  and  at  Canterbury  he  received  the  honour  of  knight- 
hood and  was  sworn  secretary  of  state. ^^ 

In  the  eyes  of  the  royalists,  Morice's  promotion  was  well 
earned,  for  they  attributed  to  his  influence  Monk's  change  of 
front.  According  to  a  sentence  inserted  in  Burnet's  Own  Time,^^ 
Morice  was  '  the  person  that  had  chiefly  prevailed  with  Monk 
to  declare  for  the  king  ;  upon  that  he  was  made  secretary  of 
state  '.  In  like  manner  Clarendon,  in  his  letter  of  27  May,  shows 
himself  anxious  to  make  his  acquaintance  and  win  his  friendship,^^ 
and  in  his  History  he  implies  that  it  was  after  consultation  Avith 
Morice  that  Monk  decided  '  to  advance  what  he  clearly  saw  he 
should  not  be  able  to  hinder  '.^^  Price,  on  the  other  hand,  dated 
Monk's  decision  to  restore  the  king  from  his  brother's  visit  at 
Dalkeith  in  August  1659.  '  Thus  I  found  ',  he  writes,  'that  the 
General  stood  engaged  and  from  this  Time  I  do  date,  that  his 
Resolutions  were  fixed  for  the  King's  Restoration.'  ^^  The  truth 
lies  probably  between  the  two  views.  It  is  extremely  doubtful 
whether  Morice  was  much  more  than  the  valued  friend  and  trusted 
agent  of  the  general,  and  it  is  almosl;  certain  that  he  played  no 
part  in  determining  Monk's  actions  in  the  critical  months  of  the 
autumn  of  1659.  It  was  natural  that  the  royalists,  when  baffled 
by  Monk's  perversities,  should  ascribe  his  change  of  front  to  the 
influence  of  Morice, ^^  whose  opinions  they  knew  were  friendly  ; 
but  it  is  more  probable  that  Monk's  decision  was  already  made 
when  he  summoned  Morice  to  London. 

Morice's  services  are  not,  however,  to  be  underrated  ;  he  cer- 
tainly smoothed  away  obstacles  and  so  hastened  the  Restoration, 
and  it  is  possible  that  he  strengthened  Monk's  resolution.  In 
any  case,  he  proved  himself  a  trustworthy  servant,  possessed  of 
tact  and  prudence,  and  with  a  skill  in  drafting  a  document 
invaluable  to  an  unscholarly  soldier  like  Monk.    His  reward  came 

"  Broderick  to  Hyde,  3  May;  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixxii.  157. 

^*  Morice  Letters,  no.  2.    See  Appendix  11. 

"  Letter  of  the  king  to  Monk,  27  May  1G60 ;  Clarendon  MSS.,  Ixxii.  408. 

s»  Clarendon,  bk.  xvi.  245.  ^9  i.  i.  179. 

«"  Thurloc  State  Papers,  vii.  013.  «'  Bk.  xvi.  164. 

"»  Price,  p.  19. 

^  See  Ormond's  letter  to  Morice,  below,  Appendix  III. 


376  WILLIAM  MORIGE  AND  THE  July 

quickly,  but  he  soon  found  the  burdens  of  office  outweighed  its 
delights,  and  in  1661  he  wrote  to  his  brother-in-law  : 
Though  God  hath  called  me  beyond  my  expectation  as  wel  as  merit  to 
a  place  of  much  honor  &  no  little  profit,  yet  contentment  (the  maine 
rootes  whereof  are  liberty  &  leasure)  is  a  flower  that  springs  not  out  of 
this  grounde.6* 

Mary  Coate. 

APPENDIX 

Letters  prom  the  Collection  at  Prideaux  Place,  Padstow 

I.    Sir  William  Morice  to  Edmund  Prideaux 
Brother. 

Though  I  am  under  the  incumbrency  of  much  busines  heere,  yet  it 
springs  more  from  importunity  of  som  in  the  country  then  any  things 
that  I  manage  heere.  God  hath  given  me  great  favour  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Generall,  very  many  even  unrelated  would  have  me  use  it  to  advance  their 
private  interests  did  not  modesty  as  wel  as  prudence  prompt  me,  that 
the  lesse  I  use  my  power,  the  more  I  shall  have  and  by  frequent  inter- 
positions I  shall  grow  lesse  able  to  prevaile®^  when  I  shall  need  to 
intercede  in  the  concernments  of  my  friends,  yet  as  I  cannot  forget  my 
respecte  to  you  through  any  incumbrence  of  busines,  so  I  shall  not  fail  to 
engage  all  my  powers  in  any  of  your  services,  the  Vice  admirals  places 
were  conferde  before  my  comminge  to  London,  and  my  lord  told  me 
(since  I  receaved  yours)  that  St.  Aubyn  had  one  coast  and  Kows  the  other. 
I  had  interposed  for  you  as  for  whom  I  had  more  kindnes  though  enough 
for  our  common  friende.  newes  is  now  at  a  lowe  ebb  things  beinge  in  a  quiet 
position  &  notwithstanding  several  alarms  like  to  continue  so.  Lambert 
uppon  som  iealousies  is  made  a  close  prisoner  in  the  tower  and  none  but 
his  wife  and  children  to  have  accesse  to  him.  Massy  was  sollicitinge  at 
Gloucester  to  be  elected  there  to  serve  in  Parliament  &  there  was  seised 
uppon  by  som  souldiers  &  sent  up  to  London,  never  the  lesse  it  is  thought 
he  wilbe  chosen  at  Leycester.  200  gentlemen  came  into  the  town  protest- 
inge  if  they  chose  Haselrig  they  would  never  spend  more  mony  there  nor 
hold  session  &  other  meetings  yet  M^  Waller  hath  put  him  in  at  Whitchurch 
(together  with  Henry  Nevil).  Northamptonshire  hath  resolved  to  chuse 
none  of  the  long  Parliament.  I  hope  you  will  finde  a  place  from  one 
towne  or  others. 

The  city  hath  subscribed  600^  for  raisinge  a  statue  of  brasse  of  my  lorde 
on  horseback  at  the  Exchange.    Give  service  my  sister  and  cosens  from 
Your  affectionate  brother  and  servant 

Will.  Morice. 
April  5.  1660. 

your  militia  wilbe  appruved  ; 

ours  in  Devon  iust  passe  muster. 

Endorsed.  For  my  Dearly  Honoured  brother  Edmunde  Prideaux  Esq 
at  Padstow  Cornwall  by  Plymouth  post. 

«*  31  December  1661  ;  Morice  Letters,  no.  19. 

^*  The  word  is  illegible  in  the  manuscript,  the  sense  of  the  passage   su| 
prevail '. 


1918  RESTORATION  OF  CHARLES  II  377 

II.    William  Morice  to  Edmund  Prideaux 
Brother 

though  indeed  my  incumbrances  are  many  yet  it  can  never  be  accounted 
among  distractions  to  reade  your  commands  or  receave  notice  of  your 
welfare,  you  may  as  safely  as  ever  acte  in  the  militia  though  I  believe  your 
powers  will  not  be  long  lived  but  that  motion  wilbe  shortly  made  and 
carried  on  uppon  the  olde  hinges.  I  am  to  morrow  setting  forth  to  waite 
uppon  the  Kinge  who  will  arrive  hither  toward  the  ende  of  the  weeke  & 
be  receaved  with  more  grandor  &  celebrity  than  ever  any  Kinge  of  England 
was,  though  my  fortunes  (god  knowes  &  the  event  only  can  tell  whether 
I  may  call  them  good)  are  not  only  above  my  merit  but  beyonde  my 
expectation  &  not  only  unsought  for  but  unthought  of,  the  former  the 
Kinge  can  witnesse  and  the  later  god  knowes  yet  I  shall  never  resign  them 
if  they  give  me  any  advantage  whereby  to  serve  my  friends,  for  whom  my 
affections  will  leade  me  to  doe  all  good  offices  as  farre  as  my  opportunities 
will  reach  &  my  modesty  permit. 

I  distrust  myself  to  be  able  to  bear  up  at  Courte  yet  I  will  fall  for 
nothinge  of  dishonesty  &  so  true  to  that  interest  which  I  have  espoused  as 
a  true  Englishman  &  subiect  of  England  &  I  can  never  much  feare  to  loose 
what  I  never  had  greate  desire  to  obtaine.  his  maiesty  by  several  letters 
professeth  to  have  much  kindnes  for  me  «fe  confidence  in  me  &  hath  witnessed 
it  longe  since  (though  I  concealed  it)  in  such  a  way  as  I  am  altogether 
unworthy  of  who  am  lesse  than  the  least  of  the  Kings  favours  &  infinitely 
more  of  the  least  of  gods  mercyes.  give  my  service  to  my  good  sister 
sweete  cosen  Addy  and  my  other  cosens,  I  reioice  in  no  title  more  then  of 
Your  brother  and  affectionate  friend  to  serve  you 
Whitehall.  Will.  Morice. 

May  17.  1660. 

III.    The  Duke  of  Ormonde  to  William  Morice 
Sr. 

It  is  by  Sir  John  Grenviles  encouragement  that  I  not  only  write  to 
you  but  take  the  freedome  to  put  a  leter  directed  from  me  to  the  Lord 
Generall  into  your  hands  to  bee  delivered  to  him  &  the  subject  of  it  im- 
proved by  that  interest  you  have  in  him  &  the  friendship  Sr  John  makes 
mee  hope  you  will  have  for  me.  I  mingle  nothing  of  Publique  concernment 
(unless  the  good  intelligence  I  aime  at  be  so  called)  with  what  seems  to  be 
my  own,  because  you  will  have  that  at  large  from  other  &  better  hands 
&  because  I  hope  it  will  not  bee  long  before  I  have  the  happinesse  to 
see  a  person  that  hath  had  so  great  &  good  a  part  to  procure  as  the  blessings 
that  is  so  near  us,  if  God  please  to  continue  the  favour  of  his  countenance 
to  us,  I  shall  then  in  lesse  haste  and  more  order  endeavour  to  assure  you 
of  being  Sir 

Your  most  affectionate  &  very  humble  servant. 

Ormonde.^^ 

*®  Note  at  foot,  in  hand  of  Edmund  Prideaux, '  Copied  from  original  in  library  of 
S^  Nicholas  Morice  at  Werrington  in  the  summer,  1716'.    See  above,  note  42. 


378  A  LETTER  ON  THE  STATE  July 

A  Letter  on  the  State  of  Lreland  in  7797 

The  following  letter  was  found  among  the  papers  of  Dr.  James 
McHenry,  who  was  secretary  of  war  in  the  cabinets  of  Washington 
and  John  Adams.  McHenry  was  born  at  Ballymena,  county 
Antrim,  and  went  to  America  a  few  years  before  the  outbreak 
of  the  American  revolution,  in  which  he  served  as  surgeon  of 
a  Pennsylvania  regiment  and  as  aide-de-camp  to  Washington. 
The  letter,  which  bears  no  name,  was  not  addressed  to  McHenry, 
for  his  only  brother  came  to  America  shortly  after  him.  The 
author  is  not  hard  to  identify.  He  writes  from  Cork  as  if  that 
place  was  his  residence,  and  he  speaks  of  having  gone  '  to  Dublin, 
to  attend  a  board  of  trustees  of  our  new  R.  C.  CoUedge  '.  Now 
Dr.  Moylan,  bishop  of  Cork,  was  the  only  trustee  of  Maynooth 
from  Cork,  and  the  tone  of  the  letter  is  in  complete  agreement 
with  the  bishop's  known  opinions. ^  For  the  state  of  affairs  in 
Ireland  at  the  time,  reference  may  be  made  to  Lecky's  History  of 
Ireland  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  vols,  iii,  iv  (ed.  1903).  In  the  fol- 
lowing, the  punctuation  of  the  original  has  not  been  preserved.        [ 

Bernard  C.  Steiner. 

Cork,  April  30th,  1797. 

You  have,  my  dear  brother,  weathered  out  an  awful  revolutionary 
storm,  and  now  enjoy  calm  &  tranquility,  I  fear  we  are  getting  into  one, 
God  knows  what  may  be  the  consequence.  The  extraordinary  Kevolution 
in  France,  which  has  convulsed  the  moral  &  political  state  of  Europe, 
begins  to  operate  strongly  on  the  Brittish  empire — the  immense  expence 
of  the  present  war,  render'd  far,  tis  said,  more  expensive  by  the  injudicious 
manner  in  which  it  was  plan'd  &  pursued,  begins  to  weigh  heavy  on  the 
people  and  to  dispose  them  for  some  awful  change. 

This  poor  and  long  oppressed  kingdom  so  rapidly  of  late  advancing 
towards  a  state  of  great  prosperity  by  the  repeal  of  some  of  the  penal 
laws,  which  chain'd  down  the  spirits  &  industry  of  the  great  body  of  the 
people,  now  offers  to  the  reflecting  mind  a  prospect  dismal  &  gloomy  ^^ 
the  north  is  all  in  a  flame,  and  the  spirit  of  disaffection  which  prevail|BB 
there  is  widely  spreading  ;   there  is  too  much  reason  to  apprehend  tha^^ 
it  will  soon  pervade  the  whole  kingdom.     The  unwise  conduct  of  our 
Irish  administration,  under  the  immediate  influence  &  direction  of  the 
English  minister,  has  greatly  contributed  to  rouse  up  the  spirit  of  dis- 
affection &  sedition  :    instead  of  attending  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
times,  and  to  the  temper  of  the  northern  people,  all  which  required  at 
the  present  juncture  soothing  &  lenient  measures,  coercive   ones  were       ^ 
only  resorted  to,  and  adopted,  &  on  the  most  unconstitutional  principles 
were  vigorously  pursued.      These  vigors,  far  from  answering  the  end 
proposed,  only  served  to  sour  more  &  more  [the]  minds  of  that  people 

*  See  Bishop  John  Healy's  Centenary  History  oj  Maynooth  College  (1895),  pp.  119» 
247. 


i 


1918  OF  IRELAND  IN  1797  379 

&  to  fix  deep  resentment  in  their  independent  spirit.  In  this  disaffection 
&  disturb'd  state  of  the  north,  common  sense  &  sound  policy  would 
suggest  the  expediency  of  attaching  the  E.  C.  body  to  the  interests  of 
government.  The  administration  on  the  contrary  declared  themselves 
entirely  hostile  to  them,  as  the  partial  repeal  of  the  penal  laws  [was] 
obtained  thro'  the  interference  of  his  Majesty  against  their  wishes  ;  they 
have  exerted  the  whole  extent  of  their  power  &  influence  to  counteract 
the  gracious  views  of  our  Sovereign  &  prevent  as  far  as  they  possibly 
could  that  long  oppressed  &  loyal  portion  of  [his]  subjects  from  benefiting 
by  the  indulgence  granted  to  them.  They  encouraged  underhand,  as  it 
now  appears,  an  armed  Banditti  in  the  county  of  Armagh,  who  called 
themselves  Orange  boys  &  ascendancy  protestants,  to  rise  up,  to  plunder 
and  destroy  the  houses  and  property  of  their  poor  industrious  E.  C. 
neighbors,  to  massacre  &  hunt  them  down  like  wild  beasts  &  force  them 
to  emigrate  to  other  provinces.  These  poor  oppress'd  people,  instead  of 
being  protected  by  government,  were  entirely  abandon'd  by  them,  and 
when  they  attempted  to  defend  themselves  they  were  seized  on  as  seditious 
culprits,  several  of  them  hang'd,  many  more  of  them  hurry'd  off  from 
their  wives  &  children  and  without  any  form  of  law  or  legal  tryal  sent 
on  board  the  navy.^  The  United  Irishmen  of  the  north,  seeing  the  Machie- 
velian  system  pursued  by  administration  of  dividing  the  people  by  religious 
feuds  in  order  to  enslave  the  nation,  declared  in  their  favor,  and  as  far 
as  circumstances  allowed  opposed  the  measures  of  government,  which 
drew  its  resentment  upon  themselves  ;  no  notice  was  taken  of  the  outrages 
by  the  Orange  boys — their  conduct  was  on  the  contrary  sanctioned  by 
the  magistrates  under  the  direction  of  government.  Lord  Gosport  ^  indeed 
&  a  few  gentlemen  of  Armagh  who  were  witnesses  to  the  enormities  com- 
mitted by  them  against  their  innocent  neighbors,  cry'd  out  against  their 
wicked  proceedings,  but  their  cries  were  not  attended  to.*  Mr.  Grattan  & 
other  patriotic  members  brought  [the]  grievances  of  the  suffering  Catholic[s] 
&  the  outrages  of  the  protestant  ascendancy  party  before  parliament,^ 
but  they  were  not  heard.  The  conduct  of  the  magistrates  who  encouraged 
the  outrages  was  openly  reprobated  in  the  house,  but  the  enquiry  that 
was  moved  for  was  hushed  by  administration,  and  no  punishment  inflicted 
on  the  offending  parties.  Judge  the  state  of  the  public  mind  in  these 
circumstances. 

Such  was  the  state  of  affairs,  when  the  French  in  the  month  of  December 
last  came  on  our  coast,  with  the  intention  of  invading  this  kingdom  : 
had  not  the  Lord  most  providentially  interfered,  they  must  have  suc- 
ceeded. England  left  us  without  the  least  protection  by  its  fleets,  and 
all  the  force  that  could  possibly  be  mustered  could  make  no  adequate 
resistance  ;  indeed  we  have  neither  troops,  nor  generals,  nor  arms,  nor 
ammunition,  nor  any  preparation  whatever  that  could  prevent  the  25,000 
Frenchmen,  so  well  appointed  as  they  were,  from  being  masters  of  the 
kingdom.  The  E.  Catholics — the  great  bulk  of  the  people  of  the  province — 
displayed  at  the  critical  juncture  exertions  of  unexampled  loyalty  & 

»  Cf.  Lecky,  iii.  425-39 ;  iv.  14.  ^  Lord  Gosford. 

*  Ibid.  iii.  430. 

^  October  to  November  1796.    See  ibid.  iii.  459  ff. 


380  A  LETTER  ON  THE  STATE  July 

patriotism.^  They  forgot  all  their  grievances,  to  stand  forth  in  defence 
of  their  country,  &  by  their  zeal  in  the  service  of  their  king  &  country, 
gave  the  lie  to  the  misrepresentations  made  by  the  ruling  junto  of  this 
kingdom  to  the  English  cabinet  of  them  ;  indeed  their  conduct  on  the 
occasion  was  so  particularly  loyal,  that  the  administration,  tho'  hostile 
to  them,  could  not  but  make  honorable  mention  of  them  in  their  dis- 
patches to  England.  Here  was  the  favorable  moment  to  unite  the  whole 
nation,  and  to  attach  invariably  the  hearts  of  the  E.  C.  to  the  interests 
of  his  majesty's  government,  by  placing  them,  as  they  well  deserved,  on 
the  same  footing  with  their  fellow  subjects.  It  was  a  measure  generally 
expected  even  by  the  supporter[s]  of  the  protestant  ascendancy  ;  all 
minds  were  prepared  for  that  long  wished  for  event ;  and  when  Mr. 
Pelham,  our  Irish  secretary,  went  over  to  London,  it  was  supposed  that 
our  emancipation  was  one  of  the  first  objects  of  his  mission,  and  that  he 
would  return  with  the  olive  branch  in  hand.  I  went  up  at  that  time  to 
Dublin,  to  attend  a  board  of  trustees  of  our  new  R.  C.  CoUedge,  of  which 
I  have  been  by  parliament  appointed  a  member.  Then  I  was  assured, 
by  what  I  had  reason  to  believe  high  authority,  that  all  penal  restraints 
on  the  Catholics  were  to  be  entirely  done  away  ;  thus  were  we  fed  with 
pleasing  hopes,  until  a  week  before  Mr.  Pelham  had  left  London  to  return 
the  pleasing  prospect  began  to  change.  A  few  days  after  the  secretarys 
arrival,  I  had  the  honor  of  a  private  interview  with  the  Lord  Lieutenant 
in  his  cabinet  at  his  particular  desire.  I  took  that  opportunity  of  laying 
before  his  Excellency  the  expediency  of  government  taking  up  the  emanci- 
pation of  the  R.  C.  body  as  a  wise  &  for  the  peace  of  the  country  a  necessary 
measure.  I  gave  such  reasons  as  appeared  to  me,  and  to  such  as  I  after- 
wards communicated  them,  weighty  &  at  the  present  juncture  unanswer- 
able. He  listened  with  great  attention,  but  gave  no  answer.  A  few 
days  after  a  memorial,  one  of  the  best  I  ever  read,  was  presented  to  him 
by  the  R.  C.  noblemen  and  gentlemen  of  property  to  the  same  purpose. 
The  respectability  of  the  memorialists,  their  tryed  loyalty  &  attachment 
to  government,  &  the  powerfull  argument  made  use  of  greatly  embarrassed 
the  Lord  Lieutenant ;  the  objections  he  made  were  so  futile  &  weak,  and  so 
ably  answered,  that  he  at  last  declared  great  uneasiness  at  the  situation 
of  the  country,  &  in  particular,  that  he  could  not  consistently  countenance 
the  petition  of  the  memorial ;  he  was  sent  over  on  the  recall  of  Lord 
Fitzwilliam,  with  positive  directions  from  Mr.  Pit[t],  who  supports  the 
illiberal  junto  here,  to  oppose  every  measure  in  favor  of  the  R.  C.  &  to 
rouse  up  an  opposition  in  the  minds  of  the  protestants  under  the  pretext 
of  supporting  protestant  ascendancy.  M 

On  his  Excellency's  negative  to  the  memorial,  the  R.  C.  noblemeir'* 
and  gentlemen  thought  it  incumbent  to  them,  for  the  good  of  the  country 
as  well  as  their  own  advantage,  to  send  a  memorial  to  the  king  :  the  Lord 
Lieutenant  transmitted  it  to  the  duke  of  Portland,  as  he  had  promis'd ;  , 
but  before  it  reached  London,  a  cabinet  council  was  held  there  wherein 
it  was  decided  *  That  nothing  should  be  done  with  their  support,  for  the 
R.  C.  during  the  present  wars '.  '  This  impolitic  declaration  operated  as 
was  foreseen  and  as  I  previously  intimated  to  the  Lord  Lieutenant  would 
«  Cf.  ibid.  iii.  541-3.  '  Cf.  Lecky,  iv.  28. 


1918  OF  IRELAND  IN  1797  381 

be  the  case  ;  it  changed  the  minds  of  our  people  &  prepared  them  for 
adopting  the  sentiments  of  the  people  of  the  north.  The  disaffection  is 
rapidly  spreading  :  God  only  knows  what  will  be  the  consequence.  Coer- 
cive measures  are  those  still  pursued  against  the  north.  I  don't  think 
the  system  can  hold  ;  an  explosion  will,  I  fear,  be  the  consequence.  Indeed 
there  is  reason  to  think  that  the  sun  of  glory  &  power  of  the  British  empire 
is  rapidly  setting  :  the  spirit  of  disaffection  is  gaining  fast  in  England 
&  Scotland ;  &  what  is  still  a  more  dangerous  symptom,  that  spirit  has 
got  into  the  navy  ;  and  if  the  accounts  lately  received  of  the  emperor's 
being  forced  to  make  a  separate  peace  with  France  be  true  ^  the  prospect 
for  the  whole  of  his  Majestys  empire  is  dismal  indeed,  for  with  a  coast 
extended  from  the  Baltic  to  the  Mediterranean  (Portugal  excepted,  and 
which  must  necessarily  if  the  war  continues  be  forced  to  declare  against 
England)  and  with  such  resources  as  the  enemy  must  acquire  by  the 
accession  of  territory,  it  will  I  think  be  impossible  for  England  with  the 
enormous  weight  of  the  national  debt  to  withstand  for  any  time  the 
collected  force  of  that  spirited  &  enterprizeing  nation.  Nothing  can  save 
these  kingdoms  but  a  total  change  in  ministers  &  measures,  and  I  fear 
even  the  change  will  come  too  late  to  quiet  the  minds  of  the  people. 
Never  was  there,  this  century  past,  a  more  awful  crisis  than  the  present 
state  of  affairs,  and  may  God  preserve  us  from  the  horrors  of  anarchy 
&  civil  dissentions.  .  .  . 

*  The  preliminaries  of  Leoben,  18  April  1797. 


382  July 


Reviews  of  Books 


Essays  on  the  Early  History  of  the  Church  and  the  Ministry.    By  Various 
Writers.    Edited  by  H.  B.  Swete,  D.D.    (London  :  Macmillan,  1918.) 

This  important  book  owes  its  origin  to  a  challenge  from  the  pulpit.  Canon 
Wilson,  preaching  before  the  university  of  Cambridge  (in  a  sermon  after- 
wards incorporated  in  his  book  on  The  Origin  and  Aim  of  the  Acts),  appealed 
for  an  historical  investigation  of  the  warrant,  in  the  earliest  Christian  times, 
for  the  exclusive  claims  of  the  episcopal  churches  ;  for  a  re-examination 
of  the  subject  of  the  apostolical  succession  and  of  its  bearing  on  '  the  grace 
and  powers  conferred  in  Ordination  and  Consecration '.  He  also  asked 
whether  in  early  times  the  forms  of  ordination  and  consecration  did  not 
*  lay  more  stress  on  the  pastoral  and  teaching  work  of  the  ministry,  and 
on  the  continuity  of  doctrine,  and  less  on  its  sacramental  functions  and 
powers  than  we  now  do '.  Dr.  Wilson  also  suggested  that  the  patristic 
investigations  stimulated  by  the  Tractarian  Movement  call  for  an  inquiry 
into  the  conditions  of  a  still  earlier  Christian  age  which  should  answer  the 
question  *  when  the  separation  grew  up  between  the  conditions  for  what 
is  called  a  valid  Baptism  and  those  for  a  valid  Eucharist,  and  the  limitation 
of  the  latter  to  men  episcopally  ordained '.  To  cut  the  story  short,  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  suggested  to  the  late  Dr.  Swete  that  an  investi- 
gation of  the  kind  should  be  made  and  the  result  put  forth  in  as  precise 
a  form  as  possible.  Dr.  Swete  succeeded  in  collecting  a  band  of  workers 
whose  *  essays  as  a  whole  may  be  taken  to  represent  the  present  state  of 
historical  knowledge '.  Such  is  Dr.  Swete's  claim  for  the  work,  which 
passed  under  his  eye  before  his  death.  The  distinction  of  the  writers, 
ranging  from  membership  of  the  British  Academy  to  doctorates  of  many 
universities,  including  both  Louvain  and  Geneva,  is  some  guarantee  for 
the  confidence  expressed  by  the  editor.  But  this  confidence  is  greatly 
strengthened  by  detailed  examination  of  the  work  itself. 

There  are  six  essayists,  of  whom  Dr.  Mason  and  the  Dean  of  Wells  deal 
with  the  respective  conceptions  of  the  church  and  of  the  ministry  in  the 
apostolic  and  the  post-apostolic  age.  Mr.  C.  H.  Turner  contributes  an 
essay  of  the  utmost  importance  on  apostolic  succession  as  originally  con- 
ceived and  on  the  problem  of  orders  conferred  in  heresy  or  schism.  Arch- 
bishop Bernard  draws  out  the  Cyprianic  doctrine  of  the  ministry.  Dr.  Frere 
unravels  early  forms  of  ordination  ;  while,  last  but  not  least,  Dr.  Brightman 
examines  the  witness  of  the  earliest  times  as  to  terms  of  communion  and 
the  ministration  of  the  sacraments.  It  is  obvious  that,  although  the 
challenge  which  has  drawn  forth  the  book  and  the  aim  of  its  writers  is 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  383 

directed  to  elicit  the  disinterested  verdict  of  liistory  pure  and  simple,  the 
region  marked  out  for  exploration  is  thickly  strewn  with  at  any  rate  the 
relics  of  '  battles  long  ago  '.  The  white  light  of  history  is  at  every  step  in 
risk  of  suffusion  from  the  many-coloured  glass  of  ecclesiastical  controversy. 
But  it  must  be  fairly  allowed  that  the  writers  neither  artfully  conceal 
an  ecclesiastical  parti  pris,  nor  on  the  other  hand  obtrude  on  the  reader 
the  advocacy  of  their  special  views.  Each  writer  aims  at  reaching  and 
stating  the  facts,  and  generally  speaking  this  aim  has  been  successfully 
attained. 

The  subjects  discussed  have,  within  living  memory,  received  much 
attention.  Perhaps  we  may  take  as  a  landmark  Bishop  Lightfoot's  essay 
on  the  Christian  ministry,  first  published  with  his  commentary  on  Philip- 
pians  in  1868.  In  that  essay  Bishop  Lightfoot  stated  certain  broad  con- 
clusions. Since  that  time  there  have  appeared  Hatch's  Bampton  Lectures 
and  discussions  stimulated  by  them  both  in  England  and  abroad  ;  then  the 
discovery  of  the  Didache  or  *  Teaching  of  the  12  Apostles ' ;  and  from 
time  to  time  various  items  in  the  group  of  documents  associated  with  the 
Church  Orders,  the  Canons  of  Hippolytus,  the  eighth  book  of  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions  and  the  Testament  of  the  Lord,  as  well  as  the  Sacramentary 
of  Bishop  Serapion  containing  some  obviously  archaic  forms  for  ordination. 
All  this,  to  say  nothing  of  other  discoveries  and  discussions,  has  thrown 
light  from  various  quarters  on  the  subjects  to  which  this  volume  is  devoted. 
And  it  may  be  convenient  to  the  readers  of  this  Eeview  to  indicate  the 
extent  to  which  the  researches  of  the  writers  have  tended  to  confirm  or 
modify  the  main  positions  of  Bishop  Lightfoot.  The  latter  may  be  grouped 
under  two  heads  :  the  origin  of  the  episcopate  and  the  priestly  function  of 
the  Christian  ministry.  The  following  extracts  give  Bishop  Lightfoot's 
view  of  the  episcopate.  The  page  references  are  to  The  Christian  Ministry 
{Macmillan,  1901). 

The  Episcopate  was  formed  not  out  of  the  Apostolic  order  by  localisation  but  out 
of  the  presbyteral  by  elevation  ;  and  the  title,  which  was  originally  common  to  all, 
came  at  length  to  be  appropriated  to  the  chief  among  them  (page  25). 

During  the  last  3  decades  of  the  1st  century,  and  consequently  during  the  life- 
time of  the  latest  surviving  Apostle,  this  change  must  have  been  brought  about 
<page  31). 

It  appears  mistaken  to  maintain  that  at  the  close  of  the  1st  and  at  the  beginning 
of  the  2nd  century  the  organisation  of  all  churches  alike  had  arrived  at  the  same 
stage  of  development  and  exhibited  the  episcopate  in  an  equally  perfect  form  (page  39). 

Even  Irenaeus  seems  to  be  wholly  ignorant  that  the  word  Bishop  had  passed  from 
a  lower  to  a  higher  value  since  the  Apostolic  times  (page  72). 

We  may  perhaps  adopt  with  regard  to  this  general  conception  the 
verdict  of  Dean  Robinson  in  his  essay  (p.  90) :  '  Subsequent  research  or 
discovery  has  left  his  position  as  strong  as  ever.  New  theories  have  since 
been  offered  to  us  :  we  can  hardly  say  that  new  facts  have  come  to  light 
which  require  that  his  interpretation  should  be  modified.'  But,  while  this 
general  verdict  of  Dean  Robinson  is  justified,  there  are  many  details  as  to 
which  Bishop  Lightfoot's  statements  may  require  modification,  especially 
as  regards  the  difficult  subject  of  the  relation  between  the  bishop  and  the 
presbjrterate.  The  bishop  at  first  was  in  each  local  church  one  of  many 
bishops  or  presbyters.    His  duties  and  powers  vary  locally  from  the  marked 


384  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

monarchical  relation  assigned  to  him  in  Ignatius  (a.  d.  107)  to  that  of 
foreign  correspondent  of  his  church,  embodied  in  the  impersonal  letter  of 
Clement  of  Rome  (a.  d.  95)  and  ascribed  to  him  by  Hermas  some  years  later. 

But  it  is  too  simple  an  account  of  the  matter  to  say  with  Lightf  oot  that 
the  episcopate  arose  out  of  the  presbyterate '  by  elevation '.  From  the  first 
the  local  bishop  appears  to  have  been  in  all  cases  the  permanent,  not  the 
annual  or  occasional,  head  of  the  college.  And  as  in  course  of  time 
he  rises  to  a  uniform  headship  for  all  purposes,  whether  administrative  or 
sacramental,  the  presbyterate,  strange  as  it  may  seem  at  first  sight,  is  not 
disproportionately  depressed  in  rank,  but  gains  in  importance  pari  passu 
with  the  bishop.  This  was  doubtless  due  mainly  to  the  multiplication  of 
believers,  so  that  the  congregation  outgrew  the  limits  of  their  one  place  of 
worship  and  the  power  of  one  bishop,  even  with  the  aid  of  his  presbyters, 
to  be  the  direct  shepherd  of  all  the  souls  committed  to  his  care.  Separate 
congregations  under  the  one  bishop  were  formed  and  organized  each  with 
its  several  Eucharist  and  its  several  presbyters  and  deacons.  And  this 
meant  the  delegation  to  presbyters  of  functions  hitherto  kept  entirely  in 
the  bishop's  hands.  Beginning  as  the  exclusive  minister  of  all  sacraments 
and  sacramental  rites  the  bishop  finally  emerges  as  the  exclusive  minister 
of  only  one,  namely  that  of  ordination.  I  would  observe  in  passing  that 
the  last  lingering  exception  to  this  latter  rule,  that  of  the  power  of  the 
twelve  presbyters  of  Alexandria  to  consecrate  their  own  bishop,  appears 
to  be  somewhat  too  brusquely  swept  away  (p.  402).  The  presbyters  in 
question  were  the  last  representatives  of  the  old  identification  of  presbyter 
and  episcopus.  Egypt  had  originally  no  bishops  except  the  bishop  of 
Alexandria  ;  but  with  the  spread  of  the  church  in  the  third  century,  bishops 
multiplied,  and  the  old  episcopal  privilege  of  this  college  of  presbyters  died 
down.    There  is  no  need  to  assume  a  *  revolution '  here  or  elsewhere. 

This  brings  us  to  another  important  detail  in  which  Bishop  Lightfoot's 
conclusions  require  modification.  It  will  be  remembered  that  he  singles 
out  Cyprian  as  the  author  of  a  marked  rise  in  the  pretensions,  both 
of  the  bishop  as  diocesan  monarch,  and  of  the  presbyters  in  regard  to 
priestly  power.  The  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  in  his  scholar-like  essay  in 
this  volume,  furnishes,  I  venture  to  think,  a  correction  of  this  view. 
Cyprian's  career  as  a  Christian  was  one  of  barely  twelve  years,  of  which  his 
episcopate  occupied  about  ten.  He  brought  to  his  new  faith  and  to  his 
new  duties  the  orderly  mind  of  a  lawyer,  in  which  he  had  Tertullian  as  his 
predecessor.  We  accordingly  look  for  and  find  in  him  a  logical  sorting 
of  ideas.  But  he  was  not  likely  to  make  any  conscious  innovation,  and 
it  seems  an  exaggeration  to  say  with  the  bishop  that '  if  Tertullian  and 
Origen  are  still  hovering  on  the  border  [of  sacerdotalism]  Cyprian  has 
boldly  transferred  himself  into  the  new  domain '.  It  cannot  be  over- 
looked that,  while  Tertullian  had  applied  the  word  sacerdos  freely  to  the 
Christian  presbyter,  Cyprian  does  so  only  in  one  passage,  reserving  the 
word  elsewhere  uniformly  for  the  bishops.  Nor,  if  we  read  Cyprian 
under  the  impartial  guidance  of  Archbishop  Bernard,  shall  we  be  disposed 
to  view  him  by  any  means  as  a  sacerdotal  innovate. 

This  brings  us  to  the  second  head  under  which  we  should  like  to  measure 
the  results  of  Bishop  Lightfoot's  essays  with  those  of  the  present  volume, 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  385 

namely,  the  priestly  function  of  the  Christian  ministry  as  conceived  in 
the  earliest  times.  But  unfortunately  this  range  of  inquiry  borders  so 
closely  on  matters  of  ecclesiastical  controversy  that  it  cannot  be  adequately 
taken  in  hand  without  a  careful  investigation  and  definition  of  terms 
which  would  outrun  the  scope  of  this  notice.  We  must  therefore  be 
content  with  indicating  the  question  at  issue  and  referring  the  reader  to 
the  volume  before  us  for  further  light.  Bishop  Lightfoot  maintained  that 
sacerdotal  functions  (in  the  sense  of  offering  sacrifice)  were  foreign  to  the 
mind  of  the  apostolic  and  post-apostolic  age.  Before  this  contention 
can  be  affirmed  or  contradicted  it  is  necessary  to  go  somewhat  thoroughly 
into  the  meaning  of  the  sacrificial  language  used  by  our  early  writers, 
especially  with  reference  to  the  holy  Eucharist.  But  waiving  that 
inquiry  it  may  be  said  that  the  question  is  to  some  extent  one  of  propor- 
tion ;  and  we  may  so  far  agree  with  Bishop  Lightfoot,  that  the  sacrificial 
functions  hinted  at  in  the  early  formulae  for  the  consecration  of  bishops 
are  remarkably  absent  from  those  for  the  ordination  of  priests.  It  is 
axiomatic  in  early  church  literature  that  the  whole  church  is  a  priestly 
body,  that  the  duty  of  the  bishop  is  to  preside  at  all  gatherings  of  the 
church  for  any  purpose,  and  especially  at  the  great  eucharistic  gathering. 
In  so  far  as  the  church  then  exercises  its  priestly  character  the  president 
may  be  said  to  act  as  priest.  If  we  agree  with  Augustine,  who  later  on 
sums  up  the  nature  of  the  action  in  the  memorable  words  (echoed  by  his 
contemporary  Chrysostom)  peracti  Sacrificii  agimus  memoriam,  then  we 
have  the  foundation  laid,  not  for  sacerdotalism,  but  for  a  doctrine  of 
Christian  priesthood  closely  on  the  lines  along  which  early  Christian 
thought  seems  to  have  developed.  It  was  in  the  first  instance  evidently 
the  exception  for  a  presbyter,  other  than  the  bishop,  to  be  entrusted  with 
the  celebration  of  the  mysteries,  and  for  a  long  time  there  must  have  been 
many  presbyters  who  rarely  if  ever  were  called  upon  to  consecrate  the 
Eucharist.  But  by  degrees  circumstances  altered  and  ideas  became  modified, 
so  that  every  presbyter  came  to  regard  the  eucharistic  celebration  as  the 
main  and  distinctive  duty  of  his  priestly  life.  But  this  development  carries 
us  very  far  indeed  beyond  the  chronological  limits  of  the  volume  before  us. 
In  this  review  I  have  endeavoured,  not  to  do  full  justice  to  the  learning 
and  labour  which  will  make  this  work  for  many  years  to  come  an  indis- 
pensable book  of  reference,  but  merely  to  indicate  the  importance  and 
interest  of  many  of  the  questions  discussed  in  it.  Where  all  is  so  good, 
it  may  still  not  be  invidious  to  draw  special  attention  to  the  important 
and  original  essay  of  Mr.  C.  H.  Turner.  Like  the  other  essayists  he 
reaches  conclusions  on  conservative  lines,  but  like  his  fellow  workers  his 
moderation  of  statement  and  solid  learning  lay  not  only  the  public  but 
scholars  under  a  deep  and  lasting  obligation.  A.  Kobertson. 

Guide  to  the  Study  of  Medieval  Historij,for  Students,  Teachers,  and  Libraries. 
By  L.  J.  Paetow,  Ph.D.  (Berkeley,  California  :  University  of  California 
Press,  1917.) 

Most  students  of  medieval  history  have  felt  the  need  of  a  convenient 
bibliographical  handbook  for  the  historical  literature  of  Europe  in  general, 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  C  C 


386  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

which  should  be  classified  not  only  by  countries  and  broad  periods, 
but  by  subjects  and  '  burning  questions ',  and  should  be  full  enough 
to  take  its  user,  if  not  to  the  recesses,  at  least  to  the  most  important 
literature  of  any  special  object  of  his  studies.  We  had  exhaustive 
national  bibliographies,  like  Dahlmann-Waitz  and  Gross,  and  sectional 
subject-bibliographies,  like  those  in  the  Bibliotheque  de  V Enseignement  de 
VHistoire  Ecclesiastique,  but  not  a  work  which  would  combine  their  advan- 
tages and  treat  of  all  the  middle  ages.  Herre's  first-rate  Quellenkunde 
zur  Weltgeschichte  did  much  to  fill  the  gap,  but  its  wide  national  and 
chronological  classification,  and,  on  some  subjects,  strictly  selective 
character,  somewhat  impaired  its  usefulness.  In  Professor  Paetow's  book 
the  main  feature  is  a  series  of  subject-bibliographies  which  covers  the  whole 
field.  It  is,  we  believe,  the  first  attempt  in  English  at  more  than  a  hand- 
list of  publications  on  medieval  history,  and  is  an  invaluable  complement 
to  the  medieval  portion  of  Herre  (by  Hofmeister),  although  it  does  not 
quite  replace  it.  It  is  just  as  true  to  say  that  Herre's  work  is  the  comple- 
ment to  Dr.  Paetow's. 

The  diligence,  accuracy,  and  comprehensiveness  of  Dr.  Paetow's 
compilation  deserve  the  highest  praise.  His  system  of  classification  is 
elaborate  and  at  times  too  elaborate,  but  the  fault  is  on  the  right  side : 
a  bibliography  which  should  guide  the  student  in  his  reading  and  save  his 
time  was  what  was  wanted.  First  comes  a  numbered  bibliography,  in  the 
style  of  Herre,  but  briefer,  of  general  books.  Then  follow  the  subject-biblio- 
graphies, thirty-five  of  general  history  and  twenty-eight  of  medieval 
culture.  Each  subject  is  headed  by  a  brief  outline  of  names,  dates,  and 
chief  events  or  problems.  Next  comes  *  Special  Kecommendations  for 
Reading '  (for  the  honours  student),  and  lastly  a  *  Bibliography ',  each 
subdivided  into  usually  enlightening  sub-headings.  This  division  seems 
a  matter  for  regret.  The  '  Special  Recommendations '  are  not  repeated 
in  the  '  Bibliography  ',  and  thereby  the  order  of  merit  and  importance  is 
seriously  obscured.  The  '  Special  Recommendations '  seem  to  be  selected 
partly  because  they  are  standard  authorities,  partly  because  they  are  brief 
and  elementary,  partly  because  they  are  English  and  accessible.  The 
'  Bibliography '  largely  contains  standard  authorities  and  abstruse  or 
special  studies,  but  also  books  less  accessible  or  important  or  not  in  English. 
As  Dr.  Paetow  adopts  a  useful  order  of  importance  in  his  lists  and  much 
subdivides  the  subjects,  it  would  seem  to  have  been  preferable  to  have 
united  the  two  main  sections  and  merely  to  have  starred  the  '  Special 
Recommendations '  for  undergraduates.  Otherwise,  however,  the  plan 
of  the  book  is  excellent,  and  difficulties  of  cross-reference  are  obviated 
by  a  careful  index. 

Passing  from  the  general  design,  in  a  work  so  wide  in  scope,  there  is 
naturally  room  for  improvement.  Chief  of  the  defects  is  the  inadequate 
provision  for  reference  to  the  original  sources  in  the  original  tongues. 
*  Source-books'  and  translations,  where  available,  are  listed  in  the '  Recom- 
mendations ',  but  for  names  of  works,  &c.,  and  their  editions  in  the  'Biblio- 
graphy '  we  are  mostly  referred  in  general  terms  to  the  great  collections. 
It  seems,  though  perhaps  to  say  this  is  unjust,  to  be  assumed  that  the 
medieval  student  is  a  polyglot  in  modern  languages,  but  that,  especially 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  387 

if  an  undergraduate,  he  will  not  face  Latin.  And  this  is  the  more  regret- 
table, as  much  of  the  special  literature  recommended  loses  value  for  the 
student  apart  from  the  sources  which  it  discusses  and  from  which  it  is 
derived.  Indeed  one  might  say  the  same  for  the  use  of  medieval  history 
in  general,  for  undergraduates  as  well  as  for  the  more  mature.  To  put  the 
sources '  in  the  original  tongues '  quite  in  the  background  seems  to  abandon 
some  of  the  advance  gained  by  what  Dr.  Paetow  will  hardly  allow  us  to 
call  the  Renaissance.  On  another  point,  while  the  fullness  of  the  references 
to  English,  French,  and  German  literature  leaves  little  to  be  desired, 
Italian  is  admitted  in  too  small  quantity  for  its  importance.  Partly,  this 
may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  it  is  largely  published  in  serials  of  some  sort, 
but  some  of  those  serials  themselves,  which  are  necessary  for  Italian 
history,  are  omitted  in  the  general  bibliography.  I  may  instance  the 
Archivio  delta  Societa  Romana  di  Storia  patria,  the  Nuovo  Archivio  Veneto, 
the  Archivio  Storico  per  le  Provincie  Napoletane,  not  to  mention  others,  and 
among  authors  CipoUa,  Schiaparelli,  Fedele,  Schipa,  Gabotto,  Salvioli, 
Solmi,  Cibrario,  Pivano,  and  others,  who  are  either  omitted  or  inadequately 
represented.  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  inadequacy,  intentional  as  we 
learn  from  the  preface,  that  there  is  no  section  devoted  strictly  to  medieval 
Italian  literature  (though  Dante  has  one  and  Petrarch  and  Boccaccio  appear 
as  humanists),  and  that  most  of  the  sparse  misprints  are  of  Italian  titles. 

Two  minor  recommendations  may  be  made :  first,  that  in  the  refer- 
ences to  co-operative  works,  the  author  should  be  mentioned  as  well  as 
the  editor,  e.g.  Luchaire  and  Coville  for  the  parts  of  Lavisse's  Histoire 
de  France  for  which  they  are  responsible ;  secondly,  that  when  a  general 
book  referred  to  by  number  in  the  '  Bibliographies '  is  specially  useful, 
it  should  be  noted  by  name  as  well.  The  reader  has  a  tendency  not  to 
refer  back  to  *  nos.  394-498  '  without  crying  need  and  some  hint  of  their 
varying  applicability  and  attraction. 

On  points  of  detail  we  may  note  a  few  corrections  and  suggestions. 

In  the  numbered  bibliography  :  p.  18,  no.  122,  the  explanatory  letterpress 

and  many  unique  maps  of  the  Oxford  Historical  Atlas  might  be  mentioned. 

On  p.  29  facsimiles,  Codice  paleografico  Lomhardo  ;  on  p.  33,  §  4,  Litta, 

Famiglie  celebri  Italiane  ;  ibid.,  §  5,  Woodward's  Ecclesiastical  Heraldry  ; 

on  p..  34,  §  6,  Corpus  nummorum  Italicorum ;   on  p.  49  (e),  Solmi,  Stato 

e    Chiesa   da  Carlomagno   sino   al   Concordato   di    Worms ;    on   p.    50, 

no.  464,  Savio,  Gli  antichi  Vescovi,  the  first  part,  II  Piemonte,  Turin, 

1899 ;  ibid,  (h),  Pivano,  Stato  e  Chiesa  888-1015 ;  on  p.  57  (e),  Poupardin's 

Provence  and  Bourgogne  and  Fournier's  Royaume  d^ Aries  are  omitted. 

On  p.  62,  no.  599,  there  is  a  confusion  between  the  Storia  politica  d^Italia 

scritta  da  una  societa  d^amici,  1875  ff.,  and  its  successor  scritta  da  una 

societa  di  Professori,  1900  ff.,  written  mainly  by  fresh  authors.    On  p.  64, 

I  no.  619  (Gabotto)  and  620  (Lanzani,  part  of  599)  are  hardly  '  shorter 

i  works '  or  mere  text-books  ;  and  CipoUa's  Le  Signorie  (also  part  of  599),  as 

well  as  Romano's,  Gianani's,  and  Orsi's  volumes  of  the  re-issue  of  the 

j  Storia  politica  ('  Professori'),  are  omitted,  although  Romano,  Cipolla,  and 

Orsi   appear  in   the    subject-bibliographies.      A   good   short   series    of 

I  lectures.  La  Vita  Italiana,  is  also  here  omitted.     On  pp.  73  and  329 

:  Temperley's  Serbia  is  perhaps  too  recent  to  be  included.     On  p.  81  the 

C  C  2 


388  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

co-operative  Storia  letteraria  d' Italia,  Milan,  1900  ff .,  is  omitted.  On  p.  95, 
no.  959,  tlie  Liber  Censuum  might  be  mentioned,  and  to  p.  101,  §  5,  the 
Bihlioteca  delta  Societd  storica  subalpina  should  be  added.  In  the  subject- 
bibliographies  :  on  p.  141  Halphen's  Mude  sur  V Administration  de  Rome 
would  be  more  fitly  entered  in  section  xv,  p.  176,  and  part  iii,  section  iii, 
p.  347.  On  p.  168,  Italy,  Hartmann,  vols,  iii  and  iv,  Pivano,  Stato  e 
Chiesa  888-1016,  Gay's  Ultalie  meridionale  et  VEmpire  Byzantin,  and 
Davidsohn's  Geschichte  von  Florenz,  vol.  i,  should  all  be  mentioned.  On 
p.  176  we  miss  Fedele's  articles  on  the  Papacy  ;  and  on  p.  183  Cauchie's 
La  Querelle  des  Investitures  and  Bohmer's  Staat  und  Kirche  in  England  und 
in  der  Normandie.  On  p.  250  Archdeacon  Cunningham's  Growth  of  English 
Industry,  &c.,  and  with  regard  to  the  towns  Pirenne's  Les  Anciennes 
Democraties  des  Pays-Bas  and  Luchaire's  Les  Democraties  Italiennes  are 
lacking.  Guiraud's  UEglise  Romaine  et  les  Origines  de  la  Renaissance  would 
appear  more  appropriately  on  p.  311  than  on  p.  270.  Lord  Balcarres' 
Donatello  is  omitted  on  p.  313,  as  are  on  p.  314  the  books  of  Holroyd  and 
Symonds  on  Michelangelo.  On  p.  355  on  the  medieval  Weltanschauung 
we  should  expect  a  cross-reference  to  the  section  on  Dante.  For  the 
knowledge  of  Greek  in  South  Italy,  Gay's  Vltalie  Meridionale  et  V Empire 
Byzantin  might  be  mentioned  on  p.  415.  Room,  too,  might  have  been 
found  for  Rossetti's  translation  of  the  early  Italian  poets  for  students  to 
study  *  by  the  direct  method  ',  as  Dr.  Paetow  says,  in  the  section  on  Dante. 
In  a  work  containing  thousands  of  entries  on  the  whole  extent  of 
medieval  studies  it  is  easy  to  find  blemishes  at  its  first  appearance ;  but 
they  detract  little  from  the  merit  of  Dr.  Paetow's  single-handed  achieve- 
ment.   He  has  produced  a  most  valuable  aid  to  the  medievalist. 

C.  W.  Previte  Orton. 


Norman  Institutions.    By  C.  H.  Haskins.     (Cambridge,  Massachusetts : 
Harvard  University  Press,  1918.) 

With  the  exception  of  the  chapter  on  *  Normandy  under  Robert  Curthose 
and  William  Rufus  '  the  whole  of  the  text  of  this  volume  and  two  of  the 
appendixes  on  special  points  have  previously  appeared  as  articles  in  the 
American  or  the  English  Historical  Review  ;  in  their  revised  and  collected 
form  they  supply  not  indeed  a  continuous  constitutional  history  of  Nor- 
mandy from  1000  to  1189 — ^the  materials,  chiefly  charters,  a  few  inquests 
and  at  the  very  end  the  surviving  exchequer  rolls,  are  far  too  meagr 
for  that — ^but  a  careful  examination  of  every  scrap  of  evidence,  especiall 
in  its  bearing  on  the  constitutional  development  of  England. 

The  great  problem  of  English  history  upon  which  these  studies  thro" 
light  is  a  twofold  one  :  (1)  how  far  did  the  Conqueror  introduce  Norman 
institutions  into  England ;  and  (2)  to  what  extent  were  the  judicial  and 
administrative  improvements  of  Henry  I  and  Henry  II  first  tried  in  Nor- 
mandy ?  A  comparison  of  the  answer  given  by  Mr.  Haskins  to  the  first 
question  with  the  summaries  of  our  previous  knowledge  in  Pollock  and 
Maitland's  History  of  English  Law  or  the  fourth  appendix  in  Mr.  Davis's 
England  under  the  Normans  and  Angevins,  and  in  Mr.  Round's  articles  on 
Knight  Service,  shows  that  a  good  many  points  which  they  left  doubtful  are 


I 


I 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  389 

now  cleared  up.  Although,  for  instance,  feudal  military  service  was  known 
to  have  existed  in  Normandy,  details  were  wanting  as  to  its  organization. 
Mr.  Round's  only  positive  authority  for  Norman  servitia  debita  in  terms  of 
the  ten-knight  unit  before  1066  was  Wace,  whose  authority  for  matters 
of  that  date  he  had  elsewhere  treated  with  anything  but  respect.  A  serious 
lacuna  is  therefore  filled  up  by  Mr.  Haskins's  ingenious  and  convincing 
inferences  from  inquests  of  1133  and  1172  that  baronies,  servitia  debita, 
and  knights'  fees  were  regular  features  of  Norman  feudalism  certainly 
before  1150  and  probably  before  1035.  Early,  if  not  quite  so  early, 
indications  are  found  in  Normandy  of  the  prevalence  of  the  forty  days' 
service,  for  which  as  a  strict  limit  there  is  so  little  evidence  in  England. 
Even  in  Normandy  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  lord,  in  some  cases  at  any 
rate,  could  not  insist  on  the  prolongation  of  the  service  at  his  own  cost. 
In  regard  to  non-feudal  military  service  Mr.  Haskins  reminds  us  that  the 
arriere-han  survived  in  Normandy  and  may  have  contributed  more  to  the 
retention  of  the  fyrd  by  the  Anglo-Norman  kings  than  any  deliberate 
desire  to  preserve  Anglo-Saxon  popular  institutions. 

Among  interesting  details  of  the  Norman  feudal  arrangements  is  the 
liability  to  four,  instead  of  three,  ordinary  aids  which  occurs  in  an  early 
Mont-St.-Michel  agreement.  The  obligation  differs  from  the  English  one 
not  only  in  the  fourth  aid,  for  redeeming  the  lord's  forfeited  land  from  the 
duke  or  abbot,  but  in  having  the  ransom  of  his  son  if  captured  in  their 
service  instead  of  the  knighting,  which,  it  is  suggested,  may  have  been 
substituted  later  as  knighthood  grew  more  important. 

In  the  jurisdictional  sphere  the  ducal '  pleas  of  the  sword  '  and  grants 
of  immunity  were  too  similar  to  their  Anglo-Saxon  parallels  (despite  the 
greater  prominence  of  arson)  to  show  a  very  clear  influence,  but  the  system 
of  misericordia  which  replaced  the  old  English  preappointed  lots  and  wites 
was  so  firmly  established  in  Normandy  in  the  Conqueror's  reign  that  Mait- 
land's  rejection  of  its  Norman  origin  seems  to  rest  on  insufficient  grounds, 
i   Further  light  is  shed  upon  the  Norman  antecedents  of  the  ordinance  of 
William  1  separating  the  spiritual  and  temporal  courts,  for  instance,  on 
the  episcopal  reservation  of  the  ordeal ;  but  the  charge  brought  against 
I  Mr.  Davis  of  misinterpreting  some  of  the  canons  of  the  council  of  Lille- 
I  bonne  (1080)  in  his  appendix  on  criminous  clerks  should  have  been  more 
!  specific.    Is  it  limited  to  the  doubtful  tenability  as  regards  laymen  of  his 
I  contention  that  a  fine  to  the  bishop  necessarily  implies  episcopal  jurisdic- 
tion ?    The  canon  which  excluded  the  forest  offences  of  the  clergy  from  the 
I  bishop's  cognizance  is  interesting  in  connexion  with  the  attempt  of  Henry  II 
1  to  retain  this  jurisdiction  after  his  renunciation  of  the  Constitutions  of 

Clarendon. 
I  In  the  system  of  levy  and  collection  of  ordinary  revenue  Normandy 
I  seems  to  have  been  more  advanced  in  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century 
than  any  of  her  neighbours  except  perhaps  England.  The  vicomets  and 
other  local  areas  were  farmed  at  least  as  early  as  the  Conqueror's  time,  and 
Norman  practice  may  have  contributed  to  the  development  of  the  sheriff's 
farm  in  England.  At  any  rate  the  system  of  allowances  to  farmers  for 
ancient  alms  to  monasteries  was  older  in  Normandy  than  in  England. 
On  the  question  whether  the  Norman  vicomte  contributed  more  than 


390  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

his  name  to  the  sheriff  Mr.  Haskins  suspends  judgement,  but  Mr.  W.  A. 
Morris's  study  of  the  office  of  sheriff  before  and  after  the  Conquest,  since 
completed,  on  the  whole  gives  an  answer  in  the  negative.  The  Norman 
sheriff  was  a  man  of  higher  rank  than  his  Anglo-Saxon  predecessor  and,  like 
the  vicomte  in  Normandy^  not  infrequently  sat  in  the  curia  regis  and  acted 
as  royal  justice  and  custodian  of  the  king's  castles  locally,  but  it  is  not 
likely  that  any  extension  of  the  powers  of  the  old  English  sheriff  was  needed 
to  meet  the  new  conditions.  One  of  the  parallelisms  between  the  Norman 
vicomte  and  the  Anglo-Norman  sheriff  was  the  tendency  to  become  heredi- 
tary officials  in  some  cases  (p.  47).  That  the  special  Anglo-Norman 
forest  administration  and  jurisdiction  was  imported  from  Normandy, 
though  perhaps  not  immediately,^  seems  hardly  open  to  doubt.  Mr.  Has- 
kins is  unable  to  add  anything  to  our  knowledge  of  the  customs  of 
Breteuil  and  other  Norman  bourgs  which  were  transplanted  to  English 
soil,  and  while  mentioning  Mr.  Hemmeon's  criticism  of  Miss  Bateson's 
reconstruction  of  the  Breteuil  customs  he  omits  that  contributed  by  the 
late  Mr.  Ballard  to  this  Keview.^  He  notes  that  the  banlieue  or  privileged 
area  about  a  town  or  castle  was  a  Norman  institution. 

As  far  back  as  1904  Mr.  Kound  adduced  evidence  which  suggested  that 
in  the  names  of  his  household  officers  the  Confessor  had  already  Normanized 
his  court,^  but  Mr.  Haskins  seems  to  doubt  whether  the  chancellor  was  one 
of  them,  for,  like  Mr.  Stevenson,*  he  finds  no  traces  of  a  Norman  ducal 
chancery  either  under  William  (before  1066)  or  his  father.  The  ducal 
charters  of  William  are  local  work  apparently,  and  there  is  no  evidence  of 
the  use  of  a  seal.  '  It  seems  plain  that  the  English  tradition  asserted  itself 
strongly  after  the  Conquest.'  The  history  of  the  writ  and  the  writ-charter 
shows  this  even  more  strongly  than  the  imitation  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
diploma.  Little  is  known  of  the  Norman  curia,  but  Mr.  Haskins  cannot 
agree  with  Professor  Liebermann  that  the  three  annual  assemblies  in 
England  after  the  Conquest  were  *  a  French  novelty '.  A  chief  justiciar  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  surviving  documents.  It  is  suggested  that  the  English 
justiciar  more  probably  originated  among  the  bishops  of  the  Norman 
curia  than  from  the  seneschalship,  as  Stubbs  supposed,  though  not  on  the 
ground  taken  by  Vernon-Harcourt,  whose  contention  that  William  Fitz- 
Osbern  was  never  dapifer  is  refuted  from  documents.  Finally,  Mr.  Haskins 
agrees  with  Mr.  G.  B.  Adams  that  the  Norman  origin  of  the  practice 
of  sending  special  justices  to  hold  a  local  court  'is  not  likely  to  be 
questioned '.  Vvl 

The  general  result  of  the  investigation  is  to  confirm  and  amplify  ratheP ' 
than  to  disturb  current  views  as  to  the  influence  of  the  Norman  Conquest 
upon  the  English  constitution.  After  all,  it  was  Norman  statesmanship 
and  masterfulness  far  more  than  the  transfusion  of  actual  institutions 
which  built  up  a  new  England,  and  the  chief  value  of  the  study  of  Normandy 
under  William  the  Conqueror,  from  the  continental  as  well  as  from  the 
English  point  of  view,  is  that  it  supplies  the  fullest  picture  yet  available 
of  the  state  in  which  feudalism  was  earliest  brought  under  fairly  firm 

^  Davis,  Regesta  Begum  Anglo-NormanTiorum,  xxxi,  no.  260. 

*  Ante,  XXX.  646. 

*  Ibid,  xix.  92.  *  Ibid.  xi.  733  n.  i 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  391 

control  by  the  central  power.  The  short  reign  of  Robert  Curthose,  like 
that  of  Stephen  in  England,  showed  how  much  this  order  depended  on 
the  strong  hand  of  the  ruler.  From  an  analysis  of  Robert's  charters 
Mr.  Haskins  draws  fresh  illustrations  of  his  weakness. 

The  growth  of  royal  justice  and  finance  in  England  under  Henry  I  and 
Henry  II  has  very  close  parallels  in  Normandy,  upon  which  much  new 
light  is  thrown  from  charter  material ;  but  the  question  of  priority  cannot 
always  be  determined,  owing  chiefly  to  the  disconnectedness  of  the  Norman 
sources  and  imperfect  study  of  the  English  ones  in  the  first  case,  and  the 
lestless  activity  of  the  king  in  the  second.  England  had  a  chief  justiciar 
before  Normandy,  where  he  first  appears  between  1106  and  1109,  and 
the  exchequer  with  its  peculiar  system  of  accounting  is  recorded  in  England 
a  dozen  years  before  the  earliest  mention  of  it  in  Normandy,  and  may  very 
well  have  been  first  set  up  on  this  side  of  the  Channel,  though  the  evidence 
adduced  by  Mr.  Haskins  for  the  introduction  of  the  abacus  before  the  reign 
of  Henry  I  weakens  some  of  the  arguments  that  have  been  used  in  favour 
of  this  priority.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  possible  that  the  judicial  procedure 
of  Normandy  was  ahead  of  that  of  England,  but  it  would  be  dangerous  to 
speak  with  any  confidence  here  until  Henry's  English  charters  have  been 
scrutinized  with  the  same  care  as  those  issued  for  Normandy. 

There  was  of  course  a  good  deal  in  common  between  the  kingdom  and 
the  duchy  when  in  the  same  hands ;  they  had  only  one  chancery  and  the 
Constitutio  Domus  Regis  shows  traces  of  the  residence  of  the  royal  household 
in  Normandy  during  the  last  two  years  of  Henry  I's  reign.  The  ten  years 
of  separation  (1144-54:)  under  Geoffrey  and  Henry  of  Anjou  made  no 
break  in  the  parallel  development  of  England  and  Normandy.  The  less 
highly  organized  Angevin  system  had  nothing  to  teach  the  Normans, 
and  Geofirey  abstained  from  any  tampering  with  the  natural  evolution 
of  their  institutions  and  enjoined  the  same  policy  upon  his  son.  If 
Henry  II  needed  this  advice,  he  certainly  laid  it  to  heart.  In  his  first 
brush  with  the  church,  which  occurred  in  Normandy  (1162)  he  rein- 
forced the  canons  of  Lillebonne,  and  ch.  i  and  perhaps  to  a  certain 
extent  ch.  ix  of  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  had  Norman,  if  not  English, 
precedents  ;  while  the  requirement  of  proper  accusers  and  witnesses  in  the 
case  of  laymen  tried  before  church  courts  (ch.  vi)  had  been  the  subject 
of  legislation  by  himself  both  in  England  and  Normandy.  In  this  instance 
it  is  certain  that  he  first  took  action  in  England,  but  the  starting-point  was 
a  matter  of  indifference  to  him,  and  with '  so  restless  an  experimenter ' 
and  such  defective  evidence  it  is  not  always  possible  to  locate  it.  Among 
cases  in  which  we  are  more  fortunate,  the  Assize  of  Arms  and  the  ordinance 
for  the  Saladin  Tithe  were  first  issued  for  Normandy,  and  it  is  possible  that 
coroners  were  first  created  there,  but  the  inquest  of  knight  service  in 
England  preceded  the  Norman  one  by  six  years. 

The  most  interesting  case  of  Norman  priority,  the  use  of  the  trial-jury, 
t  hough  the  decisive  step  may  have  been  taken  by  Henry  II,  was  not  an 
accident.  As  an  institution  of  Erankish  origin  it  was  natural  that  the 
development  of  the  sworn  inquest  from  a  prerogative  method  of  fiscal 
inquiry  into  a  regular  element  of  judicial  procedure  should  be  effected  on 
Norman  rather  than  English  soil.    It  seems  possible,  it  is  true,  that  it 


392  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

was  antedated  by  Brunner,  and  antedated  more  than  he  knew,  for  the  two 
writs  in  the  Livre  Noir  of  Bayeux  which  order  recognitions  secundum 
assisiam  meant  but  have  a  blank  for  the  name  of  the  duke  are  shown  by 
Mr.  Haskins's  careful  inspection  of  the  marginal  notes  to  have  been  issued 
by  Geoffrey,  not  Henry  of  Anjou,  as  Brunner  believed.  As  they  both  belong 
to  a  series  of  inquiries  intended  to  secure  the  recovery  of  estates  lost  by  the 
see  of  Bayeux,  evidence  from  some  other  part  of  the  duchy  is  needed  to 
prove  the  assize  in  question  to  have  been  a  general  ordinance  establishing 
a  trial-jury  throughout  Normandy,  and  this  evidence  is  at  present  lacking. 
Yet  even  the  limited  development  of  the  inquest  which  is  all  that  can  safely 
be  deduced  from  these  documents  seems  to  be  in  advance  of  anything  that 
can  be  shown  to  have  existed  in  England  at  that  date,  and  in  a  Rouen 
case  between  1154  and  1159  we  hear  of  a  lay  claimant  against  the  abbey 
of  St.  Stephen  at  Caen  placing  himself  upon  the  assize,  at  least  five  years 
before  the  first  mention  of  the  assize  utrum  in  England  and  at  least  seven 
before  the  institution  of  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin.  In  the  practice  of 
the  ecclesiastical  courts  of  Normandy  some  anticipations  may  be  found  of 
the  English  petty  jury,  resort  to  which  was  based  on  the  consent  of  the 
parties,  and,  after  1159,  of  the  jury  of  presentment  which  in  England  first 
clearly  appears  in  ch.  vi  of  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon.  We  say 
'  clearly '  because  Henry's  legislation  against  unsupported  accusations  in 
church  courts,  which  preceded  the  ordinance  of  Falaise,  may  have  prescribed 
such  a  jury.  Mr.  Haskins  distinctly  implies  that  it  did  (p.  332),  but  else- 
where speaks  of  Normandy  as  the  home  not  only  of  the  assize  in  civil  cases 
but  of  the  jury  of  presentment  (p.  238).  Perhaps  the  solution  of  the  appa- 
rent contradiction  is  that  he  regards  the  execution  of  the  English  law  as 
suspended  by  the  king's  absence  abroad  from  1158  to  1163. 

Of  course,  the  parallelisms  that  have  been  noted  do  not  exclude  many 
divergences  both  of  substance  and  form,  and  so  rapid  a  summary  of  the 
chief  conclusions  of  the  book  as  they  bear  on  English  problems  would  be 
misleading  without  a  reminder  that  this  is  only  one  aspect  of  what  is  as 
complete  a  description  of  the  institutions  of  Normandy  during  the  critical 
two  centuries  as  the  evidence  allows.  The  appendixes,  which  fill  a  hundred 
pages,  include,  in  addition  to  excursuses  on  the  Documentary  Sources  of 
Early  Norman  History,  the  Norman  Consuetudines  et  lusticie  of  William 
the  Conqueror,  and  the  Materials  for  the  Reign  of  Robert  I,  a  considerable 
number  of  charters,  mostly  unpublished,  with  facsimiles  of  an  interesting 
Fecamp  series,  documents  concerning  Norman  courts,  &c.,  and  a  Norman 
itinerary  of  Henry  I.  J.  Tait 


Recueil  des  Actes  de  Philippe-Auguste.  Tome  1 :  1179-94.   Par  H.  FRAN901S 
Delaborde.    (Paris  :   Imprimerie  Nationale,  1916.) 

This  volume  makes  a  beginning  with  what  is  probably  the  most  valuable 
publication  in  the  series  of  Charles  et  Dipldmes  issued  by  the  Academic  des 
Inscriptions  et  Belles-Lettres.  It  contains  some  interesting  material  for 
a  study  of  the  transmission  of  medieval  documents.  M.  Delaborde,  in 
his  introductory  analysis  of  the  Registers  of  Philip  Augustus,  states  that, 
of  the  476  documents  here  edited,  only  39  were  copied  in  the  earliest 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  393 

register  compiled  about  1204,  and  now  in  the  Vatican.  A  few  more  acts, 
dating  from  the  period  covered  by  this  volume  (1179-94),  were  entered  in 
the  later  registers  of  1211  and  1220.  This  means  that  until  Delisle  prepared 
his  famous  Catalogue  in  the  middle  of  last  century  the  vast  majority  of 
Philip's  acts  were  practically  inaccessible,  scattered  and  unstudied,  in  local 
cartularies,  municipal  archives,  or  in  the  manuscript  collections  or  provincial 
histories  of  the  French  antiquaries  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries.  Whether  copies  were  systematically  retained  in  the  royal 
chancery  is,  to  say  the  least,  uncertain,  though  M.  Delaborde  gives  good 
reasons  for  his  view  that  the  register  contained  only  a  small  selection  of 
the  documents  in  the  archives.  He  thinks  that  Philip,  in  order  to  avoid 
another  disaster  like  that  at  Freteval  in  1194,'  immobilized'  the  archives 
in  his  palace  at  Paris,  and  that  the  arrangement  in  the  later  registers, 
somewhat  crude  in  1211  (Register  C)  and  elaborate  in  1220  (Registrum 
Guarini  or  Register  D),  reproduces  an  arrangement  of  the  documents 
themselves  which  was  completed  by  Bishop  Guerin  of  Senlis.  The 
successive  registers  were  portable  memoranda  books  of  the  more  important 
grants,  privileges,  lists  of  fees,  services,  &c.  The  acts  transcribed  in  the 
registers  are  not  minutes,  as  Delisle  thought,  but  slightly  abbreviated 
copies  of  the  originals,  which  were  drawn  in  charter  or  letter  form,  or 
occasionally  in  both  forms. 

This  view  should  stimulate  further  inquiry,  and  in  the  succeeding 
volumes  M.  Delaborde  will,  we  hope,  be  able  to  tell  us  more  about  the  fate 
of  the  archives  of  Philip  Augustus.  As  most  of  the  originals  still  extant 
belonged  to  monastic  or  municipal  archives,  the  chancery  presumably 
kept  duplicates  from  which  the  contents  of  the  registers  were  afterwards 
selected.  If  this  was  the  case,  the  records  of  the  French  chancery  corre- 
sponded to  the  English  chancery  rolls,  with  the  difference  that  they  con- 
sisted of  separate  documents.  This  would,  if  established,  be  a  very 
interesting  and  important  discovery.  The  archives  would  date  from  the 
collection  made  by  William  the  Chamberlain  to  replace  the  records  lost 
in  1194.  They  would  be  formed  gradually  ;  it  is  significant,  for  example, 
that  some  acts  dating  from  the  early  years  of  the  reign  first  appear,  not  in 
the  register  of  1204,  but  in  Guerin's  register  of  1220.  One  feels  that  the 
implications  of  M.  Delaborde's  hypothesis  require  much  more  investigation. 
There  is  room  especially  for  the  comparative  study  of  the  registers  and 
English  memoranda  books,  such  as  the  Red  Book  of  the  Exchequer.  If 
the  principles,  upon  which  the  documents  copied  in  the  register  were 
selected  could  be  more  exactly  defined,  it  might  be  possible  to  reconstruct 
in  outline  the  French  chancery  archives.  The  well-known  description  in 
the  Philippid  and  the  classification  of  Guerin's  register  are,  at  present, 
the  only  data. 

The  present  volume  contains  nearly  500  documents  dating  from  the 
years  1179  to  1194.  About  thirty  are  indicated  for  the  first  time,  and  about 
130  are  printed  for  the  first  time.  Only  73  were  unknown  to  Delisle,  but 
whereas  Delisle  knew  only  52  originals,  M.  Delaborde  has  had  access  to 
131,  or  between  a  third  and  a  fourth  of  the  whole.  In  the  absence  of  central 
archives,  the  provincial  cartularies  are  the  chief  source  of  information. 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  small  proportion  of  originals  has  continued 


394  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

to  suffer  even  in  our  own  day.  A  confirmation  of  privileges  for  the  citizens 
of  the  episcopal  hourg  at  Langres  (1181),  which  was  unknown  to  Delisle, 
was  lost  in  1892  in  the  fire  which  destroyed  the  town  hall  of  Langres. 
Fortunately  M.  Petit  had  printed  it  in  his  history  of  the  dukes  of  Burgundy, 
and.  a  copy  had  been  made  by  the  archivist  of  the  department  (no.  26, 
p.  37).  An  important  confirmation  of  the  customs  of  Bruyeres,  Cheret, 
Vorges,  and  Valbon  (1186),  copied  in  the  registers  and  in  various  cartularies, 
is  known  to  have  existed  in  the  original  in  1862,  when  it  was  sold  as  part 
of  a  private  collection  (no.  197,  p.  235).  A  grant  to  the  canons  of  St.  Pierre- 
le-Puellier  of  a  chapel  in  the  new  tower  of  Bourges  (1189-90)  has  had 
a  narrow  escape  from  oblivion.  Delisle  copied  a  transcript  in  the  fancarte 
of  Saint-Pierre,  and  Eaynal  in  his  history  of  Berry  edited  the  grant 
from  the  original.  The  pancarte  was  destroyed  by  fire  in  1859,  and  the 
original  has  disappeared  within  the  last  few  years  from  the  records  of 
Notre-Dame-de-Salles  (no.  285,  p.  346).  No.  257,  relating  to  a  vicaria  in 
the  same  tower,  was  seen  by  the  archivist  of  Cher  a  few  years  ago,  but  is 
now  lost ;  it  has  been  copied  three  times  since  the  sixteenth  century  (p.  311). 
The  original  of  no.  119  has  been  lost  since  1879,  and  the  act  is  only  known 
from  a  copy  of  1640  (p.  147).  How  haphazard  even  the  most  exhaustive 
modern  collection  must  be  may  be  seen  from  the  notes  in  surviving  copies. 
In  1180  the  king  released  from  taxation  a  converted  Jew  who  took  the  name 
of  Philip.  We  read  in  a  vidimus  of  1301  that,  the  original  charter  being 
undecipherable  owing  to  the  ravages  of  a  recent  fire,  Philip  the  Fair 
accepted  as  a  correct  record  a  transcript  sealed  with  the  seal  of  the  prevot 
of  Paris  (no.  16,  p.  22).  A  later  vidimus  often  refers  to  the  corrupt  or  aged 
condition  of  the  original  (e.g.  nos.  20,  186,  194).^  A  charter  for  Bee 
(1189-90),  which  survives  in  two  or  three  late  copies,  has  no  medieval 
record  save  a  vidimus  of  King  Henry  V  of  England,  of  March  1420,  copied 
into  a  Norman  roll  (no.  283,  p.  344).  A  charter  for  the  hospital  of  fitampes 
(no.  151)  is  only  known  from  a  brief  note  in  the  thirteenth-century 
Register  F. 

Even  if  these  acts  had  already  been  well  and  safely  edited,  their 
collection  in  one  volume  in  this  fine  series  would  have  been  of  great 
service.  It  is  one  of  the  bewildering  features  of  modern  historical  research 
that  work  of  this  kind  should  follow,  and  not  have  preceded  the  scholar! 
studies  of  Luchaire,  Cartellieri,  and  M.  Delaborde  himself  upon  the  reign 
of  Philip  Augustus.  Delisle  had  prepared  the  way,  and  his  catalogue  was 
hailed  in  France  and  Germany  as  almost  epoch-making.  Lack  of  organiza- 
tion seems  to  have  been  the  sole  reason  for  the  delay.  M.  Delaborde  has 
at  last  opened  the  way  for  a  series  of  investigations  which  were  impossible 
so  long  as  the  texts  of  the  acts  were  scattered  in  the  manuscript  collections 
of  France.  A  comparative  study  of  Philip's  charters  and  letters  and  those 
issued  from  the  English  chancery  is  long  overdue.^  And  we  have  in  this 
volume  for  the  first  time  a  definitive  edition  of  the  customs  and  privileges 

*  Naturally  the  seal  was  the  first  thing  to  suffer.  Compare  the  vidimus  of  1314  of 
a  charter  of  1186  (no.  186,  p.  223),  which  states  that  the  original  'propter  sui  vetus- 
tatem  nimiam  circa  si gilli  appensionem  detrimentum  aliquod  sustinebat '. 

*  Some  of  the  shorter  letters  are  strikingly  like  the  pithy  phrases  of  the  letters^ 
patent  of  our  English  kings,  e.  g.  no.  290. 


I 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  395 

of  the  communes  which  received  royal  confirmation.  The  value  of  this  to 
the  student  of  social  and  administrative  history  is  immense.  For  this 
reason  alone  the  Actes  of  Philip  Augustus  will  be  indispensable  to  British 
no  less  than  to  French  scholars.*  We  congratulate  M.  Delaborde  upon  the 
successful  beginning  of  a  task  which  will  become  increasingly  important 
as  he  reaches  the  central  years  of  Philip's  reign.  F.  M.  Powicke. 


Calendar  of  Inquisitions,  Miscellaneous  (Chancery).  Vols.Iandll.  (London: 
H.M.  Stationery  Office,  1916.) 

More  than  four  thousand  five  hundred  documents,  ranging  in  date  from 
'  1219 '  to  1349,  are  calendared  in  these  volumes.  A  somewhat  elaborate 
introduction  is  largely  concerned  with  the  history  and  previous  arrange- 
ment of  these  records,  but  the  chief  points  to  grasp  are  that  this  calendar 
is  intended  to  be  carried  down  to  the  accession  of  Henry  VII,  like  the 
Calendar  of  Inquisitions  fost  mortem  and  the  list  of  Inquisitions  ad  quod 
damnum,  and  that  the  documents  with  which  it  deals  are  mainly  of  a  resi- 
dual character  after  the  above  two  classes  of  inquisitions  had  been  separately 
arranged.  These  three  series  will  henceforth  comprise  all  the  Chancery 
Inquisitions  down  to  the  above-mentioned  date.  With  regard  to  the  some- 
what technical  discussion  in  the  preface,  one  may  note,  as  to  the  county 
inventories  of  escheats,  extracted  long  ago  from  an  ancient  inventory  in 
seven  volumes,  that  the  volume  for  Essex '  had  already  been  lost  in  Lemon's 
time '  (1775),  For  Morant  certainly  used  many  of  the  records  here  calen- 
dared for  his  History  of  Essex  (1768),  and  his  means  of  access  to  the  public 
records,  through  his  son-in-law  Astle,  together  with  his  acquiring  habit 
in  the  matter  of  manuscripts,  may  possibly  account  for  the  loss.  If  so  the 
volume  may  exist  among  his  manuscript  collections. 

It  is  justly  observed  by  the  Deputy  Keeper  of  the  Eecords  that '  a  refer- 
ence to  the  analysis  given  in  the  index  of  subjects  under  the  heading 
Writ  and  Inquisition  will  give  some  indication  of  the  great  variety  and 
interest  of  these  inquisitions '.  There  are  more  than  seven  columns  under 
this  heading  alone  in  the  index  of  subjects  to  vol.  i.  To  historical  students 
the  index  of  subjects  is  always  of  such  importance  that  one  is  grateful 
for  the  forty-two  pages  devoted  to  it  in  this  volume.  There  is  some  lack, 
however,  of  uniformity  in  the  matter,  for  this  index  barely  runs  to  twenty- 
five  pages  in  vol.  ii,  where  also  there  is  no  heading '  Writ  and  Inquisition  '. 
Of  *  the  great  variety  and  interest '  of  this  calendar  there  can  be  no  ques- 
tion ;  indeed,  it  is  difficult  to  pick  and  choose  among  its  vivid  illustrations 
of  medieval  life.  The  most  fascinating,  perhaps,  are  those  afforded  by 
inquisitions  on  deaths  alleged  to  have  been  caused  by  chance  medley  or 
in  self-defence.  The  latter  and  generally  successful  plea  was  usually  based 
on  amazingly  incredible  stories  by  the  culprit.  In  spite  of  the  traditional 
resort  of  an  Englishman  to  his  fists,  it  is  clear  that  our  forefathers,  on 
slight  provocation,  had  recourse  to  admitted  or  extemporized  weapons  ; 
in  the  fields,  at  the  tavern,  at  home,  or  even  at  play.    Fatalities  were  thus 

»  Some  criticisms  and  additions  by  M.  Halphen,  who  has  also  compiled  a  useful 
list  of  the  more  important  documents,  will  be  found  in  the  Eevue  Historiqiie,  March- 
April  1917,  cxxiv.  320-5. 


396  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

caused  among  men  evidently  quick  to  wrath.  But  the  arm  of  the  law 
was  strong.  In  1273  William  Mauduyt,  of  the  late  earl  of  Warwick's 
family  and  a  tenant  by  knight-service,  had  robbed  a  carter  of  two  horses 
and  was  duly  hanged  '  at  the  suit  of  the  carter  '  for  larceny  and  for  breaking 
gaol.  The  law  and  its  officers  inspired  terror  ;  Clavering  of  Callaly  Castle 
was  of  illustrious  descent,  but  when  Roger  de  Clavering' s  widow  was 
indicted  for  murder  she  evaded  the  sheriff,  she  said,  for  fear  of  a  clerk  of 
his, '  who  threatened  that,  when  she  was  imprisoned  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne, 
having  drawn  her  teeth,  he  would  carnally  know  her  against  her  will ',  in 
the  sheriff's  absence.    This  was  in  1306. 

More  than  two  pages  are  devoted  to  an  interesting  letter  fromJohi 
de  Barham,  who  was  sent  in  1302  to  take  seisin,  on  the  king's  behalf,  of  th( 
Earl  of  Hereford's  lands  in  the  west.  He  describes  how  he  tendered  th< 
oath  of  fealty  and  took  homage  from  the  earl's  tenants.  At  Brecknocl 
Castle  there  were  *  more  than  2,000  Welsh  '  who  knew  no  English.  So  h( 
took  an  interpreter  [latimerius  ?],  a  clerk,  who  had  from  him  the  words  oi 
fealty  and  then  charged  the  tenants  in  Welsh.  The  abstract  wrongl] 
reads  *one  Latimer,  a  clerk ',  which  obscures  the  point,  for  we  clearly  have 
here  the  old  Domesday  practice  of  using  the  clergy  as  interpreters.  In  127( 
a  notable  inquisition  was  held  at  the '  Stone  Cross  '  by  the  sheriff  of  Middles 
sex,  to  determine  whether  two  or  three  acres  called  '  Kyngesgore '  betweenj 

*  Knichtebrugg '  and  Kensington  were  escheat  or  ancient  demesne.  The 
return  states  that  they  were  ancient  demesne,  the  proceeds  of  which  belongec 
to  the  ferm  of  Middlesex.  Was  this  the  origin  of  Kensington  Gore,  and  ha^ 
we  in  that  name  a  relic  of  the  open  field,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  these  acre 
were  tempore  excluso  common?  *  Stone  Cross  [co.  Middlesex]'  is  not  furthei 
identified  in  the  index,  but  is  of  peculiar  interest.  No.  2313  in  this  volume 
gives  a  clue  to  its  locality  by  showing  that  in  1289  the  parson  of  St.  Mary-j 
le-Strand  was  there  assaulted,  and  in  vol.  ii  (no.  1556)  we  have  an  inquisi- 
tion as  to  Westminster  held  at  'Stone  Cross  without  the  bar  of  the  Nei 
Temple '  in  1337.  But  the  climax  is  an  inquisition  held  in  the  church 
St.  Mary-le-Strand,  at  which  the  jurors  confidently  stated,  in  1311,  that 

*  the  stone  cross  without  the  bar  of  the  New  Temple,  London,  was  erectec 
by  King  William  Rufus  in  devotion  to  the  Holy  Cross  and  for  the  health 
of  the  souls  of  himself  and  his  mother,  Queen  Maud,  whose  body  rested 
there  while  being  carried  to  Westminster  for  burial '  (no.  110).  This 
remarkable  instance  of  the  Red  King's  fietas  would  have  been  news  to 
Freeman,  for  the  queen,  he  writes,  *  was  of  course  buried  in  her  own 
church  at  Caen '.  But  the  jurors  of  1311  doubtless  had  the  Eleanor  crosses 
in  their  minds.  With  greater  daring  the  Ipswich  jurors  who  desired  in 
1340  to  exalt  their  town  as  a  port,  testified  that  it  was  *  first  appointed 
the  capital  of  Suffolk,  by  reason  of  the  port,  by  a  pagan  king,  Ypus  by 
name,  who  called  the  town  Ypeswich  '  (no.  1708). 

As  the  two  volumes  were  indexed  by  different  officers  and  with  different 
results,  they  had  better  be  separately  dealt  with.  In  vol.  i  (1219-1307)  the 
chief  feature  is  found  in  the  Inquisitiones  de  Rebellibus  (nos.  609-940) 
after  the  barons'  war.  Mr.  Pearson,  in  his  fresh  edition  (1871)  of  Blaauw's 
The  Barons'  War,  was  disposed,  in  his  important  appendix  on  the  *  Royalists ' 
and  the  '  rebels '  (pp.  364-80),  to  depreciate  the  evidence  of  these  records 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  397 

as  affording  insufficient  proof  of  'rebellion  '.  But  at  least  they  afford  most 
valuable  means  of  identification,  a  matter  which  rather  baffled  him.  His 
constant  queries  and  strange  surnames  are  eloquent  as  to  this.  The 
arrangement  of  these  returns,  not  only  under  counties,  but  under  hundreds 
and  wapentakes,  enables  one  to  identify  men  and  places  with  certainty. 
This  makes  inexplicable  the  errors  of  the  indexer  ;  '  Chauton,*  for  instance, 
in  '  Finchesden '  Hundred,  Hampshire,  is  obviously  Chalton  in  Finchdean 
Hundred,  not  Chawton  in  Alton  Hundred,  and  this  correction  is  supported 
by  the  contents  of  the  returns  (nos.  692,  978). ^  To  take  but  a  single 
county,  that  of  Essex  (nos.  657-74),  the  errors  are  staggering.  *  Keleweden ' 
in  Ongar  Hundred  is  Kelvedon  Hatch,  not  Kelvedon  (in  Witham  Hundred), 
which  occurs  in  no.  670,  but  is  unindexed.  In  Hinckford  Hundred 
*  Smetheton '  is  not  identified  as  Smeeton  in  Bulmer.  In  Lexden  Hundred, 
Crepping  ('  Creping '),  a  well-known  manor  in  the  Colnes,  is  pitchforked 
into  Eomford,  at  the  other  end  of  the  county,  and  '  La  Gernunere ',  a 
moated  house  in  the  Stour  Valley  at  Wormingford,  in  the  extreme  north 
of  the  hundred,  is  sought  for  in  its  extreme  south.  This  is  peculiarly 
unfortunate,  because  we  have  here  the  perfect  form  of  a  name  akin  to 
La  Musardere  (Miserden),  and  to  such  forms  across  the  channel  as  La 
Bigotiere,  L'Ernaudiere,  La  Quehanniere,  &c.  '  Sir  Simon  de  Pateshill 
of  Toleshontte,  "chyvaler  ",'  (no.  670),  was  a  holder  of  land  in  the  unindexed 
Tolleshunt  Knights.  Of  three  manors  in  Winstree  half -hundred,  'Bur- 
halle  in  Mereseia '  is  not  even  identified  as  Bower  Hall  in  Mersea,  while 
the  *  Legh  Mareny '  of  William  de  Mareny,  namely  Layer  Marney — 
where  the  famous  gatehouse  of  the  Marneys  towers  above  the  marsh- 
land— is  identified,  as  also  is  Leighs  (nos.  1870,  1940),  in  the  heart  of  the 
county,  with  the  far-off  Essex  port  of  Leigh  on  the  Thames. 

Before  proceeding  to  other  points  noted  in  the  index  as  needing  correc- 
tion, one  must  speak  of  a  more  delicate  subject,  the  reading  of  the  docu- 
ments in  this  volume  ;  for  the  index,  of  course,  is  affected  when  a  word 
is  incorrectly  read.  One  would  naturally  hesitate  to  question  readings 
of  documents  one  has  not  seen,  especially  when  they  are  those  of  the 
skilled  staff  of  the  Kecord  Office,  were  it  not  that  one  notable  document 
(no.  2272)  had  been  published  in  extenso  by  a  colleague  of  their  own  in 
1913.2  Comparing  these  two  versions,  we  note  first  that  this  inquisition 
was  held,  in  April  1285,  '  before  Kobert  de  Gynges,  sheriff '.  But  the 
sheriff  at  that  time  was  not  '  Kobert '  ;  he  was  that  *  Reynold  (sic)  de 
Gynges  '  who  appears  in  no.  1347,  and  who  is  styled,  we  find,  in  the  Latin 
original  of  2272,  *  Reginaldo  de  Gynges,  vicecomite '.  The  trouble  was 
a  death  in  an  affray  between  Sandwich  and  Yarmouth  mariners,  at  *  Brad- 
felt  on  the  Sea  {in  mari)  \  indexed  as  Bradfield  (on  the  Stour).  But  the 
editor  of  the  Latin  text  read  it  as  *  Bordflet  in  mari ',  which  entries  in  the 
cartulary  of  St.  John's,  Colchester,  clearly  prove  to  have  been  Brightlingsea 
Creek  at  the  mouth  of  the  Colne.  We  have  thus  here  the  earliest  mention 
of  the  (Cinque  Port)  connexion  between  Brightlingsea  and  Sandwich,  and 
a  very  early  one  of  the  famous  Colne  oyster  trade  in  which  these  mariners 

*  This,  which  is  wrongly  indexed  973,  is  a  return  of  1275,  but  refers  to  the  escheat 
stated  in  no.  692. 

*  Essex  Arch.  Trans.  [N.S.],  xiii.  143-4. 


398  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

were  engaged.  Most  of  the  doubtful  readings  arise,  as  might  be  expected, 
from  confusion  between  c  and  t  or  the  minims  of  n  and  u,  of  m  and  in  or  ni. 
Only  a  knowledge  of  names,  at  times,  can  decide  between  them.  *  Thal- 
benor,'  for  instance,  should  be  read  as  '  Chalbenor  '  (if  not  'Chabbenor  ') 
and  is,  therefore,  unidentified.  Edmund  de  '  Cameset '  (no.  659)  is  identical 
with  the  Edmund  de  *  Kemesseth '  (wrongly  indexed  as  Kemerseth)  of 
no.  203,  where  his  ancestry  is  given  ;  but  the  t  in  the  name  should  be  read 
as  c.  The  occasional  confusion  of  k  and  r  is  seen  in  so  suspicious  a  name 
as  *  Kameis '  (no.  521),  which  the  index  confuses  with  '  Raymis ',  but 
which  proves  to  be  '  Kameis '  or  '  Kameys '  (no.  639)  or  *  Cameys  '  (no.  699). 
As  for  n  and  u,  '  Chaueresbregge '  should  be  '  Chaneresbregge ',  '  La 
Kersouere '  should  be  *  La  Kersonere  *,  and  *  Granacel '  should  be  *  Grau- 
acel '  (whence  the  local  name  *  Grassals ').  It  is  of  some  importance  to 
read  greverie  instead  of  grenerie,  for  these  were  no  other  than  the  gravarie 
of  Normandy.    Why  the  *  Binnestede  '  of  no.  2274  should  be  identified  as 

*  Binsted '  [co.  Hants]  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  ;  for  the  writ  is  addressed 
to  the  sheriff  of  Essex,  and  the  places  mentioned  are  in  North  Essex. 
'  Binnestede  '  must  have  been  misread  for  '  Bumestede  '. 

The  present  writer  has  ascertained  that,  in  the  course  of  the  Segrave 
peerage  case  (1877),  *  a  large  portfolio '  containing  a  number  of  these 
inquisitions  was  produced  in  the  House  of  Lords  by  the  late  Sir  William 
(then  Mr.)  Hardy.  A  few  of  the  returns  were  then  printed  in  record  type, 
the  accuracy  of  which  was  sworn  to.^  Among  these  was  a  return  for  the 
wapentake  of  Newark,  Notts.,  in  which  we  read  (p.  28)  : 

terre  et  tenementa  domini  Galfridi  de  Stantona  et  de  Elistona.  ,  .  . 
terre  et  tenementa  Galfridi  de  Moustou'  in  Eyleston. ... 

In  the  Calendar,  however,  these  entries  run  (i.  260) : 

The  lands,  &c.,  of  Sir  Geofifrey  de  Stantona  et  de  CUftona. .  .  . 
The  lands,  &c.,  of  Geoffrey  de  Houston  *  in  Clifton. 

How  is  this  to  be  explained  ?  The  Stauntons  of  Staunton  certainly 
held,  under  Deyncourt,  at  Staunton  and  at  Elston  (Eyleston),  within 
four  miles  of  it ;  but  they  did  not  hold  at  Clifton,  which  was  much  further 
away .5  It  seems,  however,  inconceivable  that  *  Eyleston '  can  actually 
have  been  misread  as  *  Clifton  '. 

How  much  the  text  may  be  afiected  by  confusing  n  with  u  is  well  seen 
in  no.  2158,  the  return  of  an  inquisition  which  clearly  belongs  to  the  writ 
in  no.  1264  and  is  dated  by  it.    Among  some  men  guilty  of  sacrilege  at 

*  Great  Bures '  (2158) — which  is  proved  by  1264  to  be  Bures  St.  Mary, 
though  the  two  are  indexed  separately — we  find  a  strange  being, '  Gilbert 
Maunpaster  (sic)  of  William  la  Justice  of  Assingeton '.  This  makes  nonsense 
of  the  text,  but  he  is  gravely  indexed  as '  Maunpaster,  Gilbert ',  He  was, 
of  course,  *  of  the  household  of '  John,  as  manwpastus  is  rightly  rendered 
in  no.  746.  To  make  matters  worse,  Assington  (Suffolk),  which  adjoins 
Bures,  is  wildly  identified  as  Ashingdon  in  south  Essex.  The  misreading 
of  im  as  nn  has  converted  the  Breton  '  Guimar '  into  the  meaningless 

'  Minutes  of  Evidence,  pp.  26-9. 

*  He  was  probably  Geoffrey  de  Musters. 

»  Fevdal  Aids,  iv.  100-1. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  399 

'  Gunnar '  in  nos.  520,  521.    Such  readings  as  '  Tyllol '  for  '  Fyllol '  and 

*  Herbert '  (for  Hubert)  de  Burgh  may  be  scribal  errors,  but  are  uncor- 
rected in  the  index.  For  such  an  entry  as  *  Bedehampton,  Keynold  son  of 
Peter  de ',  the  text  is  responsible ;  the  rendering  in  no.  2098,  *  the  park 
of  Reynold  son  of  Peter  de  Bedehampton '  should  have  run  '  of  Reynold  son 
of  Peter  at  Bedehampton  ',  which  illustrates  the  need  for  care  in  rendering 

*  de '.  For  *  Reynold  son  of  Peter  '  (no.  1895)  is  indexed  separately,  and 
Bedhampton  not  identified.  Text  and  index  alike  are  wrong  in  the  case 
of  *  Gerard  de  Hanicurt '  {sic)  in  no.  811,  who  is  indexed  under  *  Haincurt ', 
but  who  was  really  a  '  Fanecurt '  (as  in  nos.  774,  795,  796).  The  text, 
however,  is  not  responsible  for  the  amazing  entry  '  Grimketel,  Alan  de 
Creun  son  of,'  which  is  due  merely  to  carelessness.  The  name  of  this  great 
Angevin  house  is  also  indexed  under  *  Croham '.  Why,  again,  is  the 
bridge  of  '  Amot '  (no.  1547)  indexed  as  that  of  '  Arnot ',  or  the  '  barony 
of  Bochred  (?  co.  Hereford) '  entered  thus  on  p.  667,  but  as  that  of  Bough- 
rood  (co.  Radnor)  on  p.  669  ?  Perhaps,  however,  the  strangest  matter 
is  the  fate  of  Lindsey  (Suffolk)  at  the  indexer's  hands.  The  adjacent 
villages  of  Kersey  and  Lindsey  gave  name,  as  is  well  known,  to  two  familiar 
fabrics.  In  no.  21  is  an  interesting  return  '  by  a  jury  of  the  vicinage  of 
Karesheie  and  Lellesheie  to  determine  the  boundaries '.  '  Leleseye,'  as  the 
return  terms  it,  was  an  early  form  of  the  later  Lindsey,  which  adjoins 
Kersey,  but  which,  here  and  in  three  other  documents,  is  identified  as 
Nailsea,  which  is  nowhere  near  to  either.  As  to  the  parson  of  *  Lyndesey ' 
(no.  1371),  if  his  parish  was  really  that  of  '  Lindsey  (co.  Lincoln) ',  his  cure 
must  have  been  a  large  one. 

As  with  places,  so  with  persons.  In  Oxfordshire  '  James  de  Auditleye 
seized  the  land  of  Ralph  d'Aundeli ',  and  Osbert  Giffard  that  of  *  Maurice 
d'Aundeli '  after  the  barons'  war  (No.  855).  Yet  Ralph  and  Maurice,  with 
their  Norman  surname,  are  identified  with  the  Staffordshire  Audleys.  So 
is  Walter  Dandeli  (no.  341).  Stephen,  earl  of  Aumale,  with  his  son 
William  are  indexed  as  members  of  the  later  house,  under  *  Fortibus '. 
In  Kent  '  Greneche '  (no.  1024)  is  Grenge,  not  *  Greenwich '  ;   in  Sussex 

*  Fylesham  '  is  simply  Filsham.  In  Scotland  '  Luffynock  '  is  Luffness,  the 
home  of  the  Lindsays.  It  is  strange  to  learn  that,  in  South  Wales,  Dynas,  a 
castle  of '  Sir  Reynold  son  of  Peter  '  (unindexed  on  p.  799),  which  guarded, 
as  Dinas  y  Bwlch,  a  pass  through  the  Black  Mountains,  was  *  Dynas  Powis 
(co.  Glamorgan) '.  The  mysterious  '  Eleveynnismeneth  (?  co.  Radnor) '  was 
simply  Elfael  Is  Mynydd,  now  the  Hundred  of  Painscastle.  *  Waucre,' 
i.e.  Walkern,  Herts,  (no.  1923),  is  unindexed  under  either  form.  In 
Essex  '  Elteneye '  is  Iltney,  not  *  Eltenhey  ',  and  '  Sedeburnebroke  '  is 
Brook  street  in  South  Weald  ;  there  is  no  attempt  to  identify  even  such 
familiar  forms  as  '  Meaudon '  (Maldon),  *  Little  Reines  '  (Rayne), '  Dyham  ' 
(Dedham),  *  Halleye '  (Hadleigh)  Castle,  *  Sidingeho  '  (Manningtree),  which 
present  no  difficulty,  and  the  *  Bures  St.  Mary '  of  no.  1760  is  perversely 
indexed  under  *  Bowers '.  The  great  lordship  of  Nayland  ('  Neylond ') 
on  the  Stour  is  sought  for  in  Witham  as  '  Newland  ',  while,  as  for  *  Roenges 
(?  CO.  Lincoln) ',  it  is  no  other  than  Beauchamp  Roding,  co.  Essex. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  that  local  knowledge  is  requisite  for  such 
criticism.    Let  us,  for  instance,  pass  from  Essex  to  West  Wales.    No.  986 


400  BEVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

is  an  inquisition  before  the  bailiff  of  Abergavenny  and  Kilgarran,  at 
'  Kilgarran  in  West  Wales ',  early  in  1275.  It  concerns  the  misdoings  of 
Sir  Nicholas  Fitz  Martin  when  in  charge  of  Kilgarran  Castle  and  forest. 
At  its  close  is  the  statement  that '  the  said  Sir  Nicholas  took  timber  in  the 
forest  of  Kilgarran  ...  for  building  his  castle  of  New  Town  (sic),  in  Kern- 
meas '.  This  is  indexed  as  '  Kemeys,  Kemmeas  (co.  Monmouth),  New 
Castle  (sic)  in '.  Both  text  and  index  are  wrong.  '  Kemmeas  '  is  neither 
of  the  places  named  Kemeys  in  Monmouthshire,  but  is  the  well-known 
cantref  of  Cemais  (now  in  Pembrokeshire),  of  which  the  Martins  were 
lords,  and  which  adjoined  Emlyn,  of  which  Cilgerran  was  the  stronghold. 
Of  this  Cemais  Newport  (sic)  on  the  strand  (*  Trefdaeth  ')  was  then  the  cafut 
and  the  citadel.  When  Llewelyn  captured  Newport  and  overran  this 
Cemais^  in  1257,  he  made  (and  kept  for  a  time)  prisoner — though  this  may 
not  be  known — ^the  Sir  Nicholas  of  this  document,  who  was  lord  of  Cemais 
for  about  half  a  century.  Abergavenny  and  Cilgerran  had  come  into  the 
king's  hands  in  1255  on  the  death  of  Eva  (a  Braose  heiress),  mother  of  the 
George  de  Cantelupe  named  in  this  document,  and  their  lordship  during 
his  long  minority  was  given  to  the  lord  Edward,  under  whom  Sir  Nicholas 
had  been  in  charge  at  times.  It  must  have  been  when  he  had  regained 
his  lost  castle  of  Newport  that  he  took  this  timber  for  its  rebuilding.  One 
may  add,  of  the  Cantelupe  lands  *  at  St.  Clare  and  Kilgarran ',  that 
*  St.  Clare '  (which  is  not  even  indexed)  was  St.  Clear's  (Carmarthen),  of 
which  William  de  Braose  had  died  seised  when  he  went  to  the  gallows 
tree  in  1230. 

Before  taking  leave  of  vol.  i  one  should  note  that  its  contents  are  dated 
on  the  binding  as  of  1219-1307,  but  that  no.  518  is  actually  dated  early 
(16  March)  in  1218.  This  is  of  some  importance,  because  it  seems  to 
govern  the  undated  documents  which  follow  (nos.  519-21)  and  which 
contain  valuable  lists  of  the  knights'  fees  and  their  holders  on  the  honour 
of  Richmond.  The  name,  however,  of  Earl  Aubrey  implies  a  somewhat 
later  date  for  those  in  which  it  occurs. 

In  volume  ii  the  leading  feature  is  found  in  the  inquisitions  as  to  the 
prisoners  captured  in  the  wild  flight  from  Boroughbridge  with  their 
chattels  (pp.  129-34),  together  with  those  grouped  under  '  rebels '  in  the 
index  of  subjects.  A  brief  inquest,  in  1311,  as  to  five  acres  in  Much  Marcle, 
'  held  by  John  de  Balun  who  was  hanged  for  felony  '  (no.  100),  would  not 
suggest  that  he  was  the  descendant  of  a  mighty  Domesday  earl,'  just  as 
John  de  Monmouth,  *  who  was  hanged  for  felony ',  as  recorded  in  1281 
(i.  1233),  was  the  actual  heir  male  of  a  Domesday  baron.  A  notable 
entry  of  1340  informs  us  that '  the  keeper  of  the  deanery  of  the  free  chapel 
of  Hastings  '  has  *  made  a  chapel  to  the  king's  honour  with  a  new  window 
and  a  picture  of  the  king's  father,  so  that  the  devotion  of  the  people  is 
much  increased  to  the  profit  of  the  chapel '  (no.  1716).  In  another,  dealing 
with  the  repairs  needed  at  Winchester  Castle  (no.  179),  we  read  that  '  the 
buildings  covered  with  Cornwall  stone  called  "  Esclate  "  have  been  much 
damaged  by  storms '.  This  was  in  1314.  In  the  following  year  extensive 
repairs  were  found  to  be  required  at  Salisbury  Castle,  owing  to  sheriffs' 

*  There  was  a  Cemais  of  some  importance  in  Anglesey. 
'  See  Studies  in  Peerage  and  Family  History,  p.  209. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  401 

neglect  and  corruption,  and  to  the  '  manor '  of  Clarendon  (nos.  209,  210). 
At  the  latter  the  cost  of  the  repairs  was  estimated  at  no  less  than  £1,850  ; 
in  this  historic  *  manor '  we  have  mention  of  the  chamber  called  '  Antioche ', 
chapels  for  the  king,  the  queen,  and  the  household,  *  the  chamber  for  the 
chancellor  and  the  clerks  of  chancery,  the  chamber  of  the  chaplains  and 
clerks  of  the  king  and  queen,  the  treasurer's  chamber ',  and  so  forth.  The 
particulars  as  to  castles  and  other  royal  buildings  are  among  the  most 
valuable  information  afforded  by  these  volumes.  They  deserve  the 
careful  attention  of  historical  students,  even  though  such  statements  as 
that  of  a  Somerset  jury  that  Taunton  Priory  was  founded  by  *  William 
Gyffard,  sometime  bishop  of  Winchester,  before  the  time  of  King  Edmund 
Iryneside  '  betray  an  almost  incredible  ignorance. 

It  is  a  pleasure  to  praise  the  careful  and  scholarly  work  of  the  late 
Mr.  Bland  in  the  index  to  vol.  ii.  He  is  not  responsible  for  that  persona 
ficta,  '  Baldwin  son  of  Gilbert  Wake '  (no.  107),  who  is  compounded  (as 
we  are  reminded  by  no.  255)  out  of  Baldwin  son  of  Gilbert  (de  Clare)  and 
Hugh  Wake.  The  points  one  has  noted  for  correction  are  very  few. 
'  Ressemere  '  is  not  an  unknown  place  in  Ipswich,  but  Rushmere,  close  to 
Westerfield  ;  in  two  consecutive  entries  the  hundreds  of  Wixamtree  (Bed- 
fordshire) and  Wixoe  (Suffolk)  are  assigned  to  Essex ;  the  court  of  the  Honour 
of  Boulogne  at  '  Wycham ',  as  the  text  reads  it  (no.  127),  was  held  not  at 
Wickhambreux  (Suffolk),  but  at  Witham  (Essex).  In  Sussex  *  Hongetone ' 
{sic)i  named  with  Chancton  (no.  1823),  was  not  the  far-off  Hangleton,  but 
the  neighbouring  Buncton  (Bongetone)  in  Ashington.  It  is  regrettable  that 
Patrick  and  William,  earls  of  Salisbury,  should  have  been  indexed  under 
Devereux.  *  Gilbert  de  Baiocis ',  whose  fees  are  analysed  in  no.  405,  was 
Gilbert  de  Balliol ;  but  this  may  be  a  scribal  error.  It  is  worth  noting 
that  the  old  name  of  *  Edulvesnasse  by  Waleton '  (no.  406)  still  persisted  in 
1319,  though  not  here  identified  as  the  Naze,  for  it  was  no  longer  the  name 
of  a  lordship.  *  Samford,  co.  Suffolk '  (no.  300),  was  not  a  place,  but  a  hun- 
dred, of  which  the  bailiff  was  Roger  de  '  Wyvermers '  (not  Wytiermers), 
i.  e.  Withermarsh  in  Stoke  by  Nayland.  Is  it  certain,  by  the  way,  that 
*  leagues  '  should  be  so  rendered  ?  We  find  in  the  text  (no.  1708)  Rattlesden 
described  as  *  15  leagues  from  Ipswich  ',  though  the  distance  is  just  about 
15  miles,  as  the  crow  flies.    The  point  is  of  some  importance. 

J.  H.  Round. 

Year  Books  of  Edward  IL  Vol.  XII,  5  Edward  II  (1312).  Edited  by  W.  C. 
BoLLAND.  (Selden  Society  Publications,  Vol.  XXXIII.  London: 
Quaritch,  1916.) 


I  That  Mr.  Bolland's  new  instalment  of  the  Year  Books  of  Edward  II  is  not 
I  quite  up  to  time  is  the  necessity  of  publication  under  war  conditions.  But 
I  the  volume  shows  no  falling  off  in  interest  or  importance,  and  Mr.  Bolland, 
1  as  he  warms  to  his  work,  shows  steady  development  of  capacity  for  dealing 
with  the  extraordinarily  difficult  problems  of  collation,  interpretation,  and 
translation  of  the  very  puzzling  texts  of  the  Year  Books.  His  introduction, 
I  seldom  straying  to  more  general  considerations,  is  a  close  and  valuable 
i  illustration  of  many  of  the  chief  cases  that  he  has  edited,  and  incidentally 
j       VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXI.  D  d 


402  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

raises  a  good  many  interesting  questions  of  medieval  law  and  social 
custom.  When  there  is  such  a  large  proportion  of  good  work  there  is 
little  to  say  for  a  reviewer  save  a  few  hearty  lines  of  general  commenda- 
tion. Such  warm  praise  Mr.  Bolland  fully  and  entirely  deserves.  If 
the  great  bulk  of  what  follows  deals  with  more  or  less  minute  points  of 
criticism,  it  must  not  be  thought  that  they  have  any  material  effect  in 
detracting  from  the  merits  of  a  solid  and  well-executed  edition.  Many 
of  them  are  more  in  the  way  of  corrigenda  than  of  complaint,  and  nearly 
all  are  trivial. 

Some  incuriousness  or  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  non-legal  sources  of 
history  is  perhaps  Mr.  Bolland's  worst  weakness,  which  he  is  correcting  by 
degrees.  Thus  his  return  to  his  discussion  in  a  previous  introduction  as 
to  the  right  of  the  archbishops  of  Dublin,  '  not  being  Irishmen ',  to  present 
to  the  deanery  of  Penkridge,  though  interesting  as  revealing  that  he  has 
now  discovered  the  Charter  Eolls  in  the  Public  Kecord  Office,  still  shows 
no  knowledge  that  the  charter  in  question  has  been  in  print  in  the  RotuU 
Cartarum  of  John  for  some  eighty  years.  And  other  easily  accessible 
sources,  such  as  the  Calendars  of  the  Patent  and  Close  Rolls,  would  have 
enabled  him  to  supplement  the  proof  that  there  were  deans  of  Penkridge, 
by  no  means  all  of  the  archbishops'  appointment,  for  the  forty  years  before 
1259.  We  welcome,  however,  Mr.  J.  G.  Wood's  new  addition  to  the  list 
in  Elias  (p.  xxxix). 

Another  correction  might  have  been  made  by  Mr.  Bolland  with  reference 
to  the  keepers  of  the  rolls  of  the  common  bench.  On  p.  xvii  he  suggests 
that  the  John  of  the  Moor  who  sent  the  transcript  of  a  record  from  the 
roll  of  the  bench  to  the  justices  in  eyre  was  the  actual  custos  rotulorum  et 
hreuium  de  banco  in  6th  Edward  II.  This,  however,  is  not  the  case,  as 
John  Bacon  held  that  office  from  1292  to  February  1313,  and  was  succeeded 
by  William  Raven.^  As  these  appointments  were  made  by  patent,  there 
should  have  been  no  need  to  make  guesses  in  the  matter.  Indeed  in 
Mr.  Bolland's  own  '  Note  from  the  Record '  of  one  of  his  cases,  we  actually 
find  Bacon  acting  as  keeper  of  the  records  of  the  bench  down  to  Easter  term 
5  Edward  11.^  The  whole  problem  is,  however,  puzzling,  and  the  suggestion 
that  rolls  of  the  bench  only  remained  for  a  limited  time  in  the  possession 
of  the  bench  or  of  its  individual  judges,  and  were  then  deposited  in  the 
exchequer,  hardly  satisfies  one  as  complete.  It  is  true  that  the  evidence 
that  the  exchequer  kept  copies  of  plea  rolls  is  overwhelming.  But  what 
was  the  '  keeper  of  the  rolls  of  the  bench '  for,  if  he  also  did  not  keep 
transcripts  of  these  records  ?  Is  it  possible  that,  as  the  common  bench  nor- 
mally sat  at  Westminster,  hard  by  the  quarters  of  the  exchequer,  they  were 
deposited  in  that  great  centre  of  records  for  safe  custody,  just  as  modern 
government  offices  send  their  records  from  time  to  time  to  the  Public 
Record  Office  ?  If  the  exchequer  needed  these  judicial  records  for  practical 
purposes,  the  judges  of  the  common  bench  would  surely  have  had  a  still 
more  immediate   need  to  have  them  easily  accessible  for  themselves. 

»  See  the  list  of  chief  clerks  of  the  bench  in  my  Place  of  Edward  II  in  English 
History,  pp.  372-3. 

'  p.  111.  Bacon  is  only  called  '  clericus  regis '  ;  but  it  is  clear  he  is  acting  in  his 
official  capacity. 


4 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  403 

But  there  was  probably  a  deep  line  between  the  theory  and  practice  of 
medieval  record  keeping. 

There  was  doubtless  also  a  similar  discrepancy  between  the  ideal 
and  the  actual  in  the  case  of  the  custody  of  the  plea  rolls  of  the  sheriffs, 
containing  records  of  common  pleas  in  the  county  court.  Mr.  Bolland 
(p.  xviii)  quotes  the  sharp  answer  of  Mutford  to  the  sheriff  who  said  that 
the  sheriffs'  rolls  were  kept,  not  in  the  treasury,  but  by  the  sheriffs  them- 
selves. Mutford's  retort  was  that  the  men  who  plead  before  sheriffs  got 
but  their  labour  for  their  pains.  But  here  also  the  prejudice  of  the  exponent 
of  a  rival  judicial  system  may  have  sharpened  the  justice's  wit.  There  is 
plenty  of  evidence  that,  in  the  numerous  cases  where  the  sheriff  was  also 
ex  officio  keeper  of  one  or  more  castles  within  his  jurisdiction,  the  outgoing 
sheriff  was  invariably  directed  to  hand  over  to  his  successor  the  county 
and  the  castle  in  question  *  with  the  rolls,  writs,  memoranda,  and  other 
things  touching  that  office  '.^  This  suggests  not  only  the  formal  transmis- 
sion of  records  from  one  official  to  another,  but  for  numerous  counties 
also  some  sort  of  local  record  office,  such  as  reformers  nowadays  vaguely 
hope  to  see  established.  But  here  again  practice  and  theory  may  have 
been  at  variance,  and  anyhow  medieval  sheriffs'  records  are  even  more  to 
seek  than  the  records  of  feudal  magnates  and  of  the  household  offices. 

A  few  miscellaneous  points  may  be  noted,  though  they  are  of  no  great 
importance.  On  p.  127  there  seems  no  reason  for  doubting  the  reasonable- 
ness of  a  claim  of  common  of  pasture  in  a  cuUura.  Some  of  the  notes  are 
not  very  illuminating ;  there  are  more  '  vennels '  in  Scotland  than  the 
*  alley  leading  out  of  the  south-west  corner  of  the  Grass  Market  in  Edin- 
burgh '  (p.  144),  and  the  *  Morthen '  is  a  district  in  the  West  Eiding,  not 
a  place  *  4 J  miles  south-east  of  Rotherham '  (p.  160).  *  Dean  of  Chester  ' 
on  p.  244  is  a  bad  shot  for  the  *  decanum  Cicestrensem '  of  the  next,  and  *  in 
the  quindenes  of  Easter ',  on  p.  244,  does  not  suggest  the  *  fixed  day ' 
necessary  to  bring  out  the  meaning  of  the  Latin.  Again,  on  p.  214,  *  coram 
abbate  .  .  .  loci  ordinarii '  is  a  neglect  of  proof  reading  when  ordinario 
is  clearly  the  grammatical  text,  and  there  is  perhaps  something  analogous 
in  the  twice  repeated  '  proximo  sequentis '  of  p.  219.  There  are  some 
trifling  slips  in  translation,  such  as  the  threefold  '  bishop '  for  *  erceuesqe ' 
on  p.  237. 

Among  a  multitude  of  small  interesting  points  may  be  noted  the 
interpolations  of  the  reporter  or  scribe,  sometimes  criticizing  (p.  95)  and 
sometimes  commending  (p.  24)  the  decisions  of  the  court ;  the  reference 
to  William  I's  spurious  foundation  charter  of  Battle  Abbey  (p.  15) ;  and 
the  amount  of  discretion  allowed  to  chancery  clerks  in  drawing  up  judicial 
writs  (p.  95).  T.  F.  Tout. 

Accounts  of  the  Lord  High  Treasurer  of  Scotland,  Edited  by  Sir  James 
Balfour  Paul,  Lord  Lyon  King  of  Arms.  Vol.  XI :  1559-66.  (Edin- 
burgh :  H.M.  Stationery  Office,  1916.) 

This  volume  is  the  last  of  the  series  which  we  may  expect  to  welcome 
for  some  years  to  come.    The  first  volume  (1473-98),  to  which  the  editor, 

'  See,  for  instance,  Cal  of  Fine  Bolls,  1317-27,  p.  35. 

D  d2 


404  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

the  late  Thomas  Dickson,  contributed  a  preface  which  is  still  the  best 
authority  on  some  aspects  of  the  history  of  Scottish  finance,  was  published 
in  1877,  but  the  issue  was  at  once  suspended,  and  was  not  resumed  until 
1900,  when  Sir  James  Balfour  Paul  published  the  second  volume  (1500-4). 
Since  that  date,  the  volumes  have  followed  at  regular  intervals,  and  the 
prefaces  have  been  specially  valuable  to  students  for  the  editor's  investiga- 
tions into  such  obscure  topics  as  the  history  of  the  Scottish  navy  and  of 
the  Scottish  artillery,  as  well  as  for  numerous  suggestive  sidelights  upon 
sixteenth-century  political  history.  Now  '  the  exigencies  of  public  affairs  ' 
have  brought  about  a  second  suspension  of  the  publication  of  the  series 
(as  they  have  also  brought  about,  in  the  reviewer's  small  way,  an  uncon- 
scionable delay  in  the  appearance  of  this  notice).  It  is  particularly 
unfortunate  that  it  was  not  practicable  to  arrange  for  the  issue  of  volume 
xii,  which  would  have  brought  the  published  records  down  to  the  close 
of  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary. 

The  accounts  for  the  years  1559-66,  which  form  the  text  of  the  present 
volume,  are,  unfortunately,  far  from  complete.  The  account  which  closed 
volume  X  was  dated  24  March  1559,  and  the  first  of  the  four  accounts 
included  in  vol.  xi  begins  on  31  December  1559,  and,  though  it  was  not 
rendered  until  5  March  1561,  it  contains  no  entries  after  the  death  of 
the  Queen-Regent  on  11  June  1560.  There  is  a  third  and  still  more 
serious  gap  from  28  February  1563  to  16  January  1565.  Not  only  are 
the  accounts  incomplete,  but  they  are  of  unusually  little  value  for  the 
general  history  of  the  country.  Almost  the  only  hints  of  the  existence 
of  any  religious  or  political  disturbance  are  to  be  found  in  entries  of  the 
fees  paid  to  special  messengers.  The  real  interest — and  it  is  considerable — 
is  a  contribution  to  the  history  of  costume  and  of  domestic  furniture. 
There  are  numerous  records  of  payments  for  the  dresses  of  the  queen 
and  her  ladies  and  for  the  garments  which  clothed  Darnley's  long  person. 
Traces  of  the  Wars  of  the  Congregation  are  to  be  found  in  warnings  about 
devices  to  be  adopted  in  the  event  of  an  English  invasion  in  1560,  and 
in  orders  for  supplies  for  the  French  soldiers  ;  there  are  hints  of  the  Run- 
about Raid  in  an  order  (23  July  1565)  to  the  lieges  to  attend  the  Queen 
at  Edinburgh  '  weill  bodin  in  feir  of  weir  ',  and  with  a  fortnight's  provisions, 
and  in  similar  proclamations  in  August ;  and  the  pursuit  of  Rizzio's 
murderers  was  the  occasion  of  other  notices,  none  of  which  add  anything 
to  our  knowledge.  Besides  the  records  of  clothing  (one  of  which,  the 
purchase  of  tartan  plaids  when  the  queen  was  at  Inverness  in  1562,  has 
some  political  significance),  there  is  some  information  about  jewels,  beds 
and  other  domestic  furniture,  carriages,  and  horses,  and  one  of  the  entries 
gives  an  example  of  the  use  of  the  word  '  postilion '  twenty  years  earlier 
than  the  earliest  reference  in  the  New  English  Dictionary.  Mary  was  in 
mourning  when  she  came  to  Scotland,  and  she  wore  white,  black,  and  violet 
silk,  and  black  velvet.  A  change  to  grey  damask,  trimmed  with  grey 
velvet  and  containing  some  crimson  embroidery,  probably  marks  the 
'  second  dule '.  After  her  second  marriage,  she  seems  to  have  lost  her 
confidence  in  Scottish  dressmakers,  though  Scottish  tailors  fitted  Darnley 
with  clothes  of  black  velvet,  black  satin,  black  taffety,  and  black  silk,  the 
silver  lace  trimming  for  which  cost  £73.    The  large  number  of  gifts  of 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  405 

clothing  to  the  queen's  friends  illustrates  the  generosity  in  which  she  was 
never  lacking. 

An  incidental  entry  possesses  some  interest.  On  13  April  1565 
a  boy  was  paid  12  pence  to  go  from  Edinburgh  to  Musselburgh  with  an 
order  to  the  Bailies  of  the  town  *  chargeing  thame  to  tak  diligent  held 
and  attendence  that  the  monument  of  grit  antiquitie  new  fundin  be  nocht 
demolisit  nor  brokin  downe '.  The  monument  of  great  antiquity  was 
an  altar  to  Apollo  Grannus  and  other  Roman  remains  discovered  at  Inver- 
esk.  Randolph  wrote  an  account  of  it  to  Cecil  and  preserved  the  inscrip- 
tion :  '  Apollini  Granno  Q.  L.  Sabinianus  Proc.  Aug.'  Like  others  of 
Mary's  Inchests,  the  order  was  not  obeyed,  and  no  trace  of  the  altar  is  to 
be  found. 

We  congratulate  the  Lyon  King  upon  the  ten  volumes  which  have 
occupied  much  of  his  time  for  nearly  twenty  years.  He  and,  it  should 
be  added,  the  compiler  of  the  excellent  series  of  Indexes  have  rendered 
a  great  service  to  Scottish  history.  Robert  S.  Rait. 

Geschiedenis  eener  Hollandsche  Stad.  Door  P.  J.  Blok.  Deel  III.  ('s  Graven- 
hage :  Nijhoff,  1916.) 

The  third  volume  of  Professor  Blok's  revised  and  enlarged  edition  of  his 
history  of  Ley  den  carries  the  story  on  from  the  siege  of  1574  to  the  end  of 
the  Republic  in  1795.  The  records  of  few  European  cities  can  compare  in 
the  intensity  and  many-sidedness  of  their  interests  with  those  of  Leyden 
during  this  period  ;  and  Mr.  Blok's  own  unwearied  researches,  assisted  by 
recent  monographs  on  the  university,  the  printers,  and  the  cloth  industry 
of  Leyden,  have  enabled  him  to  illustrate  all  the  leading  aspects  of  its 
history  with  remarkable  fullness.  Two  of  the  earlier  chapters  deal  with 
the  war  of  independence  and  the  ever-memorable  siege ;  the  closing 
chapter  is  concerned  with  the  Dutch  politics  of  the  later  revolutionary 
period,  and  on  this  newer  background  of  national  history  is  displayed, 
with  a  continuity  that  is  as  admirable  as  it  is  rare,  the  transition  from 
medieval  to  modern  Leyden.  That  transition  was  the  time  of  Leyden's 
pre-eminence.  In  the  seventeenth  century  there  were  no  greater  names  in 
their  several  spheres  than  those  of  Arminius,  Rembrandt,  and  Elzevier, 
and  the  general  reader  will  probably  feel  a  greater  interest  in  the  chapters 
on  the  '  Arminians  and  the  Gomarists  ',  on  the  University,  and  on  *  Art 
and  Letters  '  than  in  any  other  part  of  this  volume. 

In  the  work  as  a  whole,  however,  it  is  the  municipal,  social,  and  econo- 
mic developments  that  occupy  the  place  of  central  importance,  and  it  is 
the  special  merit  of  Mr.  Blok's  thoroughness  that  it  enables  us  to  make 
a  continuous  study  of  each  of  these  aspects.  The  population  of  the  city 
underwent  remarkable  fluctuations  in  the  course  of  an  unusually  eventful 
history.  Numbering  about  5,000  in  1400  and  about  20,000  in  1514,  it 
had  declined,  owing  to  the  decay  of  its  cloth  industry,  to  15,000  before  the 
siege  and  sank  even  lower  by  1581,  but,  recovering  rapidly  by  the  influx  of 
Flemish  and  Walloon  protestants,  it  rose  to  50,000  by  1640,  and  at  the  end 
of  the  seventeenth  century  numbered  about  70,000.  After  the  middle  of 
the  eighteenth  century  it  again  declined  to  28,000  in  1793. 


406  EEVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

The  second  period  of  civic  prosperity  indicated  by  tJiese  figures  was 
primarily  due  to  the  renascence  of  the  cloth  manufacture,  by  the  introduc- 
tion of  those  new  draperies — bays,  says,  grograins,  fustians,  &c. — which 
played  so  large  a  part  in  the  industrial  history  of  contemporary  England. 
(It  is  interesting  to  find  that  some  of  the  Flemings  who  had  at  first  fled  to 
England  returned  in  1577  to  settle  in  Ley  den.)  In  1612  there  is  a  record 
of  production  within  a  year  of  47,000  pieces  of  says  and  grograins,  of  10,000 
bays,  of  22,450  fustians,  and  of  lesser  quantities  of  other  textiles.  For  the 
success  of  this  development  it  was  essential  that  the  old '  civic  economy ' 
should  give  place  to  a  larger  '  territorial  economy ',  and  accordingly  we 
find  the  city  negotiating  throughout  the  seventeenth  century  for  the 
purchase  of  the  surrounding  lordships  within  a  radius  of  a  dozen  miles, 
partly  for  the  purpose  of  housing  the  overflow  of  industrial  population 
and  partly  with  the  object  of  suppressing  country  competition.  In  this 
mixture  of  motives  lies  the  most  probable  explanation  of  Ley  den's  subse- 
quent industrial  decline.  The  enlarged  economy  was  in  the  eighteenth 
century  no  longer  large  or  flexible  enough  to  compete  with  a  country 
industry  which,  as  was  the  case  in  England,  had  been  entirely  freed  from 
the  dominance  of  civic  vested  interests. 

In  the  seventeenth  century,  however,  Leyden  displayed  all  the  charac- 
teristic features  developed  by  industrial  capitalism  before  the  factory  era. 
In  1619,  and  again  in  1637,  we  hear  of  strikes  of  wage-earners,  followed  in 
1638  by  a  decree  of  the  States  which  required  the  journeyman  to  present 
a  leaving-certificate  from  his  last  employer.  But  the  trouble  continued ; 
and  in  1644,  after  a  conference  of  employers  which  subsequently  became  a 
biennial  gathering,  the  leaders  of  the  workers  were  banished  or  imprisoned. 
In  view  of  these  facts  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  we  learn  so  little  of  the 
later  phases  in  the  history  of  the  gilds  :  especially  as  seventy  of  these  sur- 
vived into  the  eighteenth  century,  of  which  four  were  gilds  of  journeymen — 
presumably  in  nominal  subordination  to  the  masters'  gilds.  An  interesting 
but  all  too  brief  account  is  given  of  the '  bossen ', '  bussen ',  or '  beurzen ' 
{Germ.  '  Biichse  ',  Eng.  '  box ',  Fr.  '  bourse  '),  or  friendly  societies  which 
covered  the  transition  from  the  medieval  fraternity  to  the  modern  trade 
union.  The  social  and  industrial  relations  of  Holland  with  Brabant  were 
of  the  closest  kind,  and  a  reference  to  the  recent  study  by  M.  des  Marez,  of 
the  seventeenth-century  compagnonage  of  the  hatters  of  Brussels,  which 
was  based  on  a  bourse  organization  and  had  ramifications  in  Holland  and 
France,  would  have  probably  enabled  Mr.  Blok  to  cast  more  light  on  the 
Leyden  '  beurzen'.  The  study  of  civic  finance  is  a  valuable  feature  of 
this  as  of  the  earlier  volumes  of  the  history.  George  Unwin.    Mi 

The  Development  of  the  British  West  Indies,  1700-63.    By  F.  W.  Pitman, 
Ph.D.    (New  Haven,  Connecticut :  Yale  University  Press,  1917.)        ■I 

Dr.  Pitman  has  contributed  to  the  Yale  Historical  Publications  a  volume 
on  the  economic  conditions  of  British  West  Indies  in  the  eighteenth 
century  which,  by  means  of  an  exhaustive  study  of  manuscript  material 
in  the  Public  Record  Office  and  other  archives,  substitutes  first-hand 
knowledge  for  the  sometimes  prejudiced,  though  vivid,  statements  of 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  407 

eighteenth-century  historians.  Here  and  there  the  author  may  not  be 
quite  sufficiently  critical,  as  when  he  seems  to  cite  seriously  the  violent 
language  of  H.  Whistler,  who  accompanied  the  Jamaica  expedition  of 
1655,  regarding  the  population  of  royalist  Barbados  ;  and  in  dealing 
with  the  subject  of  illicit  trading  he  has  omitted  to  remind  us  that  many 
of  the  dispatches  cited  as  Colonial  Office  manuscripts  have  been  printed 
in  the  published  correspondence  between  W.  Pitt  and  colonial  governors. 
Again,  in  his  concentration  upon  economic  factors,  he  ignores  the  evidence 
of  local  patriotism  shown  by  the  political  pretensions  of  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries.  But  these  things  are  trifles,  and  in  no  way 
detract  from  the  merits  of  a  most  valuable  book. 

Amidst  the  mass  of  detail  here  accumulated  certain  fundamental  conclu- 
sions seem  to  emerge.  The  dominance  of  sugar  in  the  West  Indies  involved 
the  decay  of  the  poor  white  settler,  and  the  increase  of  large  properties 
worked  by  slave  labour.  Such  a  system  tended  to  produce  absenteeism, 
which,  in  turn,  fostered  the  existence  of  a  powerful  West  India  interest 
in  London  which  worked  in  favour  of  the  planters'  as  opposed  to  the 
merchants'  interests.  The  interests  of  these  rich  planters  were  by  no 
means  identical  with  the  interests  of  the  islands,  as  it  might  be  more 
profitable  for  them  to  grow  less  sugar  at  a  high  price  than  to  have  the 
price  brought  down  by  new  lands  being  brought  under  cultivation. 
'  Towards  the  middle  of  the  century  ',  we  are  told, '  it  was  perfectly  ap- 
parent that  the  West  Indians  were  manipulating  legislation  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  elevating  prices  in  England.' 

But  it  was  not  only  Great  Britain  or  the  West  Indies  that  were  con- 
cerned with  these  questions,  they  also  had  a  considerable  bearing  upon  the 
relations  between  the  continental  colonies  and  the  mother  country  ;  and 
a  main  merit  of  this  volume  is  the  manner  in  which  the  influence  of  the 
Molasses  Act  of  1733,  and  the  illicit  commerce  thereby  occasioned,  upon 
the  temper  of  the  American  colonists  is  lucidly  demonstrated.  Dr.  Pitman 
starts  with  the  proposition  that  *  reflection  on  the  comparative  extent, 
both  in  area  and  population,  of  the  British  colonies  in  the  temperate  and 
tropical  zones  impresses  one  with  the  inequality  of  these  regions  as  comple- 
mentary trade  areas.  .  .  .  The  empire  was  overbalanced  on  its  temperate 
zone  side.'  The  French  empire  being  in  the  precisely  opposite  position,  it 
was  only  natural  that  we  should  find,  from  the  beginning,  '  a  tendency 
towards  economic  equilibrium  which  paid  no  heed  to  political  boundaries.' 
Unfortunately  for  many  of  the  years  between  1733  and  1763  Great  Britain 
and  France  were  at  war,  so  that,  apart  from  the  economic  objections  of 
the  English  mercantilist,  there  was  the  political  treason  involved  in  a  trade 
between  the  colonies  and  the  enemy.  In  Dr.  Pitman's  opinion  a  priceless 
opportunity  was  lost  when,  at  the  Peace  of  Paris,  the  French  sugar  islands 
were  restored  to  France.  Their  retention  could  have  given  to  the  empire 
a  proper  balance  between  temperate-zone  and  tropical  colonies  and  could 
have  solved  the  most  vital  commercial  need  of  North  America  as  well  as 
of  England.  Given  the  existing  economic  conditions  Dr.  Pitman  seems 
inclined  to  think  that  the  decision  to  prefer  Canada  to  Guadeloupe  was, 
at  the  time,  wrong  ;  though,  on  more  general  grounds  and  looking  to  the 
future,  we  may  rejoice  at  that  decision. 


408  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

The  Peace  of  Paris  marked  a  momentous  crisis  in  the  history  of  the  empire.  Through 
it  the  planting  interest  came  triumphant.  Its  position  of  monopoly  was  practically 
undisturbed ;  Great  Britain  and  America  were  still  exposed  to  exploitation  by  an 
interest  whose  aims  were  well  understood.  .  .  .  The  Treaty  of  Paris,  the  Sugar  Act  of 
1764,  and  the  administrative  reforms  of  Grenville,  revealed  a  firm  determination  to 
restrict  America  to  the  same  old  markets  which  time  and  again  had  been  proved 
inadequate  for  either  England  or  America.  It  is  not  surprising  that  murmurs  about 
'  the  inconvenience  of  being  British  subjects '  grew  louder  in  the  northern  colonies. 
The  West  India  planting  interest  had  laid  substantial  foundations  in  the  realm  of 
economic  life  for  that  great  discontent  which  culminated  in  the  American  Revolution. 

Whether  or  not  we  agree  with  all  its  conclusions,  it  is  difficult  to 
exaggerate  the  importance  of  this  volume  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
economic  history  of  the  British  empire.  H.  E.  Egerton. 


La  Revolution  Argentine,  1810-16,      Par  Jose  P.  Otero,  Docteur  es 
lettres.    (Paris  :   Bossard,  1917.) 

The  dates  set  down  in  the  title  of  this  book  have  a  precise  significance. 
When  news  reached  the  Eiver  Plate  that  Spain  had  been  overrun  by  the 
French  invaders,  the  city  of  Buenos  Aires  appointed  a  Junta  or  Constitu- 
tional Convention  and  deprived  the  Spanish  viceroy  of  his  functions. 
Thus  local  independence  was  practically  achieved  in  May  1810 ;  but  it 
was  not  until  1816  that  the  congress  of  Tucuman,  in  which  most  of  the 
provinces  of  the  viceroyalty  were  represented,  formally  declared  those 
provinces  to  be  independent  of  the  mother-country  and  of  the  Spanish 
monarchy.  Senor  Otero  traces,  in  a  clear  and  excellent  narrative,  the  course 
of  the  Eevolution  during  those  six  years  of  demolition  and  of  efforts  after 
reconstruction.  He  shows  how  the  British  invasions  of  1806-7  and  their 
repulse  prepared  the  way  for  independence,  and  then  narrates  the  steps 
whereby  the  community,  which  had  thus  proved  its  capacity  for  self- 
defence  and  for  local  organization,  attempted  the  more  difficult  task  of 
founding  a  new  polity  and  binding  the  provinces  of  the  former  viceroyalty 
into  a  single  state.  Particular  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  activities  of  a  small 
group  of  men  who  acted  as  a  kind  of  self-constituted  committee  of  advice 
and  pushed  the  Revolution  towards  its  logical  conclusion  of  complete 
independence.  From  among  these  Seiaor  Otero  singles  out,  as  the  central 
inspiring  influence  of  the  Revolution,  the  young  lawyer  Mariano  Moreno, 
the  student  of  French  political  philosophy,  the  translator  of  Rousseau,  the 
enthusiast  for  the  ideas  of  1789.  For  in  these  ideas  the  author  finds  not 
indeed  the  origin  of  the  Revolution,  but  the  interpretation  of  its  spirit, 
character,  and  aims.  This  is  the  main  thesis  of  the  book — Vinfiuence  de  la 
philosophie  liberatrice  de  la  France  dans  notre  premier  cycle  historique. 
And  it  is  clearly  shown  that  la  doctrine  democratique  de  la  Revolution — to 
use  the  author's  own  words — was  a  powerful  guiding  motive  to  some  of  the 
leaders,  notably  Belgranoand  Mariano  Moreno.  Senor  Otero's  interpreta-- 
tion  of  the  Revolution  by  the  formula  peuple  et  souverainete  would  have 
gained  in  interest  and  completeness  if,  instead  of  stopping  short  at  1816,  he 
had  added  a  brief  review  of  the  events  of  the  succeeding  generation  from 
the  same  point  of  view. 

In  dwelling  particularly  upon  this  very  notable  French  influence, 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  409 

Senor  Otero  hardly  does  justice  to  the  thoroughly  Spanish  methods  which 
marked  the  transfer  of  authority  across  the  Atlantic  and  the  earlier  stages 
of  the  Revolution.  He  himself  points  out  how  the  emergency  of  the  English 
invasions  was  met  by  local  forces,  which  found  their  means  of  action  in 
the  cabildo  or  municipality,  and  how  the  same  forces,  acting  through  the 
same  channel,  afterwards  met  the  second  great  emergency  of  the  collapse 
of  the  mother  country.  In  the  initial  steps  of  the  Revolution,  Spanish 
tradition  and  constitutional  precedent  were  closely  followed,  and  these 
American  Spaniards  proceeded  to  undertake  the  management  of  their  own 
affairs  in  the  manner  that  was  customary  among  Spaniards  both  in  the 
Peninsula  and  in  the  Indies.  It  is  perhaps  indicative  of  the  trend  of 
Argentine  political  thought  that  the  North  American  Revolution  is  only 
once  mentioned,  in  a  single  line.  And  the  influence  of  English  constitutional 
methods  is  left  to  be  inferred  rather  than  distinctly  stated. 

The  preliminary  account  of  the  work  of  Spain  in  America  is  the  least 
satisfying  part  of  the  book,  particularly  the  general  sketch  given  under  the 
heading  Ahsolutisme  Espagnol.  The  Spanish  system  is  here  exhibited  in 
juridical  theory  rather  than  in  action  ;  and  some  important  branches  of 
administration  are  treated  with  a  brevity  which  sometimes  fails  to  attain 
accuracy.  The  author's  main  argument  would  be  strengthened  by  a  re- 
vision of  the  statement  concerning  popular  election  to  the  Cabildos. 
The  chapters  on  Spanish  rule  in  the  River  Plate  are  less  meagre,  but 
they  hardly  picture  the  vigorous  and  independent  activities  of  the  early 
settlers,  and  nothing  is  said  concerning  the  agitated  life  of  the  turhulenta 
repuhlica  of  Asuncion,  which  for  two  centuries  claimed  the  privilege  of 
appointing  its  governors  in  case  of  vacancy,  and  occasionally  created 
vacancies  in  order  to  exercise  that  privilege.  Depuis  la  decouverte  du  Rio 
de  la  Plata  jusqu'd  la  creation  de  la  Viceroyaute,  aucune  idee  veritahlement 
civilisatrice  ne  brille  dans  ce  lointain  monde  americain.  Such  is  the  author's 
sweeping  judgement.  With  the  erection  of  the  viceroyalty  of  Buenos  Aires 
in  1776,  the  narrative  becomes  more  spirited  and  more  sympathetic,  and 
full  justice  in  done  to  the  administrative  and  economic  reforms  effected 
during  the  last  thirty  years  of  Spanish  rule. 

Senor  Otero  writes  as  a  Porteno,  a  Buenos  Aires  man.  His  view  seems 
to  be  that  all  the  provinces  of  the  viceroyalty  owed  allegiance  to  the 
emancipated  capital  as  soon  as  the  capital  had  dethroned  the  viceroy. 
The  course  of  the  Revolution  is  shown  to  be  distinctly  municipal  and  local 
in  its  earlier  stages  ;  yet  he  has  no  patience  with  local  action  elsewhere 
unless  it  agrees  with  la  pensee  directrice  de  la  capitale.  The  three  provinces 
which  were  not  represented  at  the  congress  of  Tucuman  are  labelled  as 
'  rebellious  provinces ',  and  the  Banda  Oriental,  now  the  Republic  of 
Uruguay,  is  described  as  an  '  Argentine  province '  and  *  Argentine  terri- 
tory '.  It  is  natural  and  indeed  essential  to  clearness  that  the  narrative 
should  centre  in  Buenos  Aires ;  but  notable  events  which  occurred  else- 
where do  not  always  receive  proportionate  treatment.  Thus  Senor  Otero's 
narrative  would  lead  one  to  suppose  that  Auchmuty  entered  Montevideo 
unresisted  in  1807,  whereas  in  fact  the  place  was  taken  by  assault  with 
heavy  losses  on  both  sides.  On  the  other  hand,  where  Senor  Otero  feels 
himself  to  be  at  home,  in  Buenos  Aires,  he  is  an  admirable  guide. 


410  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

At  the  present  time,  when  the  Latin-American  republics  are  being 
drawn  into  the  main  current  of  world  history,  the  publication  of  this  book 
has  a  special  interest  and  value.  For  it  illustrates  the  fact  that  the  South 
American  movement  of  independence  was  no  less  a  part  of  European 
history  than  the  North  American  Revolution,  and  that  the  Argentine 
Republic  is  a  European  community  in  origin,  sympathies,  and  character. 
German  writers  and  speakers  on  Latin-American  affairs  declare  with 
mortification  that  the  intellectual  debt  of  Latin  America  to  France  is 
a  formidable  obstacle  to  German  cultural  and  economic  designs  across  the 
Atlantic.  Senor  Otero's  generous  acknowledgement  of  that  debt  is  a  good 
omen  for  the  Argentine's  future  relations  both  with  her  American  neigh- 
bours and  with  Europe.  F.  A.  Kirkpatrtck. 

The  Great  European  Treaties  of  the  Nineteenth  Century.  Edited  by  Sir 
Augustus  H.  Oakes  and  R.  B.  Mowat.  (Oxford  :  Clarendon  Press, 
1918.) 

This  is  a  useful  book  for  the  layman  who  desires  to  make  himself 
acquainted  with  the  provisions  of  the  chief  European  treaties  from  the 
treaty  of  Vienna,  1815,  down  to  the  treaties  of  London  and  Bucharest 
of  1913,  concluded  after  the  first  and  second  Balkan  wars.  Each  section 
is  preceded  by  a  short  introduction  narrating  the  principal  events  which 
led  up  to  the  conclusion  of  the  respective  treaties.  The  words  '  of  the 
Nineteenth  Century '  are  not  to  be  taken  quite  literally.  Thus,  the  impor- 
tant treaties  of  Tilsit  (1807)  and  of  Chaumont  (1814),  the  latter  of  which 
may  be  regarded  as  the  origin  of  the  '  Concert  of  Europe ',  and  that  of 
Unkiar  Skelessi  (1833)  and  even  of  Kutchuk  Kainardji  (1775),  which  con- 
tained the  germs  of  the  Crimean  war,  might  well  have  been  included. 
The  text  of  the  crucial  article  of  the  latter  is,  however,  given  at  p.  159. 
It  clearly  conferred  on  Russia  a  right  of  remonstrance  if  the  Porte  failed 
'  to  protect  firmly  the  Christian  religion  and  its  churches ',  and  even  to 
proceed  further  if  such  remonstrances  were  disregarded. 

Chapter  i  contains  an  accurate  account,  on  the  whole,  of  the  techni- 
calities which  govern  the  conclusion  of  treaties.  Some  observations  on 
this  chapter  will  be  found  further  on.  A  vital  question  which  has  come 
into  prominence  in  connexion  with  the  present  war  is  that  of  treaties  of 
'  guarantee '.  Probably  we  ought  to  be  careful  how  we  use  this  term, 
and  to  avoid  as  far  as  possible  employing  it  in  a  non-technical  sense,  as 
is  done  at  p.  22.  There  it  is  said  that  by  article  XII  of  the  treaty  of  Paris 
of  30  May  1814  Great  Britain  guaranteed  most-favoured-nation  treatment 
in  India  to  French  subjects  and  commerce.  But  the  word  in  the  French 
text,  undoubtedly  the  original,  is  merely  s^engage,  the  word  '  guarantee  * 
being  adopted  in  the  English  version,  where  a  better  rendering  would  be 
'  undertakes '. 

A  more  important  point  is  the  distinction,  if  there  be  one,  which 
attempts  have  been  made  to  draw  between  a  joint  and  several  guarantee 
of  neutrality,  such  as  is  alleged  to  have  been  given  by  the  five  Great 
Powers  to  Belgium,  and  the  '  collective '  guarantee  in  the  case  of  Luxem- 
burg.   Space  does  not  admit-  of  a  full  discussion  of  this  question,  but  it 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  411 

may  be  pointed  out  that  in  article  XXII  of  the  treaty  of  Paris  of  1856  the 
phrase  is  '  sous  la  garantie  des  Puissances  contractantes '  with  regard  to 
the  Principalities,  while  in  article  XXVIII  the  rights  and  immunities  of 
Serbia  are  placed '  sous  la  garantie  collective  des  Puissances  contractantes ', 
where  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  intention  was  to  give  to  each  of  those 
states  the  same  guarantee. 

At  the  conference  of  London,  1867,  which  settled  the  Luxemburg  affair, 
Lord  Stanley  had  proposed  a  wording  that  the  Grand  Duchy,  sous  la 
garantie  des  Cours  of  the  five  Powers,/of wera  desormais  un  etat  perpetuelle- 
ment  neutre.    The  Prussian  plenipotentiary,  having  expressed  the  hope 
that  the  same  guarantee  would  be  given  by  the  Powers  to  the  neutrality 
of  Luxemburg  as  was  enjoyed  by  that  of  Belgium,  accordingly  proposed 
the  following  paragraph,  which,  after  some  hesitation  on  the  part  of  Lord 
Stanley,  was  added  to  the  article  :  '  Ce  principe  [i.  e.  de  neutralite]  est  et 
demeure  place  sous  la  sanction  de  la  garantie  collective  des  Puissances 
signataires  du  present  Traite,  a  Texception  de  la  Belgique,  qui  est  elle- 
meme  un  fitat  neutre.'    It  is  clear  that  the  proposer  regarded  this  form 
of  words  as  having  the  same  force  as  the  formula  adopted  in  1839  in  the 
case  of  Belgium.    Lord  Stanley  had  previously  remarked  that  the  terms 
of  his  draft  were  identical  with  those  employed  in  1839.    A  considerable 
amount  of  discussion  as  to  the  meaning  of  '  collective  guarantee '  took 
place  in  both  houses  of  parliament,  and  the  British  government  of  that 
day  maintained  the  view  that  it  did  not  imply  that  the  guarantors  were 
bound  by  themselves  individually.    We  find  it  difficult  to  agree  with  this 
opinion,  which,  as  the  authors  of  the  book  before  us  observe,  tended  to 
destroy  the  value  of  the  guarantee  if  one  of  the  parties  chose  to  disregard 
it  (p.  258).    And  considering  that  diplomatists  are  not  lawyers,  it  appears 
unlikely  that  they  would  draw  a  distinction  between  '  la  garantie  des 
Puissances '  and  '  la  garantie   collective  des  Puissances '.     It  should 
moreover  be  remembered  that  the  guarantee  in  favour  of  Belgium  is 
nowhere  stipulated  to  be  joint  and  several.    It  can  scarcely  be  alleged 
that  a  mere  plural  'des  Puissances  '  has  this  effect.    As  another  variation 
may  be  cited  article  VII  of  the  treaty  of  1856,  by  which  'Leurs  Majestes 
s'engagent,  chacune  de  son  c6te,  a  respecter  I'independance  et  I'integrite 
territoriale  de  TEmpire  Ottoman ;    garantissent  en  commun  la  stricte 
observation  de  cet  engagement '.      Then  Austria,  France,  and  Great 
Britain,  conceiving  a  doubt  whether  Eussia  would  respect  this  engagement, 
entered  into  a  separate  treaty  which  declares  that :  *  Les  Hautes  Parties 
Contractantes  garantissent  solidairement  entre  elles  I'independance  et 
I'integrite  de  I'Empire  Ottoman,  consacrees  par  le  Traite  conclu  a  Paris 
le  30  mars  1856.'    This  step  was  doubtless  taken  by  the  three  Powers 
because  Prince  Gortchakoff  had  observed  at  the  sitting  of  the  Vienna 
Conference  on  19  April  1855  that  the  proposed  wording  '  les  Puissances 
Contractantes  s'engagent  mutuellement   a  respecter  I'independance  et 
I'integrite  de  son  territoire  [i.e.  de  I'Empire  Ottoman]  comme  formant 
une  condition  essentielle  de  I'equilibre  general'  did  not  involve  any 
territorial  guarantee. 

It  seems  often  to  be  forgotten  that  in  additionto  the  treaties  of  1839 
between  the  five   Powers  and  Belgium,  Ihe  five  Powers  and  Holland 


412  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

(officially  styled  the  Netherlands),  and  between  Holland  and  Belgium,  the 
German  Confederation  on  the  same  day  acceded  to  the  first  seven  articles 
of  the  twenty-four  of  this  set  of  treaties.  Luxemburg  since  1352  had  been 
styled  a  duchy,  and  was  in  1815  promoted,  one  might  say,  to  the  rank  of 
a  Grand  Duchy.  This  change  was  meaningless,  just  as  was  the  title  of 
Grand  Duke  conferred  on  the  Dukes  of  Holstein- Oldenburg,  Mecklenburg- 
Schwerin  and  Mecklenburg-Strelitz,  and  Saxe-Weimar  by  articles  34,  35, 
and  36  of  the  treaty  of  Vienna. 

In  leaving  this  subject  we  must  remark  that  the  statement  on  p.  139 
that  '  The  Treaty  of  1839  imposed  upon  Belgium  the  heavy  burden  of 
defending  her  territory  against  any  State,  however  powerful,  which  should 
try  to  get  a  passage  for  troops,  or  a  base  of  operations  in  her  territory  '  is j 
at  most  a  mere  inference  of  international  law  from  the  obligation  to  observe) 
perpetual  neutrality  towards  all  other  States,  as  the  complement  of  the 
status  of  a  perpetually  neutralized  state  conferred  on  her  by  article  VII, 
From  the  way  in  which  it  is  put,  the  reader  might  suppose  that  the  treaty] 
of  1839  actually  contained,  in  so  many  words,  a  stipulation  respecting! 
self-defence.    And  on  p.  258  we  find  it  said  that  by  the  treaty  of  1867,1 
although  '  Luxemburg,  like  Belgium,  was  bound  by  treaty  to  observe 
neutrality  towards  all  other  States,  yet  she  was  not  bound  to  defend  that 
neutrality  by  force  of  arms ',  where  the  mention  of  Belgium  seems  to] 
suggest  that  Belgium  was  so  bound. 

The  authors  have  made  a  good  point  in  recalling  (pp.  170  and  316)  th€ 
stipulation  in  article  XIV  of  the  treaty  of  1856,  by  which  Eussia  was] 
bound  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  contracting  parties,  namely,  that  the 
Black  Sea  Convention '  cannot  be  either  annulled  or  modified  without  the] 
assent  of  the  Powers  signing  the  present  Treaty  '.  So  Eussia  was  clearly 
out  of  court  in  1870  when  she  declared  by  the  mouth  of  Prince  GortchakofE 
that  she  would  no  longer  be  bound  by  that  Convention.  They  have  also 
done  a  public  service  in  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  the  reprint 
of  the  protocol  of  3  February  1830,  in  the  Parliamentary  Paper  of  1898, 
entitled '  Treaties  containing  guarantees  or  Engagements  in  regard  to  the 
territory  of  other  governments ',  there  is  a  serious  omission,  without  any 
official  indication  that  the  document  is  incomplete.  The  words  left  out 
are  :  '  No  troops  belonging  to  one  of  these  contracting  Powers  shall  be 
allowed  to  enter  the  territory  of  the  new  Greek  State  without  the  consent 
of  the  two  other  Courts  who  signed  the  Treaty  '  [i.  e.  of  6  July  1827].^ 

Some  minor  inaccuracies  may  be  noted.  At  p.  4  it  is  stated  that  the 
king's  ratification  of  a  treaty  is  sent  to  the  British  representative  at  the 
court  of  the  other  signatory  Power.  This  will  obviously  not  be  done  where 
the  treaty  has  been  concluded  in  London,  in  which  case  the  ratification 
article  will  provide  for  the  exchange  taking  place  there.  To  say  (as  at  p.  5) 
that  in  the  United  States  the  treaty-making  power  is  vested  in  the  Senate, 
and  to  speak  of  'a  treaty  duly  ratified  by  the  Senate  ',  is  not  a  very  correct 
way  of  describing  the  process.  It  is  the  President  who  negotiates  and 
ratifies  treaties,  but  the  act  of  ratification  must  be  preceded  by  a  resolution 
passed  in  the  Senate  by  two-thirds  of  the  Senators  present  and  voting  to  the 

^  See  article  by  Dr.  Ronald  M.  Burrows  in  Ncav  Europe  of  November  9,  1910,  i.  20, 
quoted  by  the  authors  at  p.  113. 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  413 

effect  that  they  consent  to  and  advise  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.  So 
far  is  the  treaty-making  power  from  being  vested  in  the  Senate,  that  even 
after  such  a  resolution  has  been  passed,  the  President  may  still  decide  not 
to  ratify,  or  he  may  withdraw  from  the  Senate  a  treaty  that  he  has  sent  to 
that  body  for  its  approval.  On  p.  6,  after  a  statement  that  in  the  case  of 
general  treaties  between  several  Powers  the  plenipotentiaries  sign  in  the 
order  of  the  French  language,  we  are  informed  that  '  Nevertheless,  the 
British  copy  of  the  General  Act  of  Brussels  of  1890  was  signed  first  by  the 
British  Plenipotentiaries  '.  What  was  done  on  that  occasion  was,  however, 
entirely  in  accordance  with  rules.  So  also,  on  p.  7,  the  authors  report  that 
in  the  British  copy  of  the  treaty  of  Berlin  of  1878,  Great  Britain  came 
first  in  signing,  then  Turkey,  then  the  others  in  alphabetical  order.  But 
at  p.  360,  in  their  reproduction  of  the  text,  the  Turkish  signatures  are 
put  last.  The  probability  is  (for  the  original  of  the  treaty,  kept  at  the 
Public  Record  Office,  is  at  present  not  available  for  consultation)  the 
plenipotentiaries  of  the  great  Powers  signed  in  column  on  the  left  hand, 
the  British  plenipotentiaries  signing  first  in  their  copy  according  to  rule^ 
and  the  Turkish  plenipotentiaries  by  themselves  on  the  right.  These 
apparent  variations  are  explained  by  the  allernat. 

On  p.  36  it  is  stated  that  when  the  monarchs  of  Austria,  Prussia,  and 
Russia  met  at  Troppau  and  Laibach  '  Great  Britain  stood  aloof  from 
these  proceedings  '.  If  '  stood  aloof '  means  that  Great  Britain  took  no 
part,  it  seems  incorrect,  since  she  was  represented  on  both  occasions. 
P.  107,  the  Bay  of  Navarino  is  wrongly  located  on  the  south-east  coast  of 
the  Morea.  It  is  on  the  south-west.  P.  129, '  No.  IV  '  of  the  secret  articles 
of  the  treaty  of  Paris  of  30  May  1814  should  be  '  No.  Ill '.  P.  160, '  By 
the  end  of  the  year  1852,  Napoleon  III,  who  had  in  the  previous  year  suc- 
ceeded in  making  himself  Emperor  of  the  French : '  *  previous  year '  is  a  slip. 
The  senatus-consultum  which  proposed  to  conferthetitle  of  emperor  on  Louis 
Napoleon  was  dated  7  November  1852.  P.  165, '  In  1807  (7  July)  Napoleon 
and  Alexander  I  made  peace  at  Tilsit.  The  two  Powers  became  Allies  ; 
Secret  Articles  provided  that  Russia  was  to  aid  Napoleon  in  his  conflict 
with  England,  France  was  to  help  Russia  in  her  designs  upon  Turkey.' 
The  compacts  signed  at  Tilsit  consisted  of  a  treaty  of  peace,  seven  Articles 
separes  et  secrets,  and  an  offensive  and  defensive  alliance.  Articles  4,  5,  6, 
and  7  of  this  alliance  (which  was  to  remain  secret)  concerned  England, 
and  article  8  was  directed  against  Turkey.  All  these  documents  have 
been  published  over  and  over  again.  They  are  given  by  F.  de  Martens 
at  p.  325  of  vol.  xiii  of  his  Recueil  des  Traites  et  Conventions,  &c. 

P.  185,  in  reproducing  the  English  version  of  the  Declaration  of  Paris, 
it  would  have  been  advisable  to  reprint  also  the  extract  from  protocol 
no.  24,  which  provides  that  any  future  arrangement  entered  into  re^specting 
the  rights  of  neutrals  in  time  of  war  must  be  based  on  the  whole  four 
principles  contained  in  the  Declaration,  i.e.  that  no  Power  should  be 
admitted  to  accede  to,  say,  three  of  the  principles  and  reject  the  fourth. 
It  is  an  essential  portion  of  the  Declaration.  P.  192,  '  The  question  of 
submitting  the  treaty  [of  8  May  1852,  by  which  the  order  of  succession  to 
the  Crown  of  Denmark  was  regulated]  to  the  Diet  of  the  Germanic  Con- 
federation was  decided  in  the  negative.'    It  should  have  been  added  that 


414  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

it  was  the  Danish  government  alone  which  took  this  negative  decision. 
P.  374,  it  might  have  been  stated  that  articles  1,  III,  and  IV  are  published 
at  pp.  212  and  213  of  the  Austrian  Red  Book,  Diplomatische  Aktenstucke 
hetreffend  die  Beziehungen  Osterreich-Ungarns  zu  Italien  in  der  Zeit  vom 
20,  Juli  1914  his  23.  Mai  1915,  and  article  VII  at  p.  203. 

Taking  the  work  as  a  whole,  though  it  is  not  likely  to  afford  much  new 
knowledge  to  the  student  of  international  history,  its  value  to  the  general 
reader  who  cares  to  inform  himself  on  these  matters  is  incontestable. 

Ernest  Satow. 


The  Origins  of  the  Trifle  Alliance.    By  Archibald  C.  Coolidge.    (New 
York :   Scribner,  1917.) 

This  work  by  Professor  Coolidge  of  Harvard  University  consists  of  three 
lectures  given  in  1916  at  the  university  of  Virginia.     Occasionally  the^ 
narrative  goes  somewhat  beyond  the  scope  marked  out  by  the  title  ;  for] 
instance,  in  chapter  ii  the  account  of  the  decline  of  Turkey  and  of  the] 
dealings  of  the  Powers  with  her  is  told  at  considerable  length  :    but  in.) 
lectures  this  is  a  fault  on  the  right  side,  and  the  result  is  to  reveal  the 
connexion  between  the  Eastern  Question  of  1875-8  and  the  Dreikaiser- 
bund  described  in  chapter  i.     That  chapter  is  to  be  commended  for  it*, 
careful  and  luminous  survey  of  the  position  and  relations  of  the  Great  i 
Powers  in  1870-5,  as  well  as  for  its  account,  sufficiently  pointed  yet  pru-^ 
dently  restrained,  of  the  Franco-German  crisis  of  the  spring  of  1875.    Mr. 
Coolidge  adduces  sufficient  proofs  for  believing  that  there  was  very  real] 
danger  for  France  in  the  threats  of  the  military  party  at  Berlin  ;  and  his, 
narrative  is  far  fuller  and  more  convincing  than  the  one-sided  reference  to  | 
this  incident  given  by  Professor  Hermann  Oncken,  in  the  Cambridge  \ 
Modern  History,  vol.  xii,  ch.  vi.    Another  valuable  testimony  is  that  of  ] 
Lord  Odo  Russell,  cited  by  the  late  Sir  Mountstuart  Grant  Duff  in  his( 
Notes  from  a  Diary  (1886-8),  i.  129  ;    also  that   of  Lord  Derby  cited, 
by  C.  Gavard,  Un  Diplomate  a  Londres,  which  shows  that  Lord  Derby ; 
believed  the  crisis  to  have  been  serious.    These  sources  tend  to  increase, 
our  conviction  that  Moltke  and  the  General  Staff  really  harboured  the 
design  of  crushing  France,  and  that  Russia  and  Great  Britain  played  an 
important  part  in  averting  war.    Lord  Derby's  words  to  Gavard  also  assign 
more  importance  to  the  action  of  Queen  Victoria  than  Mr.  Coolidge 
allows  (p.  62,  note).    Further,  the  words  of  Alexander  11  and  Gortchakoff 
to  the  French  envoy,  Gontaut-Biron,  at  Berlin,  in  September  1872,  showed 
that  Russia,  even  then,  did  not  intend  to  allow  Germany  a  free  hand 
against  France,  and  that  they  considered  France  to  be  necessary  to  Europe 
as  a  make-weight  against  the  German  Empire.    In  view  of  these  facts, 
Mr.  Coolidge's  statement  that  in  1872  '  France  could  only  look  on,  lonely 
and  helpless  ',  a  little  overshoots  the  mark. 

Following  Wertheimer  and  Fournier  as  the  chief  sources,  he  gives  an  in- 
teresting account  of  the  bargaining  that  went  on  between  St.  Petersburg  and 
Vienna  on  Balkan  affairs  in  1876-7  and  shows  how  it  influenced  the  issue 
of  events ;  but  it  would  have  been  well  to  explain  why  *  Greeks,  Rumanians, 
and  even  Serbians  protested  violently '  against  the  San  Stefano  treaty* 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  415 

He  shows  clearly  the  causes  of  the  breach  of  friendly  relations  between 
Russia  and  Germany  at  and  after  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  and  why,  after 
Gastein,  the  Russian  sympathies  of  William  I  were  overborne  by 
Bismarck,  the  Crown  Prince,  and  Moltke.  Count  Mijatovich's  Memoirs 
(1917)  had  not  appeared  when  Mr.  Coolidge  gave  this  series  of  lectures ; 
they  prove  that  the  count  urged  and  concluded  the  Austro-Serb  treaty 
of  June  1881,  mainly  because  Austria  recognized  the  justice  of  Serbia's 
claim  to  '  Kossovo  and  Macedonia,  with  the  exception  of  Salonica  '.  The 
French  occupation  of  Tunis  Mr.  Coolidge  describes  adequately,  though 
it  might  be  well  to  mention  the  breach  of  faith  (so  Crispi  represents 
it,  Memoirs,  ii.  108)  of  which  Freycinet  was  guilty.  He  promised 
that  if  France  seized  Tunis,  she  would  inform  Italy  as  long  beforehand  as 
possible,  and  assist  her  to  acquire  adequate  compensation  in  the  Mediter- 
ranean. The  failure  to  fulfil  this  (alleged)  promise  drove  Italy  into  the 
arms  of  the  Central  Empires.  It  is  also  desirable  to  add  that  Article  VII 
of  the  Austro-Italian  treaty  of  alliance,  providing  for  *  reciprocal  com- 
pensation for  all  advantages,  territorial  or  otherwise,  which  either 
of  them  may  obtain  beyond  the  present  status  quo '  in  the  Balkans  and 
Turkey,  was  used  by  the  government  of  Rome  in  support  of  their  claim 
for  compensation,  which  took  the  form  of  Italia  irredenta ;  and  this 
claim  led  to  the  rupture  of  May  1915.  J.  Holland  Rose. 

The  Law  and  the  State.  By  Lieon  Duguit,  translated  by  Frederick  J.  de 
Slogv^jre.  Harvard  Law  Review,  Special  Number,  November  1917. 
(Cambridge,  Massachusetts  :  Harvard  University  Press.) 

For  the  last  fifteen  years  M.  Duguit  has  been  known  as  the  chief  repre- 
sentative in  France  of  those  theories  of  the  state  which  constitute  a  reaction 
from  '  neo-Hegelianism '.  He  will  have  nothing  to  say  to  the  personality 
of  the  state  or  to  its  sovereignty  :  he  believes  very  little  in  rights,  whether 
those  of  the  state  or  of  the  individual,  and  prefers  to  rely  on  the  duty  of 
co-operation  towards  the  fulfilment  of  social  needs.  For  the  full  statement 
of  his  view  and  for  his  detailed  replies  to  the  criticisms  which  have  been 
brought  against  it,  the  student  must  still  refer  to  M.  Duguit's  earlier  works  : 
the  present  volume,  though  it  leads  up  to  a  brief  statement  of  the  author's 
solution  of  the  problem  and  of  the  main  difficulties  that  have  been  iound 
in  it,  should  rather  be  regarded  as  containing  prolegomena  to  that  state- 
ment, the  object  being  to  show  that  other  solutions  have  broken  down. 
The  question  is  whether  the  state  can  be  regarded  as  itself  subject  to 
legal  principles,  or  whether  it  can  only  be  looked  upon  as  containing  the 
origin  of  all  such  principles  and  being  therefore  in  the  last  resort  superior 
to  them.  The  consequences  of  the  latter  view  to  international  law,  and 
not  to  international  law  only,  are  obvious. 

M.  Duguit  begins  by  considering  the  principles  of  1789  and  the  attempts 
to  regard  individuals  as  possessing  natural  rights  antecedent  to  the  state  : 
the  state  is  then  considered  as  an  institution  designed  to  secure  those 
natural  rights,  and  as  forfeiting  its  claim  to  consideration  so  far  as  it  fails 
to  attain  that  end.  The  English  reader  will  probably  agree  with  the 
author's  criticisms,  though  he  may  think  that  Ritchie's  examination  of 


416  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  July 

Locke's  views  carries  him  further  than  the  more  modern  French  writer 
does.  On  Kousseau,  who  comes  next,  M.  Duguit  is  sympathetic  but  rather 
one-sided  ;  Dr.  Vaughan's  introductions  to  his  edition  of  Rousseau's 
Political  Works  are  more  complete  and  fairer  to  the  author.  In  dealing 
with  Kant,  M.  Duguit  does  good  service  in  pointing  out  that  the  desire  to 
save  the  greatest  of  all  German  philosophers  from  association  with  a  theory 
which  leads  to  disastrous  consequences  has  caused  recent  writers  to  ignore 
that  side  of  his  doctrine  on  which  there  is  little  to  distinguish  him  from 
Hegel.  On  passing  to  Hegel,  we  feel  that  an  English  translation  of  a 
French  work  is  not  the  best  medium  for  an  account  of  a  characteristically 
German  thinker  :  but  the  summary  is  useful  so  far  as  it  goes,  in  spite  of 
the  Frenchman's  frequent  charges  of  obscurity  against  the  German, 
charges  which  he  is  rather  too  fond  of  levelling  against  many  of  those 
whom  he  is  discussing,  including  some  writers  who  at  any  rate  deserve 
them  less  than  Hegel  does. 

The  subsequent  chapters  will  probably  be  found  to  contain  more  that 
is  new  to  the  average  English  reader.  The  accounts  of  Constant  and  of 
Esmein  are  full  and  fair,  and  the  criticisms  of  their  views  are  just.  Constant 
is  so  certain  of  the  superiority  of  individual  rights  over  state  claims  that 
he  is  not  prepared  to  allow  that  there  can  be  any  excuse  for  a  minister, 
a  judge,  or  an  officer,  who  renders  any  assistance  in  carrying  out  the  terms 
of  a  law  which  he  believes  to  be  unjust.  This  view  seems  to  deserve  the 
charge  of  anarchy  which  has  been  brought  against  the  opinion  of  M.  Duguit 
himself ;  and  Esmein,  one  of  those  who  have  brought  that  charge,  only 
evades  the  charge  in  his  own  case  by  leaving  the  problem  as  he  found  it 
and  regarding  it  as  in  effect  insoluble.  With  the  corresponding  German 
authors  M.  Duguit  has  naturally  less  sympathy,  but  his  remarks  on 
Gerber's  vague  limitations  on  the  power  of  the  state  and  on  Jhering's  and 
Jellinek's  doctrine  of  the  state's  self-limitation  are  reasonable  enough. 

Finally,  having  disposed  of  all  those  *  metaphysical '  doctrines  which 
the  modern  Frenchman  maintains  the  tradition  of  Comte  in  disliking,  we 
come  to  those  '  realistic '  conceptions  among  which  the  truth,  as  we  are 
assured,  is  to  be  found.  In  an  interesting  account  of  Seydel,  M.  Duguit 
shows  how,  from  what  the  French  writer  believes  to  be  correct  premisses, 
he  arrives  at  an  entirely  wrong  conclusion,  and  the  book  ends  with  an 
estimate  of  the  manner  in  which  the  author  regards  himself  as  having  _. 
strengthened  the  weak  points  in  a  view  which  was  represented  by  Royer-JB 
Collard,  Guizot,  and  Benoist. 

It  is  always  easier  to  find  out  the  weaknesses  in  a  theory  than  to  avoid 
the  corresponding  difficulty  oneself.  There  is  much  that  could  be  said  in 
criticism  of  M.  Duguit's  positive  theory.  But  that  should  not  prevent  us 
from  feeling  grateful  to  him  for  his  illuminating  analysis  of  his  opponents' 
opinions,  to  Mr.  de  Sloovere  for  rendering  the  book  accessible  by  transla- 
tion, and  to  Mr.  H.  J.  Laski  for  a  valuable  supplementary  note  which 
shows  the  affiliation  of  M.  Duguit's  views  to  those  of  other  recent  and 
contemporary  writers,  P.  V.  M.  Benecke. 


1918  417 


Short  Notices 

'Christianity  in  History,  a  Study  of  Religious  Development,  by  Dr.  J.  Vernon 
Bartlet  and  Dr.  A.  J.  Carlyle  (London  :  Macmillan,  1917),  is  in  five  parts  : 
I,  the  Beginnings,  Jesus  the  Christ,  and  Apostolic  Christianity  ;  II,  Ancient 
Christianity,  which  carries  us  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  Middle  Ages  ; 
III,  the  Middle  Ages ;  IV,  the  Great  Transition  ;  and  V,  the  Modern 
Period.  Of  these  parts  the  second  and  third  take  up  380  pages  out  of  some 
600.  The  writers  state  that  their  aim  was  to  give  something  between  a 
history  of  the  Christian  church  and  a  sketch  of  the  development  of  Christian 
doctrine.  There  is,  therefore,  much  in  the  book  that  perhaps  lies  rightly 
outside  the  special  interests  of  this  Review.  If  a  reader  were  to  turn  from 
the  first  350  pages  of  this  book,  say  to  the  Essays  lately  edited  by  the 
late  Dr.  Swete  and  Mr.  C.  H.  Turner,^  he  might  find  it  difficult  to 
realize  that  he  was  being  asked  to  discuss  the  same  history  and  the  same 
growth.  Here  we  are  asked  to  consider  the  metaphysical  side  of  the 
Christian  religion ;  there  is  more  of  speculation  than  of  history ;  the 
corporate  view  of  Christianity  is  subordinated  to  the  individual.  The 
criticism  might  be  passed  that  more  use  is  made  of  isolated  and  peculiar 
documents  than  of  those  which  are  in  the  fuller  stream  of  corporate 
growth  and  belong  to  its  more  typical  literature.  The  early  period  can  be 
interpreted  in  various  ways  :  the  views  and  treatment  here  adopted  would 
meet  much  criticism  on  many  points ;  and  some  of  the  critics  might 
reasonably  plead  that  what  it  is  the  fashion  to  term  the  *  institutional ' 
side  of  Christianity  belongs  in  history  to  its  earlier  days  and  is  more 
fundamental  than  these  pages  would  lead  us  to  think.  In  part  iii, 
chapter  v  on  *  Church  and  State  '  is,  as  we  might  expect,  very  well 
•done,  and  it  is  pointed  out  with  as  much  vigour  as  reason  that  the 
medieval  papacy  stood  for  freedom  of  spiritual  life.  Equally  good  is  the 
treatment  of  Anselm  in  chapter  vi.  In  part  iv  Justification  by  Faith  is 
discussed  with  clearness  :  a  needed  distinction  is  drawn  between  Luther's 
theology  and  his  personal  religion,  while  the  places  of  Melanchthon, 
Zwingli,  and  Calvin  in  Reformation  theology  are  in  brief  compass  trench- 
antly and  well  summed  up.  The  characteristics  of  the  English  Reforma- 
tion are  put  excellently,  and  '  Anglicanism '  is  described  as  succeeding  to 
the  position  of  Contarini.  The  modern  age,  wjiich  perhaps  deserves  such 
chastening,  is  only  allowed  some  eighty  pages,  and  the  work  ends  on 
a^note  of  unity.  Here  and  there  the  detail  is  perhaps  too  abundant  for  the 
general  scheme,  and  the  perspective  might  be  criticized.  It  is  after  all 
easier  to  sum  up  the  middle  ages  than  the  Reformation,  or  still  more  our 
own  days.     The  achievement  naturally  comes  nearer  to  success  where 

^  See  above,  p.  382. 
VOL.  XXXIII. — ^NO.  CXXXI.  B  6 


418  SHORT  NOTICES  Juljr 

the  task  is  easier.  Nor  is  it  to  be  thought  that  the  writers  in  their 
selection  or  their  statements  would  command  universal  assent.  But  all 
those  competent  to  form  an  opinion  or  to  essay  such  a  task  for  themselves- 
would  agree  with  them  more  heartily  and  more  generally  in  the  medieval, 
section  than  in  the  rest  of  the  book.  J.  P.  W. 

In  SanV  Agostino  e  la  Decadenza  delV  Impero  Romano  (Estratto  daF 
*  Didaskaleion ',  Anno  iv,  Fasc.  iii,  iv.     Turin  :  Libreria  Editrice  Interna- 
zionale,  1916),  Signor  Pietro  Gerosa  discusses  the  question  whether  Augus- 
tine had  or  had  not  any  feeling  of  patriotism  for  the  Koman Empire,  on  which 
the  affirmative  was  maintained  by  Schilling  {Die  Staats-  und  Sociallehre  des- 
hi.  Augustinus,  Freiburg,  1910)  and  the  negative  by  Eeuter  (Augustinisch&^ 
StudieUy  Gotha,  1887),  and  decides  in  favour  of  the  latter.    The  authoi 
has  made  an  exhaustive  study  of  Augustine's  works,  and  in  the  present' 
treatise,  in  which  it  would  be  hard  to  find  an  error  of  fact  or  of  logic,  has-j 
probably  arrived  at  a  correct  estimate  of  his  manner  of  thought ;  but,  as- 
he  admits  that  Augustine  urged  Boniface  to  show  more  vigour  in  the-- 
defence  of  Africa  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  Christians  to  live  undis- 
turbed, and  even  grants  that  he  would  probably  have  welcomed  an  exten- 
sion of  the  Empire  if  it  carried  an  extension  of  Christianity  with  it  (pp.  127,. 
128),  the  conclusion  seems  rather  academic,  and  one  must  doubt  if  it  waff- 
worth  while  to  occupy  140  pages  over  it :  indeed  in  the  concluding  section, 
the  author  anticipates  some  such  objection  and  attempts  to  answer  it  by 
an  argument  which  can  hardly  be  considered  satisfactory.     In  the  same* 
section,  however,  he  puts  forward  without  argument  statements  whicl 
would  be  well  worth  discussing,  viz.  that  Augustine,  as  a  Christian,  couk 
not  feel  any  patriotic  sentiment  for  the  Eoman  Empire,  and  that 
attitude  with  regard  to  it  was  the  only  one  consistent  with  a  full  under- 
standing of  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel.     In  this  connexion  some  reference] 
might  be  made  to  a  passage  in  De  Civit.  Dei,  i.  31,  where  he  speaks  oi 
'  pro  vide  ntissima  patriae  caritas ',  from  which  it  is  natural  to  infer  that,.] 
whatever  may  have  been  his  own  feelings  with  regard  to  the  empire  of  j 
his  time,  he  regarded  love  of  country  in  the  abstract  as  a  virtue,  though] 
we  may  well  believe  that  by  this  name  he  meant  a  genuine  wish  to  benefit 
one's  fellow-countrymen,  not,  as  in  modern  popular  language,  a  national 
sentiment  or  a  political  aspiration.  E.  W.  B. 

JHH 

Mr.  Joseph  McCabe's  Crises  in  the  History  of  the  Papacy  (New  York : 
Putnam,  1916)  contains  an  easily  written  account  of  twenty  popes, 
eleven  of  whom  belong  to  the  middle  ages  and  four  (Benedict  XIV, 
Pius  VII,  Pius  IX,  and  Leo  XIII)  to  modern  times.  The  medieval  popes 
are  treated,  perhaps  naturally,  with  more  fullness.  The  Vatican  Council 
of  1870  is  passed  over  slightly,  and  the  many  questions  raised  under 
Leo  XIII  are  little  more  than  mentioned.  The  writer  acknowledges  his 
indebtedness  to  the  larger  modern  histories,  among  which  those  of  Grego- 
rovius.  Pastor,  and  Creighton  are  rightly  singled  out.  He  has  also  used 
older  authorities,  but  has  '  had  the  original  authorities  before '  him  through- 
out, and  in  the  earlier  chapters  he  claims  to  have  weighed  carefully  the 
original  texts.  The  scale  of  the  work  makes  it  difficult  to  test  the  assertion,. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  41^ 

although  repeated  mistakes,  such  asLanger  for  Langen  and  Killo  for  Kitts, 
induce  hesitation  in  the  casual  reader.  But  the  tone  of  the  writer  is,  in 
most  respects,  fair  and  the  notes  refer  in  most  cases  to  writers  of  mono- 
graphs not  too  well  known  in  England.  Here  and  there  historical  questions 
are  asked  and  incompletely  discussed,  as,  for  instance,  the  trustworthiness 
of  Luitprand  (p.  130),  where  his  treatment  has  really  no  pretensions^ 
to  be,  as  the  writer  calls  it,  a  fresh  analysis  of  the  original  evidence  as  to 
the  character  of  Sergius  and  popes  of  the  age.  What  matters  more  is  that^ 
especially  in  the  earlier  chapters,  there  is  a  tendency  to  treat  the  religion 
of  which  the  popes  should  have  been  (and  mostly  were)  the  guardians  as 
something  rather  superficial.  The  work  is  not  written  in  the  higher  planes 
of  historical  criticism  or  of  discussion  about  events,  but  the  writer  is  both 
sufficiently  informed  and  skilful  in  treatment  to  keep  up  the  reader's- 
interest  in  an  interesting  field.  J.  P.  W. 

Mr.  G.  G.  Coulton's  Social  Life  in  Britain  from  the  Conquest  to  the: 
Reformation  (Cambridge :  University  Press,  1918)  is  a  volume  of  extracts 
from  medieval  writers  and  documents,  somewhat  on  the  lines  of  his 
Medieval  Gamer,  arranged  according  to  subjects  under  fifteen  headings. 
The  Latin  and  French  extracts  are  translated,  the  English  given  in  the 
original  with  adequate  explanations  of  obsolete  words.  The  selection 
is  a  thoroughly  fair  and  representative  one  and  is  drawn  from  an  extra- 
ordinarily wide  range  of  reading.  Many  of  the  extracts  will  be  entirely 
new  to  professed  students  of  the  middle  ages,  but  one  is  glad  to  find  that 
Mr.  Coulton  does  not  reject  old  favourites.  Occasionally  non-British 
sources  are  used.  Thus  some  extracts  and  illustrations  (including  the 
tower  of  Laon  with  the  famous  oxen)  are  given  from  the  note-book  of 
Villard  de  Honnecourt,  the  only  medieval  architect  whose  sketch-book  ha& 
come  down  to  us.  The  translations  so  far  as  they  have  been  tested  prove 
trustworthy  except  in  one  trifling  case  where  Mr.  Coulton  thinks  it  necessary 
to  suggest  an  emendation.  The  passage  is  on  p.  130  from  Koger  Bacon's 
Of  us  Tertium,  ed.  Brewer,  p.  8,  and  translates  quite  well  as  it  stands : 
*  And  yet  the  foundations  are  not  yet  laid,  though  I  have  diligently 
investigated  the  wood  and  stones,  that  is  the  power  of  sciences  and  lan- 
guages and  other  things  requisite  for  building  the  house  of  wisdom.'  The 
references  are  not  always  quite  clear  :  e.  g.  on  p.  332  it  is  not  obvious  at 
first  sight  that  '  p.  561 '  refers  to  Kiley's  Memorials  of  London.  A  list  of 
authorities  cited  might  be  of  assistance.  The  volume  should  prove  not  only 
of  much  interest  and  entertainment  to  the  general  reader  but  of  real  value 
to  the  intelligent  teacher  of  English  literature  and  history.  A.  G.  L. 

Among  the  various  medieval  works  which  are  of  value  to  the -student 
of  history  for  the  light  they  throw  upon  matters  of  fact  or  ways  of  thinking, 
j  a  high  place  must  be  assigned  to  the  Old  Norwegian  treatise  The  King's 
Mirror  {Syeculum  Regale,  Konungs  Skuggsjd),  of  which  an  English 
translation  by  Professor  L.  M.  Larson  has  recently  appeared  (New  York  : 
American-Scandinavian  Foundation,  1917).  To  Scandinavian  scholars 
the  work  has  long  been  well  known  as  one  of  the  most  striking  products 
of  early  Norwegian  literature,  and  the  original  text  has  been  printed  several 

E  e  2 


420  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

times  as  well  as  reproduced  in  facsimile  from  the  chief  manuscript,  but 
to  others  it  has  remained  a  source  not  readily  accessible.  Mr.  Larson's 
readable  translation  will  now  enable  any  one  to  make  acquaintance  with 
the  contents  of  the  treatise,  and  to  judge  of  its  value  in  connexion  with 
other  studies.  The  work  was  intended  to  consist  of  four  parts  dealing 
respectively  with  the  occupations  and  duties  of  (1)  merchants,  (2)  kings  and 
courtiers,  (3)  ecclesiastics,  and  (4)  husbandmen.  Of  these  four  parts,  how-  ij 
ever,  only  the  first  two  are  found  in  the  existing  text,  and  it  is  possible  that  || 
the  design  was  never  fully  carried  out.  It  is  also  obvious  that  the  first  part 
and  the  earlier  chapters  of  the  second  are  much  more  interesting  than  the 
remainder  of  the  work,  which  degenerates  into  tediousness  of  a  typically 
medieval  kind.  In  the  earlier  portion  the  author  is  never  dull,  and  has 
much  to  tell  about  practical  matters,  whether  he  is  dealing  with  the 
pursuits  of  the  merchant,  with  the  phenomena  of  the  sea  and  the 
marvels  of  foreign  lands,  or  with  the  ways  of  courts  and  methods  of 
warfare.  The  sections  which  relate  to  the  natural  history  and  geography 
of  the  northern  lands  have  a  special  value  as  resting  upon  actual  observa- 
tion, and  the  chapter  on  the  wonders  of  Ireland  raises  an  interesting 
problem  as  to  the  sources  from  which  the  author  derived  his  information. 
The  opening  chapters  of  the  second  part  belong  partly  to  the  type  of 
*  courtesy  books ',  but  enter  more  deeply  into  the  serious  duties  and 
responsibilities  of  kings  and  their  attendants  or  ministers,  while  the 
chapters  on  weapons  and  military  engines  are  valuable  evidence  for  the 
nature  of  these  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Up  to  this  point  (the  end  of 
chapter  39)  there  are  few  pages  one  would  willingly  dispense  with,  but  the 
same  can  hardly  be  said  for  the  rest  of  the  seventy ;  if  the  author  ever 
finished  his  task,  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  he  again  became  more  original 
and  interesting.  In  the  introduction,  however,  Mr.  Larson  points  out 
that  the  author's  views  on  the  proper  relations  between  king  and  church, 
which  are  expressed  at  the  end  of  this  part,  have  a  close  connexion  with 
Norwegian  politics  of  the  time,  and  help  towards  fixing  the  date  of  the  work. 
It  is  certainly  as  well  that  the  translation  has  been  made  a  complete  one, 
and  with  the  various  editorial  additions  this  unique  work  is  now  presented 
to  English  readers  in  a  worthy  form,  and  gives  additional  importance  to 
the  series  of  *  Scandinavian  Monographs '  of  which  it  makes  the  third 
volume.  W.  A.  C. 

In  De  Rechterlijke  Organisatie  van  Zeeland  in  de  Middeleeuwen 
Professor  I.  H.  Gosses  of  Groningen  (Groningen :  Wolters,  1917) 
publishes  an  exceptionally  well  got  up  and  solidly-bound  study  of  the 
judicial  organization  of  a  region  that  touches  intimately,  at  more  than 
one  point,  the  late  medieval  history  of  our  own  country.  The  author 
apologizes  for  the  incompleteness  of  his  research  in  archives  on  the  ground 
that  the  extent  of  material  there  threatened  to  prevent  him  ever  accom- 
plishing his  task.  But  to  most  scholars  his  study  will  seem  thoroughly 
scientific  and  well-documented.  After  some  illuminating  geographical  and 
historical  explanations  which  throw  clear  light  on  the  complicated  relations 
of  Zeeland  with  Flanders  and  Holland,  and  show  the  process  by  which  the 
castellania  of  Zeeland  acquired,  especially  in  connexion  with  Holland,  the 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  421 

status  of  a  county,  Dr.  Gosses  enters  into  his  main  task.  This  is  a  detailed 
juridical  study  grouped  under  the  three  heads  of  the  local  court,  the  flaci- 
tum  annuale,  and  the  miria  comitis.  There  is  much  use  of  comparison  with 
other  neighbouring  regions,  notably  with  the  liberty  of  Bruges.  Index, 
full  contents,  and  notes  leave  nothing  to  be  desired  for  completeness. 

T.  F.  T. 

Illustrations  of  Chaucer's  England^  edited  by  Miss  Dorothy  Hughes 
(London  :  Longmans,  1918),  deserves  a  brief  notice  as  the  first  of  a  series 
of  *  source-books '  promoted  by  the  Board  of  Studies  in  History  in  the 
University  of  London.  The  selection  of  passages  seems  to  have  been  well 
and  carefully  made,  and  suitable  explanatory  notes  are  given.  But  it 
would  have  been  of  advantage  if  a  complete  and  somewhat  fuller  series  of 
notes  on  the  chroniclers  and  other  sources  had  been  given  in  place  of  the 
rather  meagre  notice  of  those  which  are  principally  quoted.  Professor 
Pollard,  in  a  general  preface,  hopes  that  the  series  will  appeal  to  others 
than  professed  students  of  history  ;  these  others  at  all  events  will  find 
something  lacking  in  the  unexplained  references  to  *  Wilkins '  and 
*  Foedera'.  C.  L.  K. 

Under  the  title  of  History  of  the  Spanish  Conquest  of  Yucatan  and  of 
the  Itzas  {Papers  of  the  Peahody  Museum  of  American  Archaeology  and 
Ethnology,  vol.  vii)  (Cambridge,  Massachusetts  :  Harvard  University  Press, 
1917)  Mr.  P.  A.  Means  has  published  the  result  of  his  work  as  a  graduate 
student  in  the  division  of  Anthropology  during  the  years  1915-17.  His 
paper,  which  is  a  singularly  clear  and  interesting  one,  reflects  credit  both 
upon  the  author  and  also  upon  the  Peabody. Museum.  Mr.  Means  notes 
that  while  the  Spanish  missionaries  '  were  quick  to  destroy  the  old  and 
long-venerated  gods  of  the  Indians,  they  were  unable  to  replace  them  with 
something  the  Indians  were  able  to  understand '  (p.  88).  The  story  of 
the  visits  paid  by  different  embassies  to  the  island  capital  of  this  nation 
of  80,000  fighting  men  is  full  of  vivid  incident  which  loses  nothing  in  the 
excellent  translations  by  Mr.  C.  P.  Bowditch  and  Senor  G.  Rivera.  In  the 
appendices  the  author  has  added  much  useful  information,  but  it  is  a  pity 
that  in  the  list  of  the  maps  of  Yucatan  in  Appendix  iii  he  did  not  give 
fuller  titles  and  indicate  in  every  instance  the  whereabouts  of  the  original. 

H.  P.  B. 

Miss  Frances  G.  Davenport  has  edited  a  valuable  collection  of  European 
Treaties  hearing  on  the  History  of  the  United  States  and  its  Dependencies  to 
1648  (Washington,  D.C. :  Carnegie  Institution  of  Washington,  1917).  The 
only  possible  fault  that  can  be  found  with  the  volume  is  its  title.  It  is 
not  clear  how  such  a  treaty  as  that  of  St.  Germain-en-Laye,  which  restored 
Acadia  and  Canada  to  France,  deals  with  the  history  of  either  the  United 
States  or  of  its  dependencies.  But  this  is  a  small  matter ;  what  is  of 
importance  is  that  the  student  of  early  American  history  can  now  find 
in  a  handy  form  the  papal  bulls  and  the  European  treaties,  illustrated  by 
excellent  introductions  and  bibliographical  notes.  No  less  than  four  of 
these  documents — proposed  treaties  between  Spain  and  Portugal  in  1526 


422  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

and  1529,  articles  relating  to  the  Indies  in  the  treaty  between  France  and 
Spain  concluded  at  Crepy-en-Laonnois  on  18  September  1544,  and 
Articles  concluded  between  Spain  and  Portugal  in  1552  regarding  a  joint 
use  of  their  naval  forces — are  here  printed  for  the  first  time.  It  is  satis- 
factory to  note  that  a  further  volume  is  in  preparation,  embracing  the 
period  from  1648  to  1713.  H.  E.  E. 

In  Holinshed^s  Chronicles  ;  Richard  II  and  Henry  V  (Oxford  :  Claren- 
don Press,  1917)  Professor  H.  S.  Wallace  gives  us  a  foretaste  of  a  larger 
edition,  which  he  has  in  contemplation,  to  cover  the  period  embodied  in 
;Shakespeare's  histories.  It  is  a  consummation  much  to  be  desired,  and 
we  may  hope  that  in  this  larger  edition  we  shall  have  a  full  critical  appara- 
tus. Even  in  a  plain  text  put  forward  to  meet  the  immediate  requirement 
of  schools,  something  of  the  kind  should  have  been  supplied.  Such  references 
as  Abr.  Fl.  (Abraham  Fleming)  and  W.  P.  (William  Patten)  call  for  explana- 
tion. Nor  is  the  mere  text  of  Holinshed  sufficient  for  the  purpose  of 
illustrating  the  Shakespearean  presentment  of  English  history.  The 
narrative  of  Holinshed  and  his  collaborators  was  not  coloured  simply  by 
their  own  bias.  For  a  full  understanding  that  narrative  must  be  traced  to 
its  sources,  not  merely  to  Hall  and  Stow,  but  also  to  older  writers.  No 
edition  of  Holin^^hed  can  be  fully  serviceable  which  does  not  bring  into 
account  (for  the  period  under  review)  his  indebtedness  to  the  London 
ChronicleSj  the  Brut,  and  The  First  English  Life  of  Henry  V.        C.  L.  K. 

We  wish  we  could  congratulate  those  concerned  with  the  publication  of 
Dr.  Hamilton  Vrieland  Jr.'s  Hugo  Grotius,  the  Father  of  the  Modern  Science 
of  International  Law  (New  York ;  Oxford  University  Press,  American 
Branch,  1917),  on  the  production  of  this  book.  The  figure  of  Hugo  Gro- 
tius is  one  of  the  most  notable  in  the  history  of  learning,  and  holds  an 
honoured  place  in  that  of  a  singularly  interesting  period  of  modern  states- 
manship ;  but  these  pages  contribute  little  or  nothing  to  the  existing 
knowledge  either  of  his  life  or  of  his  works — unless  perhaps,  incidentally, 
in  the  case  of  chapters  x  and  xi,  which  deal  with  the  diplomatic  activity 
of  Grotius  in  France  towards  the  end  of  his  career,  and  are  compiled 
from  his  Epistles  and  de  Burigny's  Life.  They  are  preceded  by  an  either 
superfluous  or  inadequate  summary  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  to  the 
death  of  Grotius's  royal  admirer,  Gustavus  Adolphus,  whence  we  gather 
such  information  as  that  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia,  'recently  added  to 
the  dominions  of  the  House  of  Hapsburg,  had  heard  the  voice  of  Luther 
across  the  border,  in  Saxony,  and  embraced  in  its  population  many  Protes- 
tants '.  The  earlier  part  of  the  biography  is  founded  on  the  Dutch  Life 
by  Brandt,  whose  translated  style  it  is  not  easy  to  distinguish  from  that 
of  the  adapter,  which  we  forbear  from  illustrating.  Proper  names  he  treats 
with  great  linguistic  freedom  ;  the  Counts  of  '  Borgonje  ',  like  the  city  of 
*  Leuven ',  remain  in  their  original  tongue,  while  elsewhere  the  eminent 
theologian  '  loannes  Overallus ',  though  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  is  not  un- 
latinized.  On  the  other  hand,  the  name  of  '  John  de  Vert '  appears 
in  something  like  the  form  in  which  it  may  have  territied  the  Parisians, 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  423 

and  the  much -denounced  Governor  of  Breisach  is  introduced  aiS  *  Baron 
d'Erlach,  attache  to  the  Duke  of  Weimar '. 

Of  the  writings  which  Grotius  produced  in  so  wonderfully  ample  a  se- 
quence the  account  given  here  is  meagre  in  the  extreme.  In  the  case  of  his 
translations^ — and  perhaps  of  his  original  verse  (not  always  first-rate) — ^this 
is  pardonable  enough,  but  most  readers  would  be  glad  to  learn  something 
about  his  '  Martianus  Capella ',  and  certainly  to  hear  more  about  his 
tragedies  and  the  nature  of  the  obligations  to  Adamus  Exul  of  Jjucifer, 
*  which  Professor  Leonard  C.  von  Noppen  has  translated  into  English  so 
masterfully'  {sic).  Of  Grotius  as  a  theologian  rather  more  is  said,  and  a 
translation  is  given,  in  an  appendix,  of  the  Edict  drawn  up  by  him  after 
his  return  from  England  in  1613.  His  theological  works  proper  meet  with 
scant  mention,  and  of  his  Histories  that  of  Holland  from  1560  to  1609 
with  scarcely  sufficient  notice  to  warrant  the  judgement  of  Brandt,  that  he 
was  *  the  greatest  and  the  most  perfect  historian  that  Holland  had  ever 
produced '.  On  the  other  hand,  a  chapter  is  devoted  to  the  curious  story  of 
the  lus  Praedae,  composed  by  Grotius  when  twelve  years  old — the  age  at 
which  he  also  accomplished  the  conversion  of  his  mother  from  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  of  Eome.  Of  this  book,  until  the  discovery  of  the  manu- 
script in  1864,  only  the  famous  chapter  Mare  Liherum  was  published  in 
1608,  when  it  came  to  play  a  prominent  part  in  more  than  one  historical 
-controversy.  There  seems  no  doubt  that  it  furnished  material  to  the 
earlier  portion  of  the  immortal  work  which  called  into  life  the  modern 
science  of  international  law.  This  is  indicated  in  Dr.  Vrieland's  chapter 
on  the  De  lure  Belli  et  Pads  ;  but  a  satisfactory  statement  on  the  subject 
must  be  sought  elsewhere.  U. 

The  sixth  volume  of  M.  ifidouard  Rott's  Histoire  de  la  Representation 
Diplomatique  de  la  France  aupres  des  Cantons  Suisses  (Paris  :  Alcan,  1917) 
<5overs  the  years  1643-63.  While  dealing  mainly  with  the  relations  of 
France  and  the  Swiss  cantons,  or  with  the  internal  affairs  of  Switzerland, 
it  includes  occasional  passages  on  English  affairs,  such  as  a  brief  reference  to 
John  Dury's  attempt  to  reconcile  the  various  protestant  sects,  which  was 
promoted  by  Cromwell  (p.  385),  and  an  account  of  John  Pell's  negotiation 
for  an  alliance  (p.  414).  The  intervention  of  the  Protector  on  behalf  of  the 
Vaudois  and  the  action  of  the  protestant  cantons  in  support  of  it  are  treated 
more  in  detail ;  the  causes  which  prevented  success  arc  explained, 
and  the  history  of  the  question  is  made  very  much  clearer  (pp.  414- 
25).  Cromwell's  attempt  to  mediate  in  the  Swiss  Civil  War  is  also  eluci- 
dated (p.  457).  In  short,  without  adding  anything  of  much  importance  to 
our  knowledge  of  Cromwell's  polic}^,  the  volume  makes  that  knowledge 
more  precise  and  complete.  C.  H.  F. 

Mr.  E.  Prestage's  paper  on  0  Conde  de  Castelmelhor  e  a  Retrocessao  de 
Tanger  a  Portugal  is  extracted  from  the  Bulletin  of  the  Academy  of  Lisbon 
(Coimbra,  1917).  When  Charles  II  in  1683  from  motives  of  economy 
decided  to  evacuate  Tangier,  and  to  destroy  the  harbour  works  and 
fortifications,  the  count  of  Castelmelhor  endeavoured  to  persuade  the 
king's  government  to  cede  it  back  to  Portugal  instead,  but  without  success. 


424  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

This  unsuccessful  negotiation  is  the  subject  of  Mr.  Prestage's  paper.  He 
prints  a  memoir  by  Castelmelhor  on  the  desirability  of  this  retrocession,  and 
the  capacity  of  Portugal  to  defend  and  hold  Tangier,  in  which  he  enlarges 
on  the  theme  that  the  interest  of  Portugal  and  England  is  to  be  always 
closely  united  (p.  17).  To  this  are  added  extracts  from  three  of  Barillon's 
letters  proving  that  Castelmelhor  applied  to  the  French  ambassador  to 
back  him,  and  that  the  opposition  of  Lord  Halifax  either  to  the  abandon- 
ment or  to  the  restoration  of  the  place  to  Portugal  was  largely  due  to  the 
fear  lest  it  should  pass  into  the  hands  of  France  (p.  24).  This  supplements 
and  corrects  the  account  contained  in  Miss  Enid  Eouth's  Tangier. 

C.  H.  F. 

Compilations  of  extracts  from  contemporary  documents,  printed  and. 
manuscript,  are  becoming  common  assistants  to  the  study  of  Indian,  as 
well  as  European,  history.  We  have  not  met  with  a  better  example  of 
how  useful  such  work  may  be  when  it  is  well  executed  than  in  The  Expan- 
sion of  British  India,  1818-58,  by  Professor  G.  Anderson  of  Bombay  and 
Professor  M.  Subedar  of  Calcutta  (London  :  Bell,  1918).  The  Sikh  Wars» 
the  policy  of  Dalhousie,  the  Mutiny,  are  still  the  subjects  of  controversial 
rhetoric,  and  they  are  likely  to  remain  so  for  some  time  to  come  ;  but 
Messieurs  Anderson  and  Subedar  have  managed  to  present  the  facts  on 
which  all  sound  judgement  must  be  based,  with  nothing  extenuated  nor 
aught  set  down  in  malice.  The  extracts  are  well  chosen,  the  comments  are 
sober  and  judicious,  as  well  as  genuinely  explanatory.  Indeed,  we  have 
rarely  seen  a  book  of  the  kind  so  well  done.  The  comments  on  purely 
English  politics,  however,  are  not  always  so  satisfactory,  and  there  a  few 
errors  have  crept  in.  Nor  was  Archdeacon  Hare  responsible  for  the  Storf- 
of  Two  Noble  Lives.  V. 

The  scope  of  Japan,  The  Rise  of  a  Modern  Power,  by  the  late  Mr.  Robert 
P.  Porter  (Oxford :  Clarendon  Press,1918),is  comprehensive.  Beginning  with 
the  dawn  of  Japanese  history,  for  the  dates  of  which  he  is  content  to  rely 
on  Japanese  authorities,  Mr.  Porter  traces  the  evolution  of  Japan  through 
the  period  of  Fujiwara  ascendancy,  when  China  became  the  model  for  imi- 
tation in  everything,  through  the  intervals  of  Taira  domination  and  feudal 
anarchy,  and  through  the  successive  eras  of  dual  government,  during 
which  Mikados  reigned  and  Shoguns  ruled.  He  deals  in  passing  with  the 
establishment  of  foreign  relations  on  a  treaty  basis,  with  the  Restoration" 
and  its  astonishing  results  in  the  creation  of  a  westernized  Japan,  and 
brings  his  narrative  down  to  the  end  of  the  year  1916,  by  which  time  Japan, 
had  for  some  years  won  recognition  as  one  of  the  Great  Powers.  This 
precis  of  Japanese  history  is  written  in  a  spirit  of  overflowing  enthusiasm, 
for  things  Japanese.  In  his  criticism,  for  instance,  of  the  foreign 
pressure  which  led  to  the  reopening  of  Japan  to  foreign  intercourse 
the  author  shows  himself  plus  royaliste  que  le  roi.  The  reader  will  be  welt 
advised  not  to  dwell  too  long  on  the  earlier  chapters,  the  subjects  of  which 
have  been  tieated  more  fully  and  accurately  by  previous  writers,  but  to 
pass  on  to  Mr.  Porter's  concise  account  of  the  Chino-Japanese  war,  and  to 
his  interesting  and  detailed  analysis  of  the  Russo-Japanese  campaign. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  425 

Her  war  with  China  opened  the  eyes  of  Europe  for  the  first  time  to  the 
military  efficiency  of  Japan.  The  results  of  the  Manchurian  campaign 
against  Russia  proclaimed  the  advent  of  a  new  military  power,  to  be 
reckoned  with  in  the  future  councils  of  the  world.  The  achievements  of 
Japan  in  more  peaceful  directions,  her  progress  in  the  domain  of  adminis- 
trative reconstruction,  in  education,  in  the  field  of  commerce  and  industry, 
and  in  other  branches  of  national  activity,  are  well  described  by  the  author. 
His  book,  which  is  furnished  with  excellent  maps  and  illustrations,  con- 
tains much  useful  information  on  many  matters,  and  will  help  English 
readers  to  understand  better  the  ability,  the  enterprise,  and  the  resources 
of  our  eastern  ally.  J.  H.  G. 


To  Germans  in  1871  Alsace-Lorraine  represented  simply  the  spoils 
of  war,  a '  Reichsland'  acquired  by  force  in  order  to '  cement  the  German 
states  together  ',  and  to  gratify  their  sense  of  victory.  Bismarck  told  the 
Alsatians  that  *  it  was  not  in  your  interests  that  we  conquered  you,  but 
in  the  interests  of  the  empire  '.  In  later  times  German  writers  have  set  to 
work  characteristically  to  idealize  the  treaty  of  Frankfort  into  an  emanci- 
pation of  Teutonic  folk  from  Latin  sovereignty  in  very  much  the  same 
spirit  as  that  in  which  they  are  now  prepared  to  find  racial  pretexts  for 
the  annexation  of  Flanders  or  of  any  other  Naboth's  vineyard.  Mrs.  R. 
Stawell  has  translated  some  loosely-connected  articles  of  M.  Jules  Duhem 
under  the  title  The  Question  of  Alsace-Lorraine  (London :  Hodder  & 
Stoughton,  1918),  in  which  he  has  set  himself  two  objects — ^first,  to  expose 
the  system  of  government  in  vogue  since  1871  ;  secondly,  to  traverse 
Germany's  alleged  historical  claims  to  the  two  provinces.  The  first  object 
is  easy  to  attain.  German  rule  has  meant  almost  unmitigated  persecution. 
That  French  sympathies  should  have  survived  so  strongly  among  the 
people,  in  spite  of  the  pre-war  pacificism  of  France  and  the  consequent 
fading  hopes  of  liberation,  is  the  clearest  proof  of  the  failure  of  militarism 
in  Alsace.  M.  Duhem's  arguments  on  his  second  point  are  not  always  as 
convincing.  He  contends  that  as  the  Frankfort  treaty  was  forced  upon 
France,  it  was  in  no  sense  *  a  sacred  peace  ',  like  the  treaties  of  1648  and 
1681,  that  gave  the  provinces  to  her.  He  holds  that  their  people  are 
'  Celto-Latin '  by  race,  already  in  the  dark  ages  *  once  and  for  all  imbued 
with  the  spirit  characteristic  of  France '.  Both  contentions  are  coloured 
by  rhetoric.  The  author  is  on  surer  ground  in  emphasizing  the  non-exis- 
tence of  German  national  feeling  in  the  seventeenth  century.  These 
provinces  became  French  without  any  idea  that  they  were  breaking  racial 
ties.  There  is  some  evidence  that  they  genuinely  preferred  to  be  governed 
by  Louis  XIV.  M.  Duhem  quotes  a  Prussian  minister's  description  of 
Alsace  in  1709  as  '  burning  with  love  for  France  '.  The  Revolution  com- 
pleted the  process,  of  fusion  with  the  general  body  of  the  French  nation^ 
Kleber,  Kellermann,  and  Rapp  were  Alsatians ;  Custine  and  Ney  came 
from  Lorraine.  Whatever  doubts  there  may  be  as  to  the  original  blood 
of  these  border  people,  their  French  patriotism  since  1789  is  written  large 
in  their  history,  and  is  the  truest  justification  of  the  case  for  their  restora- 
tion to  France.  G.  B.  H. 


426  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

The  first  volume  of  Dr.  Jean  Larmeroux's  work,  La  Politique  Exterieure 
de  VAutriche-Hongroie,  1875-1914  (Paris :  Plon,  1918),  is  entitled  La  Marche 
vers  VOrient,  and  covers  the  period  from  1875  to  1908.  It  is  a  weighty  and 
well-informed  contribution  to  the  study  of  international  politics,  and  throws 
a  flood  of  light  on  the  modern  history  of  Austria-Hungary  and  the  Balkan 
states.  The  author  ascribes  the  Austro-German  alliance  of  1879  (a)  to 
Andrassy,  who  regarded  it  as  the  pivot  on  which  all  the  non-Slav  elements 
in  Austria  would  rally  against  Russia ;  (b)  to  Bismarck,  who  overcame 
William  I's  objections  by  describing  a  united  Austria  allied  to  Germany  as 
the  buttress  of  the  latter's  influence  in  eastern  Europe.  Italy  joined  the 
Central  Powers  in  1882  mainly  in  consequence  of  French  policy  in  northern 
Africa,  but  also  with  a  view  to  checking  the  growth  of  Austrian  influence 
on  the  Adriatic.  No  great  state  appears  in  these  pages  to  have  pursued 
any  consistent  or  disinterested  policy  in  the  near  east.  Great  Britain's 
diplomacy  was  no  exceptionto  the  rule,  though  its  gradual  drift  from  hostility 
to  Russia  to  hostility  to  Germany  was  no  doubt  due  to  an  instinctive  ad- 
herence to  the  theory  of  the  balance  of  power.  Dr.  Larmeroux  pays  a 
tribute  to  the  work  of  Edward  VII.  His  account  of  Austrian  policy  dis- 
closes an  astuteness  which  western  Europe  failed  to  recognize  before  1914. 
The  whole  book  is  full  of  irony.  We  see  the  Tsar  Nicholas  I  classifjring 
himself  with  Sobieski  as  'the  maddest  of  all  the  kings  of  Poland'  for  having 
saved  Austria  ;  Napoleon  III  insisting  that  Prussia  should  be  admitted  to 
the  Paris  Peace  Conference  of  1856  ;  Austria  championing  Serbia's  claim 
to  independence  in  1878  ;  Great  Britain  proposing  at  the  Berlin  Congress 
that  Austria  should  occupy  Bosnia-Herzegovina,  as '  a  stop  to  the  union  of 
the  Balkan  Slavs  and  an  obstacle  to  their  aggrandisement ' ;  western  Europe 
deploring  the  Serbian  coup  d'etat  of  1903,  which  in  reality  preserved  that 
country  for  the  time  being  from  the  powers  of  darkness.  The  one  senti- 
ment, which  never  found  an  outlet  in  public  policy  during  the  period  in 
question,  was  what  is  now  called '  self-determination '.  G.  B.  H. 

Had  the  chapter  on  '  The  Story  of  Asia  Minor '  not  been  so  short  and 
elementary,  Professor  M.  Jastrow's  The  War  and  the  Bagdad  Railway 
(Philadelphia  :  Lippincott,  1917)  would,  in  deference  to  his  high  reputa- 
tion, have  been  dealt  with  by  a  competent  authority.  The  present 
volume,  however,  is  mainly  a  useful  and  interesting  account  of  the 
Bagdad  Railway,  accompanied  by  political  reflexions  which,  to  some 
of  us,  are  by  no  means  so  edifying.  A  deep  distinction  is  drawijPB 
between  the  war  of  1914  and  the  war  of  1917.  '  The  Russian  revolution  *,  ' 
we  are  told,  *  was  not  only  a  revolt  against  a  government  that  had  imposed 
a  war  on  its  people,  precisely  as  Germany  had  imposed  it,  for  the  purpose 
of  carrying  out  plans  of  aggression  .  .  .,  it  was  the  first  decisive  stroke  for 
the  triumph  of  world  democracy.'  The  German  emperor,  at  the  time  of 
his  visit  to  Abdul  Hamid,  is  described  as  *  romantically  inclined  '.  A  series 
of '  internationalized '  independent  states,  Belgium,  Luxemburg,  Lorraine, 
and  Alsace,  are  in  the  future  *  to  form  a  continuous  barrier  between 
Germany  and  France '.  Brandes  was  right  when  he  described  Persia  as 
*  the  Asiatic  Belgium  '.  Mr.  Lowes  Dickinson  is  more  than  once  cited  as 
a  high  authority.    With  regard  to  the  main  thesis  of  his  book,  that  the 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  427 

question  of  the  Bagdad  Eailway  was  a  main  contributory  cause  to  the  war 
of  1914,  it  is  not  clear  how  such  a  conclusion  is  consistent  with  the  view 
that  Mr.  Jastrow  also  adopts,  and  which  has  been  made  good  by  the 
revelations  of  Prince  Lichnowsky,  that  an  amicable  agreement  with  regard 
to  the  question  had  been  already  arrived  at,  before  the  war,  by  British  and 
German  diplomacy.  It  should  be  added  that  the  volume  is  accompanied 
by  an  admirable  map  of  the  railway  system  of  Asia  Minor.  H.  E.  E. 

The  second  and  third  volumes  of  M.  Auguste  Gauvain's  VEurope  au 
Jour  le  Jour  (Paris  :  Bossard,  1917,  1918)  reprint  his  articles  in  the 
Journal  des  Debats  on  foreign  affairs  *  from  the  Turkish  counter-revolution 
to  the  Agadir  coup ',  1909-November  1911.  These  hardly  come  within  the 
scope  of  this  Review,  but  nevertheless  have  a  real  niche  in  history  as  being 
the  contemporaneous  opinions  of  a  well-informed  Frenchman  on  events 
leading  up  to  the  war  of  1914.  On  many  points  his  insight  was  notably 
acute.  In  December  1910  he  drew  attention  to  the  certainty  of  an  alliance 
between  Germany  and  the  Young  Turks,  quoting  their  pronouncement 
that  new  Barbarossas  would  arise  to  free  the  poor  Muslim.  In  January 
1911  he  predicted  a  German  invasion  of  France  through  Belgium.  His 
incisive  articles  on  the  Agadir  crisis  exposed  plainly  the  weakness  and 
worthlessness  of  the  Caillaux-Messimy  clique  and  the  determination  of 
-Germany  to  extort  the  utmost  advantage  from  France's  wish  for  a  peaceful 
settlement.  He  never  seems  to  have  doubted  that  Germany  aimed  at  war, 
warning  his  readers  again  and  again  not  to  put  any  faith  in  such  alleged 
sources  of  confidence  as  the  goodwill  of  Austria  or  the  rise  of  socialism  in 
Germany.  He  did  his  best  to  explain  British  foreign  policy  favourably, 
and  expressed  polite  scepticism  as  to  the  utility  of  Lord  Haldane's  visit  to 
Berlin  in  February  1912.  G.  B.  H. 

The  Annual  Register  for  1917  (London  :  Longmans,  1918)  strikes  us  as 
unusually  well  compiled.  That  it  would  be  well  written  we  could  anticipate 
from  our  knowledge  of  recent  volumes,  but  in  the  exceptional  difficulties 
of  the  time  we  were  hardly  prepared  for  the  amount  of  information  which 
the  editor  has  succeeded  in  collecting  and  judiciously  arranging.  We  have 
noticed  but  few  inaccuracies.  On  p.  155]  the  statement  that '  a  seat  was 
found  for  Sir  Eric  Geddes  in  the  constituency  of  Edinburgh  and  St.  Andrews 
Universities  '  requires  correction.  It  was  sought  there  no  doubt,  but  it  was 
found  in  the  borough  of  Cambridge.  The  denunciation  of  '  Tsarism '  on 
p.  244]  is  not  perhaps  quite  in  place  in  a  book  of  this  sort,  and  to  some  it  will 
appear  wanting  in  balance,  when  the  anarchy  which  supplanted  it  is  borne 
in  mind.  The  summaries  of  the  Dardanelles  and  Mesopotamia  Reports 
are  very  carefully  done,  but  it  would  have  been  well  to  distinguish  more 
clearly  between  the  parts  which  are  quoted  textually  and  those  which  are 
given  in  abstract.  On  pp.  64  and  70  (middle)  the  date  1915  should  be 
corrected  into  1916.  W. 

Mr,  W.  W.  Rouse  Ball,  who  last  year  printed  privately  a  valuable 
monograph  on  The  King's  Scholars  and  Kitig's  Hall,  has  now  collected  a 
number  of  papers  treating  not  only  of  the  great  and  famous  college  in 


428  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

which  that  hall  was  absorbed,  but  also  of  the  university  at  large.    His 
Cambridge  Papers  (London  :    Macmillan,  1918)  thus  fall  into  two  parts. 
In  one  he  writes  concerning  Trinity  College  ;  its  foundation,  its  connexion 
with  Westminster  School,  and  a  variety  of  other  matters,  among  which  we 
specially  value  his  account  of  the  growth  of  the  tutorial  system  and  the 
details  he  gives  about  expenses.    An  interesting  chapter  on '  A  Christmas 
Journey  in  1319  ',  the  substance  of  which  had  already  appeared  in  The 
King's  Scholars ^  relates  a  journey  from  Cambridge  to  York  from  the 
Exchequer  Accounts.    It  is  curious  to  note  that  the  scholars  travelled  allJ 
the  way  by  water,  except  between  Spalding  and  Boston.    In  the  seconc 
part,  dealing  with  the  university,  we  learn  much  about  discipline  and  the] 
use  of  corporal  punishment  (at  the  foot  of  p.  199  the  '  sixteenth  century  *) 
should  be  the  '  fifteenth ').    Of  particular  interest  are  the  two  chapters-] 
on  Newton,  one  of  which  includes  a  memorandum  printed  from  a  manu- , 
script  by  him  on  the  studies  and  discipline  of  the  university  ;  and  the 
history  of  the  tripos,  which  did  not  become  exclusively  mathematical  until 
1824,  is  written  with  an  intimate  knowledge  which  few  besides  the  author] 
possess.  X. 

No.  Ixviii  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Cambridge  Antiquarian  Society 
(Cambridge  :  Deighton,  1917)  contains  papers  of  unusually  varied  interest. 
Among  them  we  may  mention  '  Cambridgeshire  Materials  for  the  History  ] 
of  Agriculture',  by  Archdeacon  Cunningham  ;  'Dr.  Dale's  Visits  to  Cam- 
bridge, 1722-1738  ',  by  the  late  Professor  T.  McKenny  Hughes,  who  shows 
the  great  extent  to  which  the  county  was  then  unenclosed  ;  and '  The  Shi] 
on  the  Seal  of  Paris  ',  derived  from  the  marchands  de  Veau,  which  Mr.  H.  H^j 
Brindley  illustrates  with  a  series  of  plates.  Y» 

An  especially  delightful  feature  of  Mr.  Wilberforce  Jenkinson's  London\ 
Churches    before    the    Great    Fire    (London :     Society    for    Promoting ' 
Christian    Knowledge,  1917)   is  its  large  number  of  admirable  repro- 
ductions of  old  engravings,  for  the  most  part  of  churches  now  destroyed] 
and  including  Hoefnagel's  View  of  London  (1561),  Visscher's  Long  View 
(1616),  Hollar's  fine  engravings  of  the  interior  of  Old  St.  Paul's,  looking- 1 
west,  and  St.  Faith's  in  the  crypt,  executed  for  Dugdale,  and  an  interesting 
drawing  of  the  original  steeple  of  St.  Michael's,  Cornhill,  before  its  destruc- 1 
tion  in  1421,     The  author's  work  consists  chiefly  of  notices  of  the  six- 
teenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  of  the  churches  existing  in  London 
before  1666,  whether   now  destroyed  or  still  standing,      These  he  ha*] 
gathered  largely  from  Newcourt  and  Mr.  Hennessy,  Stow's  Survey,  and. 
the  notes  in  Mr.  Kingsford's  excellent  edition  of  it,  of  which  he  might  witbj 
advantage  have  made  more  use,  and  Weever's  Funerall  Monuments,  but 
he  has  also  brought  together  many  from  various  other  works.    His  book,, 
though  agreeable  enough  to  dip  into,  has  no  historical  importance,  and  show* 
an  uncritical  use  of  authorities.  Mr.  Jenkinson  is  content  to  copy  assertions 
contradictory  one  of  another  or  puzzling  to  himself  and  leave  them  to  his 
readers.    Some  of  those  which  puzzle  him  are  surely  simple  enough  :  he 
confesses,  for  example,  that  he  does  not  understand  why  Howell  in  his 
Londinopolis,  published  in  1657,  calls  St.  Paul's  a  *  dome  of  devotion  ',  when 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  429 

the  present  church  with  its  dome  was  not  yet  built,  nor  the  meaning  of  a 
record  that  a '  hearneshaw  '  sitting  on  the  roof  of  a  church  in  plague-time 
was  taken  as  ominous  by  the  'menialty  '.  Again,  he  need  not  have  been 
in  difficulty  about  a  possible  connexion  of  Ciipplegate  with  lame  beggars, 
for  the  name  probably  refers  to  the  character  of  the  gate  as  covered 
or  perhaps  narrow.  He  invents  a  St.  Paul's  built  by  the  Conqueror 
before  the  church  of  Bishop  Maurice,  and  furnishes  it  with  a  steeple  ; 
he  refers  to  the  '  National  Dictionary  of  Biography  '  (sic),  where  of  course 
no  such  error  is  to  be  found,  for  the  statement  that  Ethelburga,  queen  of 
Edwin  of  Northumbria,  was  the  sister  of  Bishop  Erkenwald ;  says  that 
St.  Olaf  of  Norway  was  '  murdered  in  1028 ' ;  and  is  not  able  to  explain 
Stow's  notice  that  a  queen  of  Scots  was  buried  in  the  Blackfriars  church, 
though  as  the  next  name  in  the  list  of  those  buried  there  is  Hubert  de 
Burgh,  it  would,  one  would  have  thought,  have  been  plain  that  the  lady 
was  his  wife,  Margaret,  the  daughter  of  William  the  Lion.  Whoever  was 
responsible  for  Hunne's  death  in  the  Lollards'  tower,  it  is  an  extraordinary 
version  of  the  tragedy  that  he  was  *  by  some  mistake  hanged  before  being 
tried  in  the  spiritual  court ' ;  and  when  Queen  Elizabeth  interrupted  Dean 
Nowell's  sermon,  bidding  him  stick  to  his  text,  she  did  not  do  so  because 
she  feared  that  the  sermon  would  last  too  long.  Finally,  Mr.  Jenkinson 
makes  the  strange  remark  that,  although  the  patronage  of  St.  Mary  Abbots, 
Kensington,  pertains  to  the  bishop  of  London,  *  it  would  seem  that  Queen 
Victoria  presented  the  last  two  vicars '.  He  may  be  assured  that  there  was 
no  usurpation  on  the  part  of  the  Crown,  each  of  the  two  last  vicars  (at  the 
time  he  wrote)  having  been  presented  to  fill  a  vacancy  caused  by  the 
promotion  of  his  predecessor  to  an  English  bishopric.  It  is  surprising  that 
so  simple  a  matter  should,  as  'it  would  seem ',  present  a  difficulty  to  an 
author  writing  on  the  subject  of  this  book  and  for  a  church  society. 

Z. 

The  1916  volume  of  the  William  Salt  Society's  Collections/or  a  History  of 
Staffordshire  (London  :  Harrison,  1918)  appears  late  and  in  less  sub- 
stantial guise  than  in  the  days  of  peace,  but  it  contains  some  useful  and 
solid  matter.  Three  of  the  four  articles  are  by  Mr.  C.  G.  0.  Bridgman. 
In  one  he  studies  at  length  the  well-known  wdll  of  Wulfric  Spot,  the  founder 
of  Burton  Abbey,  giving  in  the  course  of  his  discussion  an  ingenious  but 
somewhat  hypothetical  genealogy  of  this  personage  w^hich  makes  him 
a  descendant  of  Alfred's  daughter,  the  Lady  of  the  Mercians.  In  another, 
Mr.  Bridgman  writes  nearly  a  hundred  pages  on  the  Burton  Abbey  Twelfth 
Century  Surveys,  to  whose  importance  Mr.  Bound  in  1905  called  atten- 
tion in  this  Eeview  (xx.  275-89),  where  he  pleaded  for  the  publication 
of  a  complete  text  of  both  the  surveys.  This  boon  Mr.  Bridgman  now 
confers  on  us,  printing  the  documents  in  parallel  columns  and  with  them 
some  other  deeds  from  the  Burton  cartulary.  In  a  third  and  shorter 
article  the  same  writer  strives  to  trace  the  course  of  the  Watling 
Street  in  Staffordshire,  and  beyond  it  towards  the  north  and  west. 
The  remaining  article  of  the  volume  is  from  Commander  Wedgwood, 
who  supplements  the  post-Conquest  *  Staffordshire  Chartulary*  of  earlier 
volumes  of  these  collections  by  an  English  translation  and  commentary 


430  SHORT  NOTICES  July 

on  StaH'ordshire  pre-Conquest  charters.  All  have  been  previously  printed* 
Like  Mr.  Bridgman,  Commander  Wedgwood  modestly  disclaims  preten- 
sions to  exact  philological  science.  T,  F.  T. 

The  one  article  of  general  interest  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Baptist 
Historical  Society  for  1917  (Baptist  Union  Publication  Department,  1918) 
is  *  Bunyan's  Imprisonment,  a  Legal  Study,'  by  Dr.  Whitley,  which  is 
admirably  clear  and  convincing.  An  account  of  Benjamin  Cox,  rector  of 
Sampford  Peverell  in  Devonshire,  who  was  taunted  with  Laudianism, 
became  a  Puritan  and  finally  a  Baptist,  shows  how  much  research  is  still 
needed  before  the  outlines  can  be  filled  in.  The  material  for  tracing  his  career 
from  the  date  of  his  institution,  which  is  not  given  in  the  article,  till  his 
death  about  1664  must  certainly  be  in  existence.  The  other  papers  are  of 
antiquarian  or  denominational  concern.  The  editor  is  wise  in  extending 
his  range  into  the  nineteenth  century.  He  prints  the  minutes  of  the 
London  Board  of  Baptist  ministers  down  to  1820.  They  met  at  the 
Jamaica  Coffee  House,  and  in  1799  they  agreed  to  pay  for  rent  *  sixteen 
shillings  more  in  consideration  of  the  rise  in  Tobacco '.  E.  W.  W. 

We  welcome  the  abundant  evidences  of  the  '  awakening  of  the  historical 

spirit '  in  India,  to  use  the  phrase  of  Sir  James  Meston  in  his  brilliant 

inaugural  address  which  forms  the  principal  item  in  the  contents  of  the 

first  number  of  the  Journal  of  the  Historical  Society  of  the  United  Provinces, 

and  was  delivered  at  Allahabad  in  1917.    The  society  thus  started  by  the 

outgoing  lieutenant-governor  of  the  United  Provinces  is  the  latest  of  many 

associations  of  the  kind.     One  of  the  earliest,  the  Panjab  Historical 

Society,  founded    by  Sir  John    Marshall  and  the    staff  of  the  Panjab 

University,   issues    a  fine  journal   filled  with    excellent    papers.      The 

Journal  of  the   Bihar  and  Orissa   Research   Society   (Bankipore),  while 

devoting  special  attention  to  ethnology  and  prehistoric  archaeology,  does 

not  neglect  history.    Its  number  for  December  1917  has  won  pre-eminent 

distinction  by  publishing  a  scholarly  edition  of  one  of  the  most  ancient 

and  important  of  Indian  inscriptions,  containing  a  history  of  thirteen 

years  of  the  reign  of  King  Kharavela  of  Kalinga  or  Orissa,  and  dated  about 

170  B.  c.    As  now  interpreted  it  affords  sound  reason  for  believing  that 

543  B.C.,  the    traditional    date    of   Buddha's   death,    recorded  in   the 

chronicles  of  Ceylon,  may  be  correct.     The  Journal  of  the  Hyderabad 

Archaeological  Society,  edited  by  Mr.  Yazdani,  a  Muhammadan  scholar, 

contains  many  valuable  essays  illustrating  the  history  and  antiquities  of 

the  Deccan.    Societies  of  a  similar  character  exist  at  Bangalore,  Eangoon, 

and  other  places.     Indian  scholars,  Hindu  or  Muslim,  have  now  learned 

to  use  European  canons  and  methods  of  research.    They  use  them  so  well 

that  the  work  of  the  best  writers  will  bear  comparison  with  that  of 

European  experts.    The  Indians,  in  virtue  of  their  birth  and  their  intimate 

knowledge  of  many  things  hidden  from  the  foreigner,  possess  certain 

advantages  to  which  no  outsider  can  aspire.     The  first  number  of  the 

Jouryial  of  the   United   Provinces  Historical  Society    (September,    1917), 

which  has  served  as  the  text  for  the  foregoing  remarks,  is  issued  in 

England  by  Messrs.  Longmans.     Professor  S.  B.  Smith,  who  occupies. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  431 

the  chair  of  Indian  History  at  the  Canning  College,  Lucknow,  throws  new 
light  upon  the  story  of  the  kingdom  of  Oudh  in  the  first  half  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  by  his  paper  on  Hakim  Mahdi.  The  Allahabad  University 
has  created  a  chair  of  Indian  Modern  History,  filled  by  Professor 
Rushworth  Williams.  We  expect  with  confidence  that  the  United 
Provinces,  which  may  fairly  claim  to  be  the  most  interesting  region  of 
India  from  the  historical  point  of  view,  will  be  able  to  provide  well- 
qualified  contributors  who  will  raise  the  new  journal  to  a  high  level  of 
excellence.  V.  A.  S. 

The  Papers  of  the  American  Society  of  Church  History,  second  series, 
vol.  V  (New  York  :  Putnam,  1917),  are  chiefly  valuable  for  two  elaborate 
articles  on  a  theme  which  American  scholars  are  making  their  own,  the 
religious  movements  in  Holland  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries. 
Dr.  H.  E.  Dosker  writes  on  '  Recent  Sources  of  Information  on  the  Ana- 
baptists in  the  Netherlands ',  and  Dr.  A.  H.  Newman  on  *  Adam  Pastor, 
Antitrinitarian  Antipaedobaptist '.  These  are  full  and  evidently  trust- 
worthy pieces  of  work,  theological  as  much  as  historical.  *  Criminal  Proce- 
dure in  the  Church  Courts  of  the  Fifteenth  Century,  as  illustrated  by  the 
Trial  of  Gilles  de  Rais,'  by  Professor  Howland,  of  the  university  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, is  an  interesting  paper.  As  regards  America,  Dr.  Jesse  Johnson 
describes  the  beginnings,  in  log  huts  and  with  rudimentary  tuition,  of 
theological  education  west  of  the  Alleghanies ;  but  English  readers  will 
derive  special  instruction  in  the  difference  between  American  methods  and 
their  own  from  the  secretary's  narration  of  the  means  by  which  the  society 
obtained  its  act  of  incorporation  from  the  legislature  of  New  York. 

E.  W.  W. 


CORRECTIONS  IN  THE  JANUARY  AND  APRIL  NUMBERS. 

p.  58,  add  to  note  2.  The  Pinax  referred  to  by  Cassiodorus,  de  Inst,  xxv  (here, 
misprinted  xv),  was  identified  with  the  tract  of  Dionysius  Exiguus  by  Adolf  Franz 
{Cassiodorius  Senator,  p.  83,  1872)  and  by  Bruno  Krusch,  who  added  the  precise 
comment,  '  So  werden  Ostertafeln  schon  vom  3.  Jahrh.  an  genannt '  {Neues  Archiv, 
ix.  113).  This  statement  appears  to  be  without  foundation.  The  context  of  Cassio- 
dorus'  words  leaves  no  doubt  that  he  is  referring  to  the  work  of  an  earlier  Dionysius, 
whose  Periegesis  is  known  to  have  been  illustrated  by  a  mva^  or  map,  apparently  by 
more  than  one.  See  the  extracts  from  the  scholia  quoted  by  Carl  Miiller,  proleg.  to 
Geographi  Graeci  minores,  ii  (1861),  p.  xxiv.  The  presumption  therefore  that  the 
Table  of  Dionysius  was  known  to  Cassiodorus  can  be  inferred  only  from  the  friendly 
relations  of  the  two  men,  from  Cassiodorus'  constant  activity  in  increasing  his  library, 
and  from  the  well-recognized  tendency  of  literature  to  gravitate  towards  a  great  centre. 

p.  146  line  12.-     For  vicomte  read  vicomte. 

p.  146  note  11.     For  note  51  read  note  50. 

p.  151  note  49  line  3.     For  notes  48,  49  read  notes  47,  48. 

p.  151  note  49  line  4.     For  note  48  read  note  47. 

p.  157  note  99  line  6.     For  unto  read  into. 

p.  159  line  2.     For  shown  read  held. 

p.  161  note  136.  For  Wulfstan  read  Wulfstanus  .  .  .,  and  for  Angehvinus  Eoves- 
hamensis  read  Aegelwinus  Eoveshamnensis. 

p.  165  line  3  from  foot.     For  is  read  are. 

p.  169  note  229,  and  p.  173  note  265.     For  Epist.  Ivi  read  Epist.  Ivii. 


The  English 

Historical   Review 


NO.  CXXXII.—OCTOBER  1918  ^ 


TAe  Supremacy  of  the  Mercian  Kings 

IN  a  famous  chapter  of  the  second  book  of  his  Hist(yria  Ecdesia- 
stica  Bede  remarks  that  seven  early  kings  exercised  a  supre- 
macy over  all  the  provinces  of  the  English  which  lay  to  the  south 
of  the  Humber.  He  gives  this  information  quite  incidentally 
in  the  act  of  recording  the  death  of  ^thelberht  of  Kent,  the  third 
of  these  kings/  and  neither  in  this  passage  nor  elsewhere  does 
he  attempt  to  describe  the  powers  inherent  in  this  supremacy 
or  to  account  for  its  origin.  These  problems  were  not  germane 
to  his  theme  :  with  his  death  the  writing  of  history  passed  into 
the  hands  of  annalists  who  were  not  concerned  to  explain  the 
institutions  of  their  day,  and  this  archaic  supremacy  remains  an 
enigma.  That  the  enigma  will  ever  receive  a  full  solution  we 
dare  not  hope,  for  it  arises  in  the  impenetrable  obscurity  of  the 
fifth  century.  But  the  overlordship  of  the  southern  English 
was  certainly  a  fact  of  moment  in  the  time  of  Bede,^  and  its  later 
phases  extend  into  a  period  which  is  illustrated  by  a  considerable 
body  of  diplomatic  evidence.  And  it  often  happens  that  a  king 
who  has  obtained  recognition  as  overlord  from  other  kings  is 
asked  by  them  to  confirm  their  grants  of  land,  or  makes  some 
attempt  to  express  his  supremacy  in  the  formulas  of  his  regnal 
style. 

These  formulas  deserve  careful  examination,  for  they  conflict 
sharply  with  our  literary  evidence.^    No  less  familiar  than  Bede's 

^  Historia  Ecclesiastica,  ii.  5.  ^  H.  E.  V.  23. 

*  In  tracing  the  development  of  regnal  styles  it  is  unwise  to  complicate  the  succes- 
sion of  charter  formulas  by  reference  to  the  styles  recorded  in  less  formal  texts. 
Although  nothing  definite  is  known  about  the  conditions  under  which  the  diplomas  of 
the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  were  written  it  is  certain  that  they  were  composed 
by  men  who  drew  upon  a  common  store  of  formulas.  The  regnal  styles  recorded  in 
the  diplomas  of  this  age  are  of  much  greater  authority  as  evidence  of  contemporary 
usage  than  are  those  which  occur  in  texts  written  after  the  break  in  the  series  of  original 
royal  charters  which  extends  from  the  reign  of  ^thelred  I  to  that  of  iEthelstan. 

VOL.  XXXm. — NO.  OXXXII.  F  f 

*  All  rights  reserved. 


434     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS    October 

enumeration  of  the  first  seven  overlords  of  the  southern  English 
is  the  passage  in  the  Chronicle,  a.  827,  which  relates  how  Ecgberht 
of  Wessex  conquered  the  kingdom  of  the  Mercians  and  all  that 
was  to  the  south  of  the  Humber,  and  was  the  eighth  king  who  was 
Bretwalda.  No  convincing  explanation  of  this  passage  has  ever 
been  given.  Its  implication  that  the  supremacy  exercised  by 
the  first  seven  overlords  continued  in  abeyance  from  the  sixth 
decade  of  the  seventh  century  until  the  third  decade  of  the  ninth 
is  contradicted  by  many  facts  which  suggest  that  a  position 
of  similar  authority  was  intermittently  held  by  several  Mercian 
kings  in  the  intervening  period.  On  the  other  hand,  the  theory 
that  this  West  Saxon  annalist  was  unwilling  to  acknowledge  the 
past  supremacy  of  Mercian  overlords  not  only  implies  the  per- 
sistence of  an  intenser  racial  jealousy  than  would  be  inferred  from 
any  recorded  facts  but  also  runs  counter  to  the  whole  tenour  of 
the  pre-Alfredian  sections  of  the  Chronicle.  The  attribution  of 
a  conscious  political  tendency  to  annals  of  this  date  and  character 
verges,  perhaps  more  than  verges,  upon  anachronism.  Whatever 
its  explanation  may  be,  and  quite  possibly  it  is  nothing  more 
subtle  than  the  mistake  of  an  unintelligent  annalist,  the  passage 
at  issue  certainly  gives  especial  importance  to  any  facts  which 
illustrate  the  position  held  by  the  Mercian  kings  of  the  eighth] 
century. 

For  our   knowledge   of   the   course   of  events  immediately] 
following  the  Mercian  revolt  of  658  we  depend  entirely  upon) 
literary  evidence.     The  earliest  diploma  of  which  the  original 
text  is  now  extant  is  dated  679,*  the  earliest  cartulary  diplomas] 
whose  formulas  suggest  a  seventh-century  origin  belong  to  thej 
same  decade.^   No  genuine  charter  of  Wulfhere,  whose  elevation] 
to  the  kingship  of  the  Mercians  ended  the  Northumbrian  overlord- 
ship,  has  been  preserved.^   Nevertheless  the  facts  which  we  possess 
go  far  to  prove  that  Wulfhere  during  the  greater  part  of  his  reign 
exercised  that  authority  over  the  southern  English  which  Oswiu 
of  Northumbria  had  enjoyed  down  to  the  year  658.    The  kings  of 
the  East  Saxons  are  known  to  have  been  subject  to  Wulfhere,*^ 
and  he  could  sell  the  East  Saxon  bishopric  of  London.^    He  could 
dispose  at  will  of  the  Isle  of  Wight  and  of  territory  on  the  mainland 

*  Birch,  Cartularium  Saxonicum  45  (hereafter  cited  as  C.  8.  with  the  number  of 
the  document). 

^  There  is  no  difficulty  in  accepting  the  Kentish  diploma  of  Hlothhere,  C.  8.  36, 
as  a  transcript  of  a  genuine  charter  of  674  or  5.  See  Turner,  Black  Book  of  8t.  Augus- 
tine's I.    The  charter  of  Frithuwald  for  Chertsey  (C.  8.  34)  is  considered  below. 

^  The  charters  drafted  in  his  name  in  favour  of  Medeshamstede  abbey  (C.  8.  22 
and  22  a)  can  hardly  have  been  intended  seriously  to  deceive  anybody.  His  grant  of 
Dillington  in  Huntingdonshire  to  his  kinsman  '  Berhferth  '  (C.  8.  32)  includes  a  proem 
which  in  no  respect  resembles  seventh -century  work  and  a  set  of  detailed  boundaries 
in  English.    His  charter  to  Chertsey  (C.  8.  33)  is  certainly  spurious. 

'  H.  E.  iii.  30.  ^  H.E.  iii.  7. 


1918      SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        435 

which  formed  part  of  the  West  Saxon  kingdom. »  The  king  of 
the  South  Saxons  was  his  godson  and  appears  in  Bede's  narrative 
as  his  dependant.io  If  the  difficult  text  which  is  commonly- 
regarded  as  the  foundation  charter  of  Chertsey  abbey  may  be 
trusted,  Wulf here's  assent  was  required  to  give  validity  to  a  grant 
of  land  in  Surrey.^^  The  only  southern  kingdoms  in  which  he  is 
not  recorded  as  exercising  influence  are  East  Anglia  and  Kent ; 
but  the  history  of  East  Anglia  in  his  time  is  extremely  obscure, 
and  the  series  of  authentic  Kentish  land  books  does  not  begin  until 
the  last  year  of  his  reign. 

For  definite  evidence  that  Wulfhere's  authority  extended 
over  the  whole  of  southern  England  it  is  necessary  to  refer  back 
from  Bede  to  the  Vita  Wilfridi  of  Eddi.  In  a  passage  of  which 
the  interest  has  not  always  been  recognized  Eddi  tells  us  ^^  that 
Wulf  here,  having  moved  all  the  southern  peoples  against  North- 
umbria  in  order  to  reduce  that  land  under  tribute,  was  over- 
thrown by  the  Northumbrian  King  Ecgfrith,  who  thereupon 
made  Wulfhere's  own  kingdom  tributary.  The  passage  is  valuable 
as  an  illustration  of  the  contemporary  condition  of  southern 
England,  for  this  military  combination  of  all  the  southern  peoples 
can  only  mean  that  they  were  united  to  the  extent  of  acknow- 
ledging a  common  overlord.  It  also  supplies  a  useful  warning 
against  building  overmuch  on  the  silence  of  Bede,  whose  only 

9  H.  E.  iv.  13.  "  Ibid. 

1^  The  Old  English  charters  of  Chertsey  abbey  all  carry  a  heavy  weight  of  suspicion 
which  most  of  them  only  too  well  deserve.  The  first  of  the  series,  C.  8.  34,  differs  in 
many  ways  from  the  texts  with  which  it  is  associated.  It  is  written  in  the  incoherent 
Latin  characteristic  of  seventh-  and  early  eighth -century  diplomas  which  was  not 
imitated  by  the  later  Chertsey  forgers.  But  the  feature  of  this  charter  which  most 
strongly  suggests  that  some  early  original  lies  behind  the  late  copy  which  we  possess 
is  its  remarkable  similarity  in  formulary  detail  to  the  uncial  charter  of  Hodilred  for 
the  monastery  of  Beddanham,  C.  aS^.  81,  a  charter  which  may  be  strictly  contemporary, 
and  in  any  case  is  one  of  the  very  earliest  of  extant  English  diplomas.  This  similarity, 
which  could  only  be  brought  out  adequately  by  a  parallel  edition  of  the  two  texts, 
is  so  close  as  to  suggest  either  that  the  Beddanham  charter  was  the  model  by  which 
the  Chertsey  charter  was  composed  or  that  both  came  from  some  common  scriptorium. 
In  view  of  the  general  style  of  the  Chertsey  charter  the  latter  theory  is  much  the  most 
probable ;  a  later  forger  ought  to  have  produced  a  more  intelligible  text.  As  the  Beddan- 
ham charter  is  proved  by  an  endorsement  to  come  from  the  archives  of  Barking,  and  as 
both  Barking  and  Chertsey  were  founded  by  Eorconwald,  afterwards  bishop  of  London, 
the  verbal  similarity  of  the  Beddanham  and  Chertsey  charters  is  explained  in  a  natural 
way.  The  reference  to  a  confirmation  by  Wulfhere  is  only  one  of  several  passages  in 
the  Chertsey  charter  which  are  important  if  they  really  come  from  the  seventh  century. 
The  most  interesting  is  a  statement  that  the  land  granted  to  the  monastery  extended 
usqv£.  ad  terminum  alterius  provinciae  quae  appellatur  Sunninges.  It  is  probable  that 
the  name  of  the  village  of  Sonning  in  east  Berkshire  preserves  the  memory  of  this 
archaic  provincia,  and  if  so,  the  passage  contains  a  unique  reference  to  the  local 
organization  of  Wessex  at  a  time  previous  to  the  division  of  that  kingdom  into  shires. 
As  shires  had  certainly  been  created  in  Wessex  by  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century 
{Chronicle,  a.  755)  the  reference  to  this  provincia  of  Sonning  is  a  serious  argument  in 
favour  of  an  early  basis  for  the  Chertsey  charter.  Forgers  do  not  often  invent  gratuitous 
statements  of  this  kind.  ^"  Ch.  xx. 

F  f  2 


436     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

reference  to  this  war  is  a  bare  statement  of  Wulf here's  defeat 
introduced  casually  into  an  account  of  the  appointment  of  the 
first  bishop  of  Lindsey.^^  To  Eddi  also  the  war  was  only  an 
incident,  but  he  is  a  contemporary  witness  to  events  falling  within 
the  last  years  of  Wulfhere's  reign,  and  his  quite  disinterested 
evidence  entitles  us  to  believe  that  the  succession  of  the  overlords 
of  the  southern  English  was  continued  by  Wulf  here.  The  collapse 
of  Wulfhere's  power  consequent  upon  his  defeat  explains  why  no 
reference  to  his  consent  is  made  in  a  diploma  of  April  1,  674  or  5, 
issued  by  Hlothhere  king  of  Kent.^* 

It  is  improbable  that  ^thelred,  Wulfhere's  brother  and 
successor,  was  ever  able  to  restore  the  Mercian  power.  The  other- 
wise inexplicable  harrying  of  Kent  in  676  ^^  is  best  regarded  as 
an  effort  towards  this  restoration  ;  that  ^thelred  possessed  some 
measure  of  authority  in  Kent  in  the  early  part  of  this  year  is 
proved  by  his  confirmation  and  subscription  of  a  diploma  issued 
by  King  Swsefhard  on  1  March. ^^  The  war  of  679  marked  by 
the  battle  of  the  Trent  ^'  seems  to  have  ended  in  ^thelred's 
recovery  of  the  lost  Mercian  province  of  Lindsey.  But  the  evidence 
of  charters  does  not  support  the  theory  that  ^Ethelred  exercised 
any  general  and  stable  authority  in  the  south  of  England.  On 
this  point  we  can  quote  twenty-three  documents  whose  authen- 
ticity may  reasonably  be  accepted,  ranging  from  contemporary 
texts  to  late  and  corrupt  copies  and  relating  to  five  of  the  southern 
kingdoms.  Five  of  these  charters  relate  to  land  in  the  west 
midlands ,1^  and  three  of  them  were  granted  by  ^^Ethelred  himself. 
Of  the  rest,  thirteen  relate  to  Kent,  two  to  Sussex,  one,  and  that 

"  H.  E.  iv.  12. 

"  C.  8.  36.  The  charter  is  dated  in  the  first  year  of  Hlothhere  and  the  third 
indiction,  that  is  675.  These  indications  are  incompatible,  for  Ecgberht  I,  Hlothhere's 
predecessor,  died  in  July  673  {H.  E.  iv.  5). 

15  H.  E.  iv.  12.  "  C.  S.  42.  "  H.  E.  iv.  21. 

1^  {\)C.  8.  57,  a  grant  by  a  certain  iEthelmod  to  Bernguidis  (0.  E.  Beorngyth)  the 

abbess  and  Folcburg  of  20  manentes  by  the  Cherwell,  attested  by  ^thelred.     The 

words  of  gift  run  in  the  second  person,  and  the  formulas  are  ancient.    (2)  C.  8.  60,  an 

incoherent  document  to  the  effect  that  ^Ethelred  composed  a  dispute  between  Osrio 

and  Oswald  his  brother,  two  ministri  of  noble  birth  of  the  province  of  the  Hwicce, 

by  granting  300  tributarii  at  Gloucester  to  Osric  and  300  cassati  at  Pershore  to  Oswald, 

and  that  Osric  obtained  the  king's  leave  to  found  a  monastery  in  the  city  of  Gloucester. 

It  is  certainly  not  a  medieval  fabrication ;    a  forger  would  have  produced  a  more 

grammatical  text,  would  have  made  Osric  king  of  the  Hwicce  in  accordance  with 

H.  E.  iv.  23,  and  would  not  have  invented  for  him  a  brother  of  whose  existence  there 

is  no  other  record.  (See  also  Mr.  Stevenson's  note  in  his  edition  of  Asser,  p.  155).  (3  and 

4)  C.  8.  75  and  76,  grants  by  iEthelred  to  Oftfor  bishop  of  Worcester  of  lands  at 

Hanbury  and  Fladbury,  co.  Worcester,  on  which  see  Hist.  M88.  Comm.,  Report  on 

Manuscripts  of  Lord  Middleton  at  Wollaton,  pp.  199-201,  ante,  xxix.  697,  and  xxxiii.  258. 

(5)  C.  8.  85,  grant  by  Oshere  king  of  the  Hwicce  and  ^thelhard  his  son  to  Cutswyth  the 

abbess  of  land  at  '  Penitanham '  for  the  building  of  a  monastery.     The  charter  is 

attested  by  ^thelred,  by  Berhtwald  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  by  eight  bishops 

all  of  whom  might  have  witnessed  a  diploma  in  693.     Its  brevity  and  general  style 

command  respect. 


I 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        437 

probably  an  original,  to  Essex,  and  two  to  Wessex.  There  is 
a  body  of  evidence  here  which  ought  to  illustrate  the  authority 
of  any  overlord  whose  supremacy  received  more  than  local  and 
temporary  recognition. 

It  suggests,  on  the  other  hand,  the  general  independence  of 
the  southern  kingdoms  throughout  ^Ethelred's  long  reign.  Of 
the  thirteen  Kentish  charters  ^^  two  only  imply  that  his  overlord- 
ship  was  recognized  in  that  kingdom,  and  each  appears  to  have 
been  issued  under  abnormal  circumstances.  The  earlier  of  them 
is  King  Swsefhard's  diploma  of  1  March  676  ;  ^Ethelred's  con- 
firmation of  this  grant  may  be  explained  by  his  presence  in 
Kent  at  the  head  of  an  army  of  invasion .^o  By  the  second  charter 
an  Oswine  who  is  styled  rex  Cantiae  grants  to  St.  Peter's  monastery 
at  Canterbury  an  iron  working  which  used  to  belong  to  the  estate 
of  Lyminge,  de  terra  iuris  mei  quae  mihi  ex  propinquitate  parentum 
meorum  venit  atque  ex  confirmatione  clementissimi  JEthelredi  regis 
collata  estP-  The  charter  is  dated  in  July  in  the  second  indiction, 
corresponding  with  the  year  of  Grace  689,  and  Oswine  may 
therefore  be  identified  with  one  of  the  reges  dubii  vel  externi  who 
ruled  in  Kent  between  the  death  of  Eadric  and  the  establishment 
of  Wihtred  in  690.  The  statement  that  land  of  Oswine 's  patri- 
mony had  been  confirmed  to  him  by  ^thelred  makes  it  certain 
that  he  reigned  in  Kent  under  Mercian  protection.^^     On  the 

^9  They  include  an  original  of  King  Hlothhere  (C  S.  45)  and  two  originals  of  King 
Wihtred  (C.  S,  97  and  98).  The  remaining  ten  charters  are  only  known  from  tran- 
scripts which  come  from  the  abbey  of  St.  Augustine  (C.  S.  35,  40,  42,  44,  67,  73,  86, 
88,  90,  96  ;  upon  the  date  of  the  first  two  of  these  documents  see  below,  note  22), 
Many  of  these  charters  were  abbreviated  in  transcription,  and  some  of  them  are 
difficult  to  interpret.  But  the  latter  difficulties  are  mainly  due  to  the  obscurity  of 
Kentish  history  at  this  time,  and  the  charters  as  a  group  are  distinguished  by  the  use 
of  early  formulas  and  the  absence  of  the  characteristic  diction  of  the  medieval 
fabricator.  The  documents  relating  to  the  so-called  Donation  of  Wihtred  obviously 
should  not  be  used  in  this  connexion. 

20  C.  S.  42.  A  statement  that  the  grant  was  made  with  ^thelred's  assent  and  will 
is  inserted  in  the  body  of  the  text.  After  the  attestations  a  clause  of  unusual  form 
runs  Signum  manus  ^dilredis  regis  Merciorum  dum  ille  infirmaverat  terram  nostram 
in  hoc  loco  erat  qui  dicitur  Mirajeld  atque  Stapulford.  These  places,  unfortunately, 
have  never  been  identified.  This  clause  is  followed  by  a  note  of  date  Anno  ab  incarna- 
tione  Christi  DCLXXVI  indictione  iiii,  viii  die  mensis  lanuarii  prima  feria,  which 
is  inconsistent  with  the  date  assigned  to  the  charter  in  its  opening  words,  the  Kalends 
of  March  in  the  fourth  indiction.  It  may  be  presumed  that  there  is  a  mistake  in  the 
postscript,  and  Kemble  suggested  that  lunii  should  be  read  for  lanuarii.  The  8th  of 
June  was  a  Sunday.  This  mistake  does  not  affect  the  authenticity  of  the  diploma, 
which  is  confirmed  by  its  archaic  formulas  and  by  the  reappearance  of  six  of  its 
witnesses  in  King  Hlothhere's  original  charter  of  May  679  (C.  S.  45).  Bede  remarks 
that  Swaefhard  was  associated  as  king  with  Wihtred  when  Berhtwald  was  elected 
archbishop  of  Canterbury  on  1  July  692  {H.  E.  v.  8).  The  present  charter  is  the  only 
evidence  that  Swaefhard  was  ruling  in  Kent  as  early  as  676. 
-^  C.  S.  73. 

-2  Copies  of  two  other  charters  bearing  Oswine's  name  have  been  preserved.  One 
is  a  fragment  without  any  note  of  date  (C.  S.  40).  The  other  (C.  S.  35)  is  dated 
17  January  in  the  third  indiction  and  in  the  second  year  of  Oswine's  reign.    It  is 


438     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

other  hand,  the  isolated  but  probably  contemporary  East  Saxon 
diploma  of  691  makes  no  reference  to  iEthelred's  assent ,^^  nor 
does  he  confirm  either  of  the  two  South  Saxon  charters  of  probable 
authenticity  which  fall  within  his  reign. ^*  The  evidence  respecting 
Wessex  is  difficult  to  handle  owing  to  the  untrustworthy  character 
of  most  of  the  rather  copious  material.  There  is  a  suggestion  in 
the  texts  which  relate  to  the  origin  of  Abingdon  abbey  that 
iEthelred's  authority  may  have  been  recognized  south  of  Thames, 
but  these  texts  are  associated  with  a  foundation  legend  which  was 
modified  if  not  composed  in  the  twelfth  century,  and  it  is  not  wise 
to  draw  important  conclusions  from  them.^^  The  earliest  charters 
of  the  Malmesbury  series  are  justly  of  ill  repute  :  they  may  have 
served  as  models  for  the  early  charters  of  the  Abingdon  series .^^ 
The  cartularies  of  Winchester  and  Shaftesbury  each  include  one 
ungrammatical  diploma  of  this  period  to  which  no  conclusive 
exception  need  be  taken  :  neither  of  them  refers  to  any  confirma- 
tion by  ^thelred.27  There  is  no  record  of  any  exercise  of  authority 
in  Wessex  after  the  consolidation  of  that  kingdom  by  Centwine, 
Csed walla,  and  Ine,  and  the  language  employed  respecting  these 
three  kings  by  their  contemporary  Aldhelm  suggests  that  they 
were  independent  of  all  external  control .^^  In  view  of  these 
facts  it  can  only  be  said  that  if  ^thelred  was  recognized  as  over- 
lord beyond  his  own  borders  his  overlordship  did  not  seem  a  matter 
of  much  moment  to  the  authors  of  contemporary  land  books.^^ 

There  is  nothing  to  suggest  any  extension  of  Mercian  power 
during  the  short  reigns  of  iEthelred's  successors  Cenred  and 
Ceolred.30    With  the  accession  of  ^thelbald  of  Mercia  in  716  the 

assigned  in  the  Cartularium  to  675,  but  it  may  much  more  probably  be  referred  to 
the  third  indiction  which  fell  in  690. 

2'  C.  S.  81. 

2*  C.  S.  78  and  80.  The  latter  is  an  ill-copied  fragment  which  hardly  affects  the 
question  either  way.  Upon  the  former  see  ante,  xxxiii.  258.  C.  8.  79  is  an  obvious 
forgery. 

25  For  these  charters  I  may  refer  to  my  Early  History  of  the  Abbey  of  Abingdon^ 
pp.  9-16,  C.  8.  74,  which  is  probably  founded  on  ancient  material,  makes  no  reference 
to  any  attestation  or  confirmation  by  ^Ethelred. 

26  C.  8.  54,  58,  59,  63,  65,  70,  71,  103.  There  are  features  in  C.  8.  65  by  which 
a  King  Berhtwald,  with  ^Ethelred's  consent,  grants  land  upon  the  Thames  near  the 
ford  called  Sumerford  to  Abbot  Aldhelm  which  may  be  derived  from  an  early  original, 
but  it  would  not  be  well  to  lay  much  stress  on  them  until  the  early  Malmesbury 
charters  have  been  criticized  in  detail. 

"  C.  8.  72,  107. 

28  Aldhelm,  Opera,  ed.  Giles,  115. 

2^  In  view  of  what  follows,  the  style  praestantissimus  rex  Brittanniae  assigned  to 
^thelred  in  C.  8.  51  cannot  be  dismissed  at  once  as  a  fabrication  ;  but  the  formulas 
cf  this  charter  are  decisive  against  its  genuineness. 

3»  If  C.  8.  Ill  could  be  trusted  it  would  prove  that  the  consent  of  .Ethelred, 
Cenred,  and  Ceolred  was  successively  obtained  to  a  grant  of  land  in  Middlesex  by 
Swsefred,  king  of  the  East  Saxons.  The  charter  is  written  in  a  ninth-century  hand 
and  it  includes  early  formulas,  but  it  cannot  be  accepted  as  representing  with  accuracy 
a  text  of  the  early  eighth  century.     A  note  of  iEthelred's  consent  i?  inserted  in  the 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        439 

history  of  southern  England  enters  upon  a  new  phase  which  is  illus- 
trated by  the  most  remarkable  series  of  English  diplomas  no  w  extant . 
The  series  is  intermittent  at  first ;  no  original  Mercian  charter 
has  survived  from  the  first  nineteen  years  of  ^Ethelbald's  reign.^^ 
But  the  earliest  Mercian  diploma  which  we  possess  in  a  contem- 
porary form  not  only  demonstrates  the  supremacy  of  the  Mercian 
king  in  southern  England,  a  fact  which  Bede  has  set  on  record, 
but  also  gives  unique  information  as  to  the  way  in  which  that 
supremacy  was  regarded  by  Bede's  contemporaries. 

In  736  by  a  charter  entered  on  the  last  folio  of  the  manuscript 
of  uncertain  provenance  known  as  the  Vespasian  Psalter  ^thel- 
bald  granted  to  his  comes  Cyneberht  the  land  of  ten  cassati  for 
the  building  of  a  monastery  in  the  province  called  Husmere  near 
the  river  Stour.^^  Husmere  has  been  shown  to  be  in  the  modern 
Worcestershire,  where  the  name  Ismere  House  occurs  on  the  map 
between  Kidderminster  and  Wolverley.^^  The  charter  illustrates 
the  direct  authority  of  the  Mercian  king  in  the  territory  of  the 
Hwicce  :  it  is  attested  by  ^Ethelric  subregulus  atque  comes 
gloriosissimi  principis  jEthilbaldi,  and  iEthelric  is  known  to  have 
been  a  son  of  the  seventh -century  King  Oshere.^*  But  the 
exceptional  interest  which  belongs  to  the  charter  lies  in  the  three 
different  styles  which  it  assigns  to  King  iEthelbald.  The  words 
of  gift  with  which  it  opens,  for  it  has  neither  invocation  nor 
proem,  style  the  king  domino  donante  rex  non  solum  Marcersium 
sed  et  omnium  provinciarum  quae  generali  nomine  Sutangli  dicuntur. 
A  contemporary  postscript  describes  him,  more  succinctly,  as 
rex  Suutanglorum.  And  he  heads  the  list  of  attestations  with  the 
title  rex  Britanniae. 

Now  the  latter  phrase  when  found  in  a  contemporary  text 
of  a  charter  written  in  the  year  736  deserves  to  be  taken  seriously. 
The  authentic  charters  which  have  survived  from  this  remote 

verba  dispositiva,  and  the  charter  is  ended  by  two  sets  of  attestations,  the  first  headed 
by  the  name  of  Cenred  and  the  second  by  that  of  Ceolred.  There  is  no  proof  that  it 
was  the  practice  at  this  date  to  add  supplementary  confirmations  of  this  kind  to  the 
text  of  a  diploma.  It  is  quite  possible  that  Essex  was  a  Mercian  dependency  at  this 
time,  but  the  present  charter  should  not  be  quoted  in  evidence. 

3^  To  this  period  there  belong  four  charters  of  iEthelbald  which  are  probably 
genuine :  C.  8. 137,  a  grant  of  land  for  salt  boiling  by  the  river  Salwarp  to  the  monastery 
of  Worcester ;  C.  S.  149  and  152  remissions  of  the  royal  tax  upon  ships  coming  to 
the  port  of  London  in  favour  of  Mildthryth  abbess  of  Minster  and  Ealdwulf  bishop 
of  Rochester  respectively ;  C.  S.  153,  grant  to  a  certain  Cyneburh  of  six  cassati  at 
a  place  called  Bradanlseh.  This  place  has  never  been  identified,  but  as  the  charter 
is  derived  from  Worcester  cartularies  it  presumably  relates  to  a  site  in  the  West 
Midlands  and  not  to  Maiden  Bradley  in  Somerset  as  is  suggested  in  the  Cartularium. 
The  king  attests  C.  8.  137,  149,  and  153  as  rex  Merciorum,  C.  8.  152  as  rex  without 
qualification;  in  the  verba  dispositiva  of  C.  8.  137  he  is  styled  ex  divina  dispensatione 
Mercensium  rex. 

3-  C.  8.  154. 

^*  Duignan,  Place  Names  of  Worcestershire,  pp.  92-3.  2*  C.  8.  157 


440     SUPREMACY  OF  TEE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

time  manifest  no  trace  of  that  flamboyant  diction  which  marks 
the  work  of  the  clerks  who  wrote  land  books  for  ^Ethelstan  or 
Edward  the  Confessor.  In  particular,  the  regnal  styles  of  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries  read  almost  without  exception  like 
sober  statements  of  fact.^^  '  Rex  Cantuariorum  ',  '  dux  Suth- 
saxorum  ',  '  regulus  Huicciorum  ',  '  rex  dimidiae  partis  provinciae 
Cantuariorum  '  :  styles  like  these  were  clearly  intended  to  be 
understood  in  their  literal  meaning.  '  Rex  Britanniae  '  belongs 
to  a  different  order  of  ideas  from  '  singularis  privilegii  monarchia 
praeditus  rex  '  or  *  rex  et  primicerius  totius  Albionis  '.  The 
Latin  of  the  Ismere  diploma  is  simple  and  rather  crude,  the 
writing  of  a  man  hard  put  to  it  to  express  himself  at  all  and  not  in 
the  least  likely  to  be  led  into  talk  about  a  king  of  Britain  by 
a  perverted  sense  of  style.  The  phrase  for  him  had  a  meaning  : 
the  kingship  of  Britain  was  a  succinct  expression  of  the  powers 
implied  in  rule  over  the  provinces  which  by  a  general  name  are 
called  the  South  English. 

Who,  then,  are  the  Sutangli  ?  The  word  is  rare,  and  it  appears 
to  have  borne  a  different  sense  for  each  of  the  few  writers  who  have 
employed  it.  It  was  certainly  current  at  a  date  earlier  than  that 
of  the  Ismere  charter,  for  it  occurs  in  an  archaic,  though  corrupt, 
form  in  the  Whitby  life  of  Gregory  the  Great. ^^  Fuit  igitur 
frater  quidam  nostrae  gentis,  nomine  Trimma,  in  quodam  monasterio 
Sundaranglorum  .  .  .  diebus  Edilredi  regis  illorum.  The  context 
suggests  that  the  South  English  of  this  passage  represent  the 
peoples  under  ^Ethelred's  direct  rule,  the  Mercians,  Middle  Angles, 
and  men  of  Lindsey  ;  it  is  unfortunate  that  we  do  not  know  the 
site  of  the  monastery  of  which  Trimma  was  an  inmate.  Of 
interest  as  an  early  geographical  note,  the  passage  throws  no 
light  upon  the  problem  of  the  Sutangli  and  their  relation  to  the 
kingship  of  Britain. ^^ 

35  The  first  authentic  diploma  to  introduce  inflated  language  into  a  regnal  style 
is  Offa's  Salmonsbury  charter  of  779  (C.  S.  230).  In  the  verba  dispositiva  the  king  is 
made  to  describe  himself  as  deo  cuncta  pie  disponente  in  cuius  manu  sunt  omnia 
iura  regnorum  absque  ulla  antecidente  merito  rex  Mercionum  ;  he  attests  as  divina 
gubernante  gratia  rex  Mercensium.  Even  here,  the  words  which  describe  the  actual 
extent  of  his  dominion  are  precise.  The  original  Westbury  diploma  of  793-6  {C.  S.  274) 
runs  in  the  name  of  Offa  rex  a  rege  -reguum  constitutus,  the  king  attests  vaguely  as  rex 
dei  dono.  Formulas  of  this  sort  are  quite  different  from  the  grandiloquent  styles  of 
the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries.  Also,  in  charters  of  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries 
there  is  little  difference  in  character  between  the  style  attributed  to  a  king  in  the  words 
of  gift  and  that  which  accompanies  his  signature. 

36  Ante,  iii.  308. 

37  Florence  of  Worcester  in  his  enumeration  of  the  sees  which  were  created  out  of 
the  original  Mercian  bishopric  remarks  '  quintam  vero  constituit  (Theodoras)  Suth 
Angliam  ad  quam  .  .  .  ^tlam  eligit  antistitem  eique  praesulatus  sedem  in  loco  qui 
vocatur  Dorcacestra  constituit '  {Mon.  Hist.  Brit.  622).  The  source  of  this  passage 
is  Bede's  statement  in  H.  E.  iv.  23,  that  ^tla  was  consecrated  to  the  bishopric  of 
Dorchester.  The  South  English  are  never  mentioned  by  Bede,  and  there  is  no  pre- 
Conquest  authority  for  the  application  of  the  term  Suth  Anglia  to  ^^tla's  bishopric. 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        441 

A  convincing  explanation  of  the  problem  appears  when  the 
formulas  of  the  Ismere  charter  are  compared  with  certain  relevant 
passages  in  the  Historia  Ecclesiastica.  Five  years  only  before 
this  charter  was  written,  Bede,  in  drawing  his  History  to  a  close, 
had  named  the  eleven  bishops  who  ruled  the  southern  churches 
of  England  in  the  year  731.  In  so  doing  he  had  named  also  the 
kingdoms  in  which  the  seats  of  those  bishops  were  established, 
and  had  ended  his  enumeration  with  the  sentence  Et  hae  omnes 
provinciae  ceteraeque  australes  ad  confinium  usque  Hymbrae 
fluminis  cum  suis  quaeque  regibus  Merciorum  regi  jEdilbaldo 
subiectae  sunt.^^  Now  Bede  was  looking  at  this  supremacy  from 
the  point  of  view  of  ecclesiastical  order ;  the  man  who  wrote  the 
Ismere  charter  was  merely  recording  the  style  of  the  reigning 
king.  And  yet  if  the  relevant  sentences  from  Bede  and  the  charter 
are  read  consecutively  the  conviction  cannot  be  avoided  that 
in  these  two  passages,  each  composed  within  the  same  decade, 
the  same  supremacy  is  described.  The  people  who  by  a  common 
name  are  called  the  Sutangli  are  not  only  the  Mercians,  not 
only  the  various  midland  folks  grouped  under  the  direct  rule 
of  the  Mercian  king ;  they  are  the  men  of  all  those  southern 
provinces  extending  from  the  Channel  to  the  Humber  of  which 
^thelbald  was  overlord.  And  the  king  to  whom  this  supremacy 
belonged  is  described  at  the  same  moment  by  the  title  rex 
Britanniae. 

It  is  this  combination  of  the  title  rex  Britanniae  with  words 
asserting  the  general  authority  of  its  bearer  over  the  southern 
English  which  gives  its  unique  interest  to  the  Ismere  charter. 
For  this  authority  exactly  corresponds  to  the  power  that  was 
assigned  by  Bede  to  those  seven  early  kings  from  ^^Ua  of  Sussex 
to  Oswiu  of  Northumbria  who  in  the  ninth  century  were  regarded 
as  the  first  Bretwaldas.  In  his  enumeration  of  these  kings  Bede 
defines  their  supremacy  in  terms  virtually  identical  with  the 
phrases  which  he  applies  to  the  position  held  by  ^thelbald  in 
the  year  731.  Qui  tertius  quidem,  he  says  of  ^thelberht  of  Kent, 
in  regibus  gentis  Anglorum  cunctis  australibus  eorum  prouinciis 
quae  Humbrae  fluuio  et  contiguis  ei  terminis  sequestrantur  a  boreali- 
bus  imperauit.^^  That  this  passage  lay  before  the  West  Saxon 
annalist  who  added  Ecgberht's  name  to  Bede's  list  has  never  yet 
been  doubted  :  every  theory  upon  the  nature  of  the  office  of 
Bretwalda  has  assumed  the  connexion.  The  peculiar  significance 
of  the  Ismere  charter  consists  in  the  proof  which  it  affords  that 

3«  H.  E.  V.  23. 

38  H.  E.  ii.  5.  With  this  passage  should  be  taken  H.  E.  i.  25  Emt  eo  tempore  rex 
JEdilberct  in  Cantia  potentissimus  qui  ad  confinium  usque  Humbrae  fluminis  maximi 
quo  meridiani  et  septentrionales  Anglorum  populi  dirimuntur  fines  imperii  teteiiderat. 
The  phrase  in  H.  E.  ii.  3  Qui  (sc.  JEdilberct)  omnibus  ut  supra  dictum  est  usque  ad 
terminum  Humbrae  fluminis  Anglorum  gentibus  imperabat  is  another  parallel. 


442     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

the  wielder  of  this  supremacy  was  explicitly  recognized  as  king 
of  Britain  already  in  the  very  decade  of  Bede's  death. *^ 

The  same  supremacy  is  asserted  in  other  Mercian  texts  which 
like  the  Ismere  charter  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  reign  of 
i^thelbald.  Ego  jEthilbalth  non  solum  Mercensium  sed  et  univer- 
sarum  provinciarum  quae  communi  vocabulo  dicuntur  Suthengli 
divina  largiente  gratia  rex  is  the  opening  of  a  document  of  which 
the  original  was  written  before  the  death  of  Bishop  Ealdwine  of 
Lichfield  in  737.*^  And  the  restriction  of  iEthelbald's  dominion 
to  the  southern  English  is  brought  out  again  in  two  charters 
which  purport  to  have  been  made  in  favour  of  Bishop  Wilfrith  of 
Worcester  during  the  episcopate  of  his  neighbour  Walhstod  of 
Hereford.  Three  copies  of  each  of  these  documents  have  been 
preserved  ;  none  of  them  can  accurately  represent  the  text  of 
its  original.  But  the  phraseology  of  the  first /^  by  which  ^thelbald 
divina  dispensatione  rex  Suthanglorum  grants  to  the  bishop  land 
at  Batsford  in  the  modern  Gloucestershire  *^  suggests  the  formulas 
of  the  Ismere  charter,  and  it  is  possible  that  the  rex  Australium 
Anglorum  of  the  second  ^^  may  also  come  from  the  eighth  century. 

Anno  DCCL  Cudretus  rex  Occidentalium  Saxonum  surrexit 

*"  The  Ismere  charter  has  often  been  used  to  prove  ^thelbald's  supremacy  in 
the  south,  in  particular  by  Lappenberg  in  his  chapter  on  the  eighth  century  in  England. 
It  does  not  seem  that  Kemble,  though  he  printed  a  facsimile  of  the  charter,  ever 
appreciated  the  bearing  of  the  style  rex  Britanniae  upon  the  significance  of  the  term 
Bretwalda.  Had  he  done  so  it  is  improbable  that  he  would  have  been  satisfied  to 
define  the  latter  word  as  meaning  '  an  extensive,  powerful,  king,  a  king  whose  power 
is  widely  extended '  {Saxons  in  England,  ed.  1876,  ii.  21).  He  may  have  regarded 
the  words  rex  Britanniae  as  mere  verbal  decoration.  Freeman,  who  never  made  any 
detailed  study  of  the  earliest  English  regnal  styles,  deferred  to  Kemble' s  authority 
on  this  point.  His  appendix  on  the  Bretwaldadom  and  the  imperial  titles  in  the  first 
volume  of  the  Nonnan  Conquest  (pp.  542-56,  ed.  1870)  only  deals  with  charters  of  the 
tenth  century  and  later.  The  recent  histories  by  the  late  Dr.  Hodgkin  and  Professor 
Oman  do  not  include  any  discussion  of  the  charter  evidence. 

*i  C.  S.  157,  a  text  that  has  been  transcribed  with  unusual  care.  Both  the  formulas 
and  such  name  forms  as  iEthilricse,  Sigibed,  Oosherses,  .Ethiluuald  are  proper  to  an 
eighth-century  document.  The  description  of  the  site  in  regione  quae  antiquitus 
nomin/itur  Stoppingas  in  loco  qui  vetusto  vocabulo  dicitur  Uuidutuun  iuxta  Jiuvium 
quern  priores  nostri  appellare  solebant  et  adhuc  nominantur  (sic)  Mluuinnce  belongs  to 
an  early  type  of  such  formulas,  and  is  interesting  for  its  reference  to  the  name  of  ^^^^j 
archaic  west  Midland  regio  that  is  otherwise  unknown.  ^Hl 

*2  C.  S.  163.    This  charter,  like  C.  8.  157,  has  neither  invocation  nor  proem.    A8^^| 
these  features  do  not  occur  in  the  contemporary  C.  S.  154  their  absence  is  by  no  means 
an  argument  against  the  authenticity  of  the  present  text. 

**  The  place  name  is  given  by  the  charter  in  the  form  set  Bseccesore  with  the  variant 
Bsecces  horan  in  other  copies.  It  is  identified  by  Dr.  Birch,  with  a  query,  as  Paxford 
in  Gloucestershire,  but  the  Domesday  form  Beceshore  (i.  169  b)  establishes  the 
identification  with  Batsford. 

"  C.  S.  164,  relating  to  Woodchester,  co.  Gloucester.  Charters  of  ^thelbald 
concerning  this  property  were  produced  before  the  Mercian  witan  in  896  (C  S.  574) 
and  the  boundaries  set  out  in  them  were  then  perambulated.  The  names  of  the 
boundary  points  are  given  in  a  very  corrupt  form  in  the  present  charter,  but  six  of 
them  can  be  identified  with  names  which  occur  in  the  record  of  896,  and  it  is  quite 
possible  that  C.  S.  164  represents  a  text  that  was  shown  in  the  latter  year. 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        443 

contra  uEdilbaldum  regem.  The  compiler  of  the  Bedae  Con- 
tinuatio  ^^  has  here  used  words  which  well  describe  the  rebellion 
of  a  subordinate  king  against  his  overlord.  From  the  Parker  MS. 
of  the  Chronicle  we  learn  that  this  rising  was  marked  by  a  battle 
at  an  unknown  site  named  Beorhford  :  *^  later  texts  of  this  work 
inform  us  that  ^Ethelbald  was  driven  into  flight  there.  The 
regnal  style  assigned  to  ^Ethelbald  in  a  diploma  of  757  ^^  throws 
light  on  the  relationship  existing  after  this  battle  between  the 
kings  of  Mercia  and  Wessex.  The  former  grants  under  the  ample 
title  rex  non  solum  Mercensium  sed  etiam  in  circuitu  populorum 
quibus  me  divina  dispensatio  sine  meritorum  suffragio  praeesse 
voluit,  King  Cynewulf  of  Wessex  attests  the  charter  together 
with  the  bishops  of  Sherborne,  Winchester,  and  Worcester,  and 
a  number  of  men  who  sign  without  designation,  but  of  whom 
several  reappear  a  little  later  in  the  guise  of  West  Saxon  prefecti.^^ 
These  facts  will  gain  a  more  precise  significance  when,  if  ever, 
we  come  to  know  the  situation  of  the  land  which  was  the  subject 
of  the  charter,  ten  cassati  by  the  wood  called  Toccan  sceaga, 
next  the  tumulus  called  Reada  beorg,*^  but  the  attestation  of 
Cynewulf  and  his  reeves  entitles  us  to  infer  that  iEthelbald  was 
dealing  with  land  in  West  Saxon  territory  or  under  West  Saxon 
influence.  The  further  inference  that  ^Ethelbald  was  recognized 
as  overlord  is  permitted  by  the  formulas  employed  in  his  style. 
The  personal  taste  of  a  clerk  has  altered  the  phrasing  which  in 

*^  H.  E.,  ed.  Plummer,  i.  362.  The  words  et  Oengusum  which  follow  this  entry  can 
have  no  connexion  with  it,  whatever  their  explanation  may  be. 

*•*  The  place  where  this  battle  was  fought  is  quite  uncertain.  There  is  no  evidence 
I  o  support  the  common  identification  of  the  Beorhford  of  the  Chronicle  with  Burford 
in  Oxfordshire.  The  medieval  forms  of  this  place  name  have  recently  been  collected 
(Alexander,  Place  Names  of  Oxfordshire,  p.  68),  and  uniformly  after  the  Conquest 
point  to  a  combination  of  ford,  not  with  heorh  but  with  burh.  As  there  is  no  reason 
other  than  an  arbitrary  identification  to  connect  these  later  forms  with  the  ninth- 
century  Beorhford  it  is  unnecessary  to  assume  a  confusion  between  beorh  and  burh 
in  the  first  element  of  this  name.  In  the  place  name  Burghfield  in  Berkshire  in  which 
I  this  confusion  has  occurred  it  is  not  recorded  before  the  fourteenth  century.  All  the 
earlier  forms  descend  normally  from  the  original  implied  in  the  phrase  to  Beorhfeldinga 
I    gemaere  of  C.  S.  888  (see  my  Place  Names  of  Berkshire,  p.  46). 

"  C.  S.  181.  The  date  is  not  given  in  the  charter,  which  is  mutilated  at  the 
beginning,  but  may  safely  be  inferred  from  the  association  of  ^Ethelbald  with  Cynewulf 
of  Wessex, 

**  The  witnesses  Ceardic,  Wigferth,  Scilling,  Eoppa,  ^thelric  attest  with  the 
I  letters  pr.  for  prefectus,  after  their  names  C  S.  200,  a  grant  by  Cynewulf  of  Wessex 
j  to  St.  Andrew's  at  Wells.  In  C.  S.  186,  a  document  from  the  Shaftesbury.Register, 
Scilling  and  Cerdic  attest  as  presbiteri,  doubtless  through  a  mistaken  extension  of 
i  the  contracted  pr.  of  the  original.  Scilling,  Caerdic,  and  Wigferth,  without  any  designa- 
\  tion,  witness  C.  S.  224,  a  grant  by  Cynewulf  to  Bishop  ^thelmod  of  Sherborne  ;  Scilling 
I  certainly,  and  Wigferth  probably,  attest  as  prefecti  the  eighth-century  charter  of 
I  Cynewulf  to  his  comes  Bica  (C.  S.  225). 

**  There  seems  no  evidence  to  support  the  identification  of  Toccan  sceaga  with 
Tickenhurst  in  Kent  suggested  in  the  Cartularium  and  the  Index  Locorum  to  the 
I  Charters  and  Bolls  in  the  British  Museu7n.    The  recipient  of  the  charter,  an  abbot 
named  Eanberht,  is  otherwise  unknown. 


444     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

earlier  charters  of  the  same  reign  denoted  the  king's  overlordship, 
but  the  use  of  vaguer  words  does  not  imply  any  change  in  the 
character  of  the  supremacy  which  they  describe.  The  Mercian 
hegemony  survived  the  battle  of  750. 

It  is  difficult  to  form  a  definite  opinion  upon  the  question 
whether  a  style  of  this  type  was  ever  employed  by  Off  a.  Most 
of  the  charters  which  have  survived  from  his  reign  describe 
him  as  rex  Merciorum,  a  style  which  he  bears  in  original 
diplomas  of  Kentish,  Middle  Saxon,  South  Saxon,  and  West 
Midland  provenance. ^^  The  evidence  that  he  reverted  to  the 
phraseology  of  ^Ethelbald's  day  is  solely  derived  from  three 
texts  of  the  year  780,  which  form  a  distinct  group  in  the  long 
series  of  his  diplomas.  In  the  first  of  these  documents,  with  the 
style  rex  Merciorum  simulque  aliarum  circumquaque  nationum, 
he  grants  to  the  church  of  St.  Peter  of  Bredon  which  his  grand- 
father Eanulf  had  founded  the  land  of  ten  manentes  at  Wastill 
and  Cofton  and  the  land  of  five  cassati  at  Rednall.^^  In  the 
second,  with  the  variant  style  rex  Mercensium  simulque  in 
circuitu  nationum,  he  grants  the  royal  village  of  Cropthorne 
with  six  named  members,  the  whole  estate  including  just  fifty 
manentes,  to  the  episcopal  see  of  Worcester  .^^  The  third  charter, 
like  the  second  purporting  to  be  issued  at  Brentford  on  22  Sep-' 
tember  780,  conveys  to  the  church  of  Bredon  an  estate  divided 
among  four  villages  of  which  the  first  named  is  Teddington  on 
the  river  Carrant  :  these  villages  are  estimated  to  contai 
thirty-five  tributariorum  iugeraP  The  style  accorded  to  Off  a  here 
is  identical  with  that  given  him  in  the  text  which  has  last  been 
quoted,  and  is  obviously  a  condensation  of  the  earlier  styles, 
borne  by  .^thelbald.^* 

None  of  these  charters  can  be  accepted  without  discussion  as 
representing  texts  of  Offa's  day.  The  Cropthorne  charter  may 
at  once  be  ruled  out  of  consideration,  for  there  is  good  reason  to 
believe  that  it  was  composed  in  the  eleventh  century  to  support 
the  monks  of  Worcester  in  their  great  plea  against  the  monks  of 

^°  In  Kentish  texts  this  style  is  assigned  to  Offa  in  the  original  C.  S.  254  of  788 
in  the  eighth -century  C,  S.  247  and  248  dated  respectively  in  785  and  786,  and  in  all  the 
charters  bearing  his  name  between  757  and  796  entered  in  the  Textus  Roffensis.  He  has 
the  same  style  in  his  grant  of  land  in  Middlesex  to  the  abbot  Stithberht  in  767  {C  S. 
201),  and  in  his  confirmation  of  a  grant  in  Sussex  by  the  dux  Oslac  (C.  S.  1334,  the  first 
South  Saxon  charter  of  which  the  original  is  extant).  He  attests  with  the  same  style 
the  West  Midland  charter  of  the  reguli  Eanberht,  Uhtred,  and  Aldred,  dated  759 
(C.  8.  187),  and  an  original  diploma  of  the  regulus  Uhtred  in  770  {C.  S.  203). 

"  C.  S.  234.  52  c.  S.  235. 

"  C.  S.  236 ;  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Report  on  Manuscripts  of  Lord  MiddUion  at 
Wollaton,  pp.  202-3. 

"  Offa's  charter  of  781  {C.  S.  240)  which  combines  the  style  rex  Merciorum  neciwn 
in  circuitu  nationum  in  the  verba  dispositiva  with  the  style  rex  Anglorum  in  the  clause 
of  attestation  is  either  spurious  or  remodelled,  and  in  neither  case  should  be  quoted 
in  this  connexion.    See  ante,  xxix.  697. 


I 


1918        SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        445 

Evesham  for  the  possession  of  Bengeworth  and  Hampton. ^^  But 
the  Teddington  and  Wastill  charters  deserve  more  respectful 
treatment.  If  they  are  forgeries  they  are  at  least  early  ones,  for 
each  is  entered  in  the  oldest  of  all  English  cartularies,  the  Worces- 
ter fragment  of  c.  1000,^^  and  neither  bears  any  trace  of  the 
characteristic  Latin  of  the  tenth  century.  In  particular,  the 
Teddington  charter  is  distinguished  by  ancient  features  ^'^  such 
as  the  definition  of  a  site  with  reference  to  the  name  of  an  adjacent 
river,  it  includes  an  immunity  clause  of  a  form  which  is  not  likely 
to  have  been  invented  at  a  later  time  by  the  monks  of  Worcester,^^ 
and  in  general  style  though  not  in  formulary  detail  it  resembles 
the  contemporary  Salmonsbury  charter  of  the  previous  year.^^ 

^^  Cf.  Round  in  Victoria  History  of  Worcestershire,  i.  255. 

56  Cotton  Nero  E.  i.  181-4;  Hist.  M8S.  Comm.,  Wolla ton  Report,  pp.  199-212. 
5^  The  statement  that  the  immunity  of  the  estate  is  to  last  quamdiu  fides  Christiana 
in  Brittannia  perdurat  belongs  to  a  type  of  formula  in  common  use  in  the  ninth  century 
of  which  there  is  no  certain  example  so  early  as  780.  Many  of  the  charters  in  which 
it  occurs  are  spurious  (e.  g.  C.  8.  428,  434,  454,  468, 469,  470,  472,  483,  495).  Others 
are  suspicious  (C.  S.  360,  which  was  probably  forged  on  the  basis  of  the  genuine 
C.  S.  357  in  which  the  formula  does  not  occur,  and  C.  S.  450).  But  there  is  adequate 
evidence  of  the  employment  of  this  type  of  formula  in  genuine  charters.  In  the  form 
qiiando  Christiana  fides  in  terra  servata  it  occurs  in  an  original,  private,  Kentish  deed 
of  868  {C.  8.  519),  and  with  the  substitution  of  the  more  appropriate  quamdiu  for 
quando  in  a  charter  of  .^thelred  of  Wessex  entered  in  the  Textus  Roffensis  (C.  8.  518). 
It  is  employed  by  Ecgberht  of  Wessex  and  by  Ceolnoth  archbishop  of  Canterbury  in 
original  charters  of,  apparently,  830  and  833  respectively  (C.  8.  396,  406).  The  variant 
tamdiu  quam  Christianitas  in  ista  permaneat  regione  appears  in  a  Worcester  charter  of 
Cenwulf  of  Mercia  to  which  no  serious  exception  need  be  taken  (C  8.  351).  Other 
phrases  of  the  same  type  can  be  traced  back  to  the  eighth  century.  In  a  postscript 
appended  to  an  original  Kentish  diploma  of  Cenwulf  dated  in  the  second  year  of  that 
king's  imperium  the  grantee  records  the  transference  of  the  estate  to  the  monastery 
at  Lyminge  upon  condition  that  the  anniversary  of  his  death  shall  be  observed  quamdiu 
fides  catholica  in  gente  Anglorum  perseveret  {C.  8.  289).  The  occurrence  of  the  phrase 
quamdiu  fides  Christiana  apud  Anglos  in  Bryttannia  maneat  in  a  Worcester  charter 
made  between  791  and  796  (C.  8.  272,  with  which  compare  the  expanded  duplicate 
C.  8.  273)  would  prove  that  formulas  of  this  type  were  employed  by  OfEa  if  the  charter 
were  genuine,  as  indeed  it  seems  to  be.  The  occurrence  of  a  similar  formula  in  the 
Teddington  charter  is  one  of  the  facts  which  inspire  confidence  in  the  authenticity 
of  that  text.  On  the  other  hand,  C.  8.  231,  a  charter  of  778-9  in  which  the  same 
formula  occurs,  is  probably  spurious. 

°*  The  words  of  immunity  have  no  exact  parallel  in  other  texts.  They  run  : 
Libera  sit  ah  omni  exactione  regum  et  principum  tarn  in  agrorum  donationibus  vel 
terrarum  positionibus  .  .  .  sttb  dominio  ac  potestate  parentelae  meae  atque  cognationi 
rite  per  successiones  heredum  iuste  succedentium  permaneat  in  eternum.  Apparently 
this  means  that  no  land  is  to  be  detached  from  the  estate  for  the  benefit  of  the 
king  or  the  ealdorman.  The  statement  that  the  land  is  to  remain  for  ever  under 
the  lordship  and  power  of  Offa's  kindred  is  natural  enough  if  the  charter  is  a  genuine 
grant  by  that  king  to  a  monastery  of  his  grandfather's  foundation,  but  it  is  highly 
improbable  that  these  words  would  have  been  inserted  in  a  text  fabricated  after  the 
revival  of  monasticism  in  the  age  of  Edgar. 

5*  C.  8.  230.  This  charter  is  important  as  the  earliest  diploma  of  unimpeachable 
authenticity  whose  author  was  consciously  striving  after  elegance  of  diction.  The 
resulting  inflation  does  not  extend  far  beyond  the  proem  into  the  body  of  the  text, 
but  it  would  certainly  have  brought  suspicion  upon  the  charter  if  it  had  not  happened 
to  be  preserved  in  its  original  form.  The  inflation  of  the  Teddington  charter  is  much 
less  evident. 


446     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

It  may  well  have  been  the  model  on  which  the  forger  of  the 
Cropthorne  charter  composed  his  fabrication.  The  Wastill 
charter  includes  an  early  reservation  of  the  burdens  of  bridge 
work,  fortress  work,  and  military  service  appended  to  its  immunity 
clause  ;  this  reservation  is  a  difficulty,  but  need  not  be  fatal  to 
the  authenticity  of  the  text.^^  Upon  the  whole  it  may  reasonably 
be  argued  from  these  charters  that  the  style  '  king  of  the  Mercians 
and  of  the  nations  around  '  was  current  in  Offa's  reign,  and  we  may 
therefore  recognize  a  reference  to  the  kingship  of  Britain  in  the 
curious  style  rex  et  decus  Brittaniae  which  is  applied  to  Offa  in 
a  diploma  of  Cenwulf  of  Mercia  of  which  the  original  has  been 
preserved. ^^ 

But  the  importance  of  Offa's  reign  in  the  development  of 
English  regnal  styles  lies  in  another  direction.  In  774  Offa  made 
two  charters  conferring  two  separate  estates  in  Kent  upon 
Archbishop  Jaenberht,  and  the  original  of  each  charter  is  still 
extant.  In  one,  from  the  Cotton  collection,  Offa  with  the  style 
rex  Anglorum  grants  to  the  archbishop  five  aratra  in  the  place 
called  Higham.^^  The  second  charter  comes  from  the  Stowe 
collection  and  grants  to  the  archbishop  three  sulungs  at  Lydd 
in  occidentali  parte  regionis  quae  dicitur  MerscuuareP  And  in 
this  text  Offa  is  described  as  rex  totius  Anglorum  patriae.^^ 

Upon  the  whole,  this  is  the  most  interesting  style  applied  to 
any  English  king  of  the  period  before  the  Danish  wars.  For  if 
these  words  may  be  taken  in  their  natural  sense  they  prove  that 
Offa  claimed  not  only  the  supremacy  over  the  southern  English 
which  iEthelbald  had  asserted  but  also  an  overlordship  beyond 
the  Humber.  We  should,  at  least,  be  very  unwise  to  admit  any 
definition  of  the  patria  Anglorum  from  which  Northumbria  is 
excluded.  The  style  is  an  innovation  and  a  very  remarkable  one. 
So  far  as  our  knowledge  extends  no  earlier  ruler  had  ever  asserted  in 


^o  Upon  this  charter  see  W.  H.  Stevenson,  awfe,  xxix.  697.  The  tenth-century  copy 
of  this  charter  printed  as  C.  S.  847  bears  the  accurate  date  780  as  against  the  impossible 
730  of  the  pseudo-original  Cotton  Aug.  ii.  30. 

®^  C.  S.  293.     Offa  is  addressed  by  Alcuin  as  decus  Britanniae,  but  in  a  conte: 
which  forbids  the  assumption  that  he  is  quoting  any  formal  style  of  that  king  :    Monu 
menta  Alcuiniana,  p.  265.    It  is  not  well,  therefore,  to  lay  much  stress  upon  the  passage 
in  C.  S.  293.  ^^  C.  S.  213 

*^  C.  S.  214.    In  each  charter  the  king  subscribes  as  rex  without  further  definition 

**  There  is  a  very  close  correspondence  between  the  formulas  employed  in  these 
two  charters.  They  agree  in  their  respective  invocations,  in  the  preambles  to  their 
words  of  gift,  in  the  phrase  cum  sacerdotibus  et  senioribus  populi  more  testium  subscri- 
bendo  which  introduces  the  list  of  witnesses  in  each  charter,  the  witnesses  themselves 
are  almost  identical  in  the  two  diplomas.  They  were  certainly  composed  by  the  same 
man  and  not  improbably  upon  the  same  day.  The  formulary  correspondence  is  so 
close  that  the  rex  totius  Anglorum  patriae  of  the  Lydd  charter  reads  like  a  deliberate 
expansion  of  the  rex  Anglorum  of  the  Higham  charter.  In  any  case  the  phrase  is 
important  as  a  contemporary  gloss  upon  the  most  important  of  English  regnal  styles 
at  the  moment  of  its  first  appearance. 


)le 

ge         I 
n.  f 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        447 

a  formal  document  supremacy  over  the  whole  land  of  the  English. 
But  unless  the  clerk  who  composed  this  diploma  intended  to 
convey  this  meaning  his  invention  of  a  new  style  was  pointless, 
nor,  it  may  be  added,  are  we  entitled  to  dismiss  his  invention  as 
a  piece  of  rhetorical  embellishment.  In  draughtsmanship  the 
text  in  which  this  formula  occurs  is  one  of  the  most  concise  of  all 
our  early  land  books.  It  is  short,  intelligible,  free  from  any  touch 
of  inflation,  its  proem  is  brief,  its  anathema  is  temperate.  It  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  man  who  wrote  such  a  diploma 
meant  just  what  he  said,  no  less  and  no  more. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  charter  bears  the  incarnation  date  774, 
and  we  may  well  hesitate  before  we  admit  that  Offa  in  this  year 
was  possessed  of  authority  beyond  his  own  borders  sufficiently 
extensive  to  justify  a  style  carrjdng  such  wide  implications. 
The  fragmentary  tale  of  his  wars  which  can  be  pieced  together 
from  different  sources  suggests  that  his  power  was  won  in  a  succes- 
sion of  battles  most  of  which  fell  within  the  second  half  of  his 
reign.  The  first  fourteen  years  of  his  rule  are  almost  a  blank. 
In  771  he  is  asserted  by  the  Northumbrian  annals  incorporated 
in  the  work  of  Simeon  of  Durham  to  have  conquered  the  gens 
Hestingorum  :  probably  the  men  of  the  Hastings  region  are 
meant  by  this  phrase,  and  we  may  date  from  this  time  the  begin- 
ning of  Offa's  authority  in  Sussex.^^  The  Chronicle  states  that  the 
Mercians  and  Kentishmen  fought  at  Otford  in  773,  and  that 
Offa  took  Bensington  from  Cynewulf  of  Wessex  in  777  ;  as  events 
recorded  in  this  section  of  the  Chronicle  are  commonly  antedated 
by  two  years  these  battles  should  probably  be  referred  to  the  years 
775  and  779  respectively.  In  the  Annales  Camhriae  we  read  of 
raids  into  Wales  which  are  dated  in  778,  784,  and  795.  As  for 
the  two  marriages  by  which  Offa  is  understood  to  have  secured 
the  dependence  of  the  kings  of  Wessex  and  Northumbria,  the 
marriage  of  Berhtric  of  Wessex  to  Offa's  daughter  Eadburh 
is  assigned  by  the  Chronicle  to  787,  by  which  789  is  probably  to 
be  understood,  and  the  marriage  of  ^Ethelred  to  Offa's  daughter 
iElffised  did  not  take  place  till  792.  Can  we  say,  in  face  of  this 
chronology,  that  Offa  in  774  might  seriously  have  been  styled 
rex  totius  Anglorum  patriae  ? 

Before  we  give  a  negative  answer  to  this  question  we  should 

^5  As  late  as  1011  the  Haestingas  appear  in  the  Chronicle  as  distinct  from  the  South 
Saxons.  There  is  no  conclusive  charter  evidence  that  Offa  exercised  any  authority 
in  Sussex  before  Wihthun  became  bishop  of  Selsey,  at  whose  request  Offa  confirmed 
a  grant  by  the  dux  Oslac  to  Wihthun's  predecessor  Gislhere  {C.8,  1334,  cf.  C.8.  237). 
Wihthun's  first  signature  occurs  in  789  {C.  S.  255).  A  charter  of  the  dux  Aldwulf 
attested  by  Bishop  Gislhere  contains  a  clause  recording  Offa's  consent  (C.  S.  262). 
This  clause  may  not  be  original,  for  a  postscript  asserts  that  Offa  confirmed  the  gift 
at  Bishop  Wihthun's  request.  The  earlier  South  Saxon  fragments  C.  S.  197, 206,  and  211 
which  are  signed  by  Offa  are  all  of  doubtful  genuineness. 


448     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

consider  how  little  we  really  know  about  the  general  drift  of 
affairs  in  this  period.  Offa  is  at  once  the  most  important  and  the 
most  obscure  of  early  English  rulers,  and  the  meagre  annals 
which  record  the  more  important  events  of  his  reign  leave  their 
true  meaning  indefinite.  The  fight  at  Otford  between  the 
Mercians  and  the  Kentishmen,  for  example,  is  just  as  likely  to 
have  followed  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Kentishmen  to 
throw  off  the  Mercian  overlordship  as  an  attempt  on  the 
part  of  Off  a  to  extend  his  authority  over  Kent.^^  We  are 
certainly  not  entitled  to  oppose  our  own  interpretation  of 
the  history  recorded  in  a  series  of  scattered  annals  to  the  explicit 
evidence  of  the  regnal  style  recorded  in  a  contemporary  text. 
Moreover,  the  most  remarkable  feature  of  the  style  rex  totius 
Anglorum  patriae,  its  implication  that  Offa  possessed  some  measure 
of  power  over  Northumbria,  agrees  very  well  with  what  we  know 
of  contemporary  events  in  that  distressful  kingdom.  The  North- 
umbrian annals  preserved  by  Simeon  of  Durham  record  under 
this  year  the  flight  of  King  Ealhred  and  his  succession  by  ^Ethelred 
the  son  of  ^thelwald.  It  is  at  least  a  permissible  conjecture 
that  the  new  king  sought  to  strengthen  his  position  by  making 
a  submission  to  his  powerful  neighbour,  a  submission  that  was 
renewed  after  eighteen  years  by  his  marriage  to  Offa's  daughter. 
More  than  this  cannot  be  said  :  but  in  view  of  the  general  credi- 
bility of  regnal  styles  at  this  date  the  Lydd  charter  may  reason- 
ably be  taken  as  evidence  that  some  transaction  of  the  kind  did 
actually  take  place  in  this  year. 

Apart  from  the  charters  which  have  been  quoted  there  remain 
nine  texts  in  which  the  style  rex  Anglorum  is  applied  to  Offa. 
Six  of  them  present  features  which  to  say  the  least  make  it 
inadvisable  to  accept  their  evidence  in  a  question  which  turns  on 
the  formal  accuracy  of  a  document,^^  and  one  only,  a  grant  of 

®^  If  C.  S.  195  could  be  accepted  as  genuine  it  would  prove  that  OfEa's  authority 
was  recognized  in  Kent  as  early  as  764.  The  charter  is  remarkable  for  its  combination 
of  very  early  formulas  with  a  highly  rhetorical  harangue  :  in  substance  it  is  a  grant 
to  Bishop  Eardwulf  of  Rochester  of  an  estate  by  the  Medway  which  the  bishop  had 
already  received  from  Sigered,  king  of  half  Kent  (C  S.  194).  The  style  rex  Merciorum 
regali  prosapia  Merciorum  oriundus,  atque  omnipotentis  Dei  dispensatione  eiusdem 
constitutus  in  regent  is  suspicious  in  a  charter  which  purports  to  come  from  the  year  764. 
The  Rochester  provenance  of  the  charter  weakens  the  argument  for  its  authenticity 
derived  from  its  ancient  formulas.  The  monks  of  Rochester  had  a  store  of  most 
excellent  material  on  the  basis  of  which  they  might  compose  a  charter  of  this  date. 
On  the  other  hand,  unless  the  charter  were  forged  at  a  time  when  the  overlord's  con- 
firmation was  necessary  for  the  validity  of  a  gift  by  an  under  king  there  is  no  obvious 
motive  for  its  fabrication. 

^'  Of  these  charters  C.  8.  208  and  259  are  patent  forgeries ;  on  the  latter  see 
Mr.  Stevenson's  discussion,  ante,  vi,  736,  xxviii.  6-7.  C.  8.  210  may  possibly  be 
descended  from  an  ancient  text,  but  it  contains  a  phrase,  seniorum  meorum  magisterio 
edochis  et  exemplo  roboratus,  the  like  of  which  is  not  found  in  any  genuine  charter  of 
this  period,  and  it  certainly  cannot  be  admitted  as  testimony  on  a  point  of  regnal 


1918       SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        449 

land  in  Middlesex  to  Archbishop  iEthelhard,  is  preserved  in 
contemporary  writing.^^  This  charter,  which  is  highly  abnormal 
both  in  structure  and  in  phraseology,  is  incompatibly  dated  on 
Whit  Sunday  in  the  incarnation  year  790  and  the  thirty-eighth 
year  of  Offa's  reign  :  the  year  of  the  incarnation  should  probably 
be  corrected  to  795.^^  At  the  opening  of  the  charter  and  again  in 
the  course  of  the  verba  dispositiva  the  king  is  styled  rex  Anglorum, 
but  he  attests  as  rex  Merciorum  ;  the  occurrence  of  two  styles 
in  the  same  document  is  unusual  at  this  date,  but  is  only  one 
among  many  irregular  features  presented  by  this  eccentric  text. 
In  any  case,  the  significance  of  the  title  rex  Anglorum  is  not 
affected  by  the  persistence  of  the  more  ancient  and  narrower 
style  of  the  Mercian  kings.  The  remaining  charters  of  this  group 
are  less  important.  In  one,  Aldwulf  dux  Suth  Saxonum  grants 
land  to  Bishop  Wihthun  with  the  consent  and  licence  of  Offa 
rex  Anglorum  ;  the  text  of  this  charter  is  only  preserved  in  a  late 
and  imperfect  copy,  but  may  well  be  genuine. "^^  In  the  other. 
Off  a  signs  with  the  title  rex  Anglorum  a  charter  in  favour  of 
Worcester  cathedral ;  '^  the  king's  style  is  altogether  omitted 
from  the  verba  dispositiva.  Of  the  last  two  charters  the 
first  is  inaccurately  dated  711,  the  second  bears  no  date  in 
its  present  form,  but  each  belongs  to  the  last  decade,  and  the 
Worcester  charter  belongs  to  the  last  five  years  of  Offa's  reign. 

In  view  of  these  facts  it  may  be  said  with  some  confidence 
that  according  to  the  diplomatic  evidence  Offa  was  the  first  of 
English  kings  to  claim  by  the  style  rex  Anglorum  dominion  over 
all  peoples  of  English  race  within  Britain.    When  all  due  allowance 

style.  The  same  phrase  occurs  in  C,  S.  226,  which  also  includes  a  set  of  English 
boundaries,  a  feature  foreign  to  the  scheme  of  composition  followed  in  Mercian  charters 
of  the  eighth  century.  The  most  interesting  of  these  six  suspicious  charters  is  C  <S.  216 
which  purports  to  convey  to  the  church  of  St.  Peter  at  Worcester  land  in  loco  qui 
nuncupatur  Readanoran,  an  unidentified  site  in  the  south  of  the  modern  Oxfordshire, 
where  there  certainly  existed  an  ancient  church  under  the  authority  of  the  bishop  of 
Worcester  (cf.  G.  8.  547).  A  long  perambulation  in  English,  a  reservation  of  bridge 
work,  fortress  work,  and  military  service  from  the  general  immunity  of  the  estate, 
and  a  bad  mistake  of  date  are  fatal  to  the  credit  of  this  charter.  Reference  has 
already  been  made  to  the  sixth  of  these  charters,  C.  S.  240  (above,  note  54). 

«»  C.  S.  265. 

^^  As  Cynewulf  of  Wessex,  who  cannot  have  been  recognized  as  king  before  757, 
attests  a  charter  of  iEthelbald  of  Mercia  (above,  note  47),  the  latter's  death  cannot  have 
occurred  before  that  year,  to  which  it  is  referred  by  the  Continuatio  Bedae.  After  an 
interval  of  civil  war,  but  within  the  same  year,  Offa  obtained  the  kingdom.  The 
principles  which  governed  the  computation  of  regnal  years  in  the  eighth  century  are 
not  certainly  known,  but  in  any  case  Offa's  accession  cannot  have  occurred  before 
the  second  half  of  757,  and  the  Whit  Sunday  of  his  thirty-eighth  year  cannot  be 
assigned  to  an  earlier  year  than  795.  As  part  of  the  incarnation  year  789  fell  within 
Offa's  thirty-first  year  (C.  S.  256)  it  is  probable  that  his  regnal  years  were  reckoned 
from  some  day  in  the  early  part  of  758,  but  this  day  cannot  reasonably  be  placed  so 
late  in  the  year  as  Whit  Sunday,  and  the  present  charter  cannot  therefore  be  assigned 
to  796. 

">  C.  S.  261.  '1  C.  S.  272. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  G  g 


450     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

has  been  made  for  the  indefiniteness  of  early  formulas,  and  it  is 
easy  to  exaggerate  the  allowance  that  is  necessary,  the  appearance 
of  this  style  will  still  remain  a  significant  event.  Fragmentary 
as  are  the  annals  which  describe  Offa's  reign,  they  certainly 
show  that  he  endeavoured  with  success  to  extend  his  power  over 
the  whole  of  the  patria  Anglorum,  even  over  the  particularist 
Northumbria.  Even  were  diplomatic  evidence  lacking  we  might 
have  expected  that  such  a  king  would  assume  a  style  more 
nearly  consonant  with  the  reality  of  his  position  than  the  words 
which  asserted  ^thelbald's  authority  over  the  southern  English. 
It  is  a  happy  accident  that  the  style  rex  Anglorum  is  applied  to 
Offa  in  charters  which  are  extant  in  contemporary  writing,  of  j 
whose  authenticity  there  can  be  no  question,  and  the  fact  thatj 
he  assumed  this  style  already  in  the  middle  of  his  reign  affords] 
a  welcome  clue  to  the  course  of  events  in  a  period  most  inade- 
quately illustrated  by  literary  evidence. 

With  the  diploma  of  Whit  Sunday  795  the  succession  of  these 
formulas  comes  to  an  abrupt  end.  So  far  as  our  knowledge  goes, 
and  we  possess  a  very  considerable  body  of  material  on  which 
to  form  an  opinion,  Cenwulf  of  Mercia  never  assumed  any  style 
claiming  either  the  kingship  of  the  southern  English  or  authority 
over  the  English  nation  as  a  whole.  In  a  mutilated  diploma^ 
of  797-8  he  is  described  as  rector  et  imperator  Merciorum  regni,'^^] 
but  it  is  not  well  to  lay  much  stress  on  words  like  imperator  orj 
imperiumP^  That  Cenwulf  exercised  direct  rule  in  Kent  is  proved , 
by  a  long  series  of  genuine  diplomas,  but  only  once,  and  then' 
in  a  charter  whose  authenticity  is  by  no  means  certain,  is  he  made 
to  assert  the  kingship  of  that  province  in  his  formal  style. ''^ 
His  successor  Ceolwulf  I  in  original  diplomas  of  822  and  823 
takes  the  style  rex  Merciorum  vel  etiam  Contwariorum,'^^  a  formula 
that  is  interesting  as  an  anticipation  of  the  style  commonly 

"  a  8.  289. 

"  The  equivalence  of  regnum  and  imperium  in  the  early  ninth  century  is  proved 
by  the  formulas  employed  in  the  dating  clauses  of  two  original  diplomas  of  811  anda 
812  respectively  {C.  S.  335  and  341).    In  the  first,  the  regnal  year  is  given  as  imperiii 
piissimi  regis  Merciorum  Ccenuulfi  anno  xv;  in  the  second,  as  regni  gloriosissimi^ 
Merciorum  regis  Ccenuulfi  anno  xvi. 

'*  C.  8.  328.  In  this  charter  Cenwulf,  with  the  style  Christi  gracia  rex  Mercioruml 
atque  provincie  Cancie,  grants  seven  aratra  at  Barham  to  Archbishop  Wulfred., 
The  territorial  element  in  this  style  is  not  of  itself  a  ground  of  suspicion  ;j 
an  original  diploma  of  805  was  granted  by  Cuthred  rex  Cantiae  cum  licentia  Cmnulfi] 
regis  Merciae  {C.  8.  322).  But  the  present  charter  is  only  known  from  a  copy  in  thej 
Lambeth  MS.  1212,  it  is  concluded  by  a  list  of  supplementary  attestations  of  unusual  i 
form,  and  its  substance  is  not  obviously  reconcilable  with  the  original  C.  8.  381  of  | 
824  which  seems  to  relate  to  part  of  the  same  land.  It  may  nevertheless  be  authentic, 
but  it  is  hardly  wise  to  argue  from  a  copy  in  a  cartulary  in  which  the  texts  of  other 
charters  are  known  to  have  been  modified. 

"  C.  8.  370,  373.     The  latter  charter  reads  seu  for  vel  and  Cantwariorum  for 
Contwariorum. 


1918      SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS        451 

assumed  by  the  kings  of  Wessex  a  little  later,  and  the  subsequent 
kings  of  the  Mercians  normally  employ  the  style  rex  Merciorum 
without  qualification.'^  The  evidence  of  charter  styles  suggests 
with  much  force  that  the  Mercian  overlordship  ended  with  the 
death  of  Off  a. 

In  829  Ecgberht  of  Wessex  conquered  the  kingdom  of  the 
Mercians  and  all  that  was  to  the  south  of  the  Humber,  but  the 
overlordship  he  acquired  in  that  year  is  never  reflected  in  his 
regnal  style.  The  series  of  Ecgberht's  charters  is  short :  it  is 
difficult  to  believe  in  face  of  its  brevity  that  he  ever  exercised 
anything  corresponding  to  the  general  authority  in  the  south 
possessed  by  ^thelbald  and  Off  a.  In  an  original  diploma  of 
830  he  bears  the  title  rex  Occidentalium  Saxonum  necnon  et 
Cantuariorum  ;  '"^  a  type  of  style  repeatedly  employed  by  his 
successors  but  introduced,  as  has  been  observed,  by  Ceolwulf  I 
of  Mercia.  A  Shaftesbury  charter  of  833,  ill  copied  as  are 
all  the  early  texts  which  come  from  that  house  but  probably 
authentic,  describes  him  as  Occidentalium  Saxonum  rea?,'^  and 
his  assent  as  rex  Occidentalium  Saxonum  is  asserted  in  a  grant 
by  his  son  ^thelwulf  to  Christ  Church,  Canterbury,  to  which  no 
conclusive  exception  need  be  taken.'^^  He  is  described  as  rex 
without  further  qualification  in  a  genuine  Rochester  charter 
of  833  ^^  and  in  the  record  of  proceedings  in  the  Kingston  council 
of  the  same  year.^-^  The  remaining  charters  which  purport  to 
come  from  his  reign  are  all  of  doubtful  or  more  than  doubtful 
authenticity.  Three  charters  from  the  Codex  Wintoniensis 
which  distinguish  between  Ecgberht's  regnal  year  and  the  year 
of  his  ducatus  are  transparent  fabrications. ^^  The  solitary  text 
which  assigns  to  him  the  style  rex  Anglorum  is  derived  from  the 
Textus  Roffensis,  but  does  not  acquire  authenticity  from  its 
respectable  environment. ^^  And  among  the  numerous  diplomas 
issued  after  Ecgberht's  death  by  iEthelwulf  and  his  immediate 
successors  there  is  none  which  definitely  asserts  any  wider 
dominion  than  rule  over  the  West  Saxons  and  Kentishmen.^^ 

'«  e.  g.  C.  8.  378,  400,  416,  429.  "  C.  S.  396. 

'«  C.  8.  410. 

"»  C.  8.  407,  cf.  C.  8.  419.  The  same  style  occurs  in  C.  8.  852  which  comes  from 
St.  Augustine's,  Canterbury,  and  may  be  genuine. 

««  C.  8.  418.  "  C.  8.  421.  «*  C.  8.  390,  39.1,  393. 

®*  C.  8.  395.  The  charter  is  witnessed  by  ^Ethelwulf,  Ecgberht's  son,  as  king,  by 
Ealhstan  bishop  of  Sherborne  and  by  Wulfhard  the  ealdorman,  and  is  dated  823.  The 
Chronicle  states  under  this  year  that  these  persons  were  sent  into  Kent  by  Ecgberht 
and  expelled  the  Kentish  king  Baldred.  But  events  in  this  section  of  the  Chronicle 
are  antedated  by  two  years. 

**  In  C.  8,  411,  a  charter  preserved  in  a  tenth-century  copy,  Ecgberht  bears  the 
style  rex  Cantiae  necnon  et  aliarum  gentium.  The  style  is  unique,  and  it  is  difficult 
to  believe  in  its  genuineness.  In  particular  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  Ecgberht 
in  a  formal  style  would  have  asserted  his  rule  in  Kent  while  making  no  specific  reference 

Gg2 


452     SUPREMACY  OF  THE  MERCIAN  KINGS     October 

By  this  time  the  idea  of  the  kingship  of  the  southern  English, 
the  ducatus  which  Bede  described,  was  obsolete,  and  events 
had  not  permitted  the  establishment  of  the  wider  dominion  over 
the  whole  land  of  the  English  foreshadowed  in  Offa's  day.  With 
the  Danish  wars  the  opportunity  of  a  permanent  unification  of 
England  under  the  hegemony  of  a  native  king  passed  finally 
away.  It  is  true  that  a  memory  of  the  archaic  ducatus  was 
retained  through  the  ninth  century,  if  only  by  the  learned.  It 
was  certainly  preserved  by  the  West  Saxon  annalist  who  named 
Ecgberht  the  eighth  Bretwalda,  it  may  well  have  been  present 
to  the  Celtic  Asser  when  he  dedicated  his  book  to  Alfred,  omnium 
Brittanniae  insulae  Christianorum  rector. ^^  But  it  was  a  literary 
memory,  not  a  tradition  of  chancery  practice,  and  if  iEthelstan 
probably  and  Edmund  certainly  bore  styles  which  asserted 
imperial  dignity  we  may  not  safely  assume  any  true  continuity  of 
idea  between  these  titles  and  the  words  which  denoted  the  supre- 
macy of  iEthelbald  and  Off  a.  The  imperial  styles  of  the  tenth 
century  are  experimental  and  indefinite,  they  form  part  of  the 
exuberant  phraseology  which  pleased  the  men  who  wrote  charters 
in  this  age,  the  age  of  Hesperic  latinity.  They  express  a  habit 
of  mind  quite  alien  from  that  which  led  the  clerks  of  the  eighth 
century  to  attempt  the  utmost  precision  allowed  by  their  imperfect 
command  of  the  Latin  language.  F.  M.  Stenton. 

to  his  rule  in  Wessex.  The  charter  is  dated  773,  but  as  it  is  witnessed  by  Archbishop 
Ceolnoth  of  Canterbury  it  must,  if  it  is  really  derived  from  a  diploma  of  Ecgberht  of 
Wessex,  belong  to  the  years  833-9.  It  is  possible  that  a  set  of  witnesses  obtained  from 
a  charter  of  the  latter  period  has  been  appended  to  the  text  of  a  charter  of  the  eighth- 
century  Ecgberht  king  of  Kent,  though  this  suggestion  will  not  explain  the  difficulties 
presented  by  the  regnal  style.  In  substance,  the  charter  is  a  grant  to  the  abbess  Dunne 
and  the  church  of  Lyminge  of  150  acres  in  the  place  called  Sandtun,  with  salt  works 
there,  and  120  loads  of  wood  from  the  forest  of  Andred  for  salt  boiling.  These  details 
seem  to  represent  the  gifts  which  iEthelberht  II  of  Kent  had  made  to  the  abbot  Dun 
and  the  church  of  Lyminge  by  a  charter  of  732  which  survives  in  its  original  text 
(C.  S.  148).  In  this  charter  the  king  states  that  he  has  granted  to  the  abbot  the  quarter 
of  an  aratrum  by  the  river  Lympne  which  he  had  formerly  leased  {quam . . .  praestiteram) 
to  the  abbot's  predecessor  Hymora,  and  has  added  120  loads  of  logs  for  salt  boiling, 
and  100  acres  of  the  same  property  {eiusdem  ruris)  at  Sandtun.  If,  as  there  is  reason 
to  believe  {Ante,  xix.  285),  the  aratrum  or  sulung  contained  two  hundred  acres,  the 
quarter  aratrum  and  the  supplementary  100  acres  granted  by  C.  S.  148  will  exactly 
equal  the  150  acres  granted  by  C.  S.  411.  Whatever  the  original  form  of  the  latter 
charter  may  have  been,  it  can  only  be  regarded  as  a  confirmation  of  i^thelberht's 
diploma  of  732.  It  is,  of  course,  quite  possible  that  the  church  of  Lyminge  may  have 
been  ruled  by  an  abbot  named  Dun  in  732  and  by  an  abbess  named  Dunne  between 
833  and  839,  but  the  coincidence  does  not  inspire  confidence  in  a  text  to  which  there 
are  other  grounds  of  objection. 

'8  De  Rebus  Gestis  JElfredi,  ed.  Stevenson,  1  and  148. 


1918  453 


'Barons'  and  'Peers' 

MORE  than  two  centuries  ago,  in  his  great  work  on  the 
exchequer,  the  admirable  Madox,  under  '  Amercements  ', 
dealt  at  some  length  with  two  notable  cases,  those  of  the  abbot 
of  Crowland  and  of  Thomas  de  Furnival.^  These  cases  Appear 
to  have  attracted  insufficient  attention  as  throwing  light  on  the 
two  senses  in  which  the  term  '  baron  '  was  used  in  the  days  of 
Edward  II.  On  the  one  hand,  the  '  barons  '  were  the  whole  body 
of  those  who  held  in  chief  'per  servitium  militare,  and  who,  as 
holding  by  '  barony  ',  received  the  special  summons  to  perform 
their  military  service  '  with  horse  and  arms  ',  were  liable  to  the 
special  baronial  '  relief  ',2  and  were  entitled  to  the  privilege  (or 
subject  to  the  burden)  of  being  specially  '  amerced  '  and  to  that 
of  exemption  from  service  on  juries.^  On  the  other,  the  *  barons  ' 
were  the  smaller  class  who  received  the  special  summons  to 
parliament  and  who  constituted  with  the  earls  (comites  et  barones) 
the  estate  of  the  lords  temporal  in  the  upper  house  of  parliament. 
It  was  this  class  which  was  then  beginning  to  be  distinguished 
as  '  peers  '  (pares)  in  common  with  the  earls  and  prelates,  a  style 
which  proclaimed  their  equal  membership,  with  those  magnates, 
of  the  upper  house,  and  which,  at  the  same  time,  severed  them 
from  those  '  barons  '  who  did  not  receive  the  special  summons 
to  parliament.  It  therefore  played,  in  my  opinion,  a  part  of 
considerable  importance  in  that  differentiation  of  the  peerage  as 
a  body  which  developed,  as  it  seems  to  me,  in  the  first  half  of 
the  fourteenth  century .* 

The  ambiguity  of  the  term  *  baron  '  is  responsible  for  some 
misunderstanding   and    even   misrepresentation   of    Thomas   de 

^  History  and  Antiquities  of  the  Exchequer,  cap.  xiv,  sec.  2  (ed.  1711,  pp.  367-74) 
Dugdale  had  already  (1675)  cited  the  Furnival  record  in  hin  Baronage  (i.  726). 

2  See,  on  this  point,  my  paper  on  '"  Barons  "  and  "  Knights  "  in  the  Great  Charter ' 
in  Magna  Carta  Commemoratio7i  Essays  (1917),  p.  46  et  seq. 

^  It  was  this  exemption  that  was  claimed  by  Ralf  de  Eversden,  as  a  '  baron ',  so 
late  as  48  Edward  III  (see  the  Lords'  Eeports  on  the  Dignity  of  a  Peer,  i.  395,  and 
Pike's  Const.  Hist,  of  the  House  of  Lords,  p.  95). 

*  The  term  pares,  I  need  scarcely  say,  first  appears  in  England,  in  this  sense,  so 
far  as  is  known,  in  1321.  Mr.  Pike  admits  {op.  cit.,  pp.  108-9)  that  what  he  terms  the 
'gradual  transition  from  burden  to  privilege'  in  a  baron's  attendance  in  parliament 
'  was  beginning,  perhaps,  at  the  time  when  English  Peers  first  spoke  of  themselves 
as  Peers  of  the  Realm,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  II '. 


454  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

Furnival's  case.  An  amusing  illustration  of  this  ambiguity, 
which  is  probably  quite  unknown,  is  found  in  the  patent  of 
creation  for  the  dukedom  of  Dorset  (1720).  After  justly  insisting 
on  the  antiquity  of  the  grantee's  house — the  Sackvilles — this 
document  proceeds  to  explain  that  the  title  of  '  Baron  '  con- 
ferred by  Queen  Elizabeth  on  his  ancestor  was  virtually  a  restora- 
tion of  the  dignity  originally  conferred  by  Richard  I.^  I  propose 
to  deal  fully  below  with  the  historical  effect  of  the  ambiguity 
arising  from  the  double  sense  of  '  baron  ',  which  affects  the  use 
of  the  style  even  at  the  present  day  ;  but  it  may  be  well,  before 
doing  so,  to  dispose  of  Thomas  de  Furnival's  case  because  it 
illustrates  so  well  the  danger  of  arguing  from  the  use  of  a  term 
of  which  the  meaning  is  undefined. 

For  the  argument  in  question  we  must  turn  to  the  use  made 
of  the  Fur  nival  case  in  the  late  Mr.  L.  O.  Pike's  Constitutional 
History  of  the  House  of  Lards  (1894).  Valuable  and  important  as 
his  work  is,  both  from  the  independence  of  his  views  and  from 
his  careful  citation  of  those  authorities  on  which  his  views  are 
based,  its  weak  point  is  that,  as  a  lawyer,  Mr.  Pike  attached 
excessive  weight  to  the  dicta  of  medieval  lawyers  and  the  decisions 
recorded  in  the  year-books.^  He  endeavoured  to  base  on  what 
he  termed  '  the  established  legal  opinions  '  (p.  95)  the  doctrine, 
which  was  with  him  an  obsession,  that,  down  to  '  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Edward  III  ',  at  least,  '  the  summons  to  Parlia- 
ment was  regarded  solely  as  a  burden  '  (p.  95).  He  was,  of 
course,  well  aware  that  the  greater  barons  extorted  from  John 
their  right  to  the  summons,  but  he  urged  that  it  was  only  '  desired 
as  the  means  of  mitigating  demands  for  money  '  (p.  92),  '  was 
prompted  only  by  the  desire  for  protection  when  some  excep- 
tional tax  was  to  be  imposed  '  (p.  235).  Possibly  ;  but  surely 
the  whole  of  English  constitutional  history  illustrates  the  funda- 
mental importance  of  a  control  over  supplies  for  the  redress  of 
grievances  and  as  an  engine  for  obtaining  power.  Here  again 
the  sagacity  of  Stubbs  is  seen  in  his  speaking  of  '  a  right  which 
from  the  very  first  was  as  precious  as  it  was  burdensome  '? 

After  speaking  of  '  the  burden  of  a  writ  of  summons  calling 

^  '  Unus  a  Richardo  Primo  Baronis  titulum  accepit ;  postea  vero  alter  longo 
annorum  intervallo,  a  Regina  Elizabetha  .  .  .  Baro  de  Buckhurst  creatus  est,  vel 
potius  in  pristinum  honorem  revocatus.'  The  allegation  is  based  on  a  charter  of 
Richard  I  to  Bordesley. 

*  That  I  am  justified  in  this  criticism  is  well  shown  by  the  fact  that,  at  the  outset 
(pp.  23-5),  he  devoted  three  pages  of  his  work  to-'  a  Parliament  of  William  the  Con- 
queror '  in  1081  as  '  the  first  assembly  in  England  to  which  the  word  "  Parliament " 
has  been  applied  by  any  legal  authority ',  viz.  Year-hook,  21  Edw.  Ill  (1347-8).  He 
also  relied  on  '  a  famous  law-book,  issued  by  royal  authority '  (viz.  Britton)  for  an 
i'psc  dixit  on  the  constitution  of  the  time  which  he  termed  an  '  important  and  authori- 
tative statement  of  the  law '  (pp.  93-4). 

'  Const.  Hist.  iii.  (1878),  443. 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  455 

an  unwilling  baron  or  bishop  to  attend  the  king  in  parliament  ', 
Mr.  Pike  endeavours  to  prove  his  point  by  contending  that  '  the 
Baron  did  not  desire  to  be  present '  (p.  235).  This  he  proceeds 
to  illustrate  by  the  famous  Furnival  case.  He  cites  this  as  an 
instance  of  the  *  efforts  of  lay  Barons  to  escape  summons  and 
sitting  '.  Now  it  is  extremely  important  to  ascertain  exactly 
what  it  was  that  Thomas  de  Furnival  actually  did  claim.  There 
is  no  difficulty  in  doing  this,  for  Madox  dealt  fully  with  the  case,® 
and  even  Dugdale  ^  cited  the  record  as  early  as  1675.  But, 
although  in  accordance  with  his  admirable  practice  Mr.  Pike 
cites  the  original  authorities,  he  paraphrases  the  claim  thus  : 

There  are  even  instances  in  which  men  who  had  been  summoned,  and 
whose  ancestors  had  been  summoned  to  Parliament,  were  ready  to  deny 
that  they  were  barons  at  all.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  II,  Thomas  de 
Furnivall  tried  \sic\  to  show  that  he  was  not  a  Baron,  nominally  [s^c]  to 
escape  a  particular  amercement.  ...  He  and  his  descendants  were  never- 
theless summoned  to  Parliament  for  some  generations,  as  his  ancestors 
had  been  before  him  (pp.  235-6). 

This  paraphrase  requires  somewhat  plain  speaking.  There  is 
not  one  word  in  the  record  to  show,  or  even  to  suggest,  that 
Thomas  de  Furnival  was  '  trying  '  to  escape  attendance  in  parlia- 
ment ;  his  claim  was  solely  that  he  had  been  '  amerced  as  a 
Baron '  (tanquam  Baro  amerciatus  fuit),  though  he  was  not 
a  baron  and  held  nothing  by  barony,  and  was  therefore  not  liable 
to  such  amercement.  The  word  '  nominally  '  is  an  interpolation 
intended  to  convey  the  impression  that  what  he  was  really 
seeking  was  exemption  from  being  summoned  to  parliament. 
Madox,  though  holding  that  his  claim,  as  to  holding  by  barony, 
was  not  justified,  was  careful  to  point  out  that  *  holding  by 
Barony  and  being  summoned  to  attend  amongst  the  Barons  in 
Parliament,  were,  in  those  days,  very  different  things  '.  That  is 
exactly  the  point  which  I  desire  to  enforce. 

Quite  correctly,  Madox  has  treated  the  Furnival  case  together 
with  that  of  the  abbot  of  '  Croyland  ',  who  similarly  claimed, 
about  the  same  time,  that  he  had  been  wrongly  amerced  as 
a  baron  ^^  though  he  held  nothing  by  barony  (licet  ipse  non  teneat 
terras  sen  tenementa  aliqua  per  Baroniam  vel  partem  Baroniae,  per 
quod  tanquam  Baro  amerciari  debeat).  As  in  the  case  of  Thomas 
de  Furnival  there  is  a  series  of  writs  of  summons  to  parliament 
both  before  and  after  the  abbot's  case  arose  ;  but  in  this  case 
also  the  claim  raised  was  definite  and  had  nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  the   abbot's  attendance  in  parliament.     It  is   highly 

8  Cap.  xiv,  sec.  2  (ed.  1711,  pp.  370-4). 
*  Baronage,  i.  726. 

^"  '  De  clameo  Abbatis  de  Croyland  facto  quod  non  debet  amerciari  tanquam 
Baro.' 


456  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

significant  that,  although  Madox  rightly  treats  these  two  cases 
in  conjunction  under  '  amercements  ',  Mr.  Pike  sharply  separates 
them,  and,  while  dealing  with  the  abbot's  case  as  a  question  only 
of  '  amercement '  (p.  257),  endeavours,  as  we  have  seen,  to  treat 
the  Furnival  claim  as  an  effort  *  to  escape  summons  and  sitting ' 
(p.  235).      He  even  went  so  far  as  to  urge  that 

In  the  reign  of  Charles  I  the  Lords  had  completely  forgotten  the  reluct- 
ance of  their  ancestors  to  sit  in  Parliament.  ...  It  is  impossible  to  imagine 
a  greater  contrast  than  that  between  Thomas  de  Furnivall  trying  to  prove 
that  he  was  not  a  Baron  in  the  reign  of  Edward  II,  and  the  Earl  of  Bristol 
three  centuries  later,  endeavouring  to  force  the  King  to  send  him  a  sum- 
mons (pp.  238-9). 

It  is  impossible  to  imagine  a  more  misleading  contrast.     Mr. 
Pike's  contention  rests,  it  will  be  seen,  on  the  ambiguous  meaning! 
of  the  phrase  *  a  Baron  '  ;    the  two  issues  spoken  of  were,  of 
course,  entirely  distinct. 

The  reader  should  be  warned  that  in  the  Furnival  case  it  is 
immaterial  whether  the  claim  was  sound,  as  a  fact,  or  not.  Madox 
shows  cause  for  believing  that  it  was  not ;  but  on  the  definite' 
issue  raised  by  the  claimant,  the  result  of  an  inquisition  was  that 
his  claim  was  good.^^  Stubbs  was  dependent  for  the  facts  onj 
Courthope,  who  observes  that 

It  was  found  by  Inquisition  19  Edw.  II.  that  he  did  not  hold  by  barony  ;j 
nevertheless  he  continued  to  be  summoned,  as  were  his  son  and  grandson,! 
thus  showing  that  his  writ  issued  not  by  reason  of  tenure,  but  by  the] 
grace  and  favour,  or  rather  the  will  of  the  Crown  .^^ 

The  Crown  was  bound  by  the  finding,  whether  it  was  justified  oi 
not ;  and,  if  Thomas  continued  to  be  summoned,  in  despite  oi 
that  finding,  it  must  be  inferred  that  this  was  because  the  findingj 
that  he  did  not  hold  by  barony  had  no  bearing  on  his  summons! 
as  a  '  baron  '  of  parliament.  Stubbs  was  quick  to  perceive  the] 
importance  of  this  inference  as  proving  that  among  the  baronsj 
summoned,  *  some  at  least  did  not  possess  the  qualification  byj 
baronial  tenure,  but  became  barons  simply  by  virtue  of  the! 
special  writ,  and  conveyed  to  their  heirs  a  dignity  attested  byj 
the  hereditary  [sic]  reception  of  the  summons.'  ^^ 

So  much  for  the  Furnival  case,  as  bearing  on  those  who  werei 
peers,  though  not  '  barons  '  by  tenure.  Mr.  Pike,  I  shall  now 
show,  was  led  by  the  excessive  importance  he  attached  to  the 
views  of  medieval  lawyers  to  disparage  even  at  a  late  date  thej 

"  The  question  really  turned  on  his  tenure  of  Sheffield  (Hailamshire),  the  capi 
of  the  alleged  barony  derived  from  his  Louvetot  ancestors.     He  contended  that  hisj 
tenure  of  Sheffield  was  by  homage  only  {per  Jiomagium  tantnm). 

^2  Historic  Peerage^  p.  xxv.     Cf.  p  206. 

"  Const.  Hist.  ii.  (1875),  204  (§  201). 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  457 

status  as  peers  of  those  barons  who  were  regularly  summoned  to 
parliament.    He  claimed  that  even 

when  the  wars  of  the  Roses  were  giving  new  power  to  the  Barons,  the  old 
ideas  still  prevailed  in  the  Courts  of  Justice,  and  a  Baron  was  still  not  as 
another  peer.  As  late  as  the  eighth  year  of  Henry  VI  it  was  expressly 
decided  that  there  was  a  difference  between  a  lord  who  was  only  a  Baron 
and  a  lord  who  was  an  Earl  or  a  Duke,  and  that  when  a  writ  was  brought 
by  or  against  an  Earl  or  Duke,  he  must  be  named  by  his  name  of  dignity, 
but  not  when  the  writ  was  brought  by  or  against  a  Baron  (Year  Book, 
8  Henry  VI,  no.  22,  fo.  10) .i* 

Here,  as  in  the  Furnival  case,  two  issues  are  confused  ;  the 
question  of  the  formal  style  to  be  assigned  in  legal  documents  is 
entirely  distinct  from  the  status  of  a  baron  of  parliament  as 
a  peer  ;  '  a  lord  who  was  only  a  Baron  and  a  lord  who  was  an 
Earl '  were  equally  peers  (pares)  of  the  realm. 

I  desire  to  treat  the  above  passage  in  conjunction  with  one 
which  has  recently  appeared,  and  in  which  this  erroneous  doctrine 
is  even  further  developed.  The  immediate  cause,  I  may  explain, 
of  my  dealing,  at  the  present  time,  with  the  subject  of  '  Barons  ' 
and  '  Peers  '  is  that  the  matter  has  been  brought  to  the  front 
by  the  publication — as  an  appendix  to  vol.  iv  of  The  Complete 
Peerage  (1916)— ^of  a  treatise  on  '  Earldoms  and  Baronies  in  history 
and  in  law  '  (pp.  651-756),  in  which  an  extreme  view  on  the 
origin  of  '  Baronies  by  W^rit '  is  set  forth  with  much  assurance 
and  with  a  certain  show  of  learning.  Both  in  its  original  form 
and  in  the  present  revised  edition,  this  very  useful  work,  which 
is  familiar  to  historical  students,  has  adopted  a  tone  of  marked 
hostility  to  the  '  settled  law  '  on  the  subject.  This  hostility, 
however,  is  due  less,  in  my  opinion,  to  the  law  in  question  itself 
than  to  the  modern  development  of  the  doctrine  of  abeyance, 
which  has  led  to  a  great  increase  in  the  practice  of  *  calling  out 
of  abeyance  '  baronies  unheard  of  for  centuries.  This  develop- 
ment culminated  in  Mr.  Asquith's  statement  when  prime  minister, 
from  his  seat  in  the  house  of  commons,  that  it  was  *  an  automatic 
process  '.  Such  a  description  of  what  is  well  recognized  as  a 
special  exercise  of  the  Crown's  prerogative,  was  so  grave  and 
obvious  a  constitutional  error  that  it  was  instantly  challenged, 
and  had,  of  course,  to  be  modified.  One  can  sympathize  with 
Mr.  Vicary  Gibbs  in  his  comment  on  this  incident,^^  but  we  must 
here  confine  ourselves  to  purely  historical  questions. 

Mr.  Gibbs  seems  to  have  felt  that  the  attitude  assumed  in  his 
work  needed  something  more  to  justify  it  than  the  genial  jests 
and  gibes  of  Mr.  '  G.  E.  C  '[okayne].  He  has,  therefore,  set  his 
assistant  editor,  Mr.  H.  Arthur  Doubleday,  to  provide  a  reasoned 
onslaught  on  the  doctrine  he  so  much  dislikes  and  on  those  who 

^*  Op.  cit.,  p.  101.  ^^  Complete  Peerage,  iv.  755  n. 


458  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

in  the  past  or  present  have  been  foolish  enough  to  accept  it. 
For  two  reasons  it  is  quite  impossible  to  ignore  this  production. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  part  of  what  is  bound  to  become  the  per- 
manent work  of  reference  on  the  history  of  the  peerage  ;  in  the 
second,  we  learn  at  the  outset  that 

The  writer  is  indebted  to  W.  Paley  Baildon,  Sir  Henry  Maxwell-Lyte, 
K.C.B.,  Deputy-Keeper  of  the  Public  Records,  Professor  T.  F.  Tout,  and 
G.  W.  Watson  for  much  helpful  criticism  and  for  valuable  suggestions. 
He  also  has  to  thank  the  Librarian  and  other  officers  of  the  House  of  Lords 
for  many  courtesies. 

The  names  of  these  scholars  will  doubtless  inspire  confidence  ; 
and  their  mention  is  no  mere  formality,  as  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  Mr.  Doubleday  was  indebted  to  the  Deputy-Keeper  of  the 
Public  Records  for  his  knowledge  of  a  document  which  forms  the 
subject  of  one  of  his  most  adventurous  and  most  unlucky  flights. 
With  the  aid  of  another  of  his  helpers,  Mr.  G.  W.  Watson, 
we  find  him  plunging,  to  begin  with,  into  the  Norman  period. 

For  some  time  after  the  Conquest  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  between 
the  Norman  Count  and  the  English  Earl,  and  the  fact  that  many  of  the 
Conqueror's  followers  held  large  estates  in  Normandy  led  ultimately  to 
a  division  of  inheritances  and  nationality  in  their  descendants  \sic\y  one 
son  retaining  the  Norman,  the  other  the  English  lands  (p.  652). 

It  is  difficult  to  understand  what  Mr.  Doubleday  means.  He  is 
speaking  of  the  '  descendants  ',  not  the  sons,  of  the  Conqueror's 
followers,  and  yet  he  cannot  be  speaking  of  the  loss  of  Normandy 
under  John  ^^*.     Happily,  however,  he  explains  in  a  footnote  that 

The  Montfort  and  Leicester  fiefs  furnish  a  good  example.  Amaury, 
Count  of  Montfort,  certifies  Henry,  King  of  England,  that  he  has  ceded  all 
his  lands  in  England  to  his  brother,  Aug.  1231  (Tresordes  Charles,  p.  628 — 
Angleterre  II — no.  14  (4)).  In  June  1232  he  declares  that  he  has  ceded 
all  his  lands  in  England  to  his  brother  Simon,  Earl  of  Leicester  {Idem, 
no.  14  (1)).  .  .  .  The  writer  is  indebted  to  G.  W.  Watson  for  these  refer- 
ences (p.  652). 

It  is  somewhat  strange  that  Mr.  Watson,  who  has  long  made 
a  special  study  of  foreign  genealogies,  should  have  assisted 
Mr.  Doubleday  with  these  impressive  references. ^^  For  the 
great  house  of  Montfort  L' Amaury  is  not  found  among  the  duke's 
followers,  and,  if  it  were  not  for  Messrs.  Doubleday  and  Watson, 
we  should  certainly  never  have  discovered  that  its  stammhaus, 
between  Chartres  and  Paris,  lay  in  '  Norman  lands  '. 

15a  YoT  it  was  not  on  the  loss  of  Normandy  that  such  division  took  place.  Indeed, 
his  own  illustration  is  taken  from  1231-2. 

^^  They  are  duly  given  and  the  documents  both  printed  in  full  in  Vernon  Harcourt's 
His  Grace  the  Steward  and  Trial  of  Peers  (1907),  pp.  110,  112. 


1918  'B AEONS'  AND  'PEERS'  459 

The  writer  then  proceeds  to  remind  us  that  '  to  ascertain  the 
truth  regarding  earldoms  and  baronies  we  must  look  .  .  .  into  the 
facts  of  history ',  and  undertakes  '  to  show  in  startling  relief  the 
misconceptions  on  which  popular  ideas  .  .  .  are  based  '  (pp.  652-3). 
We  recognize  one  of  these  popular  ideas  on  p.  676,  where  Mr. 
Doubleday  writes  glibly  of  '  the  signing  of  Magna  Carta  \  and 
again  on  p.  682,  where  we  learn  that  '  the  Great  Charter  was 
signed  '.  Mr.  Tout's  '  helpful  criticism  '  seems  to  have  been  here 
wanting. 

With  the  subject  of  historic  peerage  controversies  a  writer 
on  '  baronies  in  history  and  in  law  '  should,  at  least,  be  familiar. 
But  the  extent  of  Mr.  Doubleday's  acquaintance  with  them  may 
be  gauged  from  three  examples.  The  most  famous,  perhaps,  of 
all  peerage  cases  was  the  contest  for  the  barony  of  Abergavenny 
(1587-1604)  between  Mary,  Lady  Fane,  claiming  as  heir-general, 
and  two  Edward  Nevills,  father  and  son,  successively .^^  But, 
oddly  enough,  there  was  another  case,  well  known  to  peerage 
lawyers,  which  was  cited  as  *  Neville's  case '  (7  Co.  Rep.  33).^^  In 
this  a  wholly  different  person,  Edmund  Neville  (not  Edward, 
as  Mr.  Doubleday  styles  him),  claimed  the  earldom  of  West- 
morland, forfeited  for  treason  by  Earl  Charles  [Neville]  in  1570. 
The  dignity  claimed  was  different ;  the  claimant  was  different ; 
the  date  was  different  ;  the  legal  issue  was  wholly  different  ; 
but,  as  there  was  an  M  in  Macedon  and  in  Monmouth,  so  there 
was  a  Neville  concerned  in  both.  Therefore  Mr.  Doubleday 
imagines,  incredible  though  it  may  seem,  that  these  two  celebrated 
cases  were  one  and  the  same.  He  actually  writes  of  *  Nevil's  case 
against  Lady  Fane,  which  Coke  was  reporting  '.^^ 

Yet  even  this  is  not  all.  In  a  special  summary  of  the  Aber- 
gavenny case  (p.  732),  which  he  there  heads  '  Despenser  ',  he 
explains  that  '  as  Lady  Fane  and  Edward  Nevill  were  co-heirs  to 
the  Barony  of  Despenser  [sic],  this  gave  the  King  an  opening  to 
compromise  '.  The  reader  will  be  somewhat  surprised  to  learn 
that  Lady  Fane  and  Edward  Nevill  were  not  '  co-heirs  to  the 
barony  of  Despenser  ',  or  indeed  to  any  other.  Mr.  Doubleday, 
for  this  case  of  '  Despenser  '  (i.  e.  Abergavenny),  refers  in  a  foot- 
note to  my  own  book,  'Peerage  and  Pedigree,  vol.  i,  pp.  78-89  and 
166-201  [sic],  where  the  very  confused  account  given  in  Collins's 
Proceedings  is  disentangled.'  But  what  is  the  use  of  disentangling 
that  grievous  mass  of  confusion  for  the  benefit  of  one  who  proceeds 
to  add  fresh  confusion  of  his  own  ?    That  this  expression  is  amply 

"  The  case  is  exhaustively  discussed  and  the  many  errors  concerning  it  traced 
to  their  source  and  corrected  in  my  Peerage  and  Pedigree,  i.  75-89. 

*^  See  Pike's  Const.  Hist,  of  the  House  of  Lords,  p.  148  n. 

"  p.  656  n.  Sir  Francis  Palmer,  of  whose  work  {Peerage  Law  in  England,  1907), 
as  of  my  own,  JMr.  Doubleday  has  made  liberal  use,  dealt  with  the  Abergavenny  case 
on  pp.  181-2,  and  with  '  Nevil's  case '  on  pp.  4,  36,  192,  196,  199-202. 


460  '  BARONS  '  AND  '  PEERS  '  October 

justified  the  reader  will  certainly  admit  when  he  learns  that  the 
second  of  the  two  citations  from  my  own  work  above  deals  (at 
great  length)  not,  as  alleged,  with  the  Abergavenny  claim,  but 
with  that  wholly  different  matter,  '  The  Lord  Abergavenny's 
case  '  (12  Co.  Rep.).  This  is  the  very  important  case  (or  alleged 
case)  on  which  rests  Coke's  doctrine  that  the  writ  of  summons 
must  be  followed  by  a  sitting  in  parliament.^o  What  makes 
Mr.  Doubleday's  confusion  absolutely  inexcusable  is  that  at  the 
outset  of  the  argument  he  cites,  I  actually  inserted,  as  a  caution 
to  the  reader,  a  footnote  that  '  This  case  (1610)  must  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  the  contest  for  the  barony  of  Abergavenny, 
which  had  come  to  an  end  in  1604  '.^i 

Here  we  have  three  historic  cases  of  the  very  first  importance, 
involving  as  they  did  (or  were  alleged  to  do)  (a)  the  question  of 
barony  by  tenure,  (b)  the  entail  of  dignities,  (c)  the  necessity  of 
a  proved  sitting.  Mr.  Doubleday  confuses  the  first  with  the 
second  and  identifies  the  second  with  the  third  .-^    Quid  plura  ? 

We  can  now  approach  Mr.  Doubleday's  development  of  Mr. 
Pike's  proposition. 23  The  former,  quoting  Mr.  Pike's  statement 
that  '  as  late  as  the  eighth  year  of  Henry  VI  it  was  expressly 
decided  that  there  was  a  difference  between  a  lord  who  was  only 
a  Baron  and  a  lord  who  was  an  Earl  or  a  Duke  ',  adds,  on  his 
own  authority  : 

The  difference  between  '  a  lord  who  was  only  a  Baron  '  and  Earls  and 
Dukes  was,  however,  just  as  marked  at  a  very  much  later  period  (p.  690). 

This  statement  is  intended  to  support  Mr.  Doubleday's  amazing 
contention  that  a  baron  was  not  a  '  peer  '  in  the  same  sense  as 
an  earl  was.  I  invite  the  reader's  particular  attention  to  the 
evidence  on  which  this  statement  is  based.  It  is  thus  given  in 
a  footnote  : 

Sir  Henry  Maxwell-Lyte  has  shown  the  writer  a  transcript  of  a  docu- 
ment dated  9  Edw.  IV,  in  Sir  William  Pole's  MS.  Collections  (fol.  567), 
in  which  a  man  is  designated  Nicholas  Carew  baron  Carew,  esquire. 

What  this  citation  really  proves  is  that  Mr.  Doubleday  at  least 
actually  imagines  that  at  what  he  terms  '  a  very  much  later 
period  '  (i.  e.  forty  years  later),  '  a  lord  who  was  only  a  Baron ' 
could  be  formally  styled  '  esquire  '.  No  one,  I  venture  to  think, 
who  has  any  knowledge  of  the  period,  could  possibly  suppose 

2°  '  This  writ  hath  no  operation  until  he  sit  in  Parliament '  (Institutes  i,  16  b). 
2^  Peerage  and  Pedigree,  i.  166. 

22  This  can  hardly  be  among  the  results  of  the  '  helpful  criticism  and  valuable 
suggestions '  of  Mr.  W.  Paley  Baildon. 
2^  See  above,  p.  457. 


1918  '  BARONS  '   AND  '  PEERS  '  461 

that  the  above  style  could  describe  a  member  of  the  upper  house 
in  9  Edward  IV  ;  the  prefix  '  baron  '  is  nearly  as  absurd  as  the 
addition  '  esquire  '.  But  was  there  even  any  such  lord  temporal 
in  1469-70  ?  We  have  only  to  turn  to  the  Complete  Peerage,  of 
which  Mr.  Doubleday  is  '  assistant  editor  ',  to  learn  that  of  course 
there  was  not.  Volume  iii,  in  which  he  would  be  found,  had 
already  been  completed  for  some  time  when  Mr.  Doubleday 
wrote,  and  there  is  no  such  '  lord  '  to  be  found  in  that  volume. 

What  then  is  the  explanation  of  the  style  quoted  above  ? 
Simply  that  the  Devonshire  Carews  were  still  also  the  holders 
of  that  feudal  '  barony  '  of  Carew  (as  it  was  sometimes  styled), 
which  was  held  as  five  knights'  fees  of  the  earldom  of  Pembroke, 
and  of  which  Carew  castle  was  the  caput.^^  It  was  in  virtue  of 
this  holding  that  the  heralds  sometimes  styled  the  family  '  Baron 
of  Carew  \^^  even  as,  in  the  bishopric  of  Durham,  '  the  family 
of  Hilton  had  their  chief  seat  at  Hilton  Castle  in  the  palatinate 
and  were  reckoned  titular-barons  by  tenure -in-chief  of  the 
Bishop  '.^®  But  what,  I  confess,  one  cannot  understand  is  how 
so  sound  and  careful  a  scholar  as  the  Deputy-Keeper  of  the 
Public  Records  came  to  be  thus  connected  with  Mr.  Doubleday's 
performance. 

It  is,  however,  when  dealing  with  '  the  facts  [sic]  concerning 
baronies  by  writ '  that — taking  leave  of  Mr.  Pike's  arguments — 
Mr.  Doubleday  ventures  on  his  boldest  flight.  It  is,  I  presume, 
generally  known  that,  as  stated  at  the  outset  of  this  paper,  the 
term  '  peers  of  the  realm  '  {piers  de  la  terre)  occurs  as  early  as 
1321,  in  the  summer  of  which  year  the  earls  and  barons  (of  parlia- 
ment) apply  it  to  themselves — *  nous  piers  de  la  terre,  countes  et 
barouns.'  Stubbs  and  Mr.  Pike  alike  mention  the  fact  pro- 
minently. In  a  noteworthy  passage  Stubbs,  speaking  of  '  the 
hereditary  \sic\  summoning  of  a  large  proportion  of  great  vassals  ' 
under  Edward  I,^^  observes  that 

It  is  to  this  body  of  select  hereditary  barons,  joined  with  the  prelates 
that  the  term  *  peers  of  the  land  '  properly  belongs,  an  expression  which 
occurs  first,  it  is  said,  in  the  act  by  which  the  Despensers  were  exiled 
[1321],  but  which  before  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century  had  obtained 
general  recognition  as  descriptive  of  members  of  the  house  of  lords .^^ 


"  Cf.  Owen's  Old  Pembroke  Families,  p.  18. 

"  See  my  paper  on  '  The  origin  of  the  Carews '  {The  Ancestor,  no.  5,  pp.  35,  38-9). 

2«  Lapsley's  County  Palatine  of  Durham,  p.  64.  Mr.  Lapsley  adds  that  '  the 
barons  of  Hilton  continue  to  be  heard  of  in  Durham  as  late  as  1539 '  (p.  65).  But 
even  as  late  as  1669  we  find  a  complaint  of  the  unseemly  pride  of  the  dean  in  *  taking 
a  place  above  Baron  Hilton  at  the  quarter  sessions,  to  the  great  disgust  and  reluctancy 
of  the  county  gentry '.  "  Op.  cit.  ii.  (1875),  183  (§  190). 

28  The  closing  words  Should  be  carefully  noted.  The  historian  cites  Lords'  Report, 
i.  281. 


462  '  BARONS  '  AND  '  PEERS  '  October 

Thenceforward,  as  we  shall  see,  the  barons  (of  parliament)  occur 
as  '  peers  '  jointly  with  the  earls,  and  so  well  established  had 
this  practice  become  by  the  time  of  Richard  II  that  the  very 
important  patent  of  creation  in  1387  by  which  a  barony  was 
conferred  on  Sir  John  de  Beauchamp  of  Holt,  spoke  of  his  pro- 
motion 'in  unum  parium  et  baronum  regni  nostri  Angliae'. 
These  '  peers  and  barons  '  of  whom  he  was  thus  made  one  had 
nothing  but  a  writ  of  summons  to  show  for  their  tenure  of  that 
position.     Hence  the  importance  of  the  phrase. 

Mr.  Pike,  with  whose  work  Mr.  Doubleday  is  so  familiar,  is 
careful  to  note  that  *  the  earliest  known  use  of  the  expression 
"  Peer  of  the  Realm  ",  or  Pier  de  la  Terre,  occurs  in  a  document 
of  1322^9  (15  Edward  II)  ',  and  discusses  the  document  at  some 
length.  He  also  cites  subsequent  cases  under  Edward  II  and 
Edward  III^  in  which  the  earls  and  barons  appear  jointly  as 
'  peers  '.  In  spite,  however,  of  this,  Mr.  Doubleday  confidently 
writes  : 

It  is  significant  that  the  upholders  of  the  theory  of  barony  by  writ 
have  never  produced  any  contemporary  description  of  a  man  in  the  14th 
century  which  shows  unmistakably  that  he  was  ...  a  peer,  as  were  the 
earls  of  that  time.  No  man  appears  to  have  so  described  himself  or  to 
have  been  so  described  by  others  (p.  695). 

All  through  Mr.  Doubleday 's  arguments  one  notes  the  same 
endeavour  to  prove  that  barons  [of  parliament]  in  the  fourteenth 
century  were  not  really  'peers',  because  they  had  merely  been 
summoned  to  parliament  and  did  not  hold  an  hereditary'  peerage '. 
'  There  is  ',  he  proceeds,  '  a  description  of  a  man  by  himself 
in  1383  which  throws  a  most  interesting  and  important  light  on 
the  subject.'  Mr.  Doubleday  is  fully  entitled  to  the  credit  of 
this  discovery  ;  for  in  this  instance,  so  far  as  I  know,  he  has  not 
drawn  his  matter  from  the  works  of  others.  Michael  de  la  Pole, 
he  reminds  us,  '  was  summoned  to  Parliament  among  the  Barons  ' 
from  1366  to  1384,  the  summons  to  that  of  October  1383  being 
addressed  '  Michaeli  de  la  Pole  '.  We  read  that  '  as  chancellor 
he  opened  the  meeting  ',  and  his  opening  words  are  quoted  from 
the  Rolls  of  Parliament  themselves. 

Vous,  Mess'  Prelatz  &  Seign'rs  Temporelx,  et  vous  mes  compaignons  le 
Chivalers  &  autres  de  la  noble  co[mun]e  d'Engleterre  cy  presentz,  deviez 
entendre,  etc.^^ 

Mr.  Doubleday's  comments  on  this  exordium  run  as  follows 

Here  we  have  a  man  who  had  been  summoned  for  nearly  20  years, 
now  Lord  Chancellor  of  England,  separating   himself  from  the  Lore 

^^  Both  in  the  text  and  in  the  marginal  heading  he  erroneously  gives  this  dat 
(for  1321). 

3»  Mot.  Pari  iii.  149  n. 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  463 

Temporal  and  proclaiming  his  equality  with  the  knights  of  the  shire 
(p.  696). 

The  student  will  instinctively  feel  that  this  cannot  be  so,  and  that 
the  chancellor's  words  must  here  be  misunderstood.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  when  carefully  read,  they  are  seen  to  refer  to  the  whole 
of  the  Third  Estate  and  not  merely  to  the  knights  of  the  shire. 
Indeed,  on  a  later  page,  Mr.  Doubleday  himself  tells  us  that 
Michael  here  *  ranks  himself  with  the  Commons  '  (p.  726).  But 
what  is  far  more  important  is  the  fact  that  Michael  de  la  Pole  is 
here  speaking,  not  as  a  member  of  one  of  the  three  assembled 
estates,  but  ex  officio  as  the  king's  mouthpiece,  that  is  to  say,  as 
chancellor.  Mr,  Pike  has  clearly  established  the  facts  that,  when 
they  were  ecclesiastics,  '  the  early  Chancellors  received  a  summons 
only  when  bishops  ',  and  that  '  as  Chancellors  they  attended 
Parliament  ex  officio  '  ;  that  *  the  first  lay  Chancellors  attended, 
but  were  not  summoned  '  ;  that  '  a  Baron  Chancellor  [was] 
summoned  only  among  the  Barons  ',  and  that  '  in  accordance 
with  the  practice  of  centuries,  the  Chancellor's  presence  in 
Parliament  was  ex  officio,  and  not  in  virtue  of  any  writ  of  sum- 
mons'.^^  Consequently  Michael  de  la  Pole, in  1383,  was  addressing, 
on  the  one  side,  the  estates  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  temporal, 
and,  on  the  other,  the  estate  of  the  commons,  while  he  himself, 
as  chancellor,  was  apart  from  all  three.  Mr.  Doubleday 's  '  in- 
teresting and  important '  discovery  collapses  like  a  house  of 
cards. 

But  there  is  more  than  this.  Having  proved,  as  he  imagines, 
that  Michael  de  la  Pole,  although  summoned  as  a  baron,  was 
not  (in  virtue  of  that  summons)  among  *  the  Lords  Temporal  ', 
he  builds  on  this  supposed  discovery  the  argument  that  this 
conclusion  must  apply  also,  as  it  would,  to  all  those  who  were 
merely  '  summoned  to  Parliament '  by  '  a  personal  writ '. 

What,  it  may  be  asked,  was  the  position  at  this  time  of  men  like 
de  la  Pole  ?  The  answer  would  appear  to  be  that  men  who  were  sum- 
moned to  Parliament  became  for  the  time  '  Lords  of  Parliament ',  but 
not  peers  in  the  modern  sense.  As  legislators  who  received  a  personal 
writ  they  sat,  as  one  might  say,  '  above  the  salt ' — with  the  Dukes  and 
Earls,  but  not  of  them,  &c.^^  (p.  696). 

In  short,  a  man  so  summoned  was  not  *  a  peer,  as  were  the  earls 
of  that  time  'P  Let  us  clearly  understand  what  this  proposition 
involves.  '  Men  who  were  summoned  to  Parliament  '  were 
'  legislators  ',  were  '  Lords  of  Parliament  ' — nay  '  Barons  of 
Parliament  '^^ — and  sat  '  with  the  Dukes  and  Earls  ' ;  they  had 

^^  Op.  ciL,  pp.  352-4.  ^^  The  italics  are  mine.  ^^  See  above,  p.  462. 

^*  '  Every  man  who  was  a  Lord  of  Parliament  by  reason  of  his  writ  of  summons 
was  a  Baron  of  Parliament '  (p.  689). 


464  'B AEONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

long  claimed  as  '  peers  of  the  realm  ',  in  common  with  the  dukes 
and  earls,  '  that  on  no  account  should  peers,  whether  ministers 
or  not,  be  brought  to  trial,  lose  their  possessions,  be  arrested, 
imprisoned,  outlawed,  or  forfeited,  or  be  bound  to  answer  or 
judged  except  in  full  parliament,  and  before  their  peers  '  ;  ^^  and 
yet,  in  spite  of  all  this,  they  were  not  really  peers  ;  they  had  no 
place  among  the  lords  temporal.  One  can  only  say,  as  Mr. 
Doubleday  himself  says  of  the  principle  involved  in  recent 
peerage  decisions  (p.  692)  :  'It  reads  more  like  Alice  in  Wonder- 
land than  '  a  proposition  soberly  advanced.  Men  '  are  summoned 
to  Parliament ',  we  are  informed,  '  as  Barons  ',  but  when  parlia- 
ment meets  and  the  three  estates  are  assembled,  Mr.  Doubleday 
bars  the  door  against  them  ;  they  are  not  among  the  elected 
representatives  of  the  estate  of  the  commons,  and  Mr.  Doubleday 
denies  them  a  place  among  '  the  Lords  Temporal '.  How  then 
could  these  unhappy  men  obey  the  king's  summons  and  attend 
to  hear,  from  his  representatives,  '  la  pronunciation  des  Causes 
de  la  Somonce  '  ?  For  them  alone  there  was  no  place  ;  they 
remind  one  of  nothing  so  much  as  of  the  showman's  amphibious 
monster  who  '  could  not  live  on  land  and  died  in  the  water  '. 

Such  is  the  desperate  plight  to  which  Mr.  Doubleday  is  reduced 
in  his  endeavours  to  prove  that  the  baron,  under  Richard  II,  was 
not  '  a  peer,  as  were  the  earls  '  (p.  695),  and  thus  to  assail  *  that 
monstrous  growth,  the  barony  by  writ '  (p.  700).  There  is  one 
more  matter  with  which  it  is  necessary  to  deal,  because  of  its 
importance  in  peerage  history  and  because  of  the  special  promi- 
nence which  Mr.  Doubleday  has  given  it.  Thomas  de  Furnival, 
with  whose  amercement  this  paper  began,  was  the  first  of  four 
Furnivals  consecutively  summoned  to  parliament.  The  first 
summons  of  this  family  was  to  '  the  Model  Parliament '  of  1295, 
and  the  last  was  dated  7  January,  6  Rich.  II  (1382/3),  being 
addressed  to  the  fourth  Furnival  so  summoned,  who  died  12  April 
1383.  He  was  the  last  of  the  house  in  the  male  line,  and  left  an 
only  daughter  as  his  heir.  Now  it  is  a  very  noteworthy  fact  that 
we  have  here  a  virtually  continuous  succession  of  writs,  from  the 
first  valid  parliament  to  the  last  Furnival's  death .^^  To  this 
series  of  writs  I  attach  great  importance  as  giving  us  what  was^ 
practically  an  hereditary  barony  from  the  earliest  date  noi 
claimed  even  by  a  peerage  lawyer.  When  the  third  of  the  Fur^ 
nivals  was  succeeded  by  his  younger  brother  (1364),  the  lattei 
promptly  received,  as  his  heir,  a  writ  of  summons.     It  is  a  fair 

'^  See  Stubbs's  summary  of  the  report  of  the  Stratford  case  (1341)  in  Const.  Hist. 
ii.  (1875),  389  (§  258).    Cf.  Pike,  op.  cit.,  p.  195. 

*^  In  these  thirty-eight  years  the  only  break  was  after  the  death  of  the  second 
of  the  line,  early  in  October  1339.  His  Inq.  p.  m.  (shortly  after  21  October  1340) 
states  that  his  son  Thomas  was  then  aged  17.  so  that  he  would  not  be  of  age  till  1344 
or  thereabouts.    He  was  not  summoned  till  1348. 


1918  ^  BARONS  '  AND  '  PEERS  '  465 

inference  that,  but  for  their  extinction  in  the  male  line,  the  family 
would  have  continued  to  be  regularly  summoned  to  parliament. 
We  have  thus,  in  the  Furnival  writs  of  summons,  a  very 
valuable  illustration  of  what  Stubbs  termed  '  hereditary  summon- 
ing '  from  the  days  of  Edward  I,  or,  as  he  elsewhere  described  it, 
the  hereditary  reception  of  the  summons  '.    This  is  the  practice 
which    Mr.   Doubleday   so    vehemently  denies,    and    which   he 
asserts  can  only  be  accepted  '  by  those  who  are  wholly  ignorant 
of  English  history  '  (p.  683).    His  fundamental  fallacy  consists  in 
assuming  that  if  words  of  inheritance  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
writ  of  summons,  an  hereditary  right  to  receive  that  summons 
could  only  have  been  the  result  of  an  imposition  ',  effecteS  by 
a  subtle  campaign  '  (pp.  679,  701).    The  fact,  of  course,  is  that, 
as  Mr.  Pike  admits,^?  '  the  baron  acquired  a  prescriptive^^  right 
to   be   summoned   to  parliament '  ;   the  right,  as  he  elsewhere 
expresses  it,39  was  based  on  '  the  prescription  in  accordance  with 
which  the  representatives  of  the  same  families  were  called  to 
parliament  generation  after  generation  '.    The  right,  in  Stubbs's 
words,  was  '  attested  by  the  hereditary  reception  of  the  summons  ' 
(n.  204).     It  is  needless,  therefore,  to  postulate  '  a  subtle  cam- 
paign '  or  a  '  monstrous  imposition  '  for  what  was  only  a  natural 
development  from  the  issue  of  writs  to  the  Furnivals,  for  example, 
generation  after  generation  '.     The  strength  of  prescription  in 
this  country  can  only  be  denied,  if  I  may  quote  Mr.  Doubleday's 
words,  '  by  those  who  are  wholly  ignorant  of  English  history ' 
(p.  683).  ^ 

To  the  Furnival  peerage  claim  in  1913  Mr.  Doubleday  has  de- 
voted over  three  pages,  on  the  ground  that '  it  is  worthy  of  special 
consideration,  for  it  is  typical  as  a  peerage  case  both  in  the 
nature  of  the  claims  made  and  in  the  Committee's  treatment  of 
them  ^  (p.  720).  With  regard  to  the  first  summoned  Furnival 
and  his  objection  '  to  being  amerced  as  a  baron  '  ^o  (p.  720),  we 
are  merely  told  that  his  disclaimer  '  throws  a  curious  light  on 
the  estimation  in  which  he  held  the  status  of  Baron  which  tenure 
by  barony  could  give  him  '.  It  is  rightly  here  recognized  that  the 
question  had  nothing  to  do  with  his  summons  to  parliament, 
although  on  p.  688  Mr.  Doubleday  had  argued  that 

the  absurdity  of  the  doctrine  that  a  writ  in  the  time  of  the  three  Edwards 
created  a  man  a  peer  in  the  modern  sense  is  demonstrated  by  facts  such 
as  .  .  .  the  repudiation  of  barony  by  a  man  who  was  summoned. 

A  footnote  to  this  argument  explains  that '  Thomas  de  Furnivall, 
summoned  to  a  Council  in  1283  and  to  Parliament  from  1295  to 
1332,  in  19  Edw.  II  denied  that  he  was  a  baron  '.    I  have  already 

3"  ^P-  ''^-'  P-  147.  38  The  italics  are  mine. 

P-  ^^^'  "  See  above,  pp.  453-6. 

VOL.  XXXm.— NO.  CXXXU.  H  h 


466  '  BARONS  '  AND  '  PEERS  '  October 

shown  that  what  Thomas  '  denied  '  was  that  he  was  a  baron 
by  tenure,  and  that  he  did  not  even  question  his  status  among  the 
barons  of  parliament. 

I  can  speak  with  special  knowledge  of  the  Furnival  peerage 
claim,  having  acted  on  behalf  of  the  Crown  throughout.  The 
point  at  issue  was  quite  simple,  but  was  of  great  importance. 
The  Crown  did  not  question  the  writs  of  summons  to  Thomas 
Nevill  (who  married  the  heiress  of  the  last  Furnival)  from  1383, 
or  his  sitting  in  parliament.  But  it  denied  the  claim  that  the  four 
Furnival s  were  peers,  on  the  ground  that  there  was  no  valid 
'  proof  of  sitting  '  in  the  case  of  any  one  of  them.  Consequently 
it  denied  that  they  could  transmit  a  peerage  to  their  heiress,  and 
contended  therefore  that  Thomas  Nevill  could  not  have  been 
summoned  in  right  of  his  wife,  because  no  such  right  was  vested 
in  her.  This  was  the  argument  that  I  had  advanced  in  my 
Peerage  and  Pedigree  (i.  274),  where  I  wrote  that  there  was  no 
valid  '  proof  of  sitting  ',  and  that,  therefore 

if  the  barony  of  Furnival  should  be  claimed,  ...  we  might  learn  if  the 
heiress  of  a  non-existent  barony  could  transmit  that  barony  to  her  hus- 
band. 

Everything,  therefore,  turned,  as  I  have  said,  on  the  '  proof  of 
sitting  '.  This,  I  may  remind  the  reader,  is  a  purely  legal  point ; 
but  the  reason  why  it  is  of  paramount  importance  and  indeed 
vital,  is  that  peerage  law,  as  is  well  settled,  requires  such  proof 
to  be  given,  and  to  be  given  from  '  the  records  of  Parliament  \^ 
I  accept  the  following  summary  by  Mr.  Doubleday  of  the 
issue  : 

The  Crown  contended  that  neither  the  above-named  Thomas  de 
Furnivall  [i.  e.  the  first  Furnival  summoned]  nor  any  of  his  descendants 
were  peers  [sic],  and  that  the  first  peer  was  either  Thomas  Nevill  or  his 
son-in-law,  John  Talbot. 

The  business  of  the  Committee  was  to  listen  to,  and  adjudicate  on,  the 
evidence  and  arguments  which  the  petitioner  advanced  to  prove  that 
the  Furnivalls  were  peers  [s^c].*2 

Quite  so  ;  and  the  committee,  of  course,  could  only  accept  such 
evidence  and  arguments  as  should  be  in  accordance  with  settled 
peerage  law.  The  Crown,  therefore,  was  bound  to  insist  on  the 
need  for  '  proof  of  sitting  ',  all  the  more  so  because  that  need, 
whether  historically  justiified  or  not,  is  the  one  great  barrier 
against  a  flood  of  peerage  claims  which  could  otherwise  be 
advanced.     I  have  elsewhere  dealt  with  the  efforts  made  on 

"  '  It  is  essential  that  a  sitting  shall  be  proved.  .  .  This  rule,  that  the  records  of 
Parliament  are  the  proper  and  only  evidence  of  a  sitting  in  Parliament,  is  one  which 
was  laid  down  by  Lord  Coke,  and  has  been  recognized  ever  since '  (Palmer's  Peerage 
Law  in  England  (1907),  pp.  45-6).  "  p.  720. 


A 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  467 

behalf  of  the  petitioner  to  supply  the  lacking  proof  .^^  Eventually 
a  new  document  was  produced  in  the  midst  of  the  hearing  before 
the  committee,  namely  a  royal  charter  granted  16  March  1306/7, 
at  the  time  [it  was  claimed]  of  the  Carlisle  parliament.  It  was 
described  by  counsel  as  a  *  charter  to  which  Thomas  de  Furnivall 
is  a  witness  at  Carlisle  during  the  holding  of  a  Parliament  there 
— that  is  from  the  Charter  Roll  of  the  35th  Edward  I,  16  day  of 
March.  That  will  be  1306  '  [sic].  Asked  whether  '  that  is  to  show 
that  he  was  present ',  counsel  replied  '  Yes,  at  Carlisle.' 

Now  I  am  not  going  to  argue  the  case  all  over  again,  although 
there  can  rarely  have  been  a  decision  so  open  to  damaging  criti- 
cism. The  only  point  on  which  I  have  to  insist  for  the  present 
is  that  such  a  charter  is  obviously  not  one  of  '  the  records  of 
Parliament '.  Even  if  it  were,  it  does  not  prove  that  the  witnesses 
thereto  took  their  seats  in  parliament.  If  it  did  so,  a  '  proof  of 
sitting  '  would  be  easy  enough  to  discover  in  other  cases  also. 
I  therefore  hold  as  strongly  as  ever  that  from  the  point  of  view  of 
peerage  law  the  committee's  decision  was  clearly  wrong.  I  formally 
recorded  at  the  time  my  reason  for  doing  so,  in  the  interest  of 
the  Crown,  and  I  hold  a  letter  from  that  brilliant  scholar,  the  late 
Mr.  Raymond  Asquith,  with  whom  I  was  privileged  at  the  time  to 
work,  in  the  preparation  of  the  argument  for  the  Crown,  express- 
ing entire  concurrence  with  my  view  and  agreeing  with  me  as 
to  the  great  danger  of  admitting  any  but  strictly  valid  *  proof  of 
sitting  '.  I  subsequently  expressed  in  print  the  same  view  in 
the  plainest  possible  manner  .** 

All  this  I  am  obliged  to  explain,  because  with  an  audacity 
rarely  equalled,  Mr.  Doubleday  has  charged  me  in  the  following 
passage  with  having  changed  my  view  on  the  subject,  in  con- 
sequence of  the  committee's  decision.  His  assumption  of  tragic 
despair  at  what  he  considers  my  desertion  of  '  the  cause  of  truth 
which  the  modern  school  of  history  seeks  to  promote  ',  may  cause 
some  amusement  to  the  readers  of  this  Review. 

Not  the  least  remarkable  feature  of  the  Furnivall  case  is  the  effect 
it  appears  to  have  had  on  J.  H.  Round's  opinions  regarding  baronies  by 
writ.  Writing  in  1910  on  the  possibility  of  a  Barony  of  Furnivall  being 
claimed  {Peerage  and  Pedigree,  vol.  i,  p.  274)  he  said  :  '  In  this  case,  there- 
fore, also  we  might  learn  if  the  heiress  of  a  non-existent  barony  could 
transmit  that  barony  to  her  husband.'  In  an  article  in  the  Quarterly 
Review,  July  1915,  entitled  '  Recent  Peerage  Cases ',  he  discussed  the 
Furnivall  case,  and  wrote  of  Thomas  de  Furnivall,  summoned  to  Parliament 
in  1295, '  and  indeed  to  the  lay  mind  even  of  a  critical  historian,  it  would  cer- 
tainly seem  clear  that  he  and  his  heirs  were  peers'.  [The  italics  are  mine. — 
H.A.D.]  Those  who  looked  to  him  as  a  leader  in  the  cause  of  truth  which  the 
modern  school  of  history  seeks  to  promote  may  well  exclaim, '  Et  tu,  Brute ! ' 

"  Quarterly  Review,  July  1915,  no.  444,  p.  69.  **  Ibid.,  ut  supra. 

Hh  2 


468  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

It  is  unfortunate  that  this  criticism  compels  one  to  impugn  either 
the  intelligence  or  the  bona  fides  of  Mr.  Doubleday.  For  the 
reader  will  be  greatly  surprised  to  learn  that  instead  of  its  having 
been  left  for  him  to  reveal  my  alleged  contradiction,  by  bringing 
the  above  passages  together,  I  myself  had  actually  done  so  in 
the  Quarterly  article,  from  which  he  quotes  (pp.  68-9).  I  myself 
had  there  repeated  the  passage  in  Peerage  and  Pedigree,  with  the 
further  words  : 

and  how  a  barony  can  be  '  vested  in '  a  man  in  right  of  his  wife,*^  when 
there  was  no  recognized  barony,  as  the  laiv  is  now  settled,  to  which  she  could 
have  succeeded. 

Worse  still,  in  order  to  produce  the  appearance  of  contradiction, 
Mr.  Doubleday  has  gone  so  far  as  to  suppress  deliberately  the 
words  which  follow  the  passage  he  has  placed  in  italic  type. 
They  are  these  : 

Yet  such  a  conclusion  from  the  evidence  is,  if  historically  right,  wrong 
in  strictness  of  law.  We  had  here,  in  fact,  one  instance  the  more  that 
'  hard  cases  make  bad  law '.  No  one  would  allege  that  a  royal  charter 
is  a  '  record  of  Parliament ',  or  that  those  who  witnessed  it  are  thereby 
proved  to  have  taken  part  in  '  a  parliamentary  proceeding  '.  Wishing  to 
do  substantial  justice,  their  lordships  were  resolved  that  petitioner  should 
not  suffer  for  the  want  of  that  technical  proof  of  sitting  which  the  law, 
as  long  settled,  undoubtedly  requires  (p.  69). 

It  is  impossible,  I  submit,  for  any  candid  reader  to  mistake  my 
meaning  or  to  discover  any  contradiction  between  my  earlier 
and  my  later  statement,  which  appear  side  by  side  in  the  Quarterly 
Review.  I  hold  as  strongly  as  ever  that  the  peerage  lawyer  is 
bound  to  deny  that  the  Furnivals  held  a  peerage  barony,  on 
account  of  the  fatal  absence  of  a  valid  *  proof  of  sitting  ',  but  I  also 
hold  that  the  '  critical  historian  '  would  be  satisfied  by  the  evidence 
that  the  Furnivals  '  were  peers  '.  For  the  need  of  '  a  proof  of 
sitting  '  was  a  doctrine  invented  by  lawyers  ;  the  historian  knows 
nothing  of  it  ;   it  troubles  him  not  at  all. 

It  is  precisely  because  the  Furnival  decision  illustrates 
forcibly  the  difference  between  the  historian's  point  of  view  anc 
that  of  the  peerage  lawyer  that  it  has  for  historical  students 
peculiar  an  interest.  No  one  should  be  more  alive  to  the  dis^ 
tinction  and,  therefore,  to  my  real  position  than  Mr.  Doubledai 
himself,  for  he  heads  his  treatise  '  Earldoms  and  Baronies 
history  and  in  law  ',  as  if  to  accentuate  the  difference  between  the 
two  points  of  view.  This,  indeed,  is  his  thesis.*^  Of  the  arguments 
on  which  in  the  Furnival  case  the  committee  based  their  decision 

^^  This  I  took  from  my  Peerage  arid  Pedigree  (i.  274). 

*^  e.  g.  p.  686  :  '  So  little  is  the  historical  atmosphere  of  early  times  in  England 
understood  by '  peerage  lawyers,  &c. 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  469 

— the  rationes  decidendi — the  principal  one  was  that  Thomas  de 
Furnival,  who  had  been  summoned  to  the  parliament  of  Carlisle 
in  35  Edw.  I,  is  found  at  Carlisle,  as  a  witness  to  a  royal  charter, 
16  March  1306/7.  The  late  Lord  Ashbourne,  who  took  the  lead  *' 
in  the  judgements,  argued  thus  : 

There  is  also  another  circumstance  that  would  go  to  show  or  makes  it 
highly  probable  that  the  first  Lord  [sic]  Furnivall  did  sit  in  ParUament. 
His  name  is  not  returned  in  the  list  [sic],  but  a  Parliament  was  held  at 
Carlisle,  and  that  was  not  near  his  home,  for  he  was  a  Norfolk  [sic]  man  ; 
he  was  at  Carlisle,  the  place  where  ParHament  was  held,  and  where  he 
was  summoned  to  attend  a  Parliament,  and  he  took  part  in  attesting 
a  document  there  (Minutes,  &c.,  p,  28). 

I  agree.  With  this  evidence  before  him  ^^  an  historian  would 
certainly  deem  it  '  highly  probable  '  that  Thomas  did  attend  this 
parliament  at  Carlisle.  The  essence  of  the  argument  is  that 
Carlisle  *  was  not  near  his  home  ',  so  that  he  would  not  be  found 
there  except  for  some  reason.  His  attendance  at  parliament 
would  supply  that  reason. 

Although,  as  we  have  seen,  Mr.  Doubleday  tells  us  that  '  he 
has  to  thank  .  .  .  the  officers  of  the  House  of  Lords  for  many 
courtesies  '  (p.  651),  and  although  he  '  is  indebted  '  to  them  in 
the  Furnival  case  '  for  the  use  of  the  transcript  of  the  shorthand 
notes  '  (p.  721),  he  shows  his  gratitude  by  sarcastically  stating 
that  '  when  we  turn  to  the  judgements  delivered  we  find  the 
same  laxity  :  the  facts  apparently  did  not  matter  '  (p.  721). 
I  should  be  the  last  to  deny  that  the  *  judgements  '  invite  criti- 
cism ;  but  let  us  at  least  be  fair.  He  seizes  on  the  lapsus  linguae 
*  for  he  was  a  Norfolk  man  '  as  ground  for  this  comment : 

Needless  to  say,  he  was  not  a  Norfolk  man,  but  came  from  Sheffield, 
a  fact  that  was  constantly  referred  to  in  the  hearing  of  the  case.  That  an 
argument  which  greatly  influenced  their  Lordships'  decision  was  based 
on  a  false  assumption  did  not  disturb  the  Committee's  equanimity.  The 
mistake  was  mentioned  after  the  judgements  were  given,  but  no  one 
worried  about  such  a  trifle  (p.  722). 

To  those  familiar  with  the  map  of  England  it  will  be  obvious 
that  the  argument  in  question  is  not  affected  by  the  slip.  If 
Sheffield  was  the  seat  of  Thomas  de  Eurnival,  then  it  remains 
no  less  a  fact  that  Carlisle  '  was  not  near  his  home  '  ;  it  was 
indeed  remote  therefrom,  owing  to  physical  obstacles  no  less  than 
to  distance.  If  Mr.  Doubleday  had  wished  to  criticize  the  judge- 
ments and  had  understood  the  matter  sufficiently  to  do  so,  he 
could  have  added  to  what  he  says  of  the  unhappy  statements 
for  which  Lord  Shaw  was  responsible,  that  learned  lord's  con- 

"  As  former  Lord  Chancellor  of  Ireland. 
*®  It  is  somewhat  loosely  here  summarized. 


470  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  October 

fident  citation  of  '  the  Close  Roll  of  Parliament '  [sic]  for  1383, 
and  his  assertion  that  he  had  looked  also  at  '  the  Parliament  Roll 
for  that  Parliament '  and  had  there  found  the  name  of  '  Le  Sire 
de  Furnivall ' ;  *^  this  was  a  really  vital  blunder  on  account  of 
the  stress  his  lordship  laid  on  the  alleged  fact.  For  not  only  is 
there  no  such  entry  on  '  the  Parliament  Roll  for  that  Parliament ' 
(7  Ric.  II),  but  not  till  21  Ric.  II  is  such  an  entry  found.^^ 

Returning  to  my  critic's  allegation  that  I  have  changed  my 
view  in  consequence  of  the  Furnival  decision,  it  is  possible  that 
the  real  reason  for  Mr.  Doubleday's  despair  is  that  I  think  it 
clear,  to  an  historian,  that  the  four  Furnivals  '  were  peers  '. 
I  repeat  that  statement  without  any  reservation.  An  historian  ^^ 
would  agree  with  Lord  Ashbourne  in  thinking  '  that  the  earlier 
Furnivalls  were  not  only  summoned  to  every  parliament,^^  })^i 
the  circumstances  go  to  show^  a  tremendous  probability  [sic]  that 
they  actually  sat  in  parliament  '.^^  If  so,  they  must  have  been 
'  peers  '  ;  for,  as  historians  of  course  know — though  my  critic, 
incredible  as  it  may  appear,  seems  to  be  actually  ignorant  of  the 
fact — barons  of  parliament  were  '  piers  de  la  terre  '  at  least  as 
early  as  1321,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  lifetime  of  the  first  summoned 
Furnival  {d.  1332).  Mr.  Pike  admits  that  '  English  Peers  first 
spoke  of  themselves  as  Peers  of  the  Realm  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  II  '.s*  The  word  is  again  used  in  4  Edward  III,  1330,^^ 
when  Simon  de  Beresford's  case  came  before  the  peers,  and  in 
Archbishop  Stratford's  case  (1341)  *  les  piers  de  la  terre  '  claimed 
to  be  judged  only  '  en  pleyn  parlement  et  devant  les  piers  '.  It 
is  needless  to  multiply  examples.  As  for  my  critic,  I  am  not 
aware  quo  waranto  pillarium  levavit,  but  I  am  proud  to  know 
that  I  there  stand  by  the  side  of  my  old  master,  Stubbs.  Dealing 
with  the  reign  of  Edward  I  and  his  *  hereditary  summoning  of 
a  large  proportion  of  great  vassals  ',  he  wrote  thus  : 

It  is  to  this  body  of  select  hereditary  barons,  joined  with  the  prelates, 
that  the  term  '  peers  of  the  land  '  properly  belongs,  .  .  .  which  before  the 
middle  of  the  fourteenth  century  had  obtained  general  recognition  as 
descriptive  of  the  members  of  the  house  of  lords.^^  .  .  .  The  estate  of  thej 
peerage  is  identical  with  the  house  of  lords. 

*9  Minutes,  p.  29. 

^"  It  was  not  even  claimed  on  behalf  of  the  petitioner  that  there  was  such  an  enti 
earlier  than  this  {Case,  p.  8  ;   Minutes^  p.  87). 

^^  I  have  (as  usual)  to  guard  myself  against  this  statement  being  turned  agair 
me  by  peerage  counsel. 

^-  I  make  only  the  reservation  expressed  on  p.  464,  note  36,  above. 

^^  Minutes,  p.  28.  "  Op.  cit.,  p.  109  ;   see  also  pp.  157-8. 

^^  '  Et  est  assentu  et  acorde,  par  nostre  seigneur  le  roi  et  tous  les  grantz  en  pleyn 
parlement  qe  tut  soit  il  que  les  ditz  peres  .  .  .  que  par  tant  les  ditz  peres  que  ore  sont,  ou 
les  peres  qui  serront  en  temps  a  venir,  ne  soient  mes  tenuz  ...  a  rendre  juggement 
sur  autres  que  sur  leur  peres  \  &c. 

"  Const.  Hist.  ii.  (1875),  183-4. 


1918  'BARONS'  AND  'PEERS'  471 

And  again  : 

The  house  consisted  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  temporal,  the  *  prelatz 
et  autres  grantz  '  ...  all  the  '  grantz  '  summoned  in  the  class  of  barons 
were  no  doubt  peers.^' 

I  apprehend  that  those  who  desire  that  '  truth  which  the  modern 
school  of  history  seeks  to  promote  \^^  will  turn  for  it  rather  to 
the  lips  of  Stubbs  than  to  those  of  Mr.  Doubleday. 

I  feel  that  I  cannot  close  without  some  protest  against  the 
use  that  Mr.  Doubleday  has  made  of  the  works  of  others.  In  his 
arguments  one  recognizes  too  often  those  which  he  has  taken 
from  Mr.  Pike  or  from  myself.  It  seems,  to  say  the  least,  un- 
gracious, when  making  use  of  Mr.  Pike's  argument  for  the  state 
ment  that  the  son  and  heir  of  an  earl  did  not  succeed  his  father ' 
as  earl  till  he  had  been  girt  with  the  sword  of  the  earldom, ^^  to 
confine  his  acknowledgement  to  the  comment  that  '  Pike  .  .  . 
has  confused  William  de  Mandeville,  3rd  Earl  of  Essex,  who 
d.  s.  p.  1189,  with  Geoffrey  de  Mandeville,  1st  Earl,  who  d. 
1144  '  (p.  666).  It  will,  I  suppose,  be  admitted  that  I  can  speak 
with  authority  on  Earl  Geoffrey  and  his  family,^^  when  I  say 
definitely  that  Mr.  Pike  was  here  guilty  of  no  confusion  at  all. 
Again,  I  naturally  object  to  being  cited  for  certain  facts,  but  not 
for  others,  as  if  the  latter  were  not  taken  from  my  works.  It  is 
true  that  at  the  outset  (p.  651)  my  critic  makes  a  general  'acknow- 
ledgment of  the  debt  which  he  owes  to  '  them  ;  but  occasional 
references  are  misleading  to  the  reader.  To  one  example  I  desire 
to  draw  special  attention.  In  my  Studies  in  Peerage  and  Family 
History  (pp.  363-5)  I  dealt  with  the  striking  contradiction  between 
the  determination  of  the  Windsor  abeyance  in  1855  and  the 
dates  assigned  to  other  baronies  created  at  the  same  period  by 
the  committee  for  privileges,  when  the  cases  came  before  them. 
The  Windsor  abeyance  had  never  come  before  the  committee  at 
all.  Mr.  Doubleday,  however,  does  not  cite  me,  but  charges 
the  committee  'in  the  case  of  Burgh'  (1912)  with  having  'upset 
a  previous  decision  in  the  Windsor  case  '  (p.  723).  There  was 
no  '  decision  '  on  Windsor,  because  there  was  no  '  case  '.  The 
moral  of  this  last  example  of  Mr.  Doubleday's  accuracy  would 
seem  to  be  that  critics  should  make  sure  of  their  facts,  and  that, 
if  one  must  plagiarize,  it  is  well  to  plagiarize  with  care. 

J,  H.  Round. 

"  Ibid.  iii.  (1878),  432,  440.  ^«  See  above,  p.  467. 

^*  Pike,  op.  cit.,  p.  61.  The  source  of  Mr.  Doubleday's  information  is  evident 
from  his  repetition  of  Mr.  Pike's  error  in  writing  of  '  Michaelmas  term  in  the  fifteenth 
year  of  John's  reign  (a.  d.  1214)'.  For  he  states  that  this  took  place  'in  1214', 
which  afEects  the  argument. 

^°  See,  not  only  my  Geoffrey  de  Mandeville,  but  the  long  passage  on  his  successors 
cited  from  my  Ancient  Charters  by  Mr.  Doubleday  on  pp.  665-6. 


472  October 


The  Navy  tender  Henry   VII 

THE  condition  of  affairs  in  Europe,  and  the  policy  of 
Henry  VII,  rendered  it  unnecessary  for  that  monarch  to 
maintain  a  powerful  navy.  His  naval,  like  his  foreign  poHcy, 
was  one  of  consolidation  rather  than  extension.  It  is  true  that 
he  was  the  first  Enghsh  sovereign  who  mixed  to  any  considerable 
extent  in  general  European  politics  :  but  he  did  so  from  necessity, 
not  from  choice  ;  for  the  safe  preservation  of  his  kingdom,  not 
from  motives  of  aggrandisement.  He  aimed  at  rendering  secure 
the  throne  which  he  had  won  ;  and  desired  neither  territorial 
acquisitions  nor  the  power  to  dictate  to,  or  to  be  deferred  to  by, 
the  countries  of  Europe.  Almost  the  sole  function  which  the 
navy  was  called  upon  to  perform  was  the  transport  of  troops  to 
the  Continent  or  the  outlying  parts  of  Britain,  on  such  expedi- 
tions as  the  sovereign  was  forced  to  undertake  for  the  security 
of  the  kingdom  :  with  the  policing  of  the  seas  against  pirates 
Henry  troubled  himself  little.  The  transport  of  troops  to  the 
Continent  he  was  able  to  undertake  without  opposition  ;  for  with 
Brittany  friendly  or  neutral,  there  was  nothing  to  be  feared  from 
France  at  sea.  When,  indeed,  Charles  VIII  married  Anne, 
Duchess  of  Brittany,  in  1491,  and  thereby  incorporated  the  duchy 
in  the  kingdom  of  France,  he  gained  a  valuable  addition  to  his 
naval  strength,  in  the  ports  and  dockyards  of  Brittany,  and  in 
the  Breton  seamen,  whose  value  to  the  fleets  of  France  at  that 
time  may  be  compared  with  that  of  the  men  of  Devon  to  the 
Elizabethan  navy,  and  the  Biscayan  fishermen  to  the  fleets  of^ 
Philip  II  of  Spain.  But  the  activities  of  the  French  king  wei 
mainly  directed  towards  the  Mediterranean  ;  and  in  any  case] 
Henry  VII  had  no  more  intention  of  becoming  committed  tc 
a  prolonged  struggle  with  France,  than  had  Charles  of  enterii 
upon  a  war  with  England.  Henry  is  presented  to  us  by  historiai 
as  grasping,  and  his  rule  as  hard  ;  but  if  he  added  few  ships  only' 
to  the  navy,  and  made  but  small  use  of  it,  at  least  he  carried  on 
the  policy  of  the  Yorkist  kings  of  setting  up  a  compact  and  well 
equipped  force.  He  granted  a  bounty  on  the  building  of  merchant 
ships,  and  he  constructed  the  first  permanent  dry  dock  known 
to  have  been  built  in  this  country. 

From  early  times  the  English  sovereigns  had  been  responsible 


1918  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII  473 

for  the  safe  keeping  of  the  seas,  and  certain  dues,  the  principal 
of  which  were  tunnage  and  poundage,  were  granted  to  them 
for  the  maintenance  of  a  force  of  ships  for  this  purpose.  The 
royal  ships  formed  merely  the  nucleus  of  the  navy,  which  was 
brought  up  to  the  required  strength,  in  a  time  when  merchant 
vessels  differed  little  from,  and  were  easily  converted  into,  fighting 
ships,  by  the  exercise  of  the  prerogative  of  impressment  of 
merchantmen  when  offensive  operations  were  to  be  undertaken 
overseas.  The  system  dislocated  and  hampered  trade,  particu- 
larly in  the  case  of  a  long  war.  Communication  was  slow  and 
difficult,  and  fleets  took  a  long  time  to  assemble.  Irregularities 
in  connexion  with  impressment  frequently  occurred.  There 
were  complaints,  for  example,  of  ships  being  impressed  long 
before  they  were  required  ;  and  no  doubt  these  complaints  were 
not  unreasonable.  For  once  a  merchant  vessel  got  to  sea  on 
a  voyage  she  was  lost  to  the  kingdom  for  an  appreciable  period  : 
unscrupulous  commissioners  would  naturally  therefore  be  inclined 
to  impress  recklessly,  lest  some  eligible  ship  should  escape  service. 
Under  Henry  VI  the  royal  navy  had  ceased  to  exist ;  one  of  the 
first  acts  of  the  Protector  and  Council  of  Regency  being  to  order 
the  sale  of  the  crown  ships,  and  the  administration  of  the  navy 
thereafter  carried  out  by  contracts  entered  into  with  various 
ship  owners  or  persons  of  rank.  The  system  was  never  altered 
during  his  reign,  owing  largely  to  the  king's  financial  difficulties 
consequent  upon  the  war  with  France  and  the  Civil  War,  which 
rendered  it  impossible  for  him  to  find  the  necessary  money. 
Under  Edward  IV  the  royal  navy  was  reconstituted  and  a  definite 
policy  adopted,  which  was  continued  by  Richard  III  ;  so  that, 
with  the  crown,  Henry  VII  succeeded  also  to  a  small  but  sufficient 
navy. 

From  the  reign  of  Edward  IV  came  four  ships — the  Gracedieu, 
Mary  of  the  Tower,  Trinity,  and  Falcon.  The  date  of  the  entry 
of  the  Gracedieu  into  the  royal  navy  is  unknown,  neither  is  it 
certain  whether  she  was  constructed  by  Edward  IV  or  bought ;  ^ 
and  if  the  latter,  whether  she  was  an  old  or  a  new  ship  at  the  time. 
But  in  1473  she  underwent  an  extensive  refit.  Her  service  in 
the  fleet  of  Henry  VII  lasted  only  two  years,  for  in  1487  she  was 
broken  up  and  her  '  Stuff  takle  and  Aparaill  ordinaunces  artillaries 
&  Abilaments  of  werre  '  were  '  dehuered  ...  to  Sir  Raynold  Bray 
Knyght  by  the  Kyngs  high  Comaundment  by  him  to  be  broken 
spent  and  emploid  for  and  upon  the  makyng  of  his  ship  cald  the 
Souueraine.'2  The  Mary  of  the  Tower  was  the  Carrach  of 
Edward  IV,^  a  Spanish  vessel  purchased  in  1478.     The  price  paid, 

^  It  is  not  on  record  that  Edward  IV  constructed  any  vessels  in  his  own  yards. 
2  Chapter  House  Book  vii,  printed  for  the  Navy  Records  Society  by  M.  Oppenheim, 
Accounts  and  Inventories  of  Henry  VII.  ^  '  Carraquon  '  or  '  Carycon  '. 


474  THE  NAVY   UNDER  HENRY   VII         October 

£100,  indicates  that  she  cannot  have  been  a  new  ship  at  the  time. 
How  or  when  the  Trinity  and  Falcon  were  obtained  by  Edward  IV 
is  not  known. 

Of  the  ships  added  to  the  navy  by  Richard  III  two  at  least 
descended  to  his  successor,  namely  the  Martin  Garsia  and  the 
Governor,  the  latter  having  been  purchased  for  £600  in  1485  from 
Thomas  Grafton  and  two  others.*  She  had  an  existence  of  only 
three  years  in  the  royal  navy. 

Six  ships  are  known  to  have  been  added  to  the  royal  navy  by 
Henry  VII.  Of  these  Le  Prise,  renamed  Margaret,  was,  as  her 
name  denotes,  a  capture  from  the  French  (during  the  expedition 
which  was  undertaken  for  the  protection  of  Brittany  in  1490)  : 
one,  the  Caravel  of  Ewe  (the  Mary  and  John  of  Henry  VIII)  was 
a  purchase  ;  and  the  remaining  four  were  of  new  construction. 
The  first  ship  to  be  built  by  Henry  VII,  after  his  accession,  was 
the  Regent,  constructed  by  WiUiam  Bond  on  the  Rother,  in  Kent, 
a  then  tidal  river.  The  king's  instructions  were  to  the  effect 
that  she  was  to  be  made  on  the  model  of  a  certain  French  ship 
which  Henry  had  perhaps  seen  and  noted  during  his  exile.  She 
was  to  have  been  of  600  tons,  but  her  actual  tonnage  on  com- 
pletion is  not  known.  Six  hundred  tons  was  a  great  size  for  an 
English  warship  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  ;  but  there 
is  noticeable  in  the  other  two  Tudor  sovereigns  who  took  an  active 
interest  in  the  navy,  namely  Henry  VTII  and  Elizabeth,  the 
tendency  to  build  at  least  a  few  huge  ships  ;  and  this  not  alone 
from  motives  of  display — certainly  not  in  the  case  of  Henry  VIII — 
but  on  account  of  the  moral  effect  in  action  of  these  great  vessels. 
A  second  motive  may  be  found  in  the  use  to  which  the  Tudor 
sovereigns  did  not  disdain  to  put  their  ships  in  time  of  peace, 
namely  hiring  them  out  to  merchants  for  trading  voyages.  Since 
they  were  better  able  than  merchantmen  to  cope  with  pirates 
whose  depredations  constituted  one  of  the  dangers  of  the  sea, 
these  large  ships  were  doubtless  in  considerable  request  by 
merchants,  more  particularly  since  the  crown  was  in  a  position 
to  let  them  out  cheaply.  The  construction  of  the  Sovereign  from 
the  timbers  of  the  Gracedieu  proceeded  coincidently  with  that 
of  the  Regent.  The  remaining  two  vessels  built  by  Henry  were 
the  Sweepstake  and  the  Mary  Fortune.  Both  date  from  1497 
and  cost  £120  Zs.  2d.  and  £110  175.  Od.  respectively.  ^  Their 
tonnage  is  not  known,  but,  though  both  were  three  masted,  they 
were  small  ships,  being  described  as  '  barks  '.  Other  ships  have 
been  credited  by  different  authorities  to  the  navy  of  Henry  VI 
on  the  strength  of  their  being  designated  '  king's  ships  '.     It  was. 


*  Oppenheim,  Administration  of  the  Royal  Navy,  p.  34. 
^  Augmentation  OjB&ce  Book,  no.   316,  printed  in  Accounts  and  Inventories  of 
Henry  VII. 


e 


1918 


THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII 


475 


however,  the  fashion  so  to  describe  vessels  taken  up  temporarily 
for  the  service  of  the  crown. 

The  navy  list,  then,  of  Henry  VII,  as  far  as  it  is  known,  is  as 
follows  : 


Added  to  the  navy. 
By  Edward  IV 
Bought  1478 
By  Edward  IV 

By  Kichard  III 
Bought  January  1485 
Le  Prise,  1490 
Built  1487 

Bought  by  Henry  VII 
Built  1497 


Put  out  of  service. 
Broken  up  1487 
Disappears  after  1496  ^ 
»      1503 

}»  }j  J) 

1485' 

Disappears  after  1488  ^ 
»      1503  6 
Descended  to  Henry  VIII 


Ship. 
Gracedieu 
Mary  of  the  Tower 
Trinity 
Falcon 

Martin  Garsia 
Governor 

Margaret,  of  Dieppe 
Regent 
Sovereign 
Caravel  of  Ewe 
Sweepstake 
Mary  Fortune 

Henry  VII  recognized  the  dependence  of  the  crown  upon  the 
merchant  marine.  Merchant  vessels  formed  the  greater  part  of 
every  fleet  which  was  got  together  for  offensive  or  defensive 
operations  of  war  ;  and  their  role  was  not  necessarily  confined  to 
the  merely  passive  one  of  transport  and  supply.  In  order  there- 
fore to  encourage  the  production  of  merchant  vessels  fit  to  be 
taken  up  for  war  service,  Henry  made  a  practice  of  giving  a  bounty 
on  new  construction.  In  so  doing  he  was  creating  no  precedent, 
for  a  bounty  is  known  to  have  been  paid  as  early  as  1449  ;  but 
it  was  not  until  the  time  of  Henry  VII  that  payment  became  in 
any  way  regular,  as  it  must  necessarily  be,  if  the  purpose  of 
stimulating  production  was  to  be  achieved.  It  is  possible  that 
during  his  exile  abroad  Henry  had  seen  the  working  of  some 
Spanish  system  of  bounties  ;  ^  for  there  is  presumptive  evidence 
that  one  was  in  force  before  1485.  The  scale  of  the  bounty  as 
paid  by  Henry  was  not  systematic.  It  ranged  as  high  as  five 
shiUings  a  ton  (the  usual  rate  under  Henry  VIII  and  EHzabeth). 
It  was  paid  only  on  large  ships,  though  it  is  not  known  where  the 
line  of  demarkation,  if  any,  was  drawn  between  vessels  fit  or 
otherwise  for  crown  service  by  virtue  of  their  size,  but  it  must 
have  been  somewhere  near  80  or  100  tons.  The  bounty  is  also 
known  to  have  been  paid  on  ships  purchased  from  foreign  owners. 

Henry's  encouragement  of  the  merchant  marine  showed  itself 
in  other  ways  besides  the  payment  of  the  bounty.     During  the 

^  Oppenheim,  Boyal  Navy,  p.  35. 

'  '  Deliuered  to  Sir  Richard  Guldeford  Knyght  to  have  of  the  Kynges  yift  by 
vertue  of  a  warraunt  vnder  the  Kynges  signet  .  .  .  directed  the  xxiijth.  day  of  the 
said  Month  of  Decembre  the  first  yere  of  ye  reigne  of  our  said  Souueraigne  lord  the 
Kyng  that  nowe  is'.  Chapter  House  Book  vii  [Accounts  and  Inventories  of 
Henry  VII)..  *  Oppenheim,  Royal  Navy,  p.  37. 


476  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII         October 

earlier  part  of  his  reign  various  navigation  acts  were  passed,  the 
general  purpose  of  which  was  that  goods  should  only  be  imported 
in  English  ships  manned  by  English  seamen.  That  he  realized 
the  importance  of  a  large  fishing  population  upon  which  to  draw 
for  crews,  is  shown  by  the  annulling,  in  1506,  of  the  treaty  which 
gave  to  foreigners  the  right  of  fishing  in  English  waters. 

The  discoveries  which  were  being  made  in  America  at  this 
period,  while  increasing  the  importance  of  the  ports  on  the  south 
and  west  coasts  of  England,  affected  the  country  little  in  other 
ways.  England  was  at  that  time  too  poor  to  indulge  in  coloniza- 
tion, and  not  sufficiently  strong  to  risk  the  inevitable  encounter 
with  Spain  which  would  have  resulted  had  English  discoverers 
persisted  in  attempts  to  open  up  territory  in  the  New  World. 
And  Henry's  object  was  to  avoid  embroihng  the  country  in  war 
with  foreign  powers. 

Mention  has  been  made  of  the  crown  prerogative  of  taking  up 
merchant  vessels  in  time  of  war  or  emergency.  Under  Henry  VII 
the  rate  of  hire  was  a  shilling  for  a  ton  per  month.  Beyond  the 
appointment  of  a  captain  and  a  few  officers,  the  putting  of  soldiers 
and  gunners  on  board,  and  the  mounting  of  extra  guns,  little  was 
required  to  convert  the  merchant  ship  of  that  period  into  an 
effective  fighting  unit.  Warrants  for  the  delivery  of  ordnance 
stores  for  arming  a  merchant  vessel,  the  Isle  of  Jersey,  employed 
on  the  royal  service  in  1486,  show  that  8  serpentines  and  201 
pounds  of  powder  were  put  aboard.  ^  In  1488  to  each  of  two 
ships  of  240  and  140  tons  respectively,  nine  guns  were  dehvered 
out  of  the  king's  storehouse  at  Greenwich,  and  six  to  a  third  ship, 
of  220  tons.  In  the  same  expedition  '  ccc  shefes  '  of  arrows  were 
dehvered  'towards  the  enarmyng  of  iij  Spaynard  Shippes  ap- 
pointed to  the  see  in  the  said  Armye  '.  It  was  part  of  Henry's 
policy  to  hire  Spanish  ships  for  his  expeditions,  even  when 
EngHsh  merchant  vessels  were  available  and  the  king's  ships  not 
all  employed  ;  and  this  although  the  rate  of  hire  paid  was,  durin 
at  least  part  of  the  reign,  double  that  for  native  ships.  It  hai 
been  suggested  that  he  saw  in  it  a  minor  way  of  knitting  togethe 
the  ties  connecting  England  with  Spain,  and  that  he  experience 
difficulty  at  times  in  obtaining  ships  at  home  owing  to  the  un 
willingness  of  merchants  and  owners  to  lend  them  :  there  wi 
continual  friction  between  the  crown  and  the  owners  as  to  the 
amounts  due  to  the  latter  at  a  period  when  the  calculation  of 
ships'  tonnage  was  a  matter  bristling  with  difficulties.  It  is 
possible,  however,  that  Henry  understood  the  evils  of  a  system 
which  by  taking  merchantmen  away  from  their  legitimate  business 
dislocated  trade.     In  addition  to  hiring,  Henry  attempted  to 

'  Chapter  House  Book  vii  (Accounts  and  Inventories  of  Henry  VII). 


1918  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII  477 

purchase  Spanish  ships,  a  cheaper  measure,  perhaps,  than  building 
for  himself.  In  this,  however,  he  was  unsuccessful ;  and  it  is 
possible  that  there  existed  ordinances  prohibiting  the  sale  to 
foreigners  of  Spanish  merchant  vessels.  The  armament  carried  by 
merchantmen  when  engaged  upon  their  ordinary  avocations  seems 
sometimes  to  have  sufficed  when  the  ships  were  taken  up  for  the 
king's  service  ;  for  according  to  a  '  declaracion  ...  of  all  the 
Ordinaunce  Artillaries  &  Abillamentes  of  warre  ...  for  the  Fur- 
nysshing  and  Enarmyng  of  our  Soveraigne  lorde  the  Kynges 
Shippes  appointed  for  to  serve  the  Kyng  in  hys  most  noble  Army 
on  the  See  Ayenste  the  Auncyent  enemies  and  Rebelles  of  Scot- 
land '  in  the  year  1497,  seven  merchantmen  were  supplied  with 
powder  and  shot  only  in  addition  to  bows  and  arrows,  '  bylles  ', 
and  *  speres  \^^ 

Like  his  two  predecessors,  but  unlike  his  successor,  Henry  VII 
was  content  that  his  navy  should  be  administered  by  a  single 
official,  the  Keeper  or  Clerk  of  the  Ships.  It  was  by  no  means 
the  rule,  however,  for  all  payments  in  connexion  with  the  royal 
ships  to  be  made  through  this  official.  The  building  of  ships  and 
the  purchase  of  victuals  and  stores  was  frequently  given  to  persons 
other  than  the  Clerk  of  the  Ships — persons,  perhaps,  whom  the 
king  wished  to  repay  for  some  service  rendered.  Neither  the 
Regent  nor  the  Sovereign,  for  example,  the  two  largest 
vessels  constructed  under  Henry  VII,  were  built  by  Thomas 
Roger,  the  then  Clerk  of  the  Ships  :  the  former  was  built  by  Sir 
Richard  Guildford,  Master  of  the  Ordnance,  and  the  latter  by 
Sir  Reginald  Bray,  Treasurer  at  War.  The  refitting  of  the 
Sovereign  in  1486  was  carried  out  by  Henry  Palmer,  a  Clerk  of  the 
Exchequer,  who  '  kepith  the  hole  Accompt  &  Rekinnyng  of  the 
newe  makyng  of  the  said  Ship  And  the  said  Thomas  Rogers  ne 
his  seruants  were  neuer  as  yet  privee  ne  dealing  with  the  same.'  ^^ 
In  May,  June,  and  July  of   the    same   year  'the   somme   of 

XX 

Dciiijxiiijli  iijs  iiijd  '  12  and  '  the  somme  of  xxx^i '  were  '  paid  at 
Harwich  vnto  Thomas  Brandon  &  his  cumpeyny  Capitaynes  of 
the  Kynges  flete  vpon  the  See  ...  for  the  Wages  &  vittail 
of  sundrie  marriners  &  soldiors  there  reteyned  in  the  Kyngs 
seruice  '. 

The  Thomas  Roger  or  Rogers  just  mentioned,  a  London 
merchant,  had  been  Clerk  of  the  Ships  under  Edward  IV  and 
Richard  III.  He  continued  in  office  under  Henry  ViX  until  his 
death  in  1488.     By  a  patent  dated  21  February  1486  he  was  to 

1"  Augmentation  Office  Book,  no.  316.     (ibid.) 
"  Chapter  House  Book  vii.     (ibid.) 

XX 

"  The  sum  of  £694  3s.  4:d.,  iiij  being  a  method  of  writing  80. 


478 


THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY   VII 


October 


remain  in  office  for  the  term  of  his  life.  Pay  was  granted  him  at 
the  rate  of  a  shilling  a  day  for  himself  and  sixpence  for  a  clerk,  with 
three  shillings  a  day  for  travelling  expenses  when  upon  the  king's 
business.  He  was  succeeded  by  William  Comersall.  Why  the 
appointment  of  the  latter  terminated  is  not  clear,  but  by  a 
patent  dated  19  May  1495  his  successor,  Robert  Brygandyne, 
commenced  accounting  from  the  first  of  that  month.  The 
salary  remained  the  same  in  each  case.  Brygandyne  was  in 
office  during  the  rest  of  this,  and  for  several  years  of  the 
succeeding  reign. 

There  is  no  record  of  the  entire  expenditure  on  the  navy 
during  the  reign  of  Henry  VII.  The  accounts  of  the  Clerk  of  the 
Ships  for  two  separate  periods,  namely  from  29  September  1485 
to  20  February  1488,  and  from  May  1495  to  December  1497,  are, 
however,  available  .^^  During  the  first  period  the  receipts  were 
£1,864  Us.  3d.  and  the  expenditure  £1,814  Us.  Sd.,  of  which  latter 
sum  £787  85.  5c?.  did  not  pass  through  the  hands  of  the  Clerk  of 
the  Ships.     The  sum  of  £1,027  2s.  lOd.  for  which  Thomas  Roger 


accounts  was  expenaea  as  tollows  : 

£     s. 

d. 

Befitting  the  Mary  of  the  Tower  . 

174  16 

6i 

*  Forein  emptions  '  : 

8  iron  serpentines 

£800 

201  lbs.  gunpowder 

5    0    6 

2  cables  &  1  hawser,  2,739  lbs.  in  all, 

@  10  shillings  per  100  Ibs.i*    . 

13  13    9 

26  14 

3 

Ship  keeping  in  harbour  : 

Gracedieu    ..... 

56  19    0 

Mary  of  the  Tower 

39  14  10 

Governor      ..... 

19    2    8 

115  18 

215 

Wages  &  victualling  of  hired  ships 

715    0 

0 

Administrative  expenses  : 

Hire  of  storehouse  at  Greenwich     . 

12  12    8J 

Do.  in  London      .... 

1     6    6 

TraveUing  expenses  of  Exchequer 

Clerks 

6  14    6 

Keward  to  Spanish  ships  ^^    . 

20    0    0 

Stationery  for  the  office 

4    0    0 

44  13 

84 

£1,027    2  10 


171 


"  Chapter  House  Book  vii  and  Augmentation  Office  Book,  no.  316  {Accounts 
and  Inventories  of  Henry  VII). 

^*  This  calculation  is  not  exactly  correct. 

^5  The  accounts  frequently  do  not  balance. 

^«  '  Also  paid  by  the  Kynges  high  comaundment  to  diuers  Maisters  &  marriners 
belongyng  vnto  diuers  Shipps  of  Spayne  retejoied  to  do  the  Kyng  seruice  in  Keward 
because  of  their  long  abidyng  in  Thammys  without  wages  or  vittel  abiding  the  Kyngs 
voiage.'  "  This  total  should  be  £1,077  2s.  8d. 


1918 


THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII 


479 


The  expenditure  on  the  Mary  of  the  Tower  was  made  up  as 

follows  :  p     „   ^ 

£     s.  a, 

.     81    4    7 

.       6  17     1 

1       6    8    4 


Cables  of  sundrie  sortes 

yj 

Caggyng  ^^  cable 

Hauser     .... 

Takkes     .... 

jpayr 

Shets        .... 

J  payr 

Eopes  of  sundrie  sortes  made  o 

f 

the  Kynges  old  Kopes     . 

.     MMCCClb 

Saile  Twyne 

.     vj  skaynes 

Canuas     .... 

iij  boltes 

Anker      .         .         .         .         . 

j 

Seniles      .... 

ij 

Gonne  poudre  in  iij  barrels 

.     DCCiijlb. 

Mayne  meson  mast    . 

i 

Cokkesi9 

j 

Toppe  Armynge  of  Say  20  . 

] 

Shovilles  shod  .         .         .         . 

iiijdd^i 

Pitch  Kettell    . 

j 

Tymbre 

Pitch  &  Tarre  .         .         .         . 

j  last 

Ocum  (@  5J^.  per  stone)   . 

.     xl  stone 

Ship  hordes  22   . 

vij 

Nailes23  .         .         . 

Sundrie  necessaries  of  Irne 

Necessaries  24    . 

Wages.     Shipwrightes  at  vjd  da; 

Y 

Calkers  &  Marriners 

Vittel  of  Artificers  and  Marriners 

Expences     necessarie     (Freight 

boat  hire,  &c.) 

.       3  16    8 

3    4 

.       3    0    0 

.       5    6    8 

6    0 

.     17  11     6 

.       4    0    0 

.       4    6    8 

.       2    0    0 

16    0 

16    8 

.       12    8 

.       2    8    0 

18    4 

2    0 

3    3 

.       2    0    1* 

15  11 

.       4  16    6 

.     11     1     4 

.     12    3    9 

.       1  11     2 

£172  19  lOJ 

During  the  second  period  for  which  accounts  are  available, 
namely  from  May  1495  to  December  1497,  the  receipts  were 
£2,061  Zs.  lid.  and  the  expenditure  £2,061  I85.  Id.  The  latter 
sum  is  thus  accounted  for  : 

Cost  of  construction  of  dock,  dock  head,  and  gates  . 

The  Sovereign.     (Wages,  victualling,  docking  and  undock- 

ing,  refitting,  equipment,  stores,  repair  of  boats,  &c.)    . 
The     Regent.     (Wages,     victualling,     equipment,     stores, 

refit,  &c.) 

The  Sweepstake.     (  Edyfiyng  and  New  making  prouision  of 

Stuff  takle  and  apparell  with  other  Soundrie  Necessaries  ') 
The  Mary  Fortune.     (Similar  expenses)  .... 

£2,061  18    7 

"  Kedging.  i*  Boats. 

^"  A  kind  of  cloth.  The  top  arming  was  perhaps  of  the  Tudor  colours,  green  and 
white.  21  Four  dozen.  ^^  Planks  (for  the  boat). 

2'  '  CCC  iij  peny  nailes  ix'' ;  CO  iiij  peny  nailes  viij^ ;  CC  vj  peny  nailes  xij**  & 
C  X  peny  nailes  x^.' 

2*  1  quart  of  oil  6d  ;  450  billets  of  wood  3*. ;  |  cwt.  tallow  6*. ;  4  fleeces  for  making 
mops  for  laying  on  pitch  8d  ;  3  lbs.  yarn  for  the  same  purpose  3d  ;  '  thamending  of  the 
ketell  x^.' 


£       s. 
193    0 

d. 
6i 

595    6 

5 

1,042  11 

H 

120    3 
110  17 

2 
0 

480  THE  NAVY   UNDER  HENRY  VII         October 

Portsmouth  dock,  against  which  an  expenditure  of  £193  Os.  6id. 
appears  in  the  naval  accounts  for  1495-6,  is  the  first  dry  dock  of 
whose  construction  there  is  any  record  in  England.  Fifty  years 
previous  to  this  date  a  dock  was  merely  some  convenient  spot  on 
the  bank  of  an  estuary  or  tidal  river,  to  which  a  ship  was  brought 
at  high  tide,  and  then  dragged  as  far  up  on  the  mud  as  possible 
by  means  of  a  capstan  or  some  such  device.  At  low  tide  a  wall 
of  brushwood  and  puddled  clay  would  be  built  around  her,  and 
the  water  which  remained  or  found  its  way  inside  emptied  out 
by  means  of  buckets,  or  possibly  a  pump  might  have  been  em- 
ployed, as  was  done  at  the  Portsmouth  dock.  The  steps  by  which, 
in  the  course  of  half  a  century,  the  dock  developed  from  the 
primitive  arrangement  described  above  into  the  comparatively 
modern  structure  which  was  built  during  Brygandyne's  adminis- 
tration, are  not  known.  It  was  a  case  probably  of  natural 
development,  and  would  seem  to  have  taken  place  within  this 
country,  since  there  is  no  record  of  the  invention  or  introduction 
of  docks  into  the  country,  neither,  as  far  as  is  known,  were  foreign 
engineers  or  artificers  employed  about  the  construction  of  the 
dock  at  Portsmouth. 

The  dock  itself  was  lined  with  wood,  4,824  ft.  of  planks  being 
used  up  on  this  work  and  on  the  gates.  The  planks  were  nailed 
to  baulks  of  timber,  of  which  '  Clviij  lode  ',  at  '  xl  fote  to  the 
lode  '  25  were  '  receyved  owte  of  the  Kynges  wood  called  Hurst  '.^^ 
The  work  of  constructing  the  body  of  the  dock  occupied  twenty- 
four  weeks  from  14  June  1495,  and  the  labour  sheet  shows  that 
there  were  employed  some  five  each  of  carpenters  and  carters, 
twenty  to  twenty-five  labourers,  and  a  couple  of  sawyers,  the 
number  varjdng  from  week  to  week  ;  while,  with  the  exception 
of  some  of  the  labourers,  none  of  the  men  employed  seem  to  have 
worked  for  more  than  three  or  four  days  in  any  one  week.  Wages, 
victualling,  travelKng  expenses  of  workmen  brought  from  a  dis- 
tance, and  carriage  of  timber  for  the  twenty-four  weeks  amounted 
to  £124  2s.  S^d.  A  master  carpenter  received  6d.  per  diem,  car- 
penters 4d.,  sawyers  4:d.,  labourers  3d.  or  2d.  per  diem,  and  some 
Is.  a  week.  Carters  were  paid  2d.  a  day  and  2d.  for  each  horse, 
of  which  they  provided  two  apiece. 

The  precise  arrangement  of  the  dock  gates  is  obscure.  There 
were  two  gates,  an  inner  and  an  '  vtturmost '  ;  and  in  place  of 
a  caisson,  the  space  between  them  was  filled  with  clay  and  rubble, 
which  had  to  be  dug  out  in  order  to  permit  the  passage  of  a  ship. 
Mr.  Oppenheim  ^^  says  :  '  The  form  of  the  structure  was  probably 

25  Augmentation  Office  Book,  no.  316  {Accounts  arid  Inventories  of  Henry  VII). 

26  The  method  of  measuring  timber  is  to  multiply  the  length  by  the  quarter  girth 
(at  the  middle  point  of  the  tree)  and  subtract  a  sixth  for  bark  in  the  case  of  oak  and  elm. 

"  Accotmts  and  Inventories  of  Henry  VII ^  p.  xxxviii. 


1918  THE  NAVY   UNDER  HENRY   VII  481 


I  i       I  •     ^^^  ^^^  extent  of  the  space  between  the  gates, 

and  the  interval  between  the  leaves  and  the  opposite  walls  of  the 
dock,  as  shown  in  the  above  diagram,  are  matters  of  pure  guess- 
work.' 

The  dock  head  was  found,  probably  after  trial,  to  be  too  weak  ; 
for  on  8  July  1497,  strengthening  was  begun,  and  occupied 
eleven  weeks.  468  tons  of  '  grete  Rookes  and  Stones  '  and  196 
tons  of  gravel  were  used  on  the  work,  with  '  xij  oken  plankes  of 
xviij  fote  long  xij  ynch  brode  &  iiij  ynch  thyke  which  with  grete 
spikys  of  yron  befastyned  at  the  seid  dooke  hede  for  fortyfying 
of  the  same.'  The  cost  of  strengthening  the  dock  head  amounted 
to  £12  9s.  lOd. 

It  is  extremely  difficult  to  form  an  accurate  notion  of  the 
appearance  of  the  warships  of  the  time  from  such  contemporary 
representations  and  descriptions  as  have  descended  to  us.  The 
character  of  the  vessels  of  Henry  VIII  is,  however,  sufficiently 
well  known  ;  and  it  is  by  a  comparison  of  the  inventories  of  fitting 
and  equipment  of  the  two  periods  that  an  estimate  can  be  formed 
of  the  probable  appearance  of  at  least  the  later  ships  of  Henry  VII. 
With  the  fifteenth  century  the  middle  ages  are  held  to  have  drawn 
to  a  close  ;  and  just  as  the  conditions  of  national  life  were  altering 
and  approaching  more  nearly  to  modern  conditions,  so  too  the 
reign  of  the  first  of  the  Tudor  sovereigns  witnessed  the  passing 
of  the  medieval,  and  the  evolution  of  the  modern  navy. 

To  form  an  estimate  of  the  appearance  of  the  ships  of 
Henry  VII  is  not  rendered  easier  by  the  indiscriminate  application 
of  class  names  to  the  various  types  of  vessels  in  contemporary 
documents.  Though  it  is  not  until  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century  that  the  confusion  caused  by  the  use  of  the  words  galley, 
galleass,  and  galleon,  becomes  almost  hopeless  to  unravel ;  yet 
even  before  the  close  of  the  preceding  century  the  employment 
of  the  name  '  galley  '  opens  up  possibilities  of  error  and  miscon- 
struction. The  navy  of  Henry  VTI  contained  none  of  that  class 
of  fighting  ship  in  which  it  differed  from  those  of  the  majority  of 
his  predecessors  and  his  immediate  successors.  The  galley  proper 
was,  in  brief,  a  long  vessel,  narrow  in  the  beam,  and  of  low  free- 
board. Its  primary  mode  of  propulsion  was  by  means  of  oars ; 
although  furnished  with  one,  or  at  most  two,  masts,  each  carrying 
a  single  lateen  sail,  the  use  of  sails  as  a  motive  power  was  entirely 
secondary.  The  armament  was  weak,  and  rarely  consisted  of 
more  than  five  guns,  which  were  all  mounted  in  the  bows  of  the 
vessel.  The  home  of  the  galley  was  the  Mediterranean  ;  and 
though  frequently  included  in  the  early  English  fleets,  the  type 
was  unsuited  to  employment  in  the  seas  surrounding  this  country. 
The  Sweepstake  and  the  Mary  Fortune  were  often  '"described  as 
galleys,  with  which,  however,  they  had  nothing  in  common.     It  is 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  I  i 


482  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII         October 

true  that  they  were  furnished  with  oars,  sixty  in  the  case  of  the 
former  and  eighty  in  that  of  the  latter,  but  with  them  oars  were 
but  a  secondary  method  of  propulsion.  Each  ship  had  a  fore, 
main,  and  mizzen  or  bona  venture  mast.^^  The  mainmast  was 
provided  with  a  topmast.  They  were,  in  fact,  small  ships  as 
opposed  to  galleys.  The  Sovereign  was  four-masted,  had  a  fore  as 
well  as  a  main  topmast,  and  a  spritsail  on  the  bowsprit.  The 
Regent  had  also  four  masts,  the  fore  and  mainmasts  being  fitted 
with  topmasts  ;  but  she  had  in  addition  a  '  maste  to  the  toppe 
upon  the  mayne  toppe  maste '.  In  the  succeeding  reign  this 
would  have  been  called,  as  to-day,  a  topgallantmast.  It  carried 
a  sail.  Topmast  and  topgallantmast  were  separate  spars,  but 
it  does  not  appear  from  the  inventories  that  any  gear  was  fitted 
for  striking  them.  The  absence  of  the  power  of  relieving  the 
ship  in  heavy  weather  by  striking  her  upper  masts,  the  poor  con- 
struction of  the  hulls  owing  to  an  elementary  state  of  technical 
knowledge,  and  the  impossibility  of  performing  any  but  the 
simplest  repairs  while  at  sea,  were  inherent  defects  not  only  in 
the  medieval  navy,  but  also  a  century  later,  and  detracted 
seriously  from  the  sea  endurance  and  sea-going  qualities  of  the 
ships.  There  has  never  been  a  time,  save  perhaps  during  the 
last  hundred  years  of  sail,  when  the  ships  of  the  royal  navy  have 
been  able  to  keep  the  sea  for  weeks  together  after  the  manner  of 
a  deep-sea  merchantman.  The  old  Mary  of  the  Toiver  and  the 
Gracedieu  were  also  four-masters,  but  were  fitted  with  one  top- 
mast only,  and  carried  no  topgallantmast.  The  Martin  Garsia 
and  the  Governor  were  fitted  each  with  three  masts  and  one 
topmast. 

The  canvas  of  which  sails  were  made  was  manufactured  at 
home.  At  this  time  the  fore-and-aft  sail  had  not  yet  been  intro- 
duced :  even  small  boats,  if  fitted  with  a  sail,  carried  a  square 
sail.  The  sails  on  the  fore  and  mainmasts  of  ships  were  square, 
those  of  the  mizzen  and  bonaventure  masts  triangular  or  lateen 
shape.  The  theory  of  the  action  of  wind  upon  a  sail  was  so  little 
understood  that  all  sails  were  shaped  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
'  belly  '  instead  of  setting  flat.  In  addition,  the  lower  courses 
were  fitted  with  bonnets,  which,  laced  on  to  the  foot  of  the  sails, 
increased  the  belly.  Ships  were  very  leewardly  ;  and  they 
could  certainly  not  sail  closer  to  the  wind  than  seven  points. 
They  strained  badly  in  a  seaway,  owing  to  imperfect  tieing  and 
strutting.  The  effect  of  the  guns,  too,  light  though  they  were, 
on  the  badly  put  together  timbers,  was  to  strain  the  ships.  With 
a  view  to  obviating  this  the  sides  were  made  to  tumble  home,  that 
is  to  say,  the  beam  of  the  ship  was  less  at  the  height  of  the  upper 

^^  In  four-masted  ships  the  third  mast  was  the  mizzen  or  main  mizzen  and  the 
fourth  the  bonaventure  mast. 


1918  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII  483 

deck  than  at  the  water-line.  The  huge  superstructures  which 
were  built  at  each  end  of  the  ship,  so  that  less  than  a  third  of  her 
upper  deck  was  free  from  encumbrance,  rendered  her  very  bad 
to  handle  under  weigh,  and,  one  would  imagine,  top  heavy.  Ships 
were  probably  much  under-canvased.  The  precise  nature  of  the 
superstructures  of  a  large  ship  is  not  known.  She  would  have 
a  poop,  poop  royal,  forecastle,  and  summercastle.  This  last  is 
said  to  have  been  a  solidly  constructed  erection  of  timber — indeed 
it  must  of  necessity  have  been  strongly  built :  on  the  deck  above 
the  Sovereign's  summercastle,  for  example,  twenty-five  serpen- 
tines were  mounted.  But  it  is  impossible  at  this  date  to  specify 
the  position  of  the  summercastle  in  the  ship's  structure. 

Seams  were  rendered  watertight  by  caulking  with  flax,  hair, 
and  oakum,  worked  up  with  pitch  and  tar.  Ships  were  pitched 
above  water  ;  they  were  unsheathed,  and  were  rosined  and 
tallowed  below  the  water-line  :  twelve  hundred  pounds  of  tallow 
were  required  for  the  Regent's  bottom.  In  addition  to  straining, 
the  absence  of  sheathing  was  another  cause  which  contributed 
to  render  the  life  of  a  ship  short  in  comparison  to  the  vessels  of 
a  couple  of  centuries  later.  Ropes  and  cables  were  tarred  to 
preserve  them.  Cables  were  usually  obtained  from  Genoa  and 
Normandy,  likewise  hawsers,  though  both  were  also  made  in 
England — the  smaller  sizes  at  least.  A  large  warship  carried  as 
many  as  forty  each  of  cables  and  hawsers,  the  largest  of  the  former 
being  13  inch.  Both  were  sold  by  weight.  Iron  nails  were  still 
used  in  ship  construction,  trenails  having  not  yet  been  introduced. 
Pumps  were  fitted  :  large  ships  had  two,  the  Sweepstake  and  Mary 
Fortune  one  apiece.  The  hoses  attached  were  made  of  leather. 
Large  yards,  instead  of  being  all  in  one  piece,  were  made  of  two 
spars  lashed  or  fished  together.  Blocks  were  fitted  with  sheaves 
of  brass  or  iron,  which  are  always  carefully  enumerated  in  in- 
ventories. Snatch  blocks  were  in  use,  and,  though  not  specifically 
mentioned,  double  blocks  were  employed.  Large  ships  carried 
three  boats,  namely  a  great  boat,  cock-boat,  and  jolywatt.^^ 
They  were  either  towed  astern  or,  if  hoisted  inboard,  were  stowed 
in  the  waist  or  some  other  convenient  place.  The  operation  of 
hoisting  in  a  boat  was  performed  by  means  of  tackles  rigged  to 
the  yards  and  masts  :  davits,  though  used  for  catting  the  anchors, 
were  not  in  use  for  hoisting  boats  .^^  Large  ships  were  provided 
with  an  enormous  number  of  anchors — more  than  a  dozen,  in 
addition  to  boats'  anchors. 

Considerable  attention  was  paid  to  the  external  decoration  of 

29  Jollyboat. 

3°  In  the  inventory  of  stores  and  fittings  of  the  Regent '  Grete  Devettes  of  tymbre 
for  the  Grete  bote '  one  in  number  is  named,  but  it  was  employed  to  hoist  the  boat 
iaboard,  and  was  something  entirely  different  from  the  davits  from  which  boats  are 
slung  to-day. 

ii2 


484  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII         October 

warships.  The  carving  about  the  head  and  stern,  which  was  such 
a  feature  of  warships  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  later,  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  applied  to  the  vessels  of  Henry  VII.  Considerable 
sums  were,  however,  expended  on  painting  them.  The  painting  of 
the  Regent  occupied  five  men  for  nine  weeks  ;  and  the  cost,  in- 
clusive of  paints  and  colours,  and  the  wages  and  victualling 
and  board  of  the  men  employed,  amounted  to  £15  6<s.  lOJc?.^^  This, 
equivalent  to  some  £150  of  our  money,  would  be  no  inconsiderable 
sum  to  spend  on  the  painting  of  a  ship  whose  tonnage  certainly 
did  not  exceed  600  tons,  if  indeed  it  touched  that  figure.  In 
the  middle  ages  the  shields  of  the  knights  and  soldiers  were  hung 
over  the  bulwarks  until  required  in  action.  A  survival  of  this 
custom  is  found  in  the  pavesses  which  were  fixed  along  the  sides 
of  the  waist  and  poop,  and  possibly  the  forecastle,  of  the  ships 
of  Henry  VII.  These  were  made  usually  of  poplar  wood,  and 
were  painted  with  coats  of  arms  and  heraldic  devices.  The 
Sovereign  was  provided  with  *  iij  Flowerdelyeez  gylte  ',  while 
a  '  Crowne  of  Coper  &  gylte  '  occurs  among  the  fittings  of  several 
ships.  Further  decoration  was  given  by  '  stremmers  ',  '  baners  ', 
'  gyttornes  ',^^  and  *  pendantes  of  say  with  Rede  Crosses  &  Roses  '. 
In  conjunction  with  the  above,  top  armours  of  say  are  usually 
enumerated,  but  these  were  in  the  nature  of  a  protective  rather 
than  a  decorative  element ;  they  were  fixed  along  the  waist  above 
the  pavesses. 

In  no  respect  was  the  navy  of  Henry  VII  more  medieval  in 
character  than  in  the  armament  of  the  ships.  Though  guns  had 
been  mounted  in  ships  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  they  were 
even  now  far  from  being  the  deciding  factor  in  a  naval  engage- 
ment. It  was  seldom,  if  ever,  that  a  ship  was  sunk  by  gunfire 
alone  ;  for  even  the  serpentine,  the  heaviest  naval  piece,  could 
make  but  little  impression  on  the  timbers  of  a  ship,  so  weak  was 
the  powder  manufactured  at  that  period,  while  the  time  required 
to  reload  a  heavy  gun  after  firing,  precluded  its  being  discharged 
more  often  than  twice  in  the  course  of  an  hour.  Guns  were  mainly 
man-killers,  for  use  against  the  personnel  and  the  rigging  of  an 
enemy  ship,  whose  decks  would  be  swept  with  one  or  two  volleys 
from  small  pieces  ;  after  which  the  serious  business  of  boarding 
would  be  resorted  to.  Bows  and  arrows  still  played  their  part 
in  an  engagement  at  sea.  The  entire  theory  of  gunnery  at  that 
time  was  opposed  to  the  teaching  of  modern  experience.  Pieces 
of  half  a  dozen  different  calibres  were  mounted  on  one  and  the 
same  deck.  The  inevitable  result  was  confusion  and  waste  of 
time  in  action  through  searching  for  the  proper  kind  of  shot 
among  the  miscellany.     Yet  even  so  recently  as  the  end  of  the 

31  Accounts  and  Inventories  of  Henry  VII, 
•'  Guidons. 


1918  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII  485 

nineteenth  century  the  same  state  of  affairs  existed,  namely, 
capital  ships  being  armed  with  two  and  even  three  different 
natures  of  heavy  guns  for  use  as  primary  armament. 

At  the  period  under  consideration  the  gun  deck  was  the  upper 
deck,  below  which  no  guns  were  mounted.  The  principal  naval 
gun  was  the  serpentine,  made  of  brass  or  iron.  Other  guns  were 
murderers,  stone  guns,  and  hand  guns.  The  serpentine,  the 
largest  ships'  gun,  weighed  probably  not  more  than  300  lb., 
inclusive  of  its  chamber.  It  was  a  breech-loader,  the  charge  being 
inserted  into  the  chamber,  of  which  several  were  provided  for  each 
gun,  for  they  had  a  highly  disconcerting  habit  of  blowing  out 
when  the  gun  was  fired.  Its  extreme  range  was  perhaps  1,300 
yards,  its  effective  range  a  great  deal  less.  With  the  exception  of 
guns  of  the  smallest  calibres  it  was  impossible  either  to  train  or 
to  elevate  the  pieces,  which  lay  on  deck  in  '  stokkes  ' — wooden 
cradles — and  fired  over  the  bulwarks  or  through  gun-ports.  The 
invention  of  what  lay  writers  on  naval  subjects  term  '  port-holes  ' 
is  said  to  date  from  the  year  1500,  though  opinion  is  unanimous 
that  they  were  in  use  many  years  earlier.  The  guns  of  the 
Sovereign,  which  may  be  taken  as  representative  of  a  large  ship 
of  the  period,  were  mounted  in  the  following  positions  : 
Forecastle  33  ....  16  iron  serpentines 
Forecastle  deck  ^^     .         .         .24  do. 

Waist 20  stone  guns 

Summercastle .         .         .         .20   iron   serpentines,    1  brass  do.,   11 

stone  guns  ^^ 

Stern 4  iron  serpentines 

*  Dekke  over  the  Somercastell ' .     25  do. 
Poop 20  do. 

A  number  of  guns,  particularly  those  of  small  cahbre,  were 
mounted  in  the  forward  and  after  superstructures  in  such  a  manner 
as  to  command  the  waist,  so  that  in  the  event  of  the  ship  being 
boarded,  the  deck  would  be  swept  with  fire  and  rendered  untenable. 
Gunpowder  was  made  at  home,  the  saltpetre  being  imported 
from    Genoa,    where   many   naval   stores    were   manufactured. 
Powder  cost  6d.  per  lb.     Half  a  dozen  barrels,  containing  in  all 
some  1,200  to  1,500  lb.  was  sufficient  allowance  for  a  ship  such 
as  the  Sovereign.     When  the  slow  rate  of  fire  is  taken  into  con- 
sideration,  and  the  small   powder  charge — about   5  oz.   for  a 
serpentine — ^the    allowance    of   10  lb.  per  gun  appears  ample. 
Shot  were  of  three  descriptions— of  iron,  lead,  or  stone — and  they 
were  both  spherical  and  cubical.     Lead  shot  were  often  cast  on 
board,  stone  moulds  being  supplied  for  the  purpose.     The  serpen- 
ts '  In  the  forecastell  aboue  the  Dekke.' 
"  '  In  the  forecastell  alowe '  (below). 
35  That  is,  guns  firing  a  stone  shot. 


486  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII         October 

tine   threw   a    ball   weighing   about    the  same  as  the   powder 


In  addition  to  guns,  the  armament  of  a  ship  of  the  period  con- 
sisted of  bows  and  arrows,  spears,  bills,  Spanish  darts,  arquebuses, 
and  fireworks  of  various  descriptions.  Neither  had  the  use  of 
quicklime,  for  blinding  the  opponents,  been  abandoned.  The 
armament  stores  of  the  Gracedieu  included  21  guns,  140  bows, 
810  sheafs  of  arrows,^^  80  bow  strings,  24  spears,  140  billhooks, 
37  Spanish  darts,  14  lead  hammers,  21  axes,  12  cross-bows,  and 
apparatus  for  fireworks. 

The  guns  mounted  in  various  ships  of  Henry  VII  were  as 
follows  : 

SMj)  Guns 

Gracedieu  .         ..........  21 

Mary  of  the  Tower 48 

Martin  Garsia    ..........  30 

Governor    ...........  70 

Sovereign  . 141 

Regent 225 

Powder  and  shot  were  among  the  stores  supplied  for  the  Sweep- 
stake and  the  Mary  Fortune^  but  there  is  no  mention  of  guns  in  the 
inventories. 

There  was  no  system  of  regular  service  in  the  navy  of 
Henry  VII.  Except  when  fitted  out  for  an  expedition,  the  ships 
were  manned  merely  by  a  few  shipkeepers.  In  this  state  they 
invariably  remained  during  the  winter  ;  for  it  was  not  at  that 
date  considered  practicable  to  keep  ships  at  sea  during  the  winter 
months,  namely  from  the  middle  of  November  to  the  middle  of 
February.  On  the  fitting  out  of  a  fleet  a  system  of  impressment 
was  resorted  to  in  order  to  provide  crews  for  the  ships.  Periodical 
musters  were  made  of  the  number  of  seamen  available  in  the 
various  maritime  districts,  and  agents  were  sent  out  to  enlist 
men  for  the  king's  service.  It  does  not  seem  that  Henry  ex- 
perienced much  difiiculty  in  obtaining  what  men  he  required, 
partly  because  no  large  fleet  was  at  sea  which  made  serious 
demands  on  the  seafaring  population,  and  partly  because  of  the 
high  pay  and  comparatively  attractive  conditions  of  service  pre- 
vailing in  his  time.  Naval  pay  has  steadily  decreased  in  com- 
parative value  since  pre-Conquest  days.  Under  Henry  there  I 
was  no  fixed  rate,  though  it  seems  usually  to  have  been  \s.  3d. 
a  week  at  sea  and  Is.  in  harbour.  Boys,  known  as  pages,  were 
paid  M.  to  9d.  The  men  were  divided  into  sailors,  gunners,  and 
soldiers  ;  and  since  the  fighting  was  the  province  of  the  soldiers, 
these  naturally  predominated,  being  in  the  proportion  of  5  :  3 

3*  The  sheaf  contained  24  arrows. 


1918 


THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII 


487 


or  2  :  1 .  For  the  conveyance  of  the  Sovereign  from  the  Thames 
to  Portsmouth  in  1496  a  crew  of  19  officers,  146  men,  and  2  boys 
sufficed.  Under  Henry  VIII  her  complement  was  400  soldiers, 
260  sailors,  and  40  gunners.  The  active  service  complement  of  the 
Caravel  of  Ewe  was  170  mariners  and  soldiers,  and  of  the  Regent 
in  1512,  700  men. 

How  little  naval  in  character  was  warfare  at  sea  during  this 
era  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  the  captain  of  a  ship  was  in- 
variably a  soldier  ;  and  he  treated  his  ship,  not  unnaturally,  as 
a  floating  fortress,  or  perhaps  it  would  be  more  correct  to  say 
as  a  means  of  bringing  a  body  of  men  into  contact  with  the  enemy. 
For  all  matters  connected  with  the  navigation  and  working  of 
the  ship  he  relied  on  the  master,  who  was  the  senior  executive 
officer.  The  remainder  of  the  officers  were  more  like  warrant 
than  commissioned  officers,  and  their  rates  of  pay  are  sufficient 
evidence  both  of  their  relative  rank  and  of  their  sHght  superior 
importance  over  the  men.  One  officer  whose  duties  are  not  clear 
was  the  Keeper  of  the  Port  :  he  corresponded,  perhaps,  to  the 
modern  Corporal  of  the  Gangway  or  to  the  Master-at-Arms. 

A  table  of  wages  of  officers  is  appended  : 

WeeUy  rate 
3s.  id. 
Is.  Sd.  to  2s. 
Is.  Sd.  to  Is.  lOJi?." 
Is.  4:d.  to  Is.  ed. 
Is.  3d.  to  Is.  6d. 


Master 

Boatswain,  Purser 
Gunner 

Quartermaster    . 
Steward,  Cook    . 


The  pay  of  the  officers  and  men  who  conveyed  the  Sovereign 
from  the  Thames  to  Portsmouth  during  March  and  April  1496  is 
given  for  comparison.     The  voyage  occupied  32  days. 


£   s.    d. 

£  s.  d. 

Master 

2  10    0 

Steward 

8    0 

Purser 

14    8 

Cook   .         .         .         . 

10    0 

Pilot  .         .          .          . 

2  13    4 

Keeper  of  the  Port 

6    8 

Chaplain 

8    8 

129  mariners  each 

5    0 

Master's  Mate 

10    0 

2  do.  each    . 

4    0 

Quartermaster^^  . 

10    0 

One  do. 

4    4 

Quartermaster's  mate  ^ 

*          6    8 

3  do.  each    . 

3    8 

Boatswain  and  his  mat 

e        16    8 

11  do.  each  . 

3    6 

Cockswain  . 

6    0 

Page  39 

2    6 

From  the  same 

source  ^^  comes  the  cost  of  the  *  ^ 

^itayle  & 

Fewell '  consumed  d 

uring  the  voyage. 

For  Brede  Ixvj  doz- 

-Ixvjs;  Ml 

weight  of  Bysket  at  iijs  the 

hundred — 

xxxs ;    Byere  xl  pipes  at  vj^  viij^i  the  pipe— xiijii  yj^  viij^  ;    Fyssh  cc 

"  75.  6d.  per  month.  ^^  Four  in  number.  ^^  Two  in  number. 

*"  Augmentation  Office  Book,  no.  316  {Naval  Accounts  and  Inventories  of  Henri/  VII). 


488  THE  NAVY  UNDER  HENRY  VII        October 

haberdyne  ^  at  xxxiijs  iiij^  the  hundred — Ixvjs  viijd  ;  An  other  di  c  price 
xviijs  ijd  ;  vj  barelles  white  herynges  at  vjs  viijd  the  barell — xl^ ;  Flesh 
vij  oxen  price  cvjs  viij^  ;  xj  busselles  salte  for  pouderyng  of  the  same 
at  vj<i  the  bussell — ^iiijs  vijd ;  ^2  ±  pjpg  ^f  g^lte  bieff  redie  dressed  xls ; 
Pesyn  x  busselles  vjs  viij<i ;  Green  pesyn  at  viijd  the  bussell  with 
cariage  of  the  same  y^  from  London  to  Eryth — vij^  jd  ;  Fewell  MiMiML 
billettes  at  v^  the  M^ — xv^ ;  viij  doz  candell  viijs  in  all  amountying 
to  xxxiijiiviij^x^. 

Practically  every  description  of  victuals  provided  in  the  navy  of 
that  date  is  here  enumerated.  The  cost  of  victualling  per  head 
per  week  rose  from  15.  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  to  Is.  2d, 
towards  the  end.  The  contract  for  victualling  a  fleet  was  usually 
given  by  the  king  to  some  person  whom  he  wished  to  reward  in 
a  manner  which  cost  him  nothing.  That  no  complaints  have 
survived  of  the  quality  of  the  provisions  supplied  is  probably 
due  to  the  inarticulateness  of  the  seaman  of  the  period  and  the 
comparative  paucity  of  records. 

Little  is  known  of  the  conditions  obtaining  on  board  ship. 
The  captain  and  the  master  were  the  only  officers  provided  with 
cabins  ;  and  they  appear  to  have  messed  apart,  though  in  the  later 
Tudor  period  the  master  messed  in  the  captain's  cabin.  The 
men  slept  on  the  deck  :  hammocks  had  not  yet  been  introduced. 
They  wore  no  regular  uniform,  though  the  crown  usually  pro- 
vided them  with  coats,  which  were  probably  of  the  Tudor  colours. 

C.    S.    GOLDINGHAM. 
«i  Salt  fish.  *^  The  arithmetic  is  somewhat  faulty. 


1918  489 


Notes  and  Doctiments 

Centuriation  in  Middlesex 

Professor  Haverfield's  assertion  that  there  is,  *  so  far,  no 
trustworthy  evidence  for  centuriation  in  Britain  ',  for  lack  of 
*  traces  of  roads  laid  out  accurately  straight,  running  in  direct 
lines  or  at  right  angles '  ^  is  too  sweeping.  Evidence  of  centuriation 
more  or  less  distinct  is  to  be  found  in  most  Romanized  districts 
of  outlying  Britain,  but  I  propose  to  confine  my  remarks  to 
briefly  indicating  how  traces  of  the  survey  were  first  discovered 
in  the  Middlesex  district,  together  with  the  historical  information 
obtained  therefrom — a  research  which  extended  over  a  period  of 
ten  years. 

The  Romans  are  known  to  have  been  great  agriculturists, 
and  it  can  hardly  be  supposed  that  they  continued  the  primitive 
methods  of  native  cultivation,  and  did  not  extend  the  area 
brought  under  the  plough.  Had  they  not  done  so,  Britain  could 
not  have  become  one  of  the  fertile  portions  of  their  empire  from 
whence  grain  was  exported  to  the  Continent.  In  the  middle  ages 
Middlesex  was  known  for  the  excellent  quality  of  the  corn  it 
produced,  and  prima  facie  in  an  earlier  age  the  Romans  were 
equally  aware  of  the  fertility  of  the  soil  in  the  valley  of  the  Thames, 
which  also  contained  their  commercial  town  and  port  of  Londinium. 

Evidence  that  this  area  had  been  settled  by  a  Romano-British 
agricultural  population  was  obtained  in  this  way.  For  some  time 
past  it  had  been  noticed  that  many  fragments  of  its  ancient  rural 
ways  ran  in  parallel  lines,  and  were  crossed  at  right  angles  by 
similar  ones,  which  in  the  several  districts  of  the  county  were 
distinguished  by  a  different  orientation.  Thus  in  the  north- 
eastern division  the  direction  of  the  cardinal  ways  was  from 
north  to  south  :  in  the  southern  portion  between  the  Brent  and 
the  Lea  rivers,  and  into  Essex,  they  pointed  south-south-east. 
Over  the  south-western  area  and  beyond  the  Colne  into  Bucking- 
hamshire the  course  was  south  by  west,  and  in  the  north-western 
district  they  were  again  south-south-east.  Passing  into  that 
part  of  the  Middle saxon  province  lying  south  of  the  upper  Colne 
and  Lea,  but  now  in  Hertfordshire,  the  two  orientations  were 

1  Ante,  p.  292. 


490  CENTURIATION  IN  MIDDLESEX         October 

respectively  south-east  by  south,  and  south  by  east.  A  further 
feature  was  that  many  cross  ways  occurred  at  equal  intervals, 
and  along  one  road  five  in  succession  were  found  at  distances  of 
120  Roman  poles  or  388  yards,  two  being  roads,  two  foot  paths, 
and  the  other  an  ancient  field  boundary,  presumed  to  have  been 
formerly  a  plough  balk  or  a  footway. 

It  was  manifest  that  this  laying  out  of  land  amounting  to 
181,000  acres  could  not  have  been  the  result  of  chance,  but  must 
have  been  carried  out  at  a  time  when  the  soil  was  mostly  in  its 
primitive  condition,  by  a  conquering  race  who  had  seized  it, 
and  who  were  accompanied  by  skilled  land  measurers.  All 
this  pointed  unmistakably  to  the  Romans  and  their  corps  of 
agrimensores,  trained  in  applied  geometry  and  using  scientific 
instruments.  The  writings  of  the  Gromatici  Veteres  were  next 
consulted  for  information  as  to  the  manner  in  which  Roman 
lands  were  surveyed  and  laid  out,  and  it  is  worthy  of  note  that 
one  of  the  most  eminent  of  these  writers  was  Sextus  Frontinus, 
Propraetor  over  Britain  from  A.  D.  74.  Among  the  more  enduring 
bench  or  land  marks  used  by  Roman  surveyors  were  mounds  of 
earth  (up  to  the  size  of  a  small  haystack),  stones,  and  trenches, 
and  in  these  three  respects  important  discoveries  have  been  made 
in  the  county.  A  mound  (botontinus)  is  to  be  seen  both  in  Cranf ord 
and  in  Syon  parks,  also  at  Hampstead,  Stanmore,  Hadley — where 
there  are  two — and  just  out  of  the  county  at  Salthill,  Slough. 
Two  others  have  not  long  ago  been  levelled,  one  by  Bushy  Park 
and  the  other  at  Hillingdon,  while  local  names  apparently 
preserve  the  sites  of  half  a  dozen  more.  Four  stones  are  still 
in  situ ;  two  marked  on  old  maps  no  longer  exist,  and  the  former 
positions  of  several  others  can  be  located.  Two  trenches  are  still 
to  be  seen. 

A  map  showed  that  these  boundary  marks  and  the  remnants 
of  the  oriented  ways  were  naturally  co-related,  that  each  district 
had  been  of  nearly  equal  area,  rectangular  in  form,  and  contained 
by  a  boundary  line,  the  course  of  which  was  disclosed  by  the 
hotontini  and  stones.  It  was  also  seen  that  these  districts  or  jpagi 
were  in  general  identical  in  area  with  those  of  the  later  hundreds 
of  the  Saxon  period,  as  set  forth  in  Domesday.  From  the  orienta- 
tion of  the  jpagi,  the  territarium  of  the  Londinium  canton  appeared 
to  extend  from  the  foot  of  the  Chiltern  hills  across  Middlesex  and 
into  Essex  ;  the  pagi  had  been  laid  out  by  lines  (quintarii) 
crossing  one  another  at  right  angles,  and  so  forming  possessae, 
each  of  which  according  to  the  text-book,  and  in  fact,  contained 
1,300  jugera  equal  to  810  statute  acres.  These  in  turn  could  be 
divided  into  25  laterculi  or  small  centuriae  of  50  jugera  lying 
in  rows  of  five,  plus  an  area  equal  to  a  centuria  distributable 
over  a  possessa  for  lanes  and  paths.    This  provision,  equal  to  one- 


1918  GENTUEIATION  IN  MIDDLESEX  491 

twenty-fifth  of  a  surveyed  area,  was  later  on  found  to  have  an 
important  bearing  when  comparing  the  total  acreage  of  the  Roman 
and  Domesday  surveys  of  the  county,  for  the  latter  did  not 
include  road  surface.  A  side  of  this  square  centuria  measured 
120  Roman  poles  or  388  yards,  and  five  of  them  lining  the  face 
of  a  possessa  accounted  for  those  five  successive  equal  intervals 
formed  by  crossways  which  were  noticed  upon  a  Middlesex  road 
between  Greenford  and  Ealing  as  above  mentioned. 

It  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  large  centuria  of  200  jug  era 
referred  to  by  Mr.  Haverfield  could  have  been  utilized,  if  the 
surveyors  used  the  possessa  as  a  measure  of  land,  or  the  saltus 
with  1,250  jugera,  its  net  or  productive  area  less  the  road  surface. 
I  hope  he  will  follow  up  his  suggestion  as  to  a  possible  trace  of 
centuria tion  south  of  the  Braintree-Dunmow  section  of  the  Roman 
road  from  Colchester  to  Bishops  Stortford,  though  military 
roads  or  streets  appear  to  have  been  laid  down  independent  of 
the  agrarian  and  centuria  ted  ways  through  which  they  passed. 
In  Middlesex,  Ermine,  Watling,  and  Tamesis  streets  bore  no 
relation  to  these  rural  ways. 

Two  curious  discoveries  came  to  light  after  the  quintarial 
cross-lines  had  been  drawn,  making  each  pagus  appear  like  a 
gigantic  chequer-board.  The  first  was,  that  47  out  of  56  mother 
churches  of  parishes  in  Middlesex  were  situated  upon  one  or  other 
of  these  lines,  the  apparent  explanation  being  that  Romano - 
British  chapels  (compita)  adjoined  the  principal  rural  ways, 
which  were  designed  to  follow  the  quintarial  lines.  In  the  next 
age  these  little  edifices  were  adopted  by  missionaries  for  Christian 
worship,  following  the  astute  and  well-known  direction  of  Pope 
Gregory  to  utilize  the  pagan  sacra  where  the  people  had  been 
accustomed  to  assemble.  If  so,  then  such  sites  have  been  associated 
with  public  worship,  first  pagan,  then  Christian,  for  nearly  2,000 
years. 

The  other  discovery  had  an  important  bearing  on  the  correct 
reading  of  the  Domesday  Survey  of  Middlesex,  for  it  became 
evident  that  the  centuria  of  50  jugera,  with  its  known  area  of 
31-158  acres,  was  identical  with  the  virgate  of  the  Saxon  period, 
the  size  of  which  has  caused  much  controversy.  The  proof  of 
this  lies  in  the  fact  that  if  the  Middlesex  Domesday  measures 
are  worked  out  on  this  basis  the  total  acreage  for  the  county, 
which  has  not  been  changed  in  area  since  the  ninth  century, 
agrees,  when  the  road  surface  is  included,  with  that  of  the  modern 
Ordnance  Survey.  All  this  bears  testimony  to  the  accuracy  of 
the  Imperial  Survey,  and  to  the  diligence  of  the  Domesday 
Commissioners. 

Such  evidence  shows  a  more  intimate  connexion  between 
Roman  Britain  and  Saxon  England,  especially  in  matters  relating 


492  CENTURIATION  IN  MIDDLESEX  October 

to  rural  economy  and  in  the  common  law  bearing  upon  it,  than 
has  hitherto  been  supposed.  Further  points  can  be  adduced,  of 
which  the  headings  of  only  three  can  here  be  given :  ( 1 )  The  Roman 
settlers'  heredium  of  two  jugera  (a  Saxon  aker)  in  non-contiguous 
plots,  and  upwards  to  a  centuria,  all  having  compascua  :  followed 
in  Saxon  and  later  times  by  scattered  holdings  in  the  village  farm 
in  acre  and  half -acre  strips,  and  amounting  to  virgates  and  half- 
virgates,  while  all  possessed  appendant  common  pasturage. 
The  average  amount  of  land  held  by  a  bordar  in  Domesday 
Middlesex  was  five  akers,  and  similarly  that  by  a  cottager  two 
akers  ;  of  the  larger  holdings  438  villanes  held  each  a  virgate, 
and  426  each  half  a  virgate  lying  in  half -acre  strips  in  the  common 
farms  of  the  villages.  (2)  The  tributarius  and  colonus  in  Britain 
under  decurions  with  the  nativus  appear  to  survive  in  the  geneat, 
gebur,  and  cosetla  in  their  tithings  during  the  Saxon  period. 
(3)  The  Domesday  geldage  for  Middlesex,  with  its  decimal  founda- 
tion upon  the  constant  geld  unit  of  five  on  the  vills,  curiously 
amounts  to  the  same  total  as  from  the  number  of  possessae  when 
multiplied  by  that  unit.  Montagu  Sharpe. 


Leo  Tuscus 

Our  knowledge  of  the  literary  relations  between  East  and  West 
under  Manuel  Komnenos  is  so  fragmentary  that  new  information, 
however  scanty,  is  welcome .  Among  the  members  of  the  large  Pisan 
colony  at  Constantinople  in  this  reign  two  brothers,  Master  Hugo 
Eterianus  and  Master  Leo,  usually  distinguished  as  Leo  Tuscus, 
have  long  been  known  to  bibliographers.^  Hugo,  from  his  first 
dated  appearance  in  1166  ^  to  his  death  in  1182,  seems  to  have 
been  actively  engaged  in  theological  controversy,  and  his  vigorous 
advocacy  of  Latin  doctrine  against  the  Greeks^  won  him  com- 

^  Gradenigo,  Lettera  intorno  agli  Italiani  che  seppero  di  greco,  ed.  Calogiera,  pp.  50-5 ; 
[Fabroni],  Memorie  di  piil  uomini  illustri  Pisani  (Pisa,  1790),  ii.  59-68,  iv.  151-3  ; 
Fabricius-Harles,  Bihliotheca  Oraeca,  viii.  563,  xi.  483  ;  Fabricius,  Bibliotheca  Mediae 
Latinitatis,  iii.  292  (ed.l754) ;  G.  Miiller,  Documenti  suUe  Relazioni  delle  Cittd  Toscave 
coIV  Oriente,  p.  384  f. 

^  See  his  letter  to  the  consuls  of  Pisa  in  Miiller,  Documenti,  no.  10,  dated  1166  by 
the  editor,  although  the  text  of  the  epitaph  there  cited  clearly  gives  1176.  That 
Hugo  was  at  Constantinople  by  1166  is  otherwise  known :  see  below,  p.  494,  the  preface 
of  Leo  here  printed,  and  Hugo's  reference  to  his  relations  with  the  cardinals  who 
came  from  Rome  in  that  year  (Migne,  Patrologia  Latina,  ccii.  233).  In  the  letter  to 
the  Pisans  Hugo  says  that  his  theological  opinions  had  already  made  him  unpopular, 
and  the  disputes  with  Nicholas  of  Methone  doubtless  fall  before  this  year. 

^  His  two  chief  treatises  are  Liber  de  anima  corpore  iam  exuta  or  De  regressu  ani- 
marum  ah  inferis,  ad  clerum  Pisanum,  written  before  1173  (since  it  mentions  Albert 
as  consul),  in  Migne,  ccii.  167-226  (there  is  a  copy  written  about  1200  in  the 
Archives  of  the  Crown  of  Aragon  at  Barcelona,  MS.  Ripoll  204,  ff.  106-92)  ;  and 
De  heresibus  Grecorum,  also  known  as  De  processione  spiritus  sancti  and  De  sancto  et 


1918  LEO  TUSGUS  493 

mendation  from  Alexander  III,  and,  just  before  his  death, 
a  cardinal's  hat  from  Lucius  III.*  Though  he  does  not  appear 
with  any  official  title,  he  was  in  relations  with  the  emperor,  and 
on  one  occasion  accompanied  him  into  Cappadocia  and  the 
Turkish  territory. ^  Leo,  already  invicti  principis  egregius  interpres 
in  1166,^  is  still  imperialium  epistolarum  interpres  in  1182,'  and 
can  in  the  meantime  be  traced  in  Manuel's  service  during  the 
Asiatic  campaigns,  as  we  learn  in  general  terms  from  Hugo's 
De  heresibus  ^  and  more  definitely  from  the  preface  printed 
below. 

Besides  assisting  Hugo  in  his  literary  labours,^  Leo  executed 
two  translations  from  the  Greek.  One,  a  version  of  the  mass  of 
St.  Chrysostom,!^  was  made  at  the  request  of  the  noble  Kainaldus 
de  Monte  Catano,  to  whom  it  is  dedicated,  subject  to  the  criti- 
cism of 

frater  et  preceptor  meus  Vgo  Eterianus  sua  gravitate  gravior,  nam  is 
Grecorum  loquela  perplexa  internodia  olorum  evincentia  melos  ver- 
borumque  murmura,  que  pene  Maronis  pectus  fatigarent  ac  Ciceronis, 
intrepida  excussione  ^^  inspectis  narrationum  radicibus  mirifice  dis- 
criminat. 

immortali  Deo,  finished  in  1177,  IVIigne,  ccii.  227-396  (manuscripts  are  common,  e.  g. 
Vatican,  Codd.  Lat.  820,  821,  Urb.  Lat.  106;  Laurentian,  xxiii.  dext.  3,  Bandini, 
Catalogi,  iv.  631  ;  Assisi,  MS.  90,  f.  53,  in  Mazzatinti,  Inventari,  iv.  38  ;  Subiaco, 
MS.  265,  Mazzatinti,  i.  210  ;  Paris,  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS.  Lat.  2948  ;  Troyes, 
MS.  844  ;  Cambridge,  Corpus  Christi  College  MS.  207)-  Other  evidence  of  his  activity 
is  found  in  the  lost  treatise  De  filii  hominis  minoritate  ad  patrem  Deum,  mentioned 
below  by  Leo  ;  in  the  Greek  text  of  an  unpublished  dispute  with  Nicholas  of  Methone 
in  the  Biblioteca  Civica  at  Brescia  (Martini,  Catalogo  di  Mss.  Greci  nelle  Bihlioteche 
Italiane,  i.  251  ;  cf.  Byzantinische  Zeitschrift,  vi.  412)  ;  in  a  reply  to  him  edited  by 
Arsenii  (see  Byzantinische  Zeitschrift,  iv.  370,  note)  ;  and  in  a  series  of  extracts 
from  his  works  containing  accusations  of  all  kinds  against  the  Greeks,  in  Maxima 
Bibliotheca  Patrum  (Lyons,  1677),  xxvii.  608  £E. 

*  Migne,  ccii.  227,  Mtiller,  no.  21  (Jaffe-Lowenfeld,  nos.  12957,  14712). 

^  '  Quod  propriis  oculis  imperatorem  sequendo  per  Cappadociam  Persarumque 
regiones  intuitus  sum,'  Maxima  Bibliotheca  Patrum,  xxvii.  609. 

^  Miiller,  no.  10.  On  the  date  see  note  2.  Cf.  Migne,  ccii.  167  '  imperialis  aule 
interpretis  egregii.' 

^  Miiller,  no.  21.  ^  Migne,  ccii.  274. 

*  '  Qui  est  ingenii  mei  acumen  huiusque  suscepti  laboris  incentivum ',  says  Hugh  : 
Migne,  ccii.  274. 

^"  It  is  printed,  with  the  preface,  in  Claudius  de  Sainctes,  Liturgiae  sive  Missae 
Sanctorum  Patrum  (Antwerp,  1562),  f.  49  ;  cf.  Swainson,  The  Greek  Liturgies,  pp.  100, 
144.  :  There  is  a  copy  in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS.  Lat.  1002,  f .  1  :  '  Magistri 
Leonis  Tusci  prologus  ad  factam  Grecorum  missam  ab  eo  verbis  Latinis  divulgatam 
ad  quendam  Raynaldum.  Cum  venisses  Constantinopolim.'  .  .  .  Engdahl,  Beitrdge 
zur  Kenntnis  der  Byzantinischen  Liturgie,  in  Bonwetsch  and  Seeberg's  Neue  Studien, 
V.  35,  84  (1908),  has  used  only  an  incomplete  Karlsruhe  MS.  of  the  translation  which 
does  not  contain  the  preface.  Leo's  translation  is  mentioned  by  Nicholas  of  Otranto 
in  the  preface  to  his  translation  of  the  mass  of  St.  Basil :  Engdahl,  p.  43  ;  MS.  Lat. 
1002,  f.  22  V. 

^^  So  Allatius,  who  cites  this  passage,  De  ecclesiae  consensione,  p.  654.  MS.  Lat. 
1002  has  exursione,  the  printed  text  excursione. 


494  LEO  TU8CUS  October 

The  other  of  Leo's  translations  is  a  version  of  the  Oneirocriticon 
of  Ahmed  ben  Sirin,  important  both  for  the  vernacular  renderings 
which  were  based  upon  it  in  the  sixteenth  century  and  for  the 
establishment  of  the  Greek  text,  of  which  it  represents  a  tradition 
older  than  the  extant  manuscripts. ^^  ^he  preface,  which  is 
addressed  to  Hugo,  and  exhibits,  like  the  preface  to  the  version 
of  the  mass,  marked  resemblance  of  style  to  his  writings,  sheds 
further  light  on  Hugo's  activity,  since  it  shows  him  engaged  in 
the  controversy  over  the  subordination  of  the  Son  to  the  Father 
which  was  started  by  Deme trios  of  Lampe,  and,  if  we  are  to 
believe  Leo,  exerting  an  influence  upon  the  emperor's  decision. 
The  mention  of  Manuel's  campaign  against  the  Turks  in  Bithynia 
and  Lycaonia  offers  a  means  of  dating  the  work.^^  The  campaign 
of  1146  being  obviously  too  early,  opinion  seems  to  have  decided 
for  that  of  1160-1  ;  at  least  all  scholars  who  mention  the  version, 
from  Rigault  and  Casiri  to  Steinschneider,  Krumbacher,  and 
Drexl,  though  without  discussing  the  question,  give  1160  as  the 
date.  This  seems  to  me  untenable,  partly  because  the  expedition 
of  this  year  can  scarcely  be  said  to  have  reached  Lycaonia,  but 
chiefly  because  the  Demetrian  controversy  began  only  in  1160, 
and  the  imperial  decree  which  put  an  end  to  it  {augustalis  clementie 
decretum)  is  of  the  year  1166.^^  All  of  this  is  already  well  in  the 
past  {ex  eo  igitur  tempore),  and  the  emperor  engaged  in  no  further 
Turkish  campaigns  except  the  unsuccessful  enterprise  of  1176. 
Now  we  know  from  Hugo's  De  heresihiis,  completed  in  1177,^^  that 
its  composition  was  interrupted  by  Leo's  absence  in  Asia  Minor 
with  the  emperor ,^^  and  it  is  accordingly  to  1176  that  t^e  transla- 
tion of  Ahmed  should  be  assigned.  The  following  text  of  the 
preface  is  from  the  Digby  MS.  103  in  the  Bodleian  Library  ^"^  : 

Ad  Hugonem  Eterialium  doctorem  suum  et  utraque  origine  fratrem  Leo 
Tuscus  imperatoriarum  epistolarum  interpres  de  sompniis  et  oracuUs. 

Quamquam,  optime  preceptor,  invictum  imperatorem  Manuel  per  fines 
sequar  Bitinie  Licaonieque  fugantem  Persas  flexipedum  hederarum  com- 

"  See  Steinschneider,  Tbn  Shahin  und  Ihn  Sirin,  in  Zeitschrift  der  Deutschen  Morgen- 
Idndischen  Gesellschajt,  xvii.  227-44 ;  and  in  Vienna  Sitzungsberichte,  Phil. -hist. 
Kl.,  clxix.  53,  cli.  2  ;  Krumbacher,  Geschichte  der  Byzantinischen  Litteratur  (1897), 
p.  630  ;  Drexl,  Achmets  Traumhuch  {Einleitung  und  Probe  eines  kritischen  Textes), 
Munich  dissertation,  1909,  who  gives  an  account  of  the  manuscripts  preliminary  to 
the  preparation  of  a  critical  edition.  None  of  these  writers  appears  to  have  examined 
the  preface. 

"  On  these  campaigns  see  Chalandon,  Les  Comnenes,  ii.  247-57,  456-9,  503-13. 

"  Chalandon,  ii.  644-51. 

**  As  seen  from  the  date  of  Alexander  Ill's  letter  acknowledging  it :  Migne,  ccii. 
227  ;  Jafife-Lowenfeld,  no.  12957.  "  Migne,  ccii.  274. 

^■^  Ff .  59-127  V,  saec.  xii-xiii ;  a  modern  copy  is  in  the  Ashmolean  MS.  179.  There  is  a 
copy  of  the  fourteenth  century  in  the  British  Museum,  Harleian  MS.  4025,  ff .  8-78 ;  and 
one  at  Wolfenbiittel,  MS.  2917,  which  I  know  only  from  Drexl  and  from  Heinemann's 
catalogue.  Without  the  preface  the  translation  is  found  in  Vat.  MS.  Lat.  4094,  ff.  1-32  v. 


■'jii^i 


1918  LEO  TUSCUS  495 

plectentes  vestigia,  tamen  memorandi  non  sum  oblitus  sompnii  a  te 
visi  qui  dictum  inexpugnabilem  virum  eneo  in  equo  supra  columpnam^^ 
quam  Traces  dicunt  Augustiana  Bizancii  sito  nobiliter  sedere  conspica- 
baris,  eodem  autem  in  loco  doctissimis  quibusdam  astantibus  Latinis 
Romana  oratione  cum  in  quodam  legeret  libello  interpellanti  tibi  soli 
favorem  prestitisse  visus  est.  Latuit  tunc  utrumque  nostrum  ea  quid 
portenderet  visio,  at  vero  eiusmodi  oraculum  editus  per  te  de  Filii  hominis 
minoritate  ad  Patrem  Deum  libellus  tempore  post  revelavit  sub  tegumentis. 
Profecto  eneus  ille  sonipes  anima  carens  altissime  sonantissimeque  que- 
stionis  erat  que  inter  Grecos  versabatur  ventilatio,  verbum  scilicet  Dei 
secundum  quod  incarnatum  patri  equale  prestans  rationis  veritatisque 
radicitus  expers  ut  quadrupes  nominatus.  Solvit  autem  illam  contro- 
versiam  clamitante  dicto  libello  augustalis  clemencie  decretum  pauco 
scandali  foment o  contra  voluntatem  illius  relicto.  Ex  eo  igitur  tempore 
pectus  sollicitudine  percussi,  sub  corde  ignitos  versavi  carbones,  cogitando 
uti  lene  esset  annon  si  onirocriti  Grecorum  pbilosophis  ariolanti  loqui 
latine  persuaderem  enucleatim  atque  inoffensam  perspicuitatem  figmenti 
sompnialis  tuo  favore  nostrorum  Tuscorum  desiderio  breviter  reserarem. 
Quos  quidem  fluctu  percupio  aspergi  undiosiore  ut  irrigentur  affatim 
efficianturque  fecundiores,  nam  Seres,  ut  fertur,  arbores  suas  undis  asper- 
gunt  quando  uberiorem  lanuginem  que  sericum  admittere  nituntur. 
Ceterum  baut  facile  est  in  buiusmodi  versari  pelago  cuius  latitudo  ad 
aures  usque  dehiscit  non  sponte  remigem  asciscens  invalidum.  Non  solum 
enim  subtilibus  expositum  investigationibus  et  illos  repellunt  qui  debilitate 
pedum  serpunt,  ut  antipodes,  et  eos  qui  non  movent  linguas,  ut  pleraque 
aquatilium,  set  neque  monoxilo  se  navigari  limine  patitur.  Quam  ob  rem 
loquelam  imperatoriorum  interpretationibus  apicum  obsequentem  per 
excubias  interdum  huic  translationi  non  irrita  spe  addixi,  totum  opus 
sapiencie  tue  dicaturus  iudicio,  mei  quidem  auctoris,  tui  vero  probatoris 
equilibre  pensans  incertum.  Narii  tuum  examen  discernere  non  sum 
ambiguus  quicquid  arida  exsanguisque  poscit  ratiocinatio.  Set  enim 
desiderantissimus  nepos  Fabricius^^  Grecarum  sciolus  et  ipse  litterarum 
sompnialium  figmentorum  odoratus  rosaria  scribendi  assiduitate  me  a  con- 
fluentibus  elevat  prestatque  non  mediocre  adiumentum,  atque  iccirco 
neque  nomen  sine  subiecto  neque  sine  viribus  erit  edicio  Sidoneis  Tirenis- 
que  sagittis  parum  penetrabilis  apparitura  ut  arbitror.  Ergo  quisquis  nodo- 
sorum  sompniorum  fatigatur  involucris,  si  per  aliquod  bic  scriptorum 
absolvi  postulet,  faveat  pretemptare  plus  nosse  quam  sat  est,  ne  titulos 
depravet  Apollinee  urbis  ambiguum  rimis  berbidisque  sentibus.  Ego 
autem  tui  solius  utrarumque  linguarum  peritissimo  examini  volumen  boo 
subpono,  ut  in  eo  que  arescunt  ac  caligant  per  te  illustrata  orbi  demum 
succincta  professione  vulgentur. 

Another  Italian  writer  appears  at  Constantinople  in  this 

1^  The  statue  of  Justinian  called  Augusteion,  in  the  place  of  the  same  name. 
See  Du  Cange,  ConstantinopoUs  Christiana,  bk.  i,  c.  24  ;  Unger,  Quellen  der  Byzan- 
tinischen  KunsfgeschicMe  (Vienna,  1878),  pp.  137  ff. 

^^  Fabricius  was  a  member  of  the  papal  household  in  1182,  when  he  was  sent  to 
Constantinople  by  Lucius  III :  Miiller,  no.  21.  Another  learned  friend,  Caciareda, 
s  mentioned  in  the  De  heresibus  (Migne,  ccii.  333  f.). 


496  LEO  T  use  US  October 

period  in  the  person  of  a  certain  Pascalis  Romanus,  who  also 
shared  the  interest  in  signs  and  wonders  which  prevailed  at 
Manuel's  court.  His  Liber  thesauri  occulti,  with  an  introduction 
citing  Aristotle's  De  naturis  animalium,  Hippocrates,  and  '  Cato 
noster  ',  is  a  dream -book  compiled  at  Constantinople  in  1165.2t> 

Charles  H.  Haskins. 


Provincial  Priors  and  Vicars  of  the  English  Dominicans 

A  FEW  additions  and  corrections  may  be  made  to  Father  Gumbley's 
list  published  in  this  Review,  above,  pp.  243-51.  Some  of  the  notes 
here  given  were  printed  in  my  edition  of  the  Durham  Liber  Exera- 
plorum  {British  Society  of  Fravx^iscan  Studies,  vol.  i,  1908),  p.  135, 
in  connexion  with  Simon  of  Hinton.  A.  G.  Little. 

Simon  of  Hinton,  Henton,  or  Heynton,  is  said  to  have  been  provincial 
c.  1360.  The  authority  is  Bale.  The  Durham  Liber  Exemplorum,  written 
between  1270  and  1279,  quotes  a  story  about  a  clericus  luhricus  and 
adds  :  '  Hoc  autem  exemplum  scripserat  in  libro  suo  quidam  frater  noster 
qui  de  fratre  Symone  de  Heynton  materiam  (?)  audierat.'  In  the  catalogue 
of  the  library  of  Christchurch,  Canterbury,  drawn  up  when  Eastry  was 
prior  (1284-1331),  occurs  the  entry  '  Compilaciones  fratris  Symonis  de 
Hentun'.^  The  only  manuscript  containing  works  by  Simon  of  Hinton 
that  I  know  of  (New  College  45)  is  dated  by  Coxe,  *  sec.  xiv  ex. '.  A  theo- 
logical miscellany  in  Harl.  MS.  2316  quotes  a  story  from  Simon  :  '  Narravit 
frater  Simon  de  Henton  in  leccione  sua  '  (fol.  58),  but  this  manuscript 
also  is  of  the  second  half  of  the  fourteenth  century.  It  is,  however,  clear 
from  the  evidence  that  Simon  of  Hinton  flourished  in  the  thirteenth 
century,  and  there  is  little  doubt  that  he  is  to  be  identified  with  the  Simon 
who  was  provincial  prior  from  1254  to  1261.  Bale  has  put  him  a  century 
too  late. 

Some  of  the  gaps  after  Hugh  Dutton,  elected  provincial  in  1339 
or    1340,    may   be    filled   up   from   the    public    records   and  episcopal 
registers. 
1346,  1347.  Arnold  de  Strelly  or  Strelley  as  provincial  prior  presented 

friars  to  hear  confessions  :   Hereford  Episcopal  Registers,  Trillek, 

pp.  92,  104. 
1350,  1351-3.  Gregory  of  St.  Michael  as  provincial  presented  friars  to 

hear  confessions  :    Bath  &  Wells  Episcopal  Registers ;    Rad.  de 

Salopia  (Somerset  Record  Society,  x),  p.  639  ;  Hereford  Episcopal 

Registers,  Trillek,  pp.  19,  20. 

2"  '  Incipit  liber  thesauri  occulti  a  Pascale  Romano  editus  Constantinopolis  anno 
mundi  .vi.  dc.  Ixxiiii.,  anno  Christi  .m.c.lxv.  Thesaurus  occultus  requiescit  in  corde 
sapientis  .  .  .  succincte  ad  thesaurum  desiderabilem  aperiendum  properemus.  Som- 
pnium  itaque  est  figura ',  &c. :  Digby  MS.  103,  fP.  41-58  v,  preceding  'Led' sOneirocriticon. 
The  first  of  the  two  books  of  the  treatise  is  also  in  the  British  Museum,  Harleian  MS. 
4025,  f.  1. 

^  M.  R.  James,  The  Ancient  Libraries  of  Canterbury  and  Dover,  p.  71. 


I 


1918  PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND   VICARS  497 

1356,  1357,  1361.  John  de  Tatenhall,  D.D.,  appears  as  provincial  in  tliese 
years  :  Hereford  Episcopal  Registers y  Charlton,  p.  61  ;  CaL  of 
Papal  Petitions,  i.  370. 

1364.  Kobert  Pynke  :  Cal.  of  Letter  Books  of  the  City  of  London,  G,  p.  177  ; 
Sharpe,  Wills,  ii.  36. 

1368,  1370.  William  of  Bottisham  or  Bodekisham  presented  friars  to 
Bishop  Charlton  in  1368  {Reg.,  p.  47),  and  issued  letters  of 
fraternity  at  the  chapter  of  Lincoln  in  the  same  year  (Public 
Record  Office,  Anc.  Deeds,  A  13187)  :  he  was  concerned  in  the 
arrest  of  an  apostate  friar  in  1370  (Public  Record  Office,  Chancery 
Warrants,  file  1765,  no.  4). 

1371-2.  Thomas  Rushook,  called  Thomas  Vichor  in  the  Acts  of  the  General 
Chapters,  was,  according  to  the  Acts  of  the  General  Chapter  held 
at  Carcassonne  in  1378,  deposed  by  the  Master-General  six  years 
ago,  i.  e.  in  1372  {Acta,  ii.  450-1)  2.  He  must  therefore  have  been 
elected  provincial  before  that,  probably  in  1370  or  1371. 

1373,  1374.  Nicholas  de  Monington  appears  as  provincial  in  September 
1373  and  March  1373-4  (Public  Record  Office,  Chancery  Warrants, 
file  1751,  nos.  5  and  6). 

1374  (?)-1382.  Thomas  Rushook  or  Vichor  does  not  seem  to  have  recog- 
nized the  validity  of  his  deposition,  as  he  was  again  declared 
deposed  by  the  General  Chapter  in  1378  {Acta,  ii.  451),  and 
several  vicars  were  appointed.  But  in  1379  Urban  VI  annulled 
all  proceedings  against  Thomas  Rushook  and  declared  him  to 
have  been  and  to  be  provincial  of  England  {Cal.  of  Papal  Letters^ 
V.  14-15).  He  resigned  in  1382  on  becoming  archdeacon  of 
St.  Asaph.  The  General  Chapter  which  adhered  to  Avignon 
declared  John  Paris  vicar  in  1380  {Acta,  iii.  3) ;  cf.  Public  Record 
Office,  Anc.  Petitions,  6666). 

1404  (?).  John  Dille  appears  as  provincial  in  Public  Record  Office,  Chancery 
Miscell.,  bundle  19,  file  4,  no.  11.  The  document  contains 
articles  of  John  Dille  against  John  Cliderowe,  chaplain,  praying 
that  the  latter  may  be  restrained  from  maintaining  the  prioress 
and  sisters  of  Dartford  against  their  ordinaries.  It  is  not  dated, 
but  appears  to  belong  to  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  or  beginning 
of  the  fifteenth  century.  Perhaps  John  Dille  should  be  inserted 
between  William  Pikworth  and  John  of  Lancaster. 

1422.  Thomas  Waryn  was  provincial  prior  on  22  January  1422  (Stowe 
Charters,  no.  605,  British  Museum).  As  John  of  Redesdale  was 
provincial  prior  on  7  February  1422,  it  is  probable  that  one  of 
these  years  should  be  1423.  (John  of  Redesdale's  grant  to 
Richard  of  Burton  is  to  be  found  in  Public  Record  Office,  Excheq. 
K.  R.,  Eccles.,  6/47.) 

1462.  John  appears  as  provincial  prior  in  British  Museum,  Add.  Charters, 
17136. 

*  '  Quia  r.  p.  frater  Elias  magister  ordinis  ex  officio  suo  provinciam  Anglie  dudum 
anno  sexto  preterit©  visitaverit,'  &c.  I  have  not  found  any  allusion  in  the  English 
Public  Records  to  this  visitation.  It  is  clear  from  an  entry  in  the  Close  Rolls, 
25  May  1377,  that  Elias  was  in  England  at  that  date. 

VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  K  k 


498      ANNALS  OF  THE  ABBOTS  OF  OSENEY     October 

The  Annals  of  the  Abbots  of  Oseney 

For  his  account  of  the  abbey  of  Oseney  near  Oxford,  Anthony 
Wood  obtained  some  of  his  facts  '  ex  MS.  anonimi  Ousney  de 
vitis  abbatum  eiusdem  penes  episcopum  Oxon  '.^  As  the  bishopric 
of  Oxford  was  endowed  with  lands  which  had  belonged  to  Oseney, 
it  would  not  be  surprising  if  such  a  record  were  preserved  among 
the  diocesan  papers  ;  but  no  trace  of  it  could  be  found  in  modern 
times.  It  now  appears  that  Wood's  authority  is  Twyne  MS. 
xxi.  264,  in  the  University  Archives,  and  that  Wood  himself 
never  saw  the  manuscript.  It  was  not  the  property  of  the  bishopric 
of  Oxford,  but  in  the  private  possession  of  John  Bridges,  bishop 
of  Oxford  between  1604  and  1618.  Although  it  adds  but  little 
to  what  we  know  from  Wykes  and  the  Annals  of  Oseney  (in  the 
Rolls  Series),  it  is  worth  printing,  that  scholars  may  not  hunt  for 
it  in  future.  It  will  be  observed  that  it  was  not  a  chronicle  of 
Oseney  but  some  notes  about  the  abbots,  added  at  the  end  of 
a  history  of  the  world  from  Adam  to  Henry  VI,  and  that  it  must 
have  been  written  after  1454  when  Bourchier  was  made  archbishop 
and  before  1460  when  Henry  VI  was  deposed.  ^ 

Ex  manuscripto  episcopi  Oxon'  ^  apud  Staunton  Harcot,  in  folio  ; 
videtur  eius  author  non  unus  sed  plures  ;  ultimus  uero  est  monachi  ^ 
cuiusdam  Osneyensis  in  Oxonia ;  sed  tamen  una  est  communis  omnibus 
inscriptio  Speculum  Theologie  lohannis  Methensis,  que  in  tegmine  reperitur 
et  in  fronte  libri. 

Primus  author  nihil  agit  in  re  historica  sed  de  rebus  aliis  ludicris,  ut 
de  arbore  virtutum  &  de  figura  Cherubin  &c. 

Secundus  author  agit  de  re  genealogica  &  de  quatuor  summis  imperiis, 
incipiens  ab  Adamo  &  desinens  in  regnum  Assyriorum ;  cuius  initium  est 
Considerans  historie  sacre  prolixitatem,^  &c. 

Tertius  ^  incipit  quoque  ab  Adamo  &  desinit  in  Henricum  VI  Anglorum 
regem,  de  quo  in  prefatione  sua  loquitur,  quam  sic  inchoat  Cuilihet  principi 
congruum,  utile  &  honestum  est  genealogie  sue  seriem  cognoscere  &c. 

1  Wood,  City  o/  Oxford,  ii.  202  n. 

*  Twyne,  in  his  later  hand,  adds  '  lo.  Bridges,  episcopus  Oxon.'  He  was 
bishop  from  1604  to  1618,  and  lived  at  Marsh  Baldon  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
time. 

3  Oseney  was  a  house  of  Austin  canons,  not  of  monks. 

*  Cf.  Bale,  Index  Britanniae  Scriptorum,  p.  469  and  note  5. 

'  In  the  margin  Twyne  adds  '  Si  iste  author  non  sit  Remingtonus  vide  Londinensem 
p.  44  *.  Londinensis  is  John  Caius,  who  under  this  name  issued  De  antiquitate  Canta- 
hrigiensis  Academie.  On  p.  59  he  quotes  an  author  who  states  that  Cambridge  was 
founded  in  394  b.  c.  ,  Oxford  in  a.  d.  873,  and  that  Cambridge  was  the  older  by  1267  years ; 
but  he  does  not  state  that  the  author  was  named  Remington.  Twyne  (xxi.  237)  has 
'  Nota  ante  Petrum  de  Ickham  in  bibliotheca  publiea  Cantabrigie  :  Author  horum 
annalium  fuit  Radulfus  Remington,  clericus  Eboracensis '.  This  manuscript  is  now 
in  the  library  of  Corpus  Christi  College  ;  see  the  Catalogue  of  the  Library  by  Dr.  M.  R. 
James  (ii.  171),  who  reproduces  the  note  about  Remington  and  suggests  that  it  may  be 
by  Dr.  Caius. 


1918        ANNALS  OF  THE  ABBOTS  OF  OSENEY         499 

Hie  loquens  de  origine  Cantabrigie  sic  scribit :  Tempore  Bladud  facta 
est  Cantabrigia  a  Cantabro  duce  ante  incarnationem  per  annos 
CCCLXXXXVIII  &  a  philosophis  frequentata,  ut  dicit  Gildas  in  lingua 
Britannica. 

De  origine  vero  Oxonie  sic  scribit  in  vita  Aluredi.  Iste  Aluredus 
fundavit  Universitatem  Oxonie  anno  domini  DCCCLXXIII  sed  Canta- 
brigia erat  fundata  a  Cantabro  duce  ante  incarnationem  annis 
CCCLXXXXVIII  &  a  philosophis  inhabitata  &  sic  Cantabrigia  erat  ante 
Universitatem  Oxon'  per  mille  nongentos  uiginti  &  nouem  ^  annos. 

In  fine  chronici  sui  scribit  vitas  quorundam  archiepiscoporum  Cantua- 
riensium  ab  Augustino  usque  ad  Thomam  Bourchier,  &  vitas  quoque 
quorundam  abbatum  Osney,  quorum  hec  sunt  nomina  : 

Kadulphus  canonicus  sancte  Frideswide  anno  1129  ;  deinde  Prior 
monasterii  beate  Marie  de  Osney  f  undate  \sixi\  a  Roberto  de  Olley  secundo 
in  insula  Osney  nuncupata,  qui  Robertus  protunc  fuit  constabularius  regis 
Henrici  primi ;  iste  Radulphus  prefuit  predicto  monasterio  annis  19  '  & 
mensibus  5,  tempore  Theobaldi  Archiepiscopi  Cantuariensis. 

Wygodus  1168  » 

Edwardus  1184 

Hugo  1205 

Clemens  1221 

Rich:  de  Gray  1229 

lo:  de  Radinge  1235 

lo:  Lecche  1249  ;  annis  24  ^  rexit  &  cure  pastorali  cessit ;  per  istum 
(inquit)  edificata  ^^  est  navis  ecclesie  cum  capella  beate  virginis,  ex  parte 
occidentali  chori  quicquid  est,  testudine  &  campanili  exceptis,  refectorium 
sumptuosum  cum  tribus  partibus  claustri  inter  refectorium  &  ecclesiam, 
aulam  abbatis  cum  camera,  infirmariam  cum  capella,  duobus  spatiis 
occidentalibus  exceptis,  maiorem  portam  abbatie,  omnes  meliores  campanas 
cum  duobus  grangiis  Weston  &  Cleydon.^^ 

Adamus  de  Berners  1254,  prodicator  egregius,  cuius  predicationi 
solebant  scholares  Uniuersitatis  aliquoties  interesse. 

Rich:  Apletree  1267,  cuius  tempore  taxata  sunt  hospitia  clericorum  in 
Oxonia  anno  domini  1256.  Placitum  inter  dominum  Rogerum  de  Ammory 
&  eundem  abbatem  pro  manerio  de  Weston  ;  fratres  Carmelite  obtinuerunt 
placiam  suam  in  Stokwelstret 

Gul:  Sutton  1284 

Rogerus  de  Couentre  1296,  cuius  tempore  ludaei  contrafecerunt 
sigillum  commune  abbatis  &  conuentus 

lo:  Bibury  1316 

®  Twyne  may  have  made  an  error  in  the  numbers  in  the  original. 

'  In  reality  9  years,  5  months. 

*  The  scribe  in  each  case  gives  the  date  when  the  abbot  died  or  resigned, 

®  He  ruled  14  years. 

10  Twyne  adds  in  the  margin  :  '  Edificatio  Osney ;  et  existimo  fuisse  circa  tempora 
quibus  facta  est  dedicatio  quorundam  altarium  Osney ;  vide  librum  veterem  quem 
habui  ex  chartario  Aedis  Christi  Oxonie,  putridum  &  lacerum.'  This  book  is  unknown. 
Many  of  Twyne' s  papers  were  lost  soon  after  his  death  in  the  great  fire  of  October 
1644.  Twyne  was  not  the  only  person  who  obtained  deeds  from  Christ  Church  ;  Wood 
certainly  did,  and  circumstantial  evidence  convicts  Cotton. 

"  Weston-on-the-Green,  Oxfordshire ;    Claydon,  Buckinghamshire. 

Kk2 


600      ANNALS  OF  THE  ABBOTS  OF  OSENEY     October 

lo:  Osney  1330 

Tho:  Cudelyngton  1373,  qui  pontem  aedificauit  usque  ad  Brokenheyns  ^^ 

lo:  Bokelonde  1403,  cuius  tempore  adepti  sumus  le  Newinn,^^  molen- 
dina  Castri  &  Kingesmed.^*  Duo  placita  ^^  contra  burgenses  Oxon'  pro 
Franchesiis  &  alterum  contra  natiuum  monasterii ;  edificauit  le  locke  iuxta 
Regalem  Locum/^  &  compositio  facta  est  inter  nos  &  Regalem  Locum. 

Gul:  Wendover  1430 

Tho:  Hoknorton  1452.  Hie  nouas  scholas  decern  ad  captandam  bene- 
volentiam  Universitatis  edificari  ^^  fecit,  quatuor  cameras  in  Aula  Vitrea, 
plures  in  Aula  Profunda,  Aulis  Georgii  &  Woodekockhall  &  similiter  in 
aula  sancti  Edwardi^^ 

lo:  Walton,  abbas  ultimus 


Philip  Wolf  of  Seligenstadt 

Of  the  Dominican  Philip  Wolf,  a  native  of  Seligenstadt,  who 
became  prior  of  Presburg  somewhere  about  the  year  1500,  nothing 
seems  to  be  known  except  from  the  extracts  made  by  John  Bale 
in  the  note -book  (Selden  MS.  supra  64,  in  the  Bodleian  library) 
which  he  compiled  at  various  dates  between  1548  and  1555,  and 
which  was  first  published  under  the  title  of  Index  Britanniae 
Scriptorum  in  1902.^    He  gives  the  biography  of  Wolf  as  follows  : 

Philippus  Wolfius,  Hierapolita,  inter  Francofordiam  et  Sineriburgum  ^ 
natus,  in  oppido  quod  Seligenstat  seu  Hierapolim  vocant :   Dominicanum 

12  This  must  have  been  a  rebuilding  of  Hythe  Bridge.  The  words  '  usque  Broken- 
hays  '  suggest  that  pons  is  used  in  its  medieval  sense,  a  bridge  with  its  causeway.  The 
abbot  not  only  rebuilt  the  bridge  but  made  a  causeway  to  the  end  of  Irishman's  Street, 
now  George  Street.    Brokenhays  was  subsequently  known  as  Gloucester  Green. 

1^  Subsequently  known  as  the  Cardinal's  Hat ;  see  Balliol  Deeds,  p.  74  (Oxford 
Historical  Society).    For  the  acquisition  see  Cal.  of  Pat.  Rolls,  3  February  1390. 

1*  20  September  1386  iCal.  of  Pat.  Rolls,  p.  214). 

15  One  of  these  was  about  the  boundary  between  the  city  and  the  manor  of  Oseney. 
It  was  settled  on  22  February  1377,  by  an  award  of  the  bishop  of  Lincoln,  preserved 
both  in  the  Cartulary  of  Oseney  and  in  the  municipal  archives  of  Oxford.  It  is  not  known 
that  there  was  any  other  dispute  between  the  abbey  and  the  burgesses  between  1373 
and  1403  ;  and  it  may  be  that  the  manuscript  read  '  Duo  placita ;  unum  contra 
burgenses  Oxon'  pro  franchesiis  &  alterum  contra  natiuum'  &c.  Nothing  is  known 
of  the  plea  against  a  nativus  of  the  monastery. 

1^  Rewley  Abbey  in  North  Oseney. 

^'  He  rebuilt  the  schools.  The  rentals  of  Oseney  show  that  they  were  twelve 
originally,  six  on  the  ground  floor  and  six  above.  After  this  time  they  were  ten, 
five  above  and  five  below.  A  school  was  a  lecture  room  fitted  with  seats  and  desks. 
There  may  have  been  about  thirty  schools  in  Oxford  at  this  time.  The  ten  Oseney  schools 
stood  in  the  western  half  of  the  Bodleian  Quadrangle,  facing  the  Divinity  School. 

1^  Glazen  Hall  was  in  School  Street  on  the  east  side  immediately  to  the  north  of 
St.  Mary's  church ;  Deep  Hall  is  now  the  western  end  of  University  College ;  George 
Hall  and  Woodcock  Hall  were  between  Deep  Hall  and  Grove  Street.  St.  Edward 
Hall  was  adjoining  to  Canon  School  and  to  the  churchyard  of  St.  Edward's.  It  was 
not  in  St.  Mary's  parish  as  Wood  states  (Wood,  City  of  Oxford,  ii.  216). 

*  The  notice  in  Quetif  and  Echard's  Scriptorcs  Ordinis  Pracdicatorum  (1719), 
p.  9046,  is  solely  dependent  on  Bale's  references  in  his  printed  Catalogus. 

*  Apparently  for  Cineriburgum,  a  fanciful  formation  from  Ascha,Eenhurg. 


1918  PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT  501 

institutumanno  domini  1485.  admisit.  Qui  theologie  bacchalaureus  factus, 
per  varias  Germani§  vrbes  pr§dicabat.  Diligens  historiarum  qu^sitor, 
diuersarum  terrarum  bibliothecas  inuisit,  etiam  Rome,  dum  ageret  priorem 
Bozanum.  Prioratum  ille  gessit,  Frankfordi§,  Mogunti§,  Treueri,  Lutzen- 
burg§,  et  Bozani.    Scripsit  ille  inter  cetera, 

Catalogum  peritorum  virorum  tripertitum,  li .  iij .  Cum  ah  ineunte  ^tate, 
vt  ita  dicam,  et  potissimum. 

Viretum  Calaguritanorum,^  li.  vj .  Eximio  sacre  theologie  professori  etc. 
Cum  mecum  ipse  tacitus  s^pe  med[itavi].* 

Bale  then  proceeds  to  enumerate  a  series  of  theological  works,^ 
and  after  them  '  Chronicon  Franckfordi§,  li.  i  ',  adding  '  Obijt 
Franckfordie  anno  domini  1529.  in  die  Gregorij  '.  Prefixed  to 
this  notice  is  the  heading  '  Omnis  generis  peritorum  seu  illustrium 
virorum  Catalogus  Philippi  Wolfij  Hierapolitani,  ordinis  Pr^di- 
catorum  '. 

Among  the  miscellanea  which  Bale  copied  out  on  various 
blank  leaves  of  his  note-book  are  several  sets  of  extracts  from 
Wolf's  Catalogus.  Two  of  them,  which  contain  biographical 
particulars  and  notices  of  writings,  I  printed  in  my  edition  :  ^ 
these  are  taken  from  books  ii  and  iii.  Others  are  simple  lists  of 
names.  On  fo.  255  6-260  6,  continued  on  f o.  264,  is  the  onomasticon 
of  book  i  :  Ex  primo  libro  Catalogi  Philippi  Wolphij,  de  non 
baptizatis.     It  begins  : 

Adam  primus  homo. 
Aba,  Rabi  solemnis. 
Aaron,  frater  Mosis. 
Abaris,  Hiperboreas. 
Abacuc  Iud§us. 

On  fo.  253,  254  are  a  series  of  notices  which  appear  to  be 
taken,  though  it  is  not  so  stated,  from  this  first  book.  I  give 
the  opening  sentences  as  a  specimen  : 

Adam  primus  omnium  parens,  cui  merit o  primus  omnium  illustrium 
seu  peritorum  virorum  debetur  locus  :  a  summo  opifice  in  agro  Damasceno 
formatus,  et  in  paradisum  locatus,  atque  tanta  gratia  informatus  est  :  vt 
nullo  tradente  magistro,  omnium  liberalium  artium  statim  clarissimam 
habuerit  agnitionem.  Siquidem,  quid  astronomia,  quid  geometria,  quidue 
ali§  artes,  quas  liberales  vocant,  in  se  detineant,  totum  sciuit. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  continue  the  quotation,  nor  does  it  seem 
worth  while  to  print  the  alphabet  of  the  contents  of. book  i. 
The  lists  for  books  ii  and  iii  are  more  interesting,  and  I  give 
them  below,  as  they  possibly  furnish  clues  which  may  lead 
to  the  discovery  of  the  lost  work.  The  contents  of  book  ii 
were  almost  all  transcribed  by  Miss  Mary  Bateson  ;    those  of 

'^  Bale  refers  to  this  book  in  his  Scriptorum  Illustrium  Catalogus  ii.  136. 

*  Index,  p.  506,  at  fo.  255  of  the  manuscript. 

^  This  list  of  works  is  printed  in  full  in  the  Index,  I.e.  *  pp.  500-6. 


602 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGEN8TADT       October 


book  iii  I  have  added,  and  I  have  collated  the  whole  with  the 
original.  No  attempt  has  been  made  to  correct  the  numerous 
errors  of  the  manuscript.  Reginald  L.  Poole. 


fo.244.]     Ex  secundo  lihro  Catalogi  Philip'pi  Wolphii, 

de  haptisatis. 


de  vitis  peritorum  virorumy 


Ambrosius  Mediolanensis. 

Aboasar  astrologus. 

Achatius  Cesariensis. 

Accursius  Florentinus. 

Aoniar  astrologus. 

Adamus  Wernerus. 

Adalbertus  Metensis. 

Adelmannus  Brixiensis. 

Adeobaldus  Vltraiectensis. 

Ado  episcopus  Viennensis. 

Adrianus  Fuldensis. 

Agnellus  Rauennas. 

Agrippa  Castorius. 

Aiotanus  Armenius. 

Alanus  de  Insulis. 

Albertus  patriarcha  Hierosolymita. 

Albertus  Galiotus. 

Albertus  Patauinus. 

Albertus  de  Eyb. 

Albertus  Ferrarius. 

Albertus  Rickmersdorp. 

Albricus  Toxatus. 

Alchabicius  Mathematicus. 

Alcuinus  Anglus. 

Albo  Floriacensis. 

Alexander  primus,  pont.  Ro. 

Alexander  Quintus. 

Alexander  de  Imola. 

Alexander  Lytlios,  Medicus. 

Alexander  Capadox,  episcopus. 

Alexander  de  Hales. 

Alexander  de  Villa  Dei. 

Alexander  de  Alexandria. 

Alpharus  Cassinensis. 

Alpharus  Hispanus. 

Alphonsus  rex  Castell§. 

Alpharabius  Arabs. 

Amalaricus  Carnotensis. 

Amalarius  monachus. 

Ambrosius  Marcionites. 

Ambrosius  Alexandrinus. 

Ambrosius  Camaldulensis. 


Ambrosius  Coriolanus. 
Ambrosius  Sphiera. 
Ambrosius  Calepinus. 
Amphilocius  episcopus. 
Anacletus  Atheniensis. 
Anatholius  Laodicensis. 
Anastasius  Bibliothecarius. 
Andoenus  Pot  homage  nsis. 
Andres  Summarius. 
Andreas  de  Traiecto. 
Andreas  Dandalus. 
Andreas  de  Pisis. 
Angelus  Perusinus. 
Angelus  de  Clauasio. 
Angelus  Policianus. 
Angelus  de  Gambiglionibus. 
Angelonus  Diaconus. 
Anianus  poeta. 
Ansegisus  Lobiensis. 
Anselmus  Laudunensis. 
Anselmus  Cantuariensis. 
Antiochus  episcopus. 
Antonius  Eremita. 
Antonius  de  Butrio. 
Antonius  Graynerius. 
Antonius  Rosellus. 
Antonius  Cormazanus. 
Antonius  Corseta,  Siculus. 
Antonius  Veronensis. 
Antonius  Panormita. 
Antonius  Rampogolis. 
Antonius  de  lenua. 
Antonius  Andre§. 
Appelles  hereticus. 
Appion  Grammaticus. 
Apollinaris  Asianus. 
Apollinaris  Laodicenus. 
Apollinaris  Cremonensis. 
ApoUonius  Rhetor. 
Apo]loni[u]s  Senator. 
Aquila  Ponticus. 
Aiabanus  Catholicus. 


1918 


PHILIP   WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT 


503 


Arator  poeta. 
Archelaiis  Mesopotamius. 
Aribo  Mogimtinus. 
Aristides  Atheniensis. 
Armagandus  physicus. 
Arnoldus  de  Villa  Noua. 
Arnobius  Rhetor. 
Arnoldus  Bostius. 
Arrius  presbyter. 
Asclepius  Apher. 
Astaxanus  Astensis. 
Asterius  Arrianus. 
Athanasius  Alexandrinus. 
Atticus  Constantinopolitanus. 
Attilius  Seuerus. 
Audentius  Hispanus. 
Augustinus  Apher. 
Augustinus  de  Anchona. 
Augustinus  de  Roma. 
Augustinus  Datus. 
Auitus  Vien[n]ensis. 
Ausonius  Burdegalensis. 
Aso  Bononiensis. 


Baptista  Platina. 
Baptista  Piasius,  Cremon[ensis]. 
Baptista  Mantuanus. 
Baptista  de  sancto  Blasio. 
Baptista  Leo,  Florentinus. 
Baptista  de  Saliis. 
Bachiarius  Peregrinus. 
Baiorotus  iurisconsultus. 
Baldericus  Dolensis.^ 
Baldus  Perusinus. 
Barbacia  Siculus. 
Barlaam  Eremita. 
Barlaam,  Basilii  monachus. 
Bardesanes  Mesopotamius. 
Barnabas  Cyprius. 
Bartholus  Saxoferratus. 
Bartholomeus  Brixianus. 
Bartholomeus  de  Ossa. 
Bartholomeus  Salicetus. 
Bartholomeus  de  Vrbino. 
Bartholomeus  Montagnana, 
Bartholomeus  Anglicus. 
Bartholomeus  de  Chaimis. 


Written  above 


Bartholomeus  de  Neapoli. 
Bartholomeus  Fauentinus. 
Bartholomeus  Mulbrunnensis. 
Bartholomeus  Ferentinus. 
Bartholomeus  de  Colonia. 
Basilides  hereticus. 
Basilius  Magnus. 
Basilius  Anquiranus. 
Beda  venerabilis. 
Benecasa  Italus. 
Benedictus  Abbas. 
Benedictus  de  Plumbino. 
Benedictus  de  Barsis. 
Beneuenutus  Imolensis. 
Berengarius  Turonensis. 
Berengarius  Cardinalis. 
Berillus  Botrensis  episcopus. 
Bernardus  Clareuallensis. 
Bernardus  Compostellanus. 
Bernardus  Parmensis. 
Bernardus  Dorna. 
Bernardus  Cassinensis. 
Bernardus  lustinianus. 
Bernardus  de  Bessa. 
Bernardus  de  Gaudonio. 
Bernardus  Bononiensis. 
Bernardus  Breydenback. 
Bernardinus  Gadalus. 
Bernardinus  Bustius. 
Bernardinus  de  Senis. 
Berno  Benedictinus. 
Bertrandus  Mediolanensis. 
Bessarion  Cardinalis. 
Bethenus  Astrologus. 
Blondus  Flauius. 
Bonaguida  iurisconsultus. 
Bonauentura  Cardinalis. 
Bonauentura  iurisconsultus. 
Boetius  Manilius. 
Bonifacius  Wenefridus. 
Bonifacius  Octauus. 
Boninus  Mombretus. 
Brito  Minorita. 
Bruno  Herbipolensis. 
Bruno  Coloniensis. 
Burgundio  Pisanus. 
Burchardus  Wormaciensis. 
Buridanus  philosophus. 
Burdegalensis. 


[fo.  245. 


604 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT       October 


Caietamis  Vincentinus. 
Caius  fidei  doctor. 
Calixtus  Tertiiis. 
Calixtus  primus  Ro.  pontifex. 
Caldicamis  lurista. 
Campanus  Lombardus. 
Candidus  Theologus. 
Capuanus  lurisconsultus. 
Caradocus  Lancarbanensis. 
Carolus  Aretinus. 
Cassiodorus  Senator. 
Celestinus  Pelagionista. 
Celestinus  primus,  Ro.  pont. 
Cerdo  hereticus. 
Cesarius  Arelatensis. 
Cesarius  Cistertiensis. 
Cerinthus  hereticus. 
Chymacius  Taurisanus. 
Claiidianus  Viennensis. 
Clemens  primus  pont. 
Clemens  Alexandrirus. 
Clemens  quintus  Ro.  pont. 
Clemens  Sextus. 
Cletus  pontifex  Ro. 
Cinus  Pistoriensis. 
Ciprianus  Apher. 
Cyrillus  Hierosolymitanus. 
Cyrillus  Alexandrinus. 
Cyrillus  Grecus,  Carmelita. 
Cirus  Alexandrinus. 
Collucius  Florentinus. 
Columbanus  abbas. 
Commodianus  philosophus. 
Constantinus  Cassinensis. 
Conradus  Suetius. 
Conradus  de  Zabernia. 
Conradus  Celtes. 
Conradus  Ratisponensis. 
Conradus  Summenhart. 
Conradus  de  Saxonia. 
Conradus  de  Alceia. 
Conradus  de  Rotenburg. 
Conradus  Leontorius. 
Cornelius  Ro.  pont. 
Crabianus  doctor. 
Crysoloras  Bizantius. 
Christianus  Hantofer. 
Christophorus  Castellio. 
Christophorus  Landinus. 


Christianus  Drutmarus. 
Curius  Alexandrinus. 

Dantes  AlegeriuB. 
Damasus  Hispanus. 
Dauid  Minorita. 
Deus  dedit,  vel  Theodatus. 
Dexter  Philosophus. 
Didimus  Alexandrinus. 
Dinus  Mugelanus. 
Dinus  de  Garbo,  Florent[inus]. 
Diodorus  Tarsensis. 
Dionysius  Ariopagita. 
Dionysius  Corinthiorum. 
Dionysius  Alexandrinus. 
Dionysius  Romanus. 
Dionysius  de  Burgo. 
Dionysius  Rikel. 
Dioscorus  Alexandrinus. 
Domicius  Caldrinus. 
Dominicus  de  S.  Gemin[i]ano. 
Dominicus  Carthusiensis. 
Donatus  Apher. 
Donatus  Grammaticus. 
Dorotheus  Eunuchus. 
Dodechinus  presbyter. 
Durandus  Minorita. 
Durandus  Speculator. 

Eberhardus  Bithiniensis. 
Ebion  hereticus. 
Eckardus  Abbas. 
Eckbertus  Treuerensis. 
Eckbertus  Leodiensis. 
Effrem  Edissenus. 
Elisabeth  Abbatissa. 
Elfredus  rex  Angli§. 
Elphes,  vxor  Boetii. 
Eynardus  Scriba. 
Egelnotus  Cantuariensis. 
Egidius  de  Fuscariis. 
Egidius  de  Roma. 
Egidius  philosophus. 
Egidius  Parisiensis. 
Egesippus  historicus. 
Egesippus  alter  monachus. 
Ethelwolphus  de  Lapide. 
Emanuel  Chrisoloras. 
Eneas  Syluius. 


[fo. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIOENSTADT 


505 


Engelhardus  poeta. 
Engelbertus  Abbas. 
EpiphaDius  Cyprius. 
Eraclides  Monachus. 
Erhardus  Corbeiensis. 
Eriphilus  Cipriletiensis. 
Eisicius  Cesariensis. 
Euagrius  Gr^cus. 
Euagrius  alter. 
Euaristus  Ro.  pont. 
Eubolus  Sophista. 
Eunomius  Cizicenus. 
Eusebius  Pamphilus. 
Eusebius  Emissenus. 
Eusebius  Vercellensis. 
Eusebius  Cremonensis. 
Eustacbius  Antiochenus. 
Eutherius  Lugdunensis. 
Eutices  h^resiarches. 
Euticius  Monachus. 
Eutropius  historicus.  ^ 
Enuodius  Ticinensis. 

Fabianus  Ro.  pontifex. 
Facius  de  Vbertinis. 
Facundus  Theologus. 
Fastidius  Britannus. 
Faustinus  presbyter. 
Faustinus  Lorinensis. 
Faustus  Episcopus. 
Federicus  Petucius. 
Felinus  Ferrariensis. 
Felix  hereticus. 
Felix  Cantor  Turicensis. 
Flauius  Grammaticus. 
Flauius  Vopiscus. 
Florus  Abbas  S.  Trudonis. 
Flodoardus  Remensis. 
Fortunatus  Apher. 
Fortunatus  Gallus. 
Fortunatus  Patauiensis. 
Fortunatus  Treuirensis. 
Franciscus  Maronis. 
Franciscus  Seraphicus. 
Franciscus  Petrarcha. 
Franciscus  de  Barbarino. 
Franciscus  de  Platea. 
Franciscus  de  Marchia. 


Franciscus  Zabarella. 
Franciscus  Barbarus. 
Franciscus  Philelphus. 
Franciscus  Niger. 
Franciscus  Albergotus. 
Franciscus  Pedemontium. 
Fridericus  ^  Petrucius. 
Frarco  Leodiensis. 
Franco  Benedictinus. 
Freculphus  Lexouiensis. 
Fulgentius  Apher. 
Fulbertus  Carnotensis. 

Gabriel  Zerbius. 
Gabriel  Byel,  doctor. 
Gains  Ro.  pontifex. 
Gallus  abbas  Cistertiensis. 
Gennadius  Constantinopolitanus. 
Gennadius  Massiliensis. 
Gentilis  Fulginas. 
Georgius  Valla. 
Georgius  Merula. 
Georgius  Borbachius. 
Georgius  Raysz  Carthusiensis. 
Gerbertus  Gallicus,  papa. 
Gerardus  Bituricensis. 
Gerardus  Odonis. 
Gerardus  Bononiensis, 
Gerardus  Groet. 
Gerardus  Senensis. 
Gerardus  Sagarellus. 
Gerardus  Cistertiensis. 
Gerardus  de  Monte,  Coloniensis. 
Gerardus  Monachus  Quintini. 
Gerardus  de  Zutphania. 
Gerardus  de  Stredam. 
Gerardus  de  Martrarijs. 
Gigo  Carthusiensis. 
Gildas  Britannus. 
Gilbertus  Porretanus. 
Gilbertus  Cistertiensis. 
Golscherus  monachus, 
Geraldus  de  Solo. 
Godfridus  Viterbiensis. 
Galfridus  Monemutensis. 
Godfridus  de  Fontibus. 
Gotscalcus  Hollen. 
Gratianus  de  S.  Proculo. 


^  Written  above  Franciscus  not  deleted. 


606 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT       October 


Gregornis  Lacticus. 
Gregorius  Magnus. 
Gregorius  Nazanzenus. 
Gregorius  Nisenus. 
Gregorius  de  Arimino. 
Gregorius  Trapesuntius. 
Gualterus  Burleus. 
Gualterus  Pictauensis. 
Guarinus  Veronensis. 
Guernerus  lurisconsultus. 
Guido  de  Columna. 
Guido  de  Monte  Rocherii. 
Guido  de  Perpiniano. 
Guido  Mandego. 
Guido  Bonatus. 

Guido  de  Baypho,  Archid[iaconus]. 
Guido  Rauennas. 
Guido  Arecius. 
Guilhelmus  Eremita. 
fo.  246  6.]  Guilhelmus  Parisiensis 
Guilhelmus  Horburk. 
Guilhelmus  Durandus. 
Guilhelmus  de  Velde. 
Guilhelmus  Ockam. 
Guilhelmus  Bechius. 
Guilhelmus  Remensis. 
Guilhelmus  Placentinus 
Guilhelmus  de  Samuco. 
Guilhelmus  de  Cumio. 
Guilhelmus  de  Landuno. 
Guilhelmus  de  Droreda. 
Guilhelmus  de  S.  Amore. 
Guilhelmus  Hirsaunensis. 
Guilhelmus  S.  Bernardi  discipulus. 
Guilhelmus  Antisiodorensis. 
Guilhelmus  de  Aquisgrano. 
Guilhelmus  Aluernas. 
Guimundus  Auersanus. 

Haymo  Benedictinus. 
Hay  mo  Anglicus. 
Hammonius  Alexandrinus. 
Hartmannus  Shedel. 
Heimmericus  de  Campo. 
Henricus  Hostiensis  ^  Cardinalis. 
Henricus  de  Gandauo. 
Henricus  de  Bruxellis. 
Henricus  de  Vrinaria. 


Henricus  de  Hassia. 

Henricus  Oita,  Austrius. 

Henricus  de  Corsueldia. 

Henricus  Friso,  Carth[usianus]. 

Henricus  de  Erfordia. 

Henricus  Monachus  Bened[ictinus]. 

Henricus  Baten. 

Henricus  Ariminensis. 

Henricus  Odendorf. 

Henricus  Herp,  Minorita. 

Henricus  Gorchen. 

Henricus  Boick. 

Henricus  de  monte  Nacken. 

Henricus  Kalcar. 

Henricus  Gulpen. 

Henricus  de  Eynbeck. 

Henricus  Carthusiensis. 

Helias  Regner. 

Heliandus  Fiigidi  montis. 

Heliodorus  presbyter. 

Heliodorus  Antiochenus. 

Heliodorus  Astrologus. 

Helmoldus  Saxo. 

Helpericus  Abbas. 

Heluidius  h§reticus. 

Heraclides  monachus. 

Heraclitus  Ponticus. 

Herigerus  Abbas. 

Hermannus  Contractus. 

Hermannus  de  Soldis. 

Hermannus  Campensis. 

Hermannus  Petra. 

Hermannus  Chronographus. 

Hermas  discipulus. 

Hermolaus  Barbarus. 

Higinus  Ro.  pontifex. 

Hilarius  Arelatensis. 

Hilarius  Pictauensis. 

Hildefonsus  Toletanus. 

Hildebertus  Cenomanensis. 

Hildegardis  Abbatissa. 

Hildemarus  monachus. 

Hilcas  Aegyptius. 

Hincmarus  Remensis. 

Hipolitus  episcopus. 

Hireneus  Lugdunensis. 

Hisichius  presbyter. 

Honorius  de  Florentia. 


Written  above  de,  Serusia  [for  Secusia]. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT 


507 


Honorius  Augustuducensis. 
Honorius  Inclusus. 
Hubertus  Lombardus. 
Hubertus  Clericus. 
Hubaldus  Musicus. 
Humbertus  Tullensis. 
Hugo  de  S.  Vict  ore. 
Hugo  de  Folieto. 
Hugo  Senensis. 
Hugo  Cathalanensis. 
Hugo,  qui  et  Hugutio. 
Hugolinus  Vrbeuentanus. 
Hugutio  Pisanus. 

lacobus  Apostolus, 
lacobus  Nisibenus. 
lacobus  de  Vitriaco. 
lacobus  Baldwinus. 
lacobus  de  Beluisio. 
lacobus  de  Arena, 
lacobus  de  Ranam. 
lacobus  Viterbiensis. 
lacobus  de  Theramo. 
lacobus  Toletanus. 
lacobus  Foroliuiensis. 
lacobus  de  Aluarois. 
lacobus  Zenus. 
lacobus  Perez,  de  Valent[ia]. 
lacobus  Zuttenbuck. 
lacobus  de  Butricariis. 
lacobus  de  Audizeno. 
lacobus  de  Esculo. 
lacobus  Locher. 
lacobus  Erfordensis. 
lacobus  de  Gruitrode. 
lacobus  Wimphelingius. 
lacobus  Basil iensis. 
lacobus  Bergomensis. 
lacobus  Publicius. 
lacobus  Magnus, 
lacobus  Paduanus. 
lacobus  Tempilius. 
lacobus  de  Dreysz,  Paradisus. 
lacobus  de  Neapoli. 
lacobus  Maynius. 
leronymus  presbyter, 
leronymus  Manfredus. 
Ignacius  Antiochenus. 

*  Above  is 


Innocentius  Tertius. 

Innocentius  Quartus. 

lodocus  Eithman. 

lodocus  Genselius.* 

loachim  Calabrius. 

Joannes  Apostolus. 

Joannes  Antiochenus. 

Joannes  Cassianus. 

Joannes  Hierosolymitanus. 

Joannes  Damascenus. 

Joannes  Erigena. 

Joannes  Gerundensis. 

Joannes  Serapion. 

Joannes  Carnotensis. 

Johannes  Beleth. 

Johannes  Bosianus. 

Johannes  de  Piano. 

Johannes  de  Deo. 

Johannes  de  Rupescissa. 

Johannes  Duns,  ScotuS;. 

Johannes  de  Bacbone. 

Johannes  Andreas. 

Johannes  Caldrinus. 

Johannes  de  Ligueriis. 

Johannes  Saxonius. 

Johannes  de  Teneramunda. 

Johannes  Boccacius. 

Johannes  de  Jmola. 

Johannes  Segobiensis. 

Johannes  Gersonus. 

Johannes  Tortellius. 

Johannes  Capistranus. 

Johannes  Ananias,  archid[iaconus]. 

Johannes  Bertachius. 

Johannes  de  Indagine. 

Johannes  Viuicellensis. 

Johannes  de  Monte  regio. 

Johannes  Britannicus. 

Johannes  Chrysostomus. 

Johannes  Fastiolus. 

Johannes  Picus,  Mirandula. 

Johannes  Tritemius. 

Joannes  Venetus. 

Joannes  Gualterus. 

Joannes  Hussius. 

Joannes  Mandeuyle. 

Joannes  Rusbroch. 

Joannes  Faber,  Aquitanus. 

written  Boyselius. 


[fo.  2476. 


508 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT       October 


loannes  Myles. 

loanues  Coler,  de  Fankel. 

loannes  Baptista,  arctecilip. 

loannes  de  Platea. 

loannes  Petri,  Ferrarius. 

loannes  Tormindt. 

loannes  de  Borboton. 

loannes  de  S.  Amando. 

loannes  de  Lapide. 

loannes  Dippurg. 

loannes  de  Sconhouia. 

loannes  Ernestus. 

loannes  Rode,  Benedic[tinus]. 

loannes  Rode,  Bohemus. 

loannes  de  Dorsten. 

loannes  Peffer. 

loannes  de  Dalburg. 

loannes  Tholassus. 

loannes  Peckhamus. 

loannes  Plath,  Heydebergensis. 

loannes  Capnion. 

loannes  Vergenhausz. 

loannes  Orem.  contra  mendicantes. 

loannes  Antonius. 

loannes  Blanchinus. 

loannes  de  Lampsheim. 

loannes  Berberius. 

loannes  Paleonydorus. 

loannes  Treyserberg. 

loannes  Mosch,  Basiliensis. 

loannes  de  Rondena. 

loannes  de  Duren. 

loannes  Rauennas. 

loannes  Diaconus. 

loannes  Teutonicus. 

loannes  de  Lignano. 

loannes  de  Hysdinio. 

loannes  de  Bassiliis. 

loannes  xxii.  pontifex. 

loannes  de  Guara,  Theologus. 

loannes  Marlianus. 

loannes  Hyspalensis. 

loannes  Quaye,  de  Parma. 

loannes  de  sacro  Bosco,  Anglus. 

loannes  Fauentinus,  lurista. 

loannes  Hautffinci. 

loannes  Polimar. 

loannes  Gutenberg. 

loannes  Fuchs,  Moguntinus. 


loannes  Nannis,  lanuensis. 
loannes  Gritz. 
loannes  de  Vrbach. 
loannes  Ladamianus. 
loannes  Datickonis. 
loannes  Eligerus. 
loannes  de  Becka. 
loannes  Hildeshem. 
loannes  Sconhouen. 
loannes  Bauonis. 
loannes  Zacharias. 
loannes  Castellensis. 
loannes  Versor. 
lolandus  de  Breda, 
lordanus  historicus. 
lordanus  Alemanus. 
Isaac,  doctor  antiquus. 
Isaac  Antiochenus. 
Isaac  Bennita. 
Isaac  Sirus  abbas. 
Isichius  Hierosolymitanus. 
Isidorus  Cardinalis. 
Isidorus  Hyspalensis. 
Isuardus  Monachus. 
ludas  Apostolus, 
ludas  historicus. 
lodocus  Badius. 
lodocus  Rubiacensis. 
lulianus  Campanus. 
lulianus  Toletanus. 
lulius  Aphricanus. 
lustinus  philosophus. 
lustinianus  imperator, 
lustinianus  Valentinus. 
luo  Canonista. 
lunianus  Maius. 
luuencus  Hyspanus. 
luuenalis  Constantinopolitanus. 

Kallincus  Architectus. 
Karolus  rex  Francorum. 
Karolus  Caluus. 
Karolus  Virulius. 

Lactantius  Firmianus. 
Lambertinus  de  Ramponibus. 
Lamberfcus  abbas  Hasungensis. 
Lambertus  Hirsueldensis. 
Lambertus  de  Monte. 


[fo. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT 


509 


Lanfrancus  Beccensis. 

Lanfrancus  Brixiensis. 

Lanfrancus  Mediolanensis. 

Lapus  Castellio. 

Latrononus  Hyspanus. 

Laurentius  lustinianus. 

Laurentius  Vallensis. 

Laurentius  de  Rudolphis. 

Laurentius  Calcaneus. 

Leander  Toletanus. 

Leporius  Monachus. 

Leonardus  de  Ethifano. 

Leonardus  Aretinus. 

Leonardus  Chiensis. 

Leo  primus  Ro.  pontifex. 

Leo  Secundus  pontifex. 

Leo  Quartus. 

Leo  Carnotensis. 

Leo  papa  Nonus. 

Liberianus  Bericus. 

Liberatus  historicus. 

Linus  Eo.  episcopus. 

Lucas  Antiocher.us. 

Lucas  Abbas  Teuto, 

Lucas  Brandisz. 

Lucianus  Antiochenus. 

Lucianus   presbyter   Hiero[solymi- 
tan]us. 

Lucifer  Caralitanus. 

Lucillianus  episcopus. 

Lucius  Arrianus. 

Lucius  Florus. 

Ludolphus  Carthusiensis. 

Ludouicus  Pontanus. 
i  Ludouicus  Lazarelus. 
W).]  Ludouicus  de  Roma. 

Lupoldus  Bambergensis. 

Lupus  de  Oliueto. 

Lupus  presbyter. 

Macharius  Aegyptius. 
Machillus  Corinthius. 
Macedonius  h§resiarcha. 
Macrobius  episcopus. 
Malchion  Antiochenus. 
Malleus  astrologus. 
Mamertus  Vien[n]ensis. 
Manes  Persa. 
Mapheus  Phegius. 


Marcianus  episcopus. 
Marcellus  Anticiranus. 
Marcella  discipula. 
Marcion  hfreticus. 
Marcus  EuangeJista. 
Marcus  Sabellicus. 
Marcus  Monachus. 
Marcus  Ro.  episcopus. 
Marianus  Solinus. 
Marianus  Scotus. 
Marinus  Samutus. 
Marius  Philelphus. 
Marsilius  Ficinus. 
Marsilius  Patauinus. 
Marsilius  philosophus. 
Martinus  Bosianus. 
Martinus  Syluianus. 
Martinus  Phileticus. 
Maternus  Astrologus. 
Matth§us  Euangelista. 
Matth§us  de  Aquasparta. 
Matth§us  Syluaticus. 
Matth^us  Cracouiensis. 
Mattheus  alter  de  Cracouia. 
Mattheus  Palmerius. 
Matth§us  Bossus. 
Mattheus  de  Mathessula. 
Mathagnanus  de  Aragundis. 
Matthias  Farinatoris. 
Maximus  Ephesius. 
Maximus  Taurinensis. 
Maximus  Alexandrinus. 
Menigfredus  Fuldensis. 
Melito  Asianus. 
Menander  h^reticus. 
Merlinus  vates  Britannus. 
Methodius  Parensis. 
Methodius  propheta. 
Michael  de  Cesena. 
Michael  de  Massa. 
Michael  Carrariensis. 
Michael  de  Mediolano. 
Michael  Scotus. 
Michael  de  Furno. 
Michael  de  Dalen. 
Michael  Coccinius. 
Melciades  doctor. 
Milo  Monachus. 
Minucius  Felix. 


610 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  8ELIGENSTADT       October 


Modestus  philosophus. 
Montanus  h^resiarcha. 
Mundinus  Bononiensis. 
Mundinus  de  Foro  lulii. 
Murachismus  Minor  it  a. 
Musanus  Scriptor. 
Muscus  Massiliensis. 

Nellus  de  S.  Geminiano. 
Nepos  de  Monte  Albano. 
Nestor  h^resiarcha. 
Nicasius  Brabantinus. 
Niceas  Eomanus. 
Nicodemus  Iud§us. 
fo.  249.]     Nicolaus  Cathanensis. 

Nicolaus  de  Aqua  pendente. 
Nicolaus  de  Cusa. 
Nicolaus  Perottus. 
Nicolaus  Dorbellus. 
Nicolaus  Antiocbenus. 
Nicolaus  de  Neapoli. 
Nicolaus  de  Lyra. 
Nicolaus  Florentinus. 
Nicolaus  Dinkelspuel. 
Nicolaus  Baiocensis. 
Nicolaus  Moguntinus. 
Nicolaus  Leonicenus. 
Nicolaus  Oresmius. 
Nicolaus  Saguntinus. 
Nicolaus  Gauer. 
Nicolaus  Biartus. 
Nicolaus  Mutinensis. 
Nicolaus  Funosus. 
Nicolaus  de  Nyse. 
Nicolaus  Lagman. 
Nicolaus  Blonius. 
Nicolaus  Hanquile. 
Norbertus  Coloniensis. 
Notbertus  Leodiensis. 
Nouacianus  presbyter, 

Odilo  Cluniacensis. 
Odo  abbas  Benedictinus. 
Odofredus  Beneuentanus. 
Oldradus  de  Laude. 
Olympus  Hyspanus. 
Omnibonus  Leonicenus. 
Optatus  Apher. 
Origenes  Adamantius. 


Oriesiesis  Monachus. 
Orosius  Paulus. 
Osbertus  Cantuariensis. 
Oswaldus  Keynlin. 
Otho  Frisingensis. 
Otho  Minorita. 

Pachonius  Monachus. 
Pelbertus  Themeswar. 
Palladius  episcopus. 
Palladius  Emilianus. 
Pamphilus  presbyter. 
Panthenon  Stoicus. 
Papias  Hieropolitanus. 
Papias  Lombardus. 
Pascasius  doctor. 
Paterius  Abbreuiator. 
Paulus  Apostolus. 
Paulus  Orosius. 
Paulus  Episcopus. 
Paulus  Longobardus. 
Paulus  Pannonius. 
Paulus  de  Lisariis. 
Paulus  Venetus. 
Paulus  Procastrus. 
Paulus  Niauis. 
Paulus  Samosatenus. 
Paulus  Alemanus. 
Paulus  de  Roma. 
Paulus  Marsus. 
Paulus  Wanus. 
Paulus  Burgensis. 
Paulus  Presbyter. 
Paulinus  Nolanus. 
Pastor  Hermes. 
Pelagius  Monachus. 
Peregrinus  Bononiensis. 
Petrus  Apostolus. 
Petrus  Edissenus. 
Petrus  Damianus. 
Petrus  Guilhelmus. 
Petrus  Alfonsus. 
Petrus  Lombardus. 
Petrus  Commestor. 
Petrus  Blesensis. 
Petrus  Cantor  Parisiensis. 
Petrus  Portugalensis. 
Petrus  de  Bella  partica. 
Petrus  de  Dacia. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  8ELIGENSTADT 


511 


Petrus  Apponus. 
Petrus  Berthorius. 
Petrus  de  Aleaco. 
Petrus  de  Alchorano. 
Petrus  Maurocenus. 
Petrus  Paulus  Vergerius. 
Petrus  Scotus,  Argentinensis. 
Petrus  Abelhardus. 
Petrus  de  Riga. 
Petrus  Rauennas. 
Petrus  Toletanus. 
Petrus  Pisanus. 
Petrus  loannis. 
Petrus  Aureolus. 
Petrus  de  Saxonia. 
Petrus  Dresnach. 
Petrus  de  Rosenhein. 
Petrus  de  Aquila. 
Petrus  de  Sampsona. 
Petrus  de  Carariis. 
Petrus  de  Amore. 
Petrus  de  Aluernia. 
Petrus  Pictauensis. 
Petrus  Brixiensis. 
Petrus  de  Braco. 
Petrus  de  Crescentijs. 
Petrus  Harentalis. 
Petrus  Montopolita. 
Petrus  Marsus. 
Petrus  de  Natalibus. 
Petrus  de  Vineis. 
Petrus  de  Lutra. 
Petrus  de  Colle. 
Petrus  de  Riuo,  Louaniensis. 
Petrocellus  Medicus. 
Petronius  Bononiensis. 
Philanius  Cyprius. 
Phileas  Aegyptius. 
Philippus  Cretensis. 
Philippus  Presbyter. 
Philippus  de  Monte  Calerii. 
Philippus  Beroaldus. 
Philippus  Florentinus. 
Philippus  de  Pergamo. 
Photinus  Gallogrecus. 
Pileus  Modicensis. 
Pinitus  Cretensis. 
Pius  Ro.  pontifex. 

*  Written  above  Preculfus 


Pius  2.  qui  et  Aeneas. 
Placentinus  lurista. 
Platina  historicus. 
Plotinus  philosophus. 
Pogius  Plorentinus. 
Polycarpus  episcopus. 
Poly  crates  Ephesius. 
Pomponius  poeta. 
Pomponius  Mela. 
Poncius  diaconus. 
Ponticus  Vitruuius. 
Porcellus  poeta. 
Freculphus  Lexouiensis.^ 
Priscianus  Grammaticus. 
Priscillianus  h^reticus. 
Prisons  philosophus. 
Prepositiuus  lurista. 
Proba  vxor  Adelphi. 
Procopius  C^sariensis. 
Proheresius  Sophista. 
Propercius  poeta. 
Prosper  Aquitanus. 
Prudentius  Palatinus. 
Ptolemeus  Lucensis. 

Quadratus  Atheniensis. 

Rabanus  Maurus. 
Radulphus  Flauiacensis. 
Raherius  Veronensis. 
Raynerus  de  Foro  Liuio. 
Raymundus  de  Sabunda. 
Raphael  Fulgosus. 
Raphael  Cumanus. 
Raymundus  loannita. 
Ratbodus  Traiectensis. 
Ratbertus  Pascasius. 
Regino  Prumensis. 
Remigius  Altissiodorensis. 
Remigius  Remensis. 
Remigius  Grammaticus. 
Reticius  Augustudunensis. 
Reuerendus  de  Salguis. 
Ricardus  de  S.  Victore. 
Ricardus  Cluniacensis. 
Ricardus  Malumbra. 
Ricardus  de  Media  Villa. 
Ricardus  Armachanus. 
Lincolniensis,  which,  however,  is  not  deleted. 


[fo.  250. 


512 


PHILIP   WOLF  OF  SELIGEN8TADT       October 


Ricardus  de  Petronibus. 
Ricardus  Cantor  Parisiensis. 
Ricardus  Anglicus. 
Ricardus  Remensis. 
Robertus  rex  Francorum. 
Rabertus  Carnotensis. 
Robertus  de  Russia. 
Robertus  de  Licio. 
Robertus  Molinensis. 
Robertus  Clareuallensis. 
Rodericus  Zamarensis. 
Rodericus  Toletanus. 
Rodon  Asianus. 
Rofredus  Beneuentanus. 
Rogerus  lurisconsultus. 
Rogerus  Bachon. 
Rogerus  Coloniensis. 
Romualdus  Camaldulensis. 
Rudolphus  Abbas. 
Rudolpbus  Agricola. 
Rogerus  Sicamber. 
Ruggandus  Metensis. 
Rufinus  Aquilegiensis. 
Rupertus  Tuitiensis. 
Rupertus  Grossum  caput. 
Rupertus  monachus  S.  Albani. 
Rupertus  Gaguinus. 
Rupertus  Premonstratensis. 
Rupoldus  de  Babinburg. 

Sabacius  Episcopus. 
Sabinus  Turrensis. 
Salomon  Constantiensis. 
Saluianus  Massiliensis. 
Samuel  Edissenus. 
Sanctus  Arduinus. 
Sebastianus  Brant. 
Sedulius  presbyter. 
Serapion  Antiochenus. 
Serapion  Scholasticus. 
Serapion  Medicus. 
Sergius  Monachus. 
Sextus  Rufus. 
Sergius  Ro.  pontifex. 
Sextus  philosophus. 
Seuerus  Sulpicius. 
Seuerus  Cecilius. 
Severus  Catholicus. 


Seuerianus  Cauellensis. 
Siagrius  Doctor. 
Sibertus  de  Beka. 
Sifridus  Wysenburgensis. 
Sidonius  Apollinaris. 
Sigebertus  Gemblacensis. 
Syluanus  Massiliensis. 
Syluester  Ro.  pontifex. 
Simachus  patricius. 
Simon  Thuruaius. 
Simachus  interpres. 
Simon  de  Cassia. 
Simon  de  Parma. 
Simon  de  Cremona. 
Simon  Affligemensis. 
Simon  de  Spira. 
Simplicianus  Mediolanensis. 
Sinesius  Pentapolensis. 
Smaragdus  Abbas. 
Sixtus  primus  Ro.  pontifex. 
Sixtus  Quartus. 
Sophronius  Gr^cus. 
Strabus  Fuldensis. 
Stephanus  Anglicus. 
Stephanus  Grandimontensis. 
Stephanus  Cistertiensis. 
Stephanus  Leodiensis. 
Stephanus  primus  Ro.  pont. 
Suetonius  Anglus. 

Tacianus  orator. 
Tadeus  Florentinus. 
Tancredus  Bononiensis. 
Thelesphorus  Ro.  pont. 
Themistius  philosophus. 
Theobaldus  episcopus. 
Theodoricus  Monachus. 
Theodoricus  de  Herxen. 
Theodoricus  Gresimundus. 
Theodoricus  Visenius. 
Theodocion  Asianus. 
Theodorus  Neocesariensis. 
Theodoras  Heracliensis. 
Theodorus  Monachus. 
Theodorus  Antiochenus. 
Theodoras  Cyprius.^ 
Theodorus  Cantuariensis. 
Theodorus  Celeusirius. 


[fo. 


^  Written  above  Syrius. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT 


513 


Theodorus  Anciranus. 
Theodorus  Thessalonicus. 
Theodorus  Constantinopolitanus. 
Theodatus  Rex. 
Theodolus  poeta. 
Theodulphus  Aurelianensis. 
Theophilus  Alexandrinus. 
Theophilus  Antiochenus. 
Theophilus  Cesariensis. 
Theotimus   Scythie   Taurine'  epi- 

scopus. 
Tertullianus  Apher. 
Timotheus  Episcopus. 
Timotheus  heresiarcha. 
Ticonius  Apher. 
Titus  Botrenus. 
Thomas  de  Argentina. 
Thomas  Florentinus. 
Thomas  Kempes. 
Thomas  de  Ceperano. 
Thomas  Bradwardinus. 
Thomas  de  Ancona. 
Thomas  de  Haselbach. 
Thomas  Bricot. 
Thomasuctius  Fulginas. 
Triphyllius  Cyprius. 
Triphon  Origenis  discipulus. 
Tursianus  Medicus. 
Turpinus  Remensis. 

Valentinus  h§reticus. 
Vbertinus  de  Casali. 
Vberius  de  Bobio. 
Vbertus  Bonacursius. 
Vdo  Commentator. 
Vigerius  Flauius. 


Victor  Ro.  pontifex. 
Victor  Capuanus. 
Victor  Maritanius. 
Victorinus  Pictauensis. 
Victorinus  Apher. 
Victorinus  Massiliensis. 
Victorianus  Buconius. 
Vigilantius  presbyter. 
Vigilius  Episcopus. 
Vigilius  Diaconus. 
Villanus  Florentinus. 
Vincentius  Franko. 
Vincentius  Gallus. 
Vincentius  Grower. 
Vitalis  de  Campanis. 
Vitalianus  Ro.  pontifex. 
Vitellius  Apher. 
Vitruuius  Taruisinus. 
Vinianus  legisperitus. 
Vlricus  de  Campo  liliorum 
Vrbanus  primus  Ro.  pont. 
Vrsinus  Monachus. 

Waldenus  Lugdunensis. 
Walafridus  Abbas. 
Waldebertus  Pruniensis. 
Wettitrindus  Corbeiensis. 
Willibaldus  Episcopus. 
Wornerus  Monachus. 
Wornerus  Westphalus. 
Vulpertus  Carnotensis. 

Zacharias  Ro.  pontifex. 
Zenon  imperator. 
Zepherinus  Ro.  pontifex. 
Zozimas  Abbas. 


[fo.  251. 


Finis  secundi  libri  peritorum  virorum  Philippi  Wolfij. 


Ex  tertio  libro  Catalogi  Philippi  Wolphij,  de  vitis  peritorum  virorum, 
De  Dominicanis. 

Albertus  Concionator. 


Albertus  Magnus,  Bolsteter. 
Albertus  de  Brixia. 
Albertus  Laudensis. 
Albertus  Clauarus. 
Albertus  Orlamude,  Thuringus. 
Albertus  Remensis. 
Albertus  Saxo. 


Albrandinus  Lombardus. ' 
Albrandinus  Ferrarius. 
Alanus  de  Rupe. 
Ambrosius  Mediolanensis. 
Ambrosius  Catherinus. 
Antoninus  Archiepiscopus. 


'  Written  above  Corinthh 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII. 


deleted. 


Ll 


514 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT       October 


Antonius  Fauentinus. 
Antonius  Parmensis. 
Antonius  de  Glistandis. 
Antonius  Bononiensis. 
Antonius  Ferrariensis. 
Angelus  Niger,  Viterbiensis. 
Andreas  Anglicus. 
Armandus  de  Bello  viso. 
Arnoldus  Leodiensis. 
Augustinus  Senensis. 
Augustinus  lustinianus. 
Ambrosius  Pelargus. 

Bartholom^us  Pisanus. 
Bartholom^us  de  Bolsenheim. 
Bartholom^us  Lucanus. 
Bartholom§us  Monopolitanus. 
Bartholom^us  Mutinensis. 
Bartholom^us  Mansolo. 
Bertoldus  de  Meysenburg. 
Benedictus  .xj.  Ro.  pont. 
Bernardus  Claremontensis. 
fo.  251  &.]  Bernardus  Guidonis. 
Bernardus  de  Trilia. 
Bernardus  de  Mynda. 
Bernardus  Parentinus. 
Bernardus  Hyspanus. 
Bernardus  Lutzenburgus. 
Bertrandus  Confluentinus. 
Boecius  Dacus. 
Bombolonius  Bononiensis. 
Burkardus  Theutonicus. 

Clarus  lurisperitus. 
Claudius  de  Bononia. 
Clemens  de  Terra  salsa. 
Conradus  de  Halberstatt. 
Conradus  de  Timberla. 
Conradus  Alemanus. 
Conradus  Esculanus. 
Conradus  Reydox. 
Conradus  Kollyn. 
Constantius  Vrbeueteranus. 
Christophorus  Molhusensis. 
Christophorus  Lombardus. 

Dominicus  Pisanus. 
Dominicus  de  Flandria. 
Dominicus  Tliolosanus. 


Durandus  de  S.  Porciano. 
Durandellus  Doctor. 

Egidius  de  Liscinijs. 
Egidius  Aurelianensis. 
Engelbertus  Cultrifex. 
Ernestus  Saxo. 
Eustachius  Bononiensis. 

Federicus  Venetus. 
Felicianus  Theologus. 
Franciscus  de  Reiza. 
Franciscus  Lombardus. 


Gabriel  Barleta. 
Gallus  Theutonicus. 
Gardianus  Doctor. 
Garzinus  Francigena. 
Georgius  de  Alexandria. 
Georgius  de  Ceruo. 
Georgius  Mediolanensis. 
Gregorius  Viennensis. 
Gerardus  Lemonicensis. 
Gerardus  Sterngasse. 
Gerardus  de  Mynda. 
Gerardus  de  Antwerpia. 
Gerardus  Leodiensis. 
Gerardus  de  Elten. 
Gobelinus  Phorcensis. 
Goswinus  Meydenburgensis. 
Gotscalcus  Erfordensis. 
Graciadeus  Esculanus. 
Griffinus  Anglicus. 
Guido  Argominensis. 
Guido  Parisiensis. 
Guido  Guecius  Bononius. 
Guillermus  Parisiensis. 
Guillermus  de  Caiotho. 
Guilhelmus  de  Altona. 
Guilhelmus  Peralt. 
Guilhelmus  Gilla. 
Guilhelmus  Brabantinus. 
Guilhelmus  de  Caleth. 
Guilhelmus  Brixiensis. 
Guilhelmus  Gallicus. 
Guilhelmus  Maklesfelde. 
Guilhelmus  Durandi. 
Guilhelmus  Hodon. 


1918 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIGENSTADT 


515 


Hanibal  Eomanus. 
Heluicus  Theutonicus. 
Henricus  Ernestus. 
Henricus  de  Hirsfeldia. 
Henricus  Elster. 
Henricus  Bitterfelt. 
Henricus  Witenburgus. 
Henricus  Institoris. 
Henricus  de  Ceruo. 
2.]     Henricus  Kaltysen. 
Henricus  Ariminensis. 
Henricus  de  Erfordia. 
Henricus  de  Hallis. 
Henricus  Sueuus. 
Hermannus  de  Mynda. 
Hermannus  Zittart. 
Herueus  Brito. 
Hyspanus  Pugio. 
Hugo  Argentinensis. 
Hugo  de  Prato  florido. 
Hugo  de  Sancto  Caro. 
Hugo  Bolonius. 
Hugo  Gallicus. 
Humbertus  Viennensis. 

lacobus  Romanus. 
lacobus  Firmianus. 
lacobus  Metensis. 
lacobus  de  Susato. 
lacobus  de  Gauda. 
lacobus  lanuensis. 
lacobus  de  Casulis. 
lacobus  de  Voragine. 
lacobus  Aegidius. 
lacobus  de  Losanna. 
lacobus  Beneuentanus. 
leronymus  Sauonarola. 
leronymus  Albertucius. 
leronymus  Foroliuiensis. 
Ingoldus  Argentinensis. 
Innocentius  quintus  Ro.  pont. 
loannes  de  Tambaco. 
loannes  Hasle.^ 
loannes  Dominici. 
loannes  de  Turre  cremata. 


loannes  Lichtenberg. 
loannes  Scbadlant. 
loannes  de  Erdenburg. 
loannes  Sterngasse. 
loannes  Nider. 
loannes  Capriolus. 
loannes  Meydenburgensis.^ 
loannes  Molenburgensis. 
loannes  Barthusen. 
loannes  de  Rust. 
loannes  Parisiensis. 
loannes  de  Columna. 
loannes  Smirgel. 
loannes  Balbus. 
loannes  de  Verdiaco. 
loannes  de  Neapoli. 
loannes  de  S.  Geminiano. 
loannes  Christophorus. 
loannes  Fauentinus. 
loannes  Pungens  asinum. 
loannes  Brommart. 
loannes  Vicaldus. 
loannes  Carolus. 
loannes  Tenus. 
loannes  Cranszben. 
loannes  de  Famio. 
loannes  Effringen. 
loannes  Bartus. 
loannes  Herolt. 
loannes  de  Monte  nigro. 
loannes  Cusyn. 
loannes  Anglicus.^*^ 
loannes  Vincentinus, 
loannes  de  Parma, 
loannes  de  Ragusio. 
loannes  Annius. 
lo.  Simiczkiin^. 
lo.  de  FontC;  Norembergensis. 
loannes  Scroler. 
loannes  Molitoris. 
lo.  de  Fonte,  Gallus. 
loannes  Tholosanus. 
loannes  Vinetus. 
loannes  Falkenburg. 
loannes  Theutonicus. 


[fo.-2526. 


**  Hash  written  after  Hasse  deleted. 

*  Above  this  name  is  written  de  vi... can ;  but  the  words  are  blotted  and  cannot 
be  read.  ^^  Above  the  line  is  written  de  S.  Aegidio. 

"  Above  the  line  is  written  de.  Franckfordia 

Ll2 


516 


PHILIP  WOLF  OF  SELIQENSTADT       October 


loannes  Gobiiis. 
loannes  Hayonis. 
loannes  Heynlin. 
loannes  Pistoriensis. 
loannes  de  S.  Miniate, 
loannes  Tabiensis. 
lordanus  Greneralis. 
loannes  Reinhardi. 
loannes  Diedenbergen. 

Latinus  Romanus. 
Laurent ius  Geruasius. 
Leander  Albertus. 
Leonardus  de  Utino. 
Leonardus  Stacius. 
Lucas  Bohemus. 
Ludolphus  Hildesheim. 
Ludouicus  Theutonicus. 
Ludouicus  Venetus. 
Ludouicus  Ferrariensis. 

Martinus  Polonus. 
Martinus  de  Dacia. 
Martinus  Scotus. 
Matth§us  Rupinensis. 
Matth§us  Doctor. 
Mauricius  Theologus. 
Michael  de  Insulis. 
Michael  de  Vngaria. 
Monet  a  Lombardus. 


Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 
Nicolaus 


Gorham. 
Treuet. 
Emericus. 
Romanus. 
de  Onesiaco. 
de  Traiecto. 
de  Giaro. 
de  Spira. 
de  Teruisio. 
de  Hanapis. 
Esculanus. 


Oliuerius  Brito. 
Oliuerius  Dacus. 

Paganus  inquisitor. 
Paulus  Soncinas. 
Petrus  de  Tarentasia. 


Petrus  de  Palude. 
Petrus  Remensis. 
Petrus  de  Pal  ma. 
Petrus  Alphonsus. 
Petrus  Anglicus. 
Petrus  Chalo,  de  Clusia. 
Petrus  de  Penna. 
Petrus  de  Maldura. 
Petrus  Niger,  Alemanus. 
Petrus  Elgast. 
Petrus  de  Sezaria. 
Petrus  Hieremi^. 
Petrus  Vasco. 
Petrus  Ferrandus. 
Petrus  de  BruxelJis. 
Philippus  Brommerde. 
Pillegrinus  Coloniensis. 
Ptolem^us  de  Luca. 
Pugio  Hyspanus. 

Raymundus  de  Pennaforti.^^ 
Raymundus  Martini. 
Raymundus  de  Vineis. 
Raynaldus  Romanus. 
Rainerius  Pisanus. 
Ramencius  Doctor. 
Raphael  de  Peruasio. 
Raphael  Soncinas. 
Ricardus  Argentinensis. 
Ricardus  Knapwell. 
Ricardus  Fiacrius. 
Robertus  Kilwarby. 
Robertus  Holcoth. 
Robertus  Oxforde. 
Romanus  Caietanus. 
Radulphus  de  Nouiomago. 
Rolandus  Cremonensis. 
Rolandus  Parisiensis. 

Sanctius  de  Porta. 
Sibitonus  Viennensis. 
Sifridus  Cirenensis. 
Sigillinus  de  Openhem. 
Syluester  Prieras. 
Simon  Anglicus. 
Simon  de  S.  Quintino. 
Stephanus  Gallicus. 
Stephanus  de  Bisuncio. 
^■^  'M.Srpemaforti, 


1918  PHILIP  WOLF  OF  8ELIGEN8TADT  51' 

Theodoricus  de  Wiberg.  Thomas  Caietanus. 

Theodoricus  Herolt.  Thomas  Cathaneus. 

Theodoricus  de  Appoldia.  Thomasius  Ferrarius. 

Theodoricus  de  Elrich.  Tulius  Dacus. 
Theophilus  Cremonensis. 
Thomas  de  Aquino. 

Thomas  de  Suttona.  Valentinus  de  Franckfordia. 

Thomas  Gualensis.  Valentinus  Camerus. 

Thomas  de  Cantiprato.  Vbertus  lector. 

Thomas  Sperman.  Vbeitinus  Florentinus. 

Thomas  Stubbes.  Venturinus  concionator. 

Thomas  Langfelde.  Vincentms  de  Valencia. 

Thomas  Anglicus.  Vincentms  Brandellus.i^ 

Thomas  Vigleuanensis.  Vincentms  Beluacensis. 

Thomas  Eadinus.  ^^^^^^^  Engelberti. 
Thomas  Mutinensis. 

Thomas  lorse,  Anglus.    ^  Wigandus  Cauponis. 

Thomas  Agnus.  Wornerus  de  Potis. 

Finis  tertij  libri,  De  vitis  peritorum  virorum,  Philipp  Wolfij. 


Fines  under  the  Elizabethan  Act  of  Uniformity 

Among  the  few  unworked  fields  of  Elizabethan  history  there 
remains  the  financial  aspect  of  the  penal  laws.  My  aim  in 
this  paper  is  to  make  a  contribution  to  its  study  from  a  well- 
defined  point  of  view  and  to  indicate  some  possible  lines  for 
further  inquiry.  It  will  be  well  then  to  begin  by  stating  clearly 
the  limitations  within  which  I  propose  to  confine  myself.  My  con- 
cern is  with  the  workings  of  the  Elizabethan  Act  of  Uniformity  in 
relation  to  fines  for  nonconformity,  as  outlined  in  the  following 
section  of  the  act. 

...  all  and  every  person  and  persons  inhabiting  within  this  realm  or  any 
other  the  Queen's  Majesty's  dominions  shall  diligently  and  faithfully, 
having  no  lawful  excuse  to  be  absent,  endeavour  themselves  to  resort  to 
their  parish  church  or  chapel  accustomed,  or  upon  reasonable  let  thereof, 
to  some  usual  place  where  common  prayer  and  such  service  of  God  shall  be 
used  in  such  time  of  let,  upon  every  Sunday  and  other  days  ordained  and 
used  to  be  kept  as  holy  days,  and  then  and  there  to  abide  orderly  and  soberly 
during  the  time  of  the  common  prayer,  preachings,  or  other  service  of 
God  tliere  to  be  used  and  ministered  ;  upon  pain  of  punishment  by  the 
censures  of  the  Church,  and  also  upon  pain  that  every  person  so  offending 
shall  forfeit  for  every  such  offence  twelve  pence,  to  be  levied  by  the  church- 
wardens of  the  parish  where  such  offence  shall  be  done,  to  the  use  of  the 
poor  of  the  same  parish,  of  the  goods,  lands,  tenements  of  such  offender, 
by  way  of  distress. 

"  Above  Brandellus  is  written  de  nouo  castro. 


6r 


518  FINES  UN  DEB  THE  Oc^ 

Three  considerations  emerge  from  this  enactment  :    (a)  f  <K' 

must  attend  church  services,  &c.,  on  the  statutory  r  ^ 

a  fine  of  twelve  pence  is  to  be  levied  on  offenders  ;   (c)  -^ 

of  the  fine  is  in  the  hands  of  the  churchwardens.     ^  '^     .^ 

with  this  third  consideration  the  forty-sixth  roj  '^        '^ 
of  1559  must  be  kept  in  mind.                                                    * 

Item,  that  in  every  parish  three  or  four  discreet  men,  which  tender 
God's  glory,  and  His  true  reUgion,  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Ordinaries 
diligently  to  see  that  all  the  parishoners  duly  resort  to  their  Church  upon 
all  Sundays  and  Holy  Days,  and  there  to  continue  the  whole  time  of  the 
Godly  Service  ;  and  all  such  as  shall  be  found  slack  or  negligent  in  resorting 
to  the  Church,  having  no  great  or  urgent  cause  of  absence,  they  shall 
straitly  call  upon  them,  and  after  due  admonition  if  they  amend  not. 
they  shall  denounce  them  to  the  Ordinary. 

As  a  matter  of  fact  the   '  three  or  four  discreet  men  '  of  this 
injunction  were  in  practice  the  parochial  churchwardens. 

It  is  necessary  to  notice  carefully  this  relation  of  the  church- 
wardens to  parochial  nonconformity.  The  fines  under  the  Act 
of  Uniformity  were  in  the  hands  of  the  parochial  officials,  and  the 
difficulty  of  spiritual  officers  levying  fines  was  overcome  by  the 
direction  of  the  act  that  the  proceeds  were  to  be  applied  in  pios 
usus,  *  to  the  use  of  the  poor.'  These  fines  then  were  not  primarily 
under  the  control  of  state  or  civil  officials,  as  was  the  case  in  con- 
nexion with  the  later  Elizabethan  penal  acts  ^  which  dealt  with 
fines  for  recusancy.  We  shall  not,  therefore,  expect  to  find  many 
records  dealing  with  fines  under  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  the 
Record  Office  or  in  other  national  collections.  Among  manuscripts 
in  such  places  can  be  found  many  references  to  fines  when  they 
became  a  concern  of  national  finance  under  later  legislation,  and 
when  their  enormous  size  made  them  a  possible  source  of  valuable 
revenue.  There  are  only  a  few  documents,  however,  in  these 
collections  which  throw  light  on  the  workings  of  the  Act  of  Uni- 
formity in  its  financial  aspect,  and  these  are  almost  all  duplicated , 
in  diocesan  and  parochial  manuscripts,  or  have  strayed  from 
diocesan  or  parochial  collections.  In  other  words,  the  Record  Office- 
and  the  British  Museum  are  the  last  places  in  which  the  studeni 
may  expect  to  find  material  illustrating  fines  under  the  Act,  andl 
as  a  matter  of  fact  he  will  find  little  of  value  there,  and  only] 
to  any  degree  in  contemporary  texts  in  the  British  Museum, 
which  are  drawn  from  diocesan  sources.  On  the  other  hand,  the' 
conclusion  must  be  guarded  against  that  because  of  such  an  ab- 
sence the  Act  of  Uniformity  was  not  enforced.  I  think  that 
when  search  is  made  among  parochial  and  diocesan  documents — 
where  prima  facie  such  research  should  be   made — there   will 

^  I  have  used  a  contemporary  text  in  the  British  Museum  (5155.  a.  14). 
2  23  Eliz.  e.  1  ;  of.  28  and  29  Eliz.  c.  6. 


1918  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  O/  UNIFORMITY  519 

emerge  sufficient  evideir^ forced  dtrant  the  conclusion  that  there 
were  at  least  consistent  ancrcn^iform  attempts  to  enforce  the  Act, 
and  these  quite  apart  from  the  great  turning-points  of  religious 
crises  during  the  reign.  Of  course,  it  may  be  said,  and  said  I 
think  with  fairness  so  far  at  least  as  my  researches  have  gone, 
that  these  attempts  do  not  prove  that  fines  were  regularly 
collected.  With  that  side  of  the  question  I  am  at  present  unable 
to  deal.  However,  my  main  concern  is  with  the  evidence  which 
I  have  brought  together  from  diocesan  sources. 

The  most  valuable  documents  which  we  possess  for  our  purpose 
are  the  Visitation  Articles  and  Injunctions  whether  administered 
by  royal  or  ecclesiastical  visitors.  These  documents  enable 
us  to  follow  almost  from  year  to  year  the  vicissitudes  of  parochial 
life  in  its  religious  aspects,  and  from  them  can  be  drawn  abundant 
evidence  on  the  workings  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity  in  connexion 
with  the  twelve-penny  fine  for  recusancy.  Before  examining 
this  evidence  I  think  it  well,  first,  to  point  out  in  outline  the 
methods  which  governed  visitations.  This  outline  will  help  to 
show  how  the  scheme  of  parochial  government  was  worked  out, 
and  will  illustrate  the  minute  care  which  was  given  to  it ;  and 
secondly,  it  will  make  it  clear  that  the  records  of  actual  visitations, 
carried  out  as  I  shall  explain,  cover  the  entire  reign  and  are  not 
confined  to  those  moments  in  Elizabethan  history  when  the  dread 
of  puritan  and  catholic  became,  if  not  a  public,  at  least  a  govern- 
mental panic. 

The  normal  method  of  beginning  a  visitation  was  by  sending 
a  notice  to  the  archdeacons  of  the  diocese  that  at  a  certain  date 
the  bishop  or  his  commissaries  would  begin  a  visitation.  In 
preparation  for  such  an  investigation,  questmen — usually  the 
churchwardens — were  appointed  to  represent  each  parish.  In 
due  course  these  representatives  met  the  bishop  or  his  officials 
at  appointed  places.  At  these  meetings  they  were  presented  as 
a  rule  with  a  set  of  questions,  called  Visitation  Articles,  wliich 
dealt  with  such  minutiae  of  parochial  life  as  came  within  the 
sphere  of  ecclesiastical  rule.  To  these  questions  they  were  obliged 
to  give  answers,  in  writing  under  oath,  before  they  left  the  place 
of  meeting.  Where  no  articles  of  inquiry  were  distributed  the 
ordinary  delivered  a  set  speech  expounding  the  general  terms  of 
the  investigation.  An  illustration  or  two  will  suffice.  In  1560  we 
find  the  usual  order  recorded  among  Archbishop  Parker's  docu- 
ments 

Then  the  questmen  to  be  called  ...  to  make  answer  directly  and  articulately 
upon  their  oaths  to  every  article  in  writing  or  they  depart  the  place.^ 

="  Parker,  Register,  i.  f.  301,  MS.  at  Lambeth.  The  registers  and  documents  of 
other  sees  are  cited  throughout  this  jiaper,  unless  otherwise  stated,  from  the  manu- 
scripts preserved  in  the  respective  cathedral  cities. 


520  FINEi.  UNDER  THE  October 

In  1589  Bishop  John  Youn^^  this  er^i^e  diocese  of  Rochester. 
The  scope  of  his  inquiry  was  sta^^a  in  a  formal  address  to  his 
clergy  and  churchwardens,^  and  Parker's  plan  just  mentioned 
governed  his  visitation.  Thus,  whether  the  visitation  began 
with  a  set  of  visitation  articles  or  with  a  formal  address,  there 
necessarily  followed  replies  in  writing  under  oath.  Each  parish 
then  provided  its  quota  of  information.  As  soon  as  this  informa- 
tion was  summarized  by  the  diocesan  officials,  it  was  customary 
for  the  bishop  or  his  commissaries  to  issue  a  set  of  Visitation 
Injunctions  based  on  the  information.  These  injunctions  were 
sent  to  each  parish  through  the  archdeacons  and  were,  by  order 
of  the  ordinaries,  read  by  the  parsons  in  the  parish  churches. 
They  became  part  of  the  scheme  under  which  the  church- 
wardens carried  on  parochial  government,  and  in  turn  afforded 
the  ordinaries  scope  for  visitation  articles  at  subsequent  visita- 
tions. Each  churchwarden  not  only  took  oath  to  observe  such 
regulations  as  were  sent  to  him  by  the  civil  government,  but  also 
to  carry  out  diocesan  injunctions.  When  either  of  the  provinces 
was  visited  by  its  archbishop,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  diocesan 
ordinaries  was  suspended  and  the  provincial  visitors  administered 
provincial  visitation  articles  and  the  subsequent  provincial 
injunctions  in  all  the  parishes  of  the  province  under  visitation. 
Thus  it  happens,  as  will  appear  later,  that  we  possess  evidence 
which  emphasizes  that  provided  by  diocesan  documents. 

From  this  method  of  obtaining  information  and  of  enforcing 
regulations,  it  is  clear  that  as  far  as  possible  every  care  was 
taken  that  there  should  be  no  loophole  through  which  any  parish 
might  escape.  It  is  well,  too,  to  point  out  that  the  clergy  were 
examined  under  oath  with  regard  to  the  administration  carried 
on  by  their  churchwardens,  and  that  the  rural  deans  of  each 
archdeaconry  were  continually  collecting  information  along 
similar  lines  in  connexion  with  parochial  life.  It  is  true  that 
here  and  there  clergy,  churchwardens,  and  people  appear  to  have 
combined  to  circumvent  the  ordinaries.  I  am  aware  that  a 
certain  amount  of  evidence  is  forthcoming  of  double-dealing  by 
churchwardens  in  spite  of  their  oaths  of  office.  This  fact  need  not 
surprise  us,  nor  need  it  prevent  us  from  concluding  that  on  the 
whole  visitations  were  something  more  than  empty  formalities. 
That  they  did  not  attain  their  objects  completely  is  evident  from 
the  incessant  repetition  of  the  same  questions  and  injunctions, 
but  their  failure  was  due  not  so  much  to  slack  administration  as 
to  the  ever  growing  distrust  of  the  principle  Cuius  regio  eius 
religio.  1  believe  that  they  provide  serious  evidence  in  connexion 
with  the  subject  which  I  am  now  considering. 

As  there  has  been  a  disposition  to  conclude  that  fines  for 

*  Young  Register,  f.  18C. 


1918  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  OF  UNIFORMITY  521 

recusancy  were  only  enforced  during  panics,  it  seems  well,  in 
the  second  place,  to  point  out  how  consistent  are  the  records  of 
visitations  during  the  reign.  I  shall  give  some  details  of 
evidence,  not  necessarily  complete,  but  sufficient  to  prove  my 
case.  The  following  list  of  some  recorded  visitations  will  show 
the  uniformity  of  diocesan  activity.  It  does  not  include  visita- 
tions from  which  direct  evidence  in  connexion  with  the  twelve- 
penny  fine  can  be  drawn — evidence  which  I  shall  consider  later. 
It  is  illustrative  only  of  diocesan  discipline,  which  I  infer  by 
analogy  dealt  with  fines  under  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  and  it 
is  exclusively  confined  to  those  visitations  for  which  I  have  as 
yet  discovered  no  visitation  articles  or  visitation  injunctions, 
which,  I  believe,  were  they  brought  to  light,  would  prove  helpful. 

1561.     Bishop  Cox  visits  diocese  of  Ely.  (Visitation  Book.) 

1563.     Visitation  of  Exeter  Diocese.    (Exeter  Register,  f.  73.) 

1569.     Bishop  Parkhurst  visits  Norwich.    (Cambridge  University  Library 

MS.    Mm.  vi.  57.  4.  f.  10.) 
1571.     Bishop  Sandys  visits  London.    (Earl's  Diary,  f .  36.  Cambridge  MS. 

Mm.  i.  29.) 

1573.  Bishop  Scambler  visits  Peterborough.    (Visitation  MSS.) 

1574.  Archbishop  Grindal  visits  York.    (Grindal  Register,  f.  141.) 
1580-2.     Traces  of  a  Metropolitical  Visitation  of  the  Province  of  Canter- 
bury.  (Lambeth,  Cart.  Misc.,  ii.  79 ;  Exeter  Register,  £f.  21,  69  v.) 

1583.  Metropolitical  Visitation  of  Province  of  Canterbury.  (Whitgift 
Register,  i,  ff.  207,  223-40,  Worcester  Liber  Canonum,  A. 
xiv.  f.  66.) 

1586.     Bishop  Freke  visits  Worcester.    {Ihid.,  f.  66  v.) 

1591.     Visitation  of  Llandaff.    (Llandaff  Act  Book  II.) 

1593.     Visitation  of  York.    (Piers'  Register,  f.  64.) 

It  is  now  necessary  to  turn  to  those  visitations  for  which 
visitation  articles  or  injunctions  survive.  These  articles  or 
injunctions  move  along  well-defined  lines.  For  our  purpose  they 
may  be  divided  into  two  classes  :  (a)  those  containing  indirect 
evidence  ;  and  (6)  those  containing  direct  evidence.  A  considera- 
tion of  this  evidence  under  both  heads  will  help  to  show  the  type 
of  illustration  which  might  be  expected  from  the  eleven  visitations 
noted  above,  had  similar  documents  been  forthcoming. 

In  considering  those  visitations  which  provide  indirect 
evidence  I  have  not  thought  it  necessary  to  refer  to  them  in  detail. 
Nearly  all  visitation  articles  or  injunctions,  when  they  do  not 
contain  a  direct  reference  to  the  enforcing  of  the  fines  under  the 
Act  of  Uniformity,  contain  an  order  or  inquiry  in  connexion  with 
the  enforcing  of  the  Act,  or  in  connexion  with  the  quarterly 
reading  of  the  royal  injunctions  of  1559.  The  former  reference 
would  keep  the  parochial  officials  in  touch  with  the  provisions  of 
the   Act ;    the    latter    would    bring    to    their    minds    the    fact 


522  FINES  UNDER  THE  October 

that  it  was  part  of  their  duty  to  see  not  only  that  the  Act  was 
enforced,  but  that  their  part  in  enforcing  it  was  carried  out. 
For  example,  in  1572,  Bishop  Freke  visited  the  diocese  of  Roches- 
ter and  inquired 

Whether  there  be  any  in  your  parish  that  are  negligent  in  coming  to 
Church  to  Divine  Service  ? 

Whether  there  be  any  in  your  parish  that  have  not  received  the 
Communion  three  times  the  year,  or  that  absenteth  themselves  from  Church 
and  come  not  unto  Divine  Service  ;  and  who  are  they  ?  ^ 

Whitgift  almost  uses  Freke 's  words  when  visiting  the  diocese 
of  Salisbury  in  1588  and  the  diocese  of  St.  Asaph  in  1600.^ 
In  1569  Bishop  Sandys  visited  the  diocese  of  Worcester  and 
inquired 

Item.  Whether  your  minister  do  every  quarter  openly  in  the  pulpit  read 
the  Queen's  Majesty's  Injunctions  ...?'' 

These  are  typical  examples  of  this  indirect  evidence,  which  is 
patient  of  the  conclusion  that,  whatever  the  dealings  may  have 
been  under  the  more  severe  penal  acts,  those  under  the  Act  of 
Uniformity  still  went  on.  Indeed,  while  Whitgift  was  enforcing 
the  more  severe  penal  acts  by  special  directions  to  the  clergy  of 
his  province,  he  was  making  the  Act  of  Uniformity  a  source  of 
indirect  orders  in  his  visitations.  The  type  of  question  c{uoted 
from  Freke 's  visitation  implies  that  the  churchwardens  will 
furnish  him  with  an  account  of  their  duties  in  connexion  with 
recusants  since  the  last  visitation,  and  such  an  account  would 
necessarily  include  a  statement  of  the  manner  in  which  the  twelve- 
penny  fine  had  been  levied.  This  custom  of  indirect  inquiry 
continued  throughout  the  reign.  It  may  not  afford  a  large  burden 
of  proof,  but  when  it  is  taken  into  consideration  with  the  direct 
evidence,  it  certainly  cannot  be  overlooked. 

I  shall  now  consider  this  direct  evidence  under  provinces  and 
dioceses. 

I.    Province  of  Canterbury 
(1)  Visitations  applying  to  the  whole  Province  of  Canterbury 

1560.  '  If  any  be  negligent  or  wilful  whether  the  forfeiture  be  levied  onj 
their  goods  to  the  use  of  the  poor,  according  to  the  laws  of  this  realm  n 
that  behalf  provided  ?  '     (Parker  Kegister,  i,  f.  302.) 

1561.  The   Episcopal   '  Interpretations  '   ordered   '  that  the  church- 
wardens once  in  the  month  declare  by  their  curates,  in  bills  subscribed  by] 
their  hands,  to  the  Ordinary  or  to  the  next  officer  under  him,  who  they  bej 
which  will  not  readily  pay  their  penalties  for  not  coming  to  God's  Divinej 
Service  according  to  the  Statutes  '.     (Inner  Temple,  London,  Petyt  MSS. 

^  Rochester  Register,  no.  7,  f.  128'. 

«  Whitgift  Register,  i,  f.  400  ;  iii,  f.  218. 

'  Lansdowne  MSS.,  Brit.  Mus.,  xi,  f.  204. 


1918  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  OF  UNIFORMITY  523 

538,  38,  f.  223,  and  538,  47,  f.  545  ;  Corpus  Christi  College,  Cambridge, 
MS.  cvi,  p.  423).8 

1566.  '  That  the  Churchwardens  once  in  the  quarter  declare  by  their 
curates  in  bills  subscribed  with  their  hands  to  the  Ordinary  or  to  the  next 
officer  under  him  who  they  be  which  will  not  readily  pay  their  penalties 
for  not  coming  to  God's  Divine  Service  accordingly.'  {The  Advertisermnts 
of  1566,  from  the  contemporary  text  printed  by  Reginald  Wolfe,  British 
Museum,  T.  1014.) 

1576.  '  Whether  the  forfeiture  of  12^  for  every  such  offence  appointed 
by  a  statute  made  in  the  first  year  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's  reign  be  levied 
and  taken  according  to  the  same  statute  by  the  churchwardens  of  every 
person  that  so  ofEendeth  and  by  them  be  put  to  the  use  of  the  poor  of  the 
parish,  and  if  it  be  not  by  whose  default  it  be  not  levied  ;  and  what 
particular  sums  of  money  have  been  forfeited  that  way  and  by  whom  since 
the  feast  of  Easter  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1575,  until  the  day  of  giving 
up  the  presentment  concerning  these  articles,  and  so  from  time  to  time 
as  the  same  churchwardens  and  swornmen  shall  be  appointed  to  present 
in  this  behalf.  And  how  much  of  such  forfeitures  have  been  delivered  to 
the  use  of  the  poor  of  the  parish,  and  to  whom  the  same  hath  been  delivered  ? ' 
(Grindal  Register,  f.  97.) 

(2)    Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Canterbury 

1563.  '  Whether  the  lay  people  be  diligent  in  coming  to  the  church  on 
the  Holy  Days  ...  if  any  be  negligent  or  wilful  whether  the  forfeiture  is 
levied  on  their  goods  to  the  use  of  the  poor  according  to  the  laws  of  this 
realm  in  that  behalf  provided,  and  what  money  hath  been  gathered  by  the 
churchwardens  of  the  forfeits  ?  '  (Parker  Register,  i,  f.  212.) 

1569.  The  article  of  1563  was  repeated  in  identical  terms  in  1569. 
{Ibid.,  f.  320.) 

1573.  The  article  of  1563  was  repeated  in  identical  terms  in  1573.  (Con- 
temporary text,  printed  by  Reginald  Wolfe,  British  Museum,  T.  775  (9).) 

1597.  The  article  of  1573  was  repeated  in  identical  terms  in  1597. 
(Contemporary  text,  British  Museum,  698.  g.  29.) 

(3)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  London 
1571.  '  Whether  the  forfeiture  of  twelve  pence  for  every  such  offence 
appointed  by  a  statute  made  in  the  first  year  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's 
reign  he  levied  and  taken  according  to  the  same  statute  by  the  church- 
wardens of  every  person  that  so  offendeth  and  by  them  be  put  to  the  use 
of  the  poor  of  the  parish.  And  if  not,  by  whose  fault  it  is  not  levied  or  not 
put  to  the  use  of  the  poor  aforesaid  ? '  (Contemporary  text,  printed  by 
William  Seres,  British  Museum,  698,  h.  20  (10).) 

(4)    Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Winchester 
1569.    '  Item,  that  if  any  absent  himself  from  Divine  Service  or  use  not 
himself  devoutly  and  reverently  thereat,  for  every  such  absence  or  evil 

8  This  order  describes  the  method  agreed  on  by  the  bishops  for  applying  the 
forty-sixth  royal  injunction  already  quoted  to  the  parishes  of  England.  See  my 
Interpretations  of  the  Bishops  (1908). 


524  FINES  UNDER  THE  October 

behaviour  12d.  to  be  paid  to  the  poor  and  levied  of  their  goods.'  (Visitation 
of  the  Channel  Islands,  in  Home  Register,  f.  67.) 

1575.  '  Item,  whether  your  churchwardens  and  swornmen  and  such  as 
were  before  you  have  according  to  the  Act  of  Parliament  therefor  in  the 
first  year  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's  reign  provided,  levied  of  every  one  that 
wilfully  or  negligently  is  absent  from  church  or  unreverently  behaveth 
himself  at  Common  Prayer  as  is  in  the  said  act  appointed,  twelve  pence 
for  every  such  offence.  Whereunto  the  said  forfeiture  is  applied,  what 
account  thereof  yearly  is  made  and  whether  your  poor  man's  box  be 
accordingly  kept  and  the  alms  thereof  accounted  yearly  to  the  parish  ?  ' 
(Contemporary  text,  printed  by  John  Daye,  British  Museum,  5155.  de.  24. 
Cf.  Home  Register,  f.  99.) 


(5)  Visitations  af  flying  to  the  Diocese  of  Ely 
1571.  '  To  certify  and  present  whether  the  churchwardens  and  sworn 
men  have  levied  and  gathered  of  every  that  wilfully  or  negligently  absenteth 
him  or  herself  from  their  parish  church  or  unreverently  behave  himself 
or  herself  in  the  church  in  the  time  of  Divine  Service  upon  the  Sundays 
or  other  Holy  Days  the  forfeiture  of  xij  d.  for  every  such  offence  according 
to  a  statute  made  in  the  first  year  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's  reign  that  now 
is,  and  have  put  the  same  forfeiture  to  the  use  of  the  poor  of  the  same  parish, 
and  what  particular  sums  of  money  are  quarterly  forfeited  that  way  and  by 
whom  and  how  much  thereof  is  levied  and  delivered  to  the  collectors  of 
the  poor  ;  and  if  any  such  forfeiture  be  not  levied  in  case  of  such  offence, 
by  whose  fault  it  happeneth  that  the  same  are  not  levied,  and  what  be 
the  names  of  such  as  offend  that  way  and  do  not  pay  the  said  forfeiture  ?  ' 
(Contemporary  text  in  the  Bodleian  Library.) 

(6)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Norwich 

1561.  '  Whether  the  churchwardens  of  every  parish  do  duly  levy  and 
gather  of  the  goods  and  lands  of  every  such  person  that  cometh  not  to  his 
own  parish  church  upon  the  Sundays  and  Holy  Days  and  there  hear  the 
Divine  Service  and  God's  Word  read  and  preached,  twelve  pence  for 
every  such  offence,  and  whether  they  have  distributed  the  same  money 
to  the  poor  ?  '  (Contemporary  text,  printed  by  John  Day,  British  Museum, 
5155.  aa.  8.) 

(7)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Lincoln 

1588.  '  Whether  have  your  churchwardens  from  time  to  time  levied 
12d.,  for  every  day,  of  those  who  absenteth  themselves  from  church  and 
whether  hath  the  same  been  bestowed  upon  the  poor  or  not  ?  '  (Contem- 
porary text,  British  Museum,  5155.  a.  20  (4).) 

1591.  The  article  of  1588  was  repeated  in  identical  terms  in  1591j 
(Contemporary  text,  British  Museum,  698.  (g.)  32.) 

Note. — In  1577  and  in  1598  the  Ordinaries  of  Lincoln  diocese  ordered 
their  clergy  to  warn  their  churchwardens  every  Sunday  after  the  Second 
Lesson  at  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  to  be  diligent  in  taking  the  names 
of  those  who  absented  themselves  from  church,  and  in  enforcing  the  Act 
of  Uniformity.  (Contemporary  textS;  British  Museum,  5155.  a.  20.,  5155. 
a.  20  (5).) 


I 


1918  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  OF  UNIFORMITY  525 

(8)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield 
1565.  '  Item,  that  they  note  and  mark  diligently  those  that  do  accustom- 
ably  absent  themselves  from  the  church,  and  after  one  monition  had,  if 
they  do  not  amend,  to  punish  them  according  to  the  Statute,  that  is  to 
pay  12d.  to  the  poor  man's  box  as  often  as  they  be  absent  and  cannot  show 
a  just  cause  of  their  absence.'  (Record  Office,  State  Papers  Domestic 
xxxvi,  no.  41.) 

(9)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Chichester 

1586.  '  Whether  the  churchwardens  do  levy  for  not  coming  to  the  church 
to  hear  divine  service  upon  Sundays  and  Holy  Days,  twelve  pence  for  every 
person  absent  without  lawful  excuse  ? '  (Contemporary  text,  British 
Museum,  1368.  d.  32.) 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  next  question  deals  with  the  enforcing 
of  a  later  penal  act.  Thus  fines  under  the  Act  of  Uniformity  went  on 
undisturbed  by  later  legislation. 

(10)  Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Rochester 

1565.  'That  the  churchwardens  once  in  the  month  declare  by  their 
curates  in  bills  subscribed  with  their  hands  to  me  or  my  officer  under  me 
who  they  be  that  will  not  readily  pay  the  penalties  for  not  coming  to  God's 
Divine  Service  according  to  the  Statute.'  (Rochester  Register,  no. 7,  f.  98"".) 

1571.  The  article  of  1565  is  repeated  in  the  form  of  a  question  to  the 
churchwardens  in  1571.    {Ihid.,  f.  118.) 

B.    Province  of  York 
(1)    Visitations  applying  to  the  whole  Province  of  York 
1561.  The  Interpretations  (as  above), 

1566.  The  Advertisements  (as  above). 

1571.  '  Item  for  the  putting  of  the  churchwardens  and  swornmen  better 
in  remembrance  of  their  duty  in  observing  and  noting  all  such  persons  of 
your  parish  as  do  offend  in  not  coming  to  Divine  Service,  ye  shall  openly 
every  Sunday,  after  ye  have  read  the  Second  Lesson  at  Morning  and  Even- 
ing Prayer,  monish  and  warn  the  churchwardens  and  swornmen  of  your 
parish  to  look  to  their  oaths  and  charge  in  this  behalf  and  to  observe  who 
contrary  to  the  law  do  that  day  offend,  either  in  absenting  themselves 
negligently  or  wilfully  from  their  parish  church  or  chapel,  or  unreverently 
use  themselves  in  time  of  Divine  Service,  and  so  note  the  same  to  the  intent 
that  they  may  either  present  such  offenders  to  the  Ordinary,  when  they 
shall  be  required  thereunto,  or  levy  and  take  away  by  way  of  distress  to 
the  use  of  the  poor  such  forfeitures  as  are  appointed  by  a  Statute  made  in 
the  first  year  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's  reign  in  that  behalf.'  (Contemporary 
text,  printed  by  William  Seres,  in  the  Bodleian  Library.) 

(2)    Visitations  applying  to  the  Diocese  of  Chester 
1581.    '  Whether  your  Churchwardens  have  .  .  .  levied  the  forfeiture  of 
12  pence  for  every  absence  from  Common  Prayer  according  to  the  Statute 
and  put  the  same  to  the  use  of  the  poor  of  the  parish  ? '     (Reprint  in 
Chester  Historical  Society'' s  Publications,  vol.  xiii.) 


526  FINES  UNDER  THE  October 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  summarize  the  evidence  which  is 
provided  by  these  visitation  articles  and  injunctions.  In  1561 
and  in  1566  the  bishops  ordered  the  churchwardens  of 
England  and  Wales  to  prepare  monthly  or  quarterly  lists  of 
those  parishioners  who  would  not  pay  the  twelve-penny  fine 
for  nonconformity.  In  1560  the  churchwardens  of  every  parish 
in  the  province  of  Canterbury — i.  e.  two-thirds  of  England  and 
Wales — were  requested  to  give  an  account  of  their  activities  in 
relation  to  that  fine,  and  in  1576  the  request  was  repeated 
in  a  more  detailed  form.  In  1563,  1569,  1573,  and  1597  the 
churchwardens  of  the  parishes  in  the  diocese  of  Canterbury 
were  asked  if  nonconformists  had  been  duly  fined,  and  to 
furnish  details  of  the  money  thus  collected  from  the  twelve - 
penny  forfeitures.  In  1571  a  similar  inquisition  took  place  in 
the  parishes  in  the  diocese  of  London.  In  1569  Bishop  Home 
went  the  full  length  of  the  law  in  the  parishes  of  the  diocese  of 
Winchester  and  included  nonconformity  and  irreverent  behaviour 
at  church  under  the  one  fine.  In  the  same  parishes  Archbishop 
Parker  carried  out  almost  his  last  official  act  as  provincial  visitor, 
when  in  1575  he  enforced  Home's  order  of  1569.  For  the  parishes 
of  the  diocese  of  Ely  in  1571  and  for  those  of  Norwich  in  1561, 
the  documents  of  Bishop  Cox  and  Bishop  Parkhurst  provide  their 
quota  of  evidence.  In  Lincoln  diocese  the  churchwardens  had 
their  attention  drawn  to  their  duties  in  this  connexion  at  four 
dates  during  the  reign,  1577,  1588,  1591,  and  1598.  In  the 
parishes  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield  diocese,  Bentham  in  1565 
allowed  a  due  monition  to  precede  the  levying  of  the  fine.  The 
parishes  of  Chichester  in  1586,  and  of  Rochester  in  1565  and  in 
1571  were  brought  into  line,  in  the  latter  case  with  demands  for 
monthly  returns.  In  the  province  of  York  the  available  evidence 
is  small.  Grindal's  manuscripts  provide  evidence  for  the  whole 
province  in  1571,  while  there  is  extant  evidence  for  the  parishes 
of  the  diocese  of  Chester  in  1581. 

We  are  warranted  from  this  summary  in  concluding  that' 
during  the  entire  reign  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  attempted  to) 
enforce  the  section  of  the  Act  of  Uniformity  which  dealt  with] 
fines.    I  wish  to  draw  attention  to  the  methods  and  to  the  dates.) 
The  former  left  no  opportunity  open  to  the  churchwardens  t( 
plead  that  they  did  not  know  their  duties.    They  took  an  oathi 
which  defined  them.     They  heard  the  royal  injunctions  of  1559 
read  quarterly  in  their  churches.    Among  the  '  furniture  '  of  their 
parish  churches  which  they  had  to  provide  were  the  Advertise- 
ments of  1566,  which  enjoined  the  levying  of  fines  in  clear-cut 
terms.    As  often  as  not  they  had  their  attention  drawn  to  this 
duty  every  Sunday  at  morning  and  evening  prayer.     The  dates 
are  interesting.  Quite  apart  from  the  well-marked  '  religious  crises ' 


1918  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  OF  UNIFORMITY  527 

of  the  reign  and  from  the  penalties  under  the  penal  acts  which 
were  the  outcome  of  these  crises,  we  find  that  there  was  no 
inclination  to  drop  such  attempts  at  enforcing  the  twelve -penny 
fine  as  these  documents  illustrate.  I  think,  too,  I  may  go  further 
and  say  that,  considering  the  uniformity  of  procedure  and 
attempts  provided  by  this  evidence,  we  may  infer  that  had 
we  similar  documents  for  visitations  which  we  know  took  place, 
we  should  find  additional  support  for  ecclesiastical  activity  in 
connexion  with  these  fines. 

In  conclusion,  there  remains  the  obvious  and  difficult  question, 
did  the  visitations  prove  successful  in  enforcing  fines  ?  To  that 
question  I  am  not  in  a  position  to  give  anything  like  a  complete 
answer,  as  such  an  answer  would  mean  a  closer  examination 
of  parochial  and  archidiaconal  records  throughout  England 
than  I  can  ever  hope  to  accomplish.  That  there  was  plenty  of 
recusancy  the  visitation  documents  prove.  That  the  twelve- 
penny  forfeitures  were  demanded  we  know  from  several  sources. 
For  example,  the  detecta  and  comperta  of  visitations  among 
the  archdeacons'  manuscripts  in  London,  Lambeth,  Ely, 
and  Canterbury,  afford  some  evidence  of  diligence.  But  the 
archdeacons'  manuscripts  are  so  abundant  and  are  so  scattered 
— not  only  in  many  collections  but  among  all  kinds  of 
miscellaneous  documents — that  they  would  require  very  wide 
and  patient  research.  With  churchwardens'  accounts  I  am 
unfamiliar — at  least,  broadly  speaking — but  they  might  provide 
evidence.  In  printed  and  edited  documents  evidence  is  forth- 
coming. For  example,  I  have  noted  evidence  in  Ecclesiastical 
Proceedings  of  Bishop  Barnes  (Surtees  Society,  22)  ;  in  Hale's 
Precedents  in  Criminal  Cases  from  the  Act  Books  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Courts  of  London  (1847)  ;  in  Glassock's  Records  of  St.  MicliaeVs, 
Bishop^ s  Stortford  (1882) ;  in  Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  xviii 
(Visitations  of  the  Deanery  of  York)  ;  in  Lancashire  and  Cheshire 
Antiquarian  Society  Transactions,  xiii  (Visitations  of  Manchester 
Deanery,  1592) ;  in  Norfolk  and  Norwich  Archaeological  Society^ 
xiii ;  in  Archaeologia  Cantiana,  xxv,  xxvi,  xxvii.  Some  of  the 
records  are  characteristic  :  '  Eec^  of  defaultes  for  absence  '  [nine 
names,  I2d.  each].  '  Recfl  for  absens.  but  not  distrib^.  It  shalfce 
shortlie.'  '  They  were  absent  from  mornynge  prayer  on  Saint 
Thomas  day  last  past,  &  wold  not  pay  their  fyne.  Ordered  to 
pay  each  12d.  to  the  poor,  to  do  penance.'  From  my  small 
experience  with  the  sources  from  which  these  published  documents 
are  drawn  and  from  these  published  documents,  I  think  there 
is  some  evidence  forthcoming,  which  I  believe  would  be  aug- 
mented by  a  full  and  complete  working  of  the  materials.  I  am 
certain  that  there  were  plenty  of  dealings  if  only  we  could  get 
the  evidence  collected,  for  even  a  superficial  acquaintance  mth 


528  ELIZABETHAN  ACT  OF  UNIFORMITY     October 

the  records  of  Elizabethan  ecclesiastical  courts  is  sufficient  to 
prove  that  the  churchwardens  were  not  permitted  as  a  general 
rule  to  neglect  their  duties.  There  are  records  of  favouritism, 
of  neglect,  of  gross  breaches  of  faith  ;  but  the  long  hand  of  the 
law  reached  out  far,  and  there  was  a  wholesome  dread  of  excom- 
munication for  contempt  of  court,  as  it  brought  with  it  not  merely 
religious  disabilities  but  social  ostracism.  The  evidence  that  the 
churchwardens  were  well  disciplined  is  too  well  known  to  need 
repetition  here. 

To  sum  up,  I  think  we  are  justified  in  saying  that  there  is 
sufficient  evidence  extant  to  permit  the  conclusion  that  the 
twelve -penny  fine  under  the  Act  of  Uniformity  was  regularly 
enforced  throughout  Elizabeth's  reign,  and  that  it  seems  to  have 
been  the  normal  method  of  proceeding  against  the  ordinary 
catholic  and  puritan  recusants.  The  visitation  documents  prove 
that  uniform  attempts  were  made  to  enforce  it,  and  in  every 
collection  of  visitation  detecta  and  comperta  which  I  have  examined 
there  are  records  of  actual  proceedings  in  connexion  with  it. 
As  is  well  known,  at  the  close  of  the  reign  this  fine  was  commonly 
included  among  the  parochial  resources  in  contemporary 
proposals  for  the  provision  of  poor  relief,  and  that  at 
a  time  when  the  enormous  fines  under  later  penal  acts  were 
being  farmed  in  the  interests  of  national  finance. 

W.  P.  M.  Kennedy. 


Ostend  in  ijSj 

In  1587,  when  Ostend  was  in  the  hands  of  Netherlanders  and 
English,  and  guarded  the  North  Sea,  the  States  took  no  steps  to 
strengthen  her  defences,  and  the  English  seemed  doubtful  if  she 
was  worth  a  garrison.  The  following  state  paper,  written  about 
that  time,  discusses  the  question,  and  gives  an  estimate  of  the 
garrison  and  munitions  thought  necessary  should  the  town  be 
retained.    It  is  printed  from  the  Cotton  MS.,  Galba  C.  xi,  fo.  105. 

V.   F.   BOYSON. 

Considerations  proposed  to  deliberation  concerning  Ostend  and  her  Ma^'^ 

Forces  there 

The  state  therof  is  to  be  presented  vnto  them  as  yt  now  standeth, 
destitute  of  money  and  victualls,  and  is  certified  by  divers  letters  addressed 
from  the  Gouernour  there,  both  which  wants  no  garrison  or  men  of  warre 
can  sustaine.  Yt  is  subiect  in  hard  weather  to  surprise,  by  which  occasion 
yf  yt  should  be  loste,  or,  for  the  wants  afforementioned,  loste  or  com- 
pounded for,  we  loose  manie  brave  Souldiers  .  . .  and  loose  the  meanewhile, 
for  these  defects,  the  hartes  of  our  owne  countreymen  in  geving  such  hart 
and  heade  to  th  enemy. 


I 


1918 


OSTEND  IN  1587 


629 


To  remedie  these  her  Ma^i©  may  please  to  consider  whether  she  meane 
to  kepe  yt  as  a  place  from  whence  she  may  (purposing  to  make  an  ofEensiue 
warre)  inuade  Flaunders  and  those  parts,  or  else  vse  yt  as  a  port  towne, 
a  place  of  traffique,  and  roade  for  shippes ;  for  which  of  these  purposes 
soeuer  yt  shall  please  her  to  keepe  yt  she  must  still  furnish  yt,  being 
a  frontier,  as  she  may  neyther  incurre  daunger  nor  dishonour. 

For  the  First  vse.  Besides  a  strong  garrison  to  be  royally  mayntained 
and  a  great  Magasin  for  those  of  the  Towne  as  is  herafter  computed,  Yt 
shalbe  needfuU  to  have  prouided  a  masse  of  victuall  for  the  campe,  accord- 
ing to  the  nombre  that  shalbe  employed  (yf  ther  shalbe  anie  occasione) 
because  the  windes  are  not  alwayes  fauourable,  and  the  army  marching 
haue  no  other  back  or  refuge. 

There  must  be  also  a  conuenient  store  of  caryages  fitt  for  such  an 
armie  because  the  countray  thereabouts  yeald  but  few  and  ther  is  sufficient 
experience  of  the  States  supply. 

Also  ther  must  be  a  necessary  store  of  all  kind  of  Ingin  for  pioning, 
aswel  for  defence  of  the  Towne  as  for  marching.  Furthermore  that  yt 
may  please  her  Ma^y  in  resolution  hereof  to  haue  consideration  of  the 
charge  that  shalbe  needfull,  conferring  th  one  with  th  other  according  to 
th  estimate  hereafter  declared  proportionable  for  the  garrison  for  six 
moneths,  at  the  least  rate  of  men,  and  yet  in  as  meane  sorte  as  they  may 
attend  a  siege  which  is  dayly  threatened  by  the  Dukes  Forces  there- 
abouts. 

An  Estimate  of  Magasin  Needful  for  six  moneths  for  1200  men  which 
is  about  the  nombre  there  now  present : 

Bread  corne 

Beare  corne 

Cheese 

Cannon  powldre 

Fine  powldre 

Match 

Balles  of  diuers  sortes 

Spades  and  Shovells 

Hand  baskets     . 

Seacoles     . 

Double  Furnishment  of  caryages  and  wheeles  for 

artillerij. 
Like  Furnishment  of  Ladles  and  rammers. 

For  the  2nti  vse.  The  former  reasons  of  manning  Fortifiyng  and 
Furnishing  must  needes  be  graunted,  so  that  also  ryseth  another  charge 
as  new  Channells,  replace  of  sluces,  seabanks,  and  water  Fortifications, 
which  by  estimate  cannot  cost  lesse  than  £3000.  And  a  present  masse  of 
Tymber  must  be  had  with  other  necessaries  to  continue  the  repaire  of  the 
same,  which  the  revenues  of  the  Towne  will  hardly  mayntayne,  by  reason 
that  they  want  the  contribution  of  Flaunders,  a  greate  parte  wherof 
hath  heretofore  bene  assured  to  them.  But  yf  her  Matie  intend  neyther 
of  these  but  onelie  to  keepe  yt  defensiuely  I  leaue  yt  to  judgment  whether 
^  A  last  is  80  English  bushels. 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  M  m 


82  lasts  1 

55           »» 

36000  ti 

20000  ti 

4000  ii 

14000  ti 

7000  ti 

1000 

1000 

200  chald. 

530  OSTEND  IN  1587  October 

yt  were  better  tlien  if  the  countrey  should  be  subiect  to  the  hazards,     ™ 
necessities,  and  shame  of  such  a  place  which  being  as  it  is  (without  greater 
providence)  is  not  defensible  against  the  waters  much  lesse  against  so 
mighty  an  enemy. 

I  will  not  produce  the  small  advauntage  her  Ma*^y  hath  by  yt,  or  dis- 
advauntage  geven  to  th  enemy  considering  the  places  within  land  and 
marine  townes  of  theirs  adioyning  to  them,  wherby  yt  hath  bene  ex- 
perienced what  smalle  harmes  they  haue  receyved  and  what  damage  they 
haue  done  to  us. 

Herevpon  yt  may  be  said  that  yf  yt  were  rased  yt  were  of  no  grete 
importaunce.  Yf  yt  should  so  be  thought  goode  yt  followeth  that  to  the 
best  advauntage  yt  maie  be  done  by  breaking  the  sluces  and  cutting  up 
the  piles  therby  utterly  to  ruyne  both  the  towne  and  harbor,  which 
with  a  million  can  not  be  recovered. 

Yf  yt  shalbe  demaunded  how  her  Mamies  forces  now  garrison  there  may 
be  employed.    Yt  may  be  aunswered, 

First  that  they  shalbe  alwayes  ready  to  renforce  the  cautionarie  places 
vpon  all  occasions. 

Secondly  where  anie  occasion  is  ofiered  to  make  head  to  th  enemy 
eyther  to  affront  them  or  by  diversion,  and  tho  they  be  no  nombre  com- 
petent in  themselues,  yet  with  our  associates  they  will  bee  most  easely 
be  made  vp. 

Thirdly  her  Ma*y  shall  the  better  hold  her  contract  with  the  States 
who  oftentymes  urge  that  her  Ma*^y  hath  not  a  Souldier  to  goe  to  the 
warres  which  may  be  spared  from  their  garrisons. 

Fourthly  they  may  be  easily  victualled  and  purchase  better  their 
Forrage,  being  well  ledde  in  the  Field,  then  in  a  Towne  which  is  subiect 
to  more  dishonour  and  losse.  For  yt  is  better  to  haue  so  many  slaine  in 
battaille  then  to  haue  them  dye  of  Famyne  and  loose  a  Towne  to  boot. . . . 
To  conclude,  what  Course  shall  seeme  good  to  others  to  direct  shalbe 
most  agreable  to  vs  on  this  syde  to  follow  ;  hauing  onlie  conceiued  this 
advertisment  vpon  th  imminent  daunger  and  dishonor  that  through  want 
and  misfortune  we  haue  of  late  (in  th  opinion  of  the  enemy)  bene  subiect 
to.  Otherwise  we  warre  for  the  Cause,  and  follow  peace,  as  the  Catholiques 
doe  reformed  religion,  for  the  princes  sake  ;  yet  wishing  as  we  may  still 
hold  the  sword  in  our  handes,  that  our  conditions  be  not  too  base  for  the 
greatnes  of  the  Cause,  and  the  person  that  mannageth  yt,  wherin  tho  ther 
be  wonderfull  assuraunce  of  all  Wisdome  agreable  to  the  care  of  such  in 
action,  yet  this  extreame  meanes  reason  (namely  the  violence  of  the  sword) 
is  not  to  be  laid  down  vntill  yt  be  throughly  compounded  (as  is  best 
knowen  to  your  Lordships). 


1918  531 


Reviews  of  Books 


The  Domnach  Airgid.  By  E.  C.  R.  Armstrong,  F.S.A.,  M.R.I.A.,  and  the 
Rev.  H.  J.  Lawlor,  D.D.,  Litt.D.  (Proceedings  of  the  Royal  Irish 
Academy,  vol.  xxxiv  (C),  no.  7.    Dublin,  1918.) 

The  shrine  which  forms  the  subject  of  this  paper  was  found  about 
the  beginning  of  the  last  century  in  the  possession  of  an  old  woman  in 
Fermanagh.  It  was  then  known  to  the  peasantry  as  the '  Dona '  (Domnach), 
and  there  were  oral  traditions  about  its  origin  and  its  wanderings  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  some  certainly  incorrect,  others  as  yet  unverified. 
It  was  supposed  to  contain  a  lock  of  the  Virgin's  hair,  but  when  opened 
an  ancient  mutilated  manuscript  of  the  Gospels  was  alone  found  in  it.  The 
shrine,  which  was  afterwards  acquired  by  the  Academy,  was  described  by 
Dr.Petriein  a  paper  in  which  he  referred  to  two  documents :  (1)  a  passage 
in  the  Tripartite  Life  of  St.  Patrick  (c.  eleventh  century)  according  to  which 
St.  Patrick  gave  the  *  domnach  airgit '  to  St.  MacCairthinn  when  estab- 
lishing him  as  bishop  in  Clogher ;  (2)  a  similar  passage  in  the  Life  of 
St.  MacCairthinn  (Codex  Salmanticensis,  fourteenth  century),  except  that 
here  the  object  given  is  called  simply  a  scrinium,  and  is  stated  to  have 
contained  some  relics  of  the  apostles,  some  of  the  Virgin's  hair,  parts  of 
the  holy  cross  and  sepulchre,  and  other  holy  relics.  Petrie  accepted  this 
ancient  tradition  in  essentials,  applied  it  to  the  shrine  before  him,  and 
argued  that  the  Domnach  Airgid  was  brought  to  Ireland  by  St.  Patrick, 
and  was  originally  intended  as  a  book-shrine  for  the  preservation  of  the 
manuscript  found  in  it. 

Mr.  Armstrong  now  gives  a  minute  description  of  the  shrine,  which 
with  the  help  of  the  photographic  illustrations  supplied  enables  the  reader 
to  obtain  a  good  idea  of  the  appearance  of  the  various  casings.  It  consists 
in  the  first  place  of  a  plain  box  of  yew- wood  of  uncertain  date.  This  box 
was  covered  with  bronze  metal  plates,  of  which  three  survive,  ornamented 
with  interlaced  patterns  of  probably  the  eighth  century.  These  had  been 
coated  with  a  white  metal,  now  found  to  be  tin  and  not  silver,  as  was  at 
first  supposed.  To  this  casing  was  afterwards  added  or  substituted,  on 
the  front,  a  representation  of  the  crucifixion  surrounded  by  four  silver-gilt 
panels  containing  figures  of  saints.  On  the  upper  rim  is  an  inscription  in 
Lombardic  lettering,  viz. :  Johs  0  Karbri  Comorbanus  S.  Tignadi  pmisit. 
As  the  death  of  John  O'Cairbri,  successor  of  St.  Tigernach  at>  Clones,  is 
recorded  in  1353,  this  inscription  gives  an  approximate  date  to  parts  of 
the  present  shrine  and  indicates  a  connexion  with  Clones.  The  back  of 
the  shrine  is  a  bronze  plate  to  which  a  copper-gilt  cross  is  riveted.  On  this 
cross  is  an  inscription  in  black  letter,  which  Petrie,  while  acknowledging 
inability  to  read  the  whole,  thought  ended  with  the  place-name  Cloachar 
(Clogher).  It  has  now,  however,  been  satisfactorily  deciphered  and  found 
to  consist  of  the  names  of  the  '  Magi ',  divided  by  the  monogram  if)t.    It 

M  m  2 


532  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

should  probably  be  assigned  to  the  fifteenth  century.  On  the  top  of  the 
shrine  over  the  bronze  plate  is  a  still  later  addition,  ascribed  by  Mr.  Arm- 
strong to  the  sixteenth  century. 

Dr.  Lawlor  tells  all  that  is  known  of  the  history  of  the  shrine,  which, 
with  Petrie,  he  here  assumes  to  be  the  Domnach  Airgid,  and  analyses  the 
traditions  concerning  it.  Controverting  Petrie,  he  argues  that  it  could  not 
have  belonged  to  St.  Patrick,  that  it  was  a  reliquary,  not  a  book-shrine, 
and  that  down  to  the  sixteenth  century  it  was  preserved  at  Clogher,  not  at 
Clones.  He  adduces  some  fresh  evidence  from  fragments  of  the  Registry 
of  Clogher  compiled  in  1525,  which  he  has  recently  edited.  Here  there  is 
a  memorandum  to  the  effect  that  Matthew  MacCathasaigh,  bishop  of 
Clogher,  in  the  year  1308  placed  some  relics  of  two  saints  in  scrinio  magno 
heati  MaTcartini,  which  shrine  in  the  same  passage  is  called  '  Domhnach 
Airgeid '.  It  is  impossible  here  to  do  justice  to  Dr.  Lawlor's  arguments, 
which,  as  regards  the  Domnach  Airgid,  are  cogent  enough  ;  but  his  theory 
affords  no  adequate  account  for  the  presence  of  the  Gospel  book  in  the 
shrine  when  opened,  or  for  the  absence  of  the  relics — ^if  we  except  what 
may  possibly  have  been  passed  off  as  a  piece  of  the  holy  cross  found  behind 
one  of  the  crystals — stated  to  have  been  preserved  in  the  Domnach  Airgid, 

When  this  paper  was  read  Professor  Macalister  put  a  new  complexion 
on  the  problem  by  propounding  a  different  theory,  which  he  has  briefly 
committed  to  writing  and  is  appended  to  the  paper  together  with  a  reply 
from  Dr.  Lawlor.  He  disputes  in  effect  the  identity  of  the  existing  shrine 
with  the  Domnach  Airgid.  He  argues  that  the  facts  point  to  two  shrines  : 
the  Domnach  Airgid,  a  reliquary  formerly  preserved  at  Clogher,  but  now 
lost,  and  the  Academy  shrine  which,  as  the  inscription  indicates,  belonged 
to  Clones.  To  this  Clones  shrine  no  authentic  tradition  attaches,  but 
'  after  the  disappearance  of  the  Clogher  shrine  the  popular  traditions  with 
regard  to  its  relics  became  attached  to  the  Clones  shrine  and  its  then 
unknown  contents.'  He  suggests  that  the  book  found  in  the  Clones  shrine, 
*  a  crushed  illegible  fragment',  belonged,  or  was  supposed  to  have  belonged 
to  some  saint  connected  with  Clones,  probably  to  the  founder  Tigernach 
himself ;  that  it  was  used  for  a  long  time  as  a  wonder-working  relic  and 
maltreated  in  various  ways  ;  and  that  after  it  had  thus  suffered  serious 
injury  and  was  useless  for  study  it  was  sealed  up  as  a  relic  in  the  bronze- 
casing,  to  which  long  afterwards  the  silver  outer  case  was  added.  Not  till 
this  was  done  could  it,  he  says,  be  called  Domnach  Airgid. 

Dr.  Macalister's  hypothesis  thus  briefly  indicated  seems  to  account 
for  all  the  facts,  and  his  arguments  are  not  seriously  weakened  by  Dr.  Law- 
lor's reply.  It  must  be  conceded  to  Dr.  Lawlor  that  the  outer  appearance 
of  the  tin-coated  bronze  plates  might  be  enough  to  account  for  the  epithet 
airgid  ('  of  silver  ')  popularly  applied,  but  against  this  it  may  be  observed 
that  the  epithet  was  still  applied  to  the  Clogher  shrine  as  late  as  1525,  when 
for  nearly  two  centuries  the  appearance  of  the  Academy  shrine  would  no 
longer  have  warranted  it.  Dr.  Lawlor  dwells  on  the  fact  that  the  word 
Domnach,  so  far  as  is  known,  has  been  applied  only  to  these  two  shrines, 
and  sees  in  this  fact  an  argument  (not  very  convincing)  for  their  identity. 
But  I  venture  to  suggest  that  the  early  use  of  this  term  as  applied  to  the 
Clogher  shrine  points  unmistakably  to  a  shrine  of  a  different  form  from 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  533 

the  Academy  shrine.  Domnach  {do7ninica)  was  commonly  used  in  early 
times  to  denote  a  church  :  aedis  dominica, '  the  Lord's  House  '  or  *  Temple  '. 
When,  therefore,  in  the  eleventh  century  or  earlier  it  was  applied  to  a 
shrine,  it  must  surely  have  been  to  the  well-known  church-shaped  variety, 
of  which  there  are  several  examples,  all  of  which  are  generally  regarded  as 
reliquaries.  The  appropriateness  of  this  form  for  the  *  corporal  relics  '  of 
saints  is  obvious.  The  close  resemblance  in  form  of  this  variety  of  shrine 
to  the  representation  of  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem  in  the  Book  of  Kells  has 
been  noted.^  '  Domnach  Airgid  '  would  then  have  much  the  same  connota- 
tion as  Templum  Argenteum,  and  could  not  with  propriety  be  applied  to 
the  Academy  shrine,  which  is  a  rectangular  box-shaped  shrine  and  should 
be  classed  with  the  '  cumdachs  '  or  book-shrines.  Characteristic  of  these 
is  also  the  adoption  of  a  cross  as  the  base  of  the  design.  The  fact  that  the 
term  Domnach  was  actually  applied  to  the  box-shaped  Academy  shrine 
by  recent  oral  tradition  is  a  further  indication  of  the  soundness  of  Dr. 
Macalister's  view  that  the  tradition  was  really  transferred  from  the  Clogher 
shrine — at  a  time,  we  may  add,  when  this  early  use  of  the  word  Domnach 
was  forgotten.    It  is  still  used  for  '  Sunday ',  dies  dominica. 

Conjectures  founded  on  the  supposed  kernel  of  truth  in  unverified 
popular  traditions,  which  are  manifestly  false  in  part,  seldom  lead  to  an 
assured  result.  Perhaps  expert  palaeographers  may  yet  be  able  to  date 
the  illegible  fragment  of  the  gospels,  and  its  date  may  have  an  important 
bearing  on  the  problem,  but  no  hypothesis  as  to  the  shrine  can  be  deemed 
satisfactory  which  does  not  take  into  account  its  form  and  the  presence 
of  the  book  found  in  it  when  opened  nearly  a  century  ago. 

GODDARD   H.   OrPEN. 


Vetus  Liber  Archidiaconi  Eliensis.    Edited  by  the  Rev.  C.  L.  Feltoe  and 
E.  H.  Minns.    (Cambridge  :  Deighton,  Bell  &  Co.,  1917.) 

In  this  book  the  Cambridge  Antiquarian  Society  has  provided  ecclesiastical 
antiquaries  with  a  mine  where  they  can  work  for  many  years.  It  contains 
a  list  of  the  churches  of  the  deaneries  of  Cambridge,  Camps,  Chesterton, 
Barton,  Shingay,  Wisbeach,  Bourne,  and  Ely,  drawn  up  apparently  in 
1277,  stating  the  amount  of  the  synodals,  the  procurations,  and  the  Peter's 
pence  that  was  paid  by  each  church,  and  the  books,  vestments,  and  orna- 
ments that  each  contained.  The  books  mentioned  are  missale,  gradu<ile, 
antiphonarium,  psalterium,  manuale,  troparium,  legenda,  martilogium, 
ordinate,  epistolare,  hymnarium,  processionarium,  portiforium,  and  homelie  ; 
all  churches  had  the  first  five  of  these,  and  nearly  all  had  the  next  two  as 
well  ;  very  few  had  the  last  four.  Evidently  some  churches  had  a  more 
elaborate  service  than  others  and  required  more  than  one  copy  of  books 
for  the  choir.  The  vestments  are  '  a  set  of  vestments  with  pertinences ', 
surplice,  rochet,  cope,  dalmatic  (generally  spelt  almatic),  and  tunicle  ;  all 
churches  had  the  mass  vestment  and  most  of  them  had  surplices  and  rochets; 
not  many  had  the  last  three.    The  ornaments  or  furniture  of  the  church 

*  See  Romilly  Allen's  Celtic  Art  in  Pagan  and  Christian  TimeSy  p.  210.  If  the 
shtine  fished  up  from  Lough  Erne,  there  illustrated,  was  ever  coated  with  white  metal, 
it  would  suit  very  well  for  the  lost  Clogher  shrine. 


534  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

were  chalice  (with  paten),  phials,  chrismatory,  pyx,  thurible,  processional 
cross,  font  with  lock,  Lenten  veil,  frontals,  banners,  and  occasionally 
a  fahula  depicta.    In  some  inventories  corporals  and  towels  are  mentioned  ; 
in  the  cases  where  they  are  not  mentioned,  they  must  have  been  reckoned 
among  the  pertinences  of  the  vestments.    In  some  churches  there  is  mention 
of  the  velum  templi,  which  the  editor  shows  to  be  identical  with  the  velum 
quadragesimale  ;  it  was  suspended  at  the  chancel  arch  during  Lent  and  was 
allowed  to  fall  on  Wednesday  in  Holy  Week  when  the  words  of  the  Gospel 
were  reached  '  the  veil  of  the  Temple  was  rent  in  twain '.    This  series  of 
inventories  is  unique.    There  is  a  similar  and  even  finer  book  at  Norwich, 
which  is  said  to  embrace  800  churches  ;   some  specimens  were  published 
sixty  years  ago  in  Norfolk  Archaeology,  vol.  v  ;  but  it  is  not  of  such  an  early 
date  as  the  Ely  book.     The  careful  editing  of  the  manuscript  deserves 
mention ;    not  only  have  the  original  lists  been  printed  but  also  the 
additions   subsequently   made    by   archdeacons   or   their   officials,   and 
Mr.  Minns  dates  these  additions  by  the  handwriting.     He  distinguishes 
as  many  as  twenty  different  writings,  but  to  be  on  the  safe  side  he  assigns 
them  to  six  correctors  ;  and  the  page  of  the  manuscript  which  is  reproduced 
in  facsimile  shows  that  the  hands  are  clearly  distinct.    These  additions  show 
how  the  ornaments  of  the  churches  increased  with  the  process  of  time,  and 
sometimes  they  contain  the  name  of  the  man  who  gave  a  book  or  vestment. 
The  volume  is  also  valuable  because  it  contains  some  of  the  chief 
documents  about  the  magister  glomerie,  an  official  peculiar  to  Cambridge. 
The  decision  of  Bishop  Hugh  (pp.  20-4)  defining  the  position  of  the  Master 
of  Grlomery,  has  often  been  printed ;  but  it  is  convenient  to  have  in  addition 
the  entries  of  the  oath  taken  by  eight  different  masters  of  Glomery.    It  is 
now  recognized  that  Glomery  is  another  form  of  the  word  Grammary, 
and  the  Master  of  Glomery  was  selected  for  his  artis  grammatice  experientia 
(p.  202) ;   he  was  chosen  by  the  archdeacon  of  Ely,  who  also  '  conferred ' 
on  him  the  scole  grammaticales  or  scole  glomerie,  which  the  late  Mr.  J.  W. 
Clark  identified  with  the  scola  glomerie  in  Glomery  Lane,  which  was  part 
of  the  site  of  King's  College.    Those  under  his  charge  were  called  glomerelli, 
which  the  editor  renders  '  grammar  boys  '  ;  no  doubt  many  of  them  were 
boys,  but  some  must  have  been  of  age  and  able  to  go  to  law  ;  for  one  of  the 
points  that  Bishop  Hugh  decides  is  in  what  court  a  case  should  be  tried 
if  a  glomerellus  goes  to  law  with  a  scholar  or  a  townsman.    In  the  former 
instance  he  decides  that  it  should  be  tried  in  the  chancellor's  court ;  in  the 
latter,  in  the  court  of  the  Master  of  Glomery.    Possibly  the  masters  who 
gave  instruction  in  grammar  were  also  among  the  glomerelli  ;    for  the 
bishop  mentions  that  a  glomerellus  might  be  sued '  de  pensionibus  domorum 
per  magistros  et  burgenses  taxatarum  '  ;  and  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries  only  a  master  of  arts,  or  occasionally  a  bachelor,  might  deposit 
caution  for  such  a  house  ;  but  perhaps  the  rule  was  different  in  the  thir- 
teenth century.    The  glomerelli  were  not  members  of  the  university  ;  they 
were  on  a  lower  plane  of  education.    The  word  occurs  in  a  well-known 
passage  in  the  French  poem  called  the  Battle  of  the  Seven  Arts  (edited  by 
L.  J.  Paetow)  ;  the  university  of  Paris,  devoted  to  logic,  and  the  university 
of  Orleans,  devoted  to  the  classics,  are  at  variance  ;  .  Orleans  sneers  at 
Paris  as  being  given  to  the  study  of  quibbling  ;  Paris  replies  that  the  clerks 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  535 

of  Orleans  are  glomeriaus  '  mere  grammar-ers '.  There  was  nothing  at 
Oxford  like  the  magister  glomerie,  i.  e.  no  individual  appointed  by  the 
archdeacon  and  with  a  jurisdiction  distinct  from  the  chancellor's  ;  but 
we  read  in  several  of  the  statutes  that  there  were  two  masters  of  arts  who 
had  the  superintendence  or  supervision  of  the  grammar  schools  in  Oxford 
and  received  a  salary  for  their  pains.  As  early  as  1322  Nicholas  de  Tingewick 
(the  doctor  who  is  mentioned  on  p.  17  of  the  book  of  the  archdeacon 
of  Ely)  gave  two  houses  to  the  university  of  Oxford  to  provide  a  salary 
of  four  marks  for  two  masters  'regents  in  the  dialectic  art  who  should  super- 
vise the  grammar  schools  for  the  good  of  the  boys  who  study  grammar'. 
There  are  a  few  misreadings  in  the  text.  On  p.  3, 1.  5  substinend^  should 
be  suhstituendi,  and  clam[iis]  is  probably  clausulis.  At  the  end  of  Bishop 
Hugh's  judgement  (p.  23)  imitandi  should  be  mutandi ;  in  several  small 
points  the  version  differs  from  that  given  by  Dean  Peacock  in  his  Observa- 
tions on  the  Statutes  of  the  University,  App.  A,  p.  xxxiv,  but  probably  the 
present  text  is  the  more  accurate.  On  p.  173,  1.  23  repet[endis]  is 
probably  reparetur;  on  p.  174, 1.  25  and  again  p.  176, 1. 19  iure  perhibiturus 
should  be  iuri  pariturus,  and  p.  177,  1.  17  perhibeant  should  be  pareant ; 
on  p.  178,  I.  15  in  the  phrase  '  penitenciam  iiii  f...  m.'  the  missing  word 
is  fustigationum,  and  the  sentence  should  probably  run '  Cum  nos  W.  de  T. 
pro  suis  delictis  notorie  commissis  coram  iudicavimus  penitenciam  mi 
fustigationum  '  ;  ('  since  we  have  publicly  adjudged  to  W.  de  T.  a  penance 
of  being  whipped  four  times  round  the  church ',  &c.) ;  it  is  the  form  of 
letter  that  the  archdeacon  would  send  to  an  incumbent  whose  parishioner 
would  not  take  his  beating  patiently.  H.  E.  Salter. 

Registrum  lohannis  de  Pontissara,  1282-1304.     Parts  ii-v.     Edited  by 
Cecil  Deedes,  M.A.    (Canterbury  and  York  Society.) 

The  register  of  John  of  Pontoise,  bishop  of  Winchester,  is  the  earliest  of 
the  series  for  that  diocese.  It  is  impressive  from  its  bulk  if  from  no  other 
cause.  The  manuscript,  which  includes  a  small  fragment  of  an  earlier 
book,  fills  226  folios.  The  published  text,  of  which  we  noticed  the  first 
part  some  years  ago,^  is  still  only  half  way  to  completion,  although  the 
five  parts  issued  between  1913  and  1917  contain  more  than  450  pages. 
The  editor  of  so  comprehensive  a  record  has  no  easy  task.  Apart  from 
obvious  technical  difficulties,  he  feels  an  obligation  to  give  his  reader  a  clue 
in  the  labyrinth,  to  indicate  what  sort  of  material  the  work  contains,  where- 
abouts it  is  to  be  looked  for,  and  how  it  may  be  checked  and  supplemented. 
Mr.  Deedes  has  prefixed  to  part  iv  an  introduction  of  115  pages 
intended  to  meet  these  requirements.  He  has  described  the  manuscript, 
given  a  life  of  the  bishop,  called  attention  to  a  large  number  of  the 
subjects  with  which  the  register  deals,  and  translated  a  good  many  extracts. 
He  has  done  all  this  not  only  patiently  and  minutely,  but  with  evident 
savour  and  appreciation.  Not  every  reader,  however,  will  agree  with  the 
principle  of  selection  the  editor  has  followed,  and  all  readers  must  cavil 
somewhat  at  his  disorderly  arrangement.  Subjects  are  begun,  laid  down, 
and  resumed.    The  translation  of  '  Pontissara  ',  for  example,  crops  up 

^  Ante.  vol.  xxix.  186. 


536  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

on  pp.  vi,  X,  and  cxii.  On  p.  cix  are  inserted  four  pages  of  *  matters  to 
be  stated  as  supplementary  to  wbat  has  gone  before  ',  some  of  which 
could  have  been  dealt  with  far  more  appropriately  at  an  earlier  point, 
when  the  subjects  to  which  they  refer  were  being  discussed.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  it  was  worth  while  to  make  so  many  translations  of  documents 
quoted  from  the  register,  especially  of  any  so  well  known  as  the  writ 
summoning  the  bishops  to  the  parliament  of  1295.  The  footnotes  are 
open  to  some  criticism.  Surely  contemporary  authorities  might  be  cited 
for  information  about  riots  in  London  in  1267,  rather  than  Stow's  Annals 
(p.  ex),  and  in  the  same  way  the  ill-treatment  of  Jews  in  the  thirteenth 
century  is  recorded  in  sources  more  primary  than  Haydn's  Dictionary  of  Dates 
(p.  Ixix) .  The  plan  of  the  series  may  authorize  notes  sending  the  reader  to 
well-known  works  of  reference  such  as  Lingard,  Milman,  and  Gibbon,  but  no 
learned  society  should  permit  even  humorous  reference  to  anecdotes  told  in 
the  Daily  Mirror  (p .  cxiii) .  A  slip  may  be  noted  on  p .  xxix,  where  the  house 
of  Austin  canons  at  Christchurch  is  described  as  a  Benedictine  priory. 

There  is  no  life  of  Bishop  John  of  Pontoise  in  the  Dictionary  of  National 
Biography.  Yet  the  life  is  worth  writing,  not  because  its  subject  was 
a  man  of  exceptional  parts,  but  for  precisely  the  reverse  reason.  John 
was  comparatively  obscure,  well-trained,  practised  by  years  of  experience, 
pushed  almost  by  accident  into  a  position  of  great  dignity  and  responsibility, 
for  which  he  proved  to  be  quitfe  adequate.  There  were  many  similar  men 
in  his  time  and  among  his  actual  acquaintance.  It  was  through  men  of 
this  type,  indeed,  that  medieval  machinery  was  able  to  perform  its 
functions  :  and  it  is  by  observation  of  the  type,  rather  than  of  the  excep- 
tion, that  a  true  vision  of  the  middle  ages  is  to  be  gained. 

John  of  Pontoise  was  an  Englishman,  probably  a  Devonian,  but  at 
the  moment  when  he  was  appointed  bishop  he  had  been  for  some  years 
resident  in  Italy,  and  was  lecturing  in  civil  law  at  Modena.  Edward  I  had 
desired  the  vacant  see  of  "Winchester  for  his  scandalous  and  invaluable 
cbancellor,  Eobert  Burnell,  and  the  chapter  had  actually  been  induced 
to  make  that  choice.  Their  election  was  quashed  by  the  Pope,  so  also 
was  a  second,  and  John  of  Pontoise  came  in  by  papal  nomination  as  an 
unexpected  third.  It  was  not  under  the  most  favourable  auspices,  therefore, 
that  the  new  bishop  came  into  contact  with  Edward  I,  though  if  the 
king  had  kept  up  grudges  against  all  the  successful  candidates  who  defeated 
his  constant  efforts  on  Burnell's  behalf,  he  would  have  had  few  friends 
left.  An  additional  grievance  was  created  when  the  bishop  refused  to 
give  Crondall  rectory  to  Queen  Eleanor's  Spanish  physician.  However, 
within  four  years  of  Bishop  John's  appointment,  early  friction  was  smoothed 
over,  and  the  king  began  to  use  him  for  missions  of  trust  of  all  sorts.  From 
1285  onwards  the  calendars  of  patent  and  close  rolls  are  full  of  references 
to  his  activities  in  Scotland,  France,  and  elsewhere.  Mr.  Deedes  makes 
no  reference  to  these  sources.  This  leads  him  to  overlook  one  of  the  most 
important  posts  the  bishop  ever  held.  In  1289  John  was  appointed  as 
one  of  the  two  prelates  in  a  commission  of  seven  persons  set  up  *  ad 
audiendum  gravamina  et  iniurias  si  que  per  ministros  illata  fuerint  quibus- 
cunque  personis  regni  '.  The  other  was  Eobert  Burnell  himself.  Thus 
the    former   rivals  were  brought  into  juxtaposition   on   a    board  com- 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  537 

posed  of  picked  men  trusted  to  unravel  a  grave  official  scandal.  We 
know,  too,  from  the  Assize  Rolls  containing  the  record  of  the  trials,  that 
although  the  appointment  did  not  necessarily  imply  continuous  personal 
attendance,  the  bishop  did  actually  sit  to  hear  cases  during  1290  and  1291. 
Honour  though  it  was,  it  was  a  very  delicate  and  irksome  business. 

The  register  gives  abundant  illustration  of  Bishop  John's  activities  in 
his  diocese,  but  not  much  material  for  discerning  his  personality.  The 
formal  phrases  of  recommendation  used  by  Archbishop  Peckham  are  not 
evidence  of  much  value.  John's  own  letters,  even  if  he  wrote  them  him- 
self, have  too  strong  a  resemblance  to  many  others  of  the  same  period  to 
justify  many  personal  inferences.  Possibly  the  best  quarter  in  which 
his  individuality  may  be  discerned  is  in  his  crowning  work  of  charity.  At  a 
moment  when  the  private  benefactor  was  very  generally  following  the  royal 
lead  in  singling  out  the  mendicant  orders  for  special  devotion,  Bishop  John 
chose  to  found  a  collegiate  chapel, served  by  seven  chaplains  and  six  clerks  in 
holy  orders.  The  dedication  was  a  trifle  unusual .  The  chief  altar  was  allotted 
to  St.  Elizabeth  of  Hungary,  while  St.  Stephen,  St.  Lawrence,  St.  Edmund 
the  King,  and  Blessed  Thomas  of  Canterbury  shared  between  them  two 
minor  altars.  In  other  respects,  however,  Bishop  John's  foundation  had 
no  particular  novelty,  but  closely  followed  the  rules  laid  down  by  two 
Isle  of  Wight  rectors  when  in  1275  they  founded  an  oratory  at  Barton. 
An  inspeximus  of  their  letters  is  printed  in  the  register  (pp.  335-43),  and 
gives  on  the  whole  a  better  text  than  the  only  one  hitherto  accessible  in 
print,  published  by  Mr.  Kirby  in  Archaeologia,  lii.  297-314.  There  are, 
however,  rather  large  omissions  in  the  former  as  compared  with  the  latter. 
The  register  is  full  of  information  of  a  bearing  wider  than  the  diocese 
of  Winchester.  The  original  compilers  followed  some  sort  of  method,  the 
result  of  which  is  that  the  register  falls  roughly  into  four  sections,  each 
chronologically  arranged.  Collations,  inductions,  &c .,  fill  the  first  47  folios. 
The  last  section,  between  folio  189  and  folio  226,  is  concerned  with  litiga- 
tion. The  intervening  parts  cover  practically  every  other  aspect  of  the 
bishop's  activities .  Section  3  (folio  48  to  folio  94)  contains  synodal  statutes, 
monastic  visitations,  and  a  large  number  of  letters  to  individuals  and  com- 
munities. Section  4  (folio  94  to  folio  189)  concerns  the  temporalities  of  the 
see  and  the  bishop's  public  business,  and  is  probably,  for  the  general  reader, 
the  most  interesting  part  of  the  register.  Its  publication  begins  with  the 
latest  printed  part  issued,  but  most  of  it  is  still  to  come.  Among  its  contents 
are  a  number  of  bulls  and  letters  from  Pope  Boniface  VIII,  not  included 
among  those  published  in  Rymer's  Foedera.  Hilda  Johnstone. 

Finance  and  Trade  under  Edward  III.  By  members  of  the  History  School 
of  the  University  of  Manchester.  Edited  by  George  Unwin,  M.A. 
(Manchester  :  University  Press,  1918.) 

The  publication  of  these  studies,  written  for  the  most  part  in  1911  and 
1912,  is  strangely  opportune.  Once  more  we  are  living  in  a  period  of  war 
finance,  and  there  is  a  family  likeness  between  the  makeshift  expedients 
of  fourteenth-century  England,  when  confronted  with  the  political  and 
economic  difficulties  of  a  great  war,  and  our  own  more  scientific  efforts 


538  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

to  cope  with  an  unprecedented  but  inevitable  national  expenditure. 
Sumptuary  laws  and  State  regulation  of  wages  and  prices  have  no  longer 
their  old  suggestion  of  distance  in  time  and  space,  and  we  feel  ourselves 
in  a  mood  to  regard  sympathetically  the  troubles  of  our  forefathers. 

Of  the  papers  included  in  the  volume  five  were  theses  by  some 
of  Professor  Unwin's  pupils  ;  one  is  a  solid  discussion  by  Mr.  Unwin 
on  the  '  Estate  of  Merchants  '  and  two  are  lectures  by  him  in  a 
lighter  vein.  A  general  introduction  sums  up  the  conclusions  which  he 
draws  from  the  varied  material  of  the  volume.  The  whole  book  is  an 
excellent  example  of  what  can  be  done  by  the  organization  of  historical 
work.  There  is  some  overlapping,  of  course,  but  the  various  writers  have 
usually  avoided  trenching  upon  each  other's  territory.  This  has  its  dis- 
advantages since  the  separate  essays  lose  in  breadth  by  the  deliberate 
omission  of  points  germane  to  their  subjects  which  are  dealt  with  by  other 
writers,  and  the  student  will  find  it  necessary  to  turn  from  one  to  another 
to  obtain  a  comprehensive  view  of  the  economic  conditions  of  the  period. 

Of  Mr.  Unwin's  two  lectures,  the  first  contains  a  lively  sketch  of 
London  and  London  society  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  III  and  Elizabeth,  and 
illustrates  the  points  that  there  was,  in  England  at  least,  no  sharp  social 
demarcation  between  the  country  gentry  an^d  the  magnates  of  the  towns, 
and  that  the  development  of  town  life  was  due  to  those  voluntary  associa- 
tions— ^universities,  craft  guilds, and  religiousorders — ^which  somehistorians 
regard  as  specially  characteristic  of  continental  nations.  The  second  is 
an  ingenious  application  of  the  information  obtainable  from  recognizances 
recorded  in  the  London  '  Letter  Books  '  to  the  determination  of  the  con- 
ditions of  foreign  wholesale  and  retail  trade  in  the  fourteenth  century. 
The  local  distribution  and  relative  importance  of  the  various  trades  inLondon 
are  brought  out  by  Miss  Curtis 's  transcription  of  the  London  accounts  of 
Fifteenth  and  Tenth  in  1332  and  the  essay  which  accompanies  it.  This  is 
the  only  paper  in  the  volume  based  on  original  documents,  and  is  specially 
valuable  in  interpreting  the  recognizances  with  which  the  previous  paper 
deals.  Those  on  the  Bardi  and  Peruzzi  by  Mr.  Eussell  and  the  taxation  of 
wool  by  Mr.  Barnes  would  both  have  been  more  valuable  than  they  are 
had  it  been  possible  for  their  authors  to  make  full  use  of  the  Eeceipt  and 
Issue  Rolls.  This  is  one  of  the  most  important  tasks  which  awaits  the 
historian.  Neither  Sir  James  Ramsay  nor  Mr.  S.  B.  Terry  has  dealt 
adequately  with  these  rolls,  and  for  a  complete  account  of  the  finance  of 
the  fourteenth  century  we  must  wait  until  a  competent  accountant  can 
extract  from  them  and  from  the  Enrolled  Accounts  an  intelligible  statement 
of  the  net  receipts  and  expenditure  of  the  kingdom.  Such  information  as 
is  given  by  the  printed  Calendars  of  Patent  and  Close  Rolls  has  been  made 
the  most  of.  Unhappily  the  Fine  Rolls,  which  contain  many  important 
financial  documents,  are  still  uncalendared  for  the  greater  part  of  the  reign 
of  Edward  III.  The  lamented  death  of  Mr.  A.  E.  Bland  in  the  battle  of 
the  Somme  in  1916  has  left  work  for  a  successor,  both  here  and  in  the 
history  of  the  staple,  which  will  need  to  be  completed  before  the  full 
financial  history  of  the  reign  can  be  written. 

Mr.  Unwin's  own  paper  upon  the  '  Estate  of  Merchants,  1336- 
65  ',  carries  on  for  the  reign  of  Edward  III  the  work  done  by  Professor 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  539 

Tout  for  Edward  II,  and,  being  written  after  the  other  essays,  acts  as 
a  cement  to  bind  together  the  contents  of  the  volume.  It  exhibits  a 
characteristic  trait  of  its  author's  method,  the  careful  analysis  of  the 
elements  of  which  the  so-called  *  Estate  of  Merchants  '  consisted,  with 
the  object  of  disentangling  the  respective  interests  of  the  various  sections. 
The  same  method  had  led  to  fruitful  results  in  the  shorter  study  of  '  London 
Tradesmen  and  their  Creditors  ' .  In  this  case  the  analysis  leads  to  destruc- 
tive criticism  of  the  traditional  financial  and  commercial  policy  of 
Edward  III.  Mr.  Unwin  makes  out  a  good  case  for  regarding  the 
measures  of  the  king  and  parliament  respectively  as  opportunist  in  the 
main,  rather  than  the  expression  of  a  definite  financial  policy.  This  view 
is  much  more  in  keeping  with  inherent  probability  and  with  the  historical 
atmosphere  of  the  period  than  the  view  previously  held  by  Dr.  Cunningham, 
and  since  considerably  modified  by  him.  The  same  subject  is  continued 
by  Miss  Greaves 's  study  of  '  Calais  under  Edward  III  ',  which  carrier 
on  the  history  of  the  staple  to  the  end  of  the  reign,  and  gives  a  useful 
account  of  the  organization  of  the  English  community  in  Calais,  of  which 
we  get  an  interesting  picture  at  a  later  date  in  the  '  Cely  Papers  ',  which  it 
may  be  hoped  that  the  Koyal  Historical  Society  will  some  day  complete 
by  adding  the  remaining  letters  contained  in  the  *  Ancient  Correspondence  ' 
and  a  few  more  of  the  subsidiary  documents  in  the  '  Chancery  Miscellanea  '. 
Mr.  Sargeant's  paper  on  the  '  Wine  Trade  with  Gascony  '  is  also 
valuable  as  illustrating  the  attitude  of  English  merchants  to  their  foreign 
competitors.  It  contains  a  curious  slip.  The  reference  to  '  murage, 
pontage  and  fannage  '  in  the  city  of  London  should  surely  be  to  '  pavage  ', 
though  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  slip  is  not  Mr.  Sargeant's,  but  that  of 
one  of  the  scribes  of  the  '  Letter  Book  '  or  the  '  Patent  Roll  '  to  which  he 
refers  through  the  medium  of  their  respective  '  Calendars  ' . 

There  are  one  or  two  minor  points  which  claim  notice.  The  list  of 
Calais  ojQ&cials  on  pp.  349-50  does  not  seem  to  have  been  compared  with 
that  in  the  '  List  and  Index  of  Enrolled  Accounts  ',  and  the  account  of  the 
Calais  Mint  might  have  been  supplemented  from  the  figures  in  the  '  Numis- 
matic Chronicle  '.  There  is  also  some  confusion  on  pp.  286-7,  where 
Bordeaux  money  is  reckoned  in  '  sols  '  or  '  sous  '  and  Tournois  money  in 
'  shillings  ' .  It  would  have  been  better  to  adopt  an  uniform  terminology 
in  both  cases.  Again,  Mr.  Unwin's  account  of  the  lavatory  made  for 
Ramsey  Abbey  (p.  33)  would  have  been  more  intelligible  had  he  ventured 
to  translate  clavibus  (clavifus  is  obviously  a  misprint)  as  'taps  '. 

In  conclusion  it  remains  to  be  said  that  the  whole  book  contains  a  great 
deal  of  solid  and  valuable  work,  and  shows  how  much  may  be  done  by 
the  thorough  use  of  printed  material,  even  without  the  opportunity  of 
research  at  the  Public  Record  Office.  C.  Johnson. 


Trade  and  Navigation  between  Spain  and  the  Indies  in  the  Time  of 
the  Hapshurgs.  By  Clarence  Henry  Haring,  Ph.D.  (Cambridge, 
Massachusetts :  Harvard  University  Press,  1918). 

Mr.  Haring  is  already  well  known  to  students  of  Spanish-American  history 
as  the  author  of  a  careful  and  accurate  book  on  The  Buccaneers  in  the  West 


540  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

Indies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century.  He  has  now  followed  up  his  earlier 
studies  with  a  work  of  much  wider  scope  and  importance.  The  subject  is 
a  difficult  and  complicated  one,  and  required  for  its  elucidation  the  sifting 
of  a  great  mass  of  documentary  material,  both  printed  and  manuscript. 
Mr.  Haring  has  overcome  these  difficulties,  and  has  produced  a  treatise 
which  fully  realizes  the  promise  implied  in  the  copious  bibliography  and 
in  the  citations  from  the  various  published  collections  of  documents,  as 
well  as  from  manuscripts  which  Mr.  Haring  himself  has  examined  in  the 
Archives  of  the  Indies  at  Seville  and  in  various  libraries  at  Madrid.  The 
result  is  a  minute,  thorough,  and  comprehensive  work  concerning  the 
system  of  commerce  with  the  Indies  under  the  Hapsburgs,  both  in  its 
theoretic  intention  and  in  its  practical  working. 

The  whole  topic  has  been  much  obscured  in  the  past  by  misapprehen- 
sion and  prejudice.  There  was  no  excuse  for  this  partiality  or  ignorance, 
for  the  great  work  of  Veitia  Linage,  Norte  de  la  Contratacion  de  las  Indias 
Occidentales,  •puhlish.ed.  in  1672,  has  always  been  accessible  to  Spanish- 
speaking  students ;  and  the  abridged  translation  by  Captain  John  Steevens, 
published  in  1702,  placed  the  essential  part  of  it  within  reach  of  all.  The 
Memorias  Historicas  of  Antunez  y  Acevedo,  published  in  1797,  provide 
a  review  of  the  whole  subject ;  and  the  excellent  essay  in  book  vii  of  Eobert- 
son's  History  of  America  (1777)  gives  a  just  and  sympathetic  summary. 
Indeed,  for  the  English  reader,  Eobertson's  work  is  now  superseded  for 
the  first  time  by  the  book  under  review. 

Mr.  Haring,  as  he  tells  us  himself,  lays  special  emphasis  on  the  earlier 
formative  period.  He  traces  the  gradual  evolution  of  the  system  of 
*  Indian  '  trade,  through  a  series  of  enactments  by  the  '  Catholic  Kings  ', 
their  grandson  Charles,  and  his  son  Philip  II.  Many  of  these  royal  ordi- 
nances, especially  during  the  generation  succeeding  Columbus'  first  voyage, 
are  of  an  experimental  and  temporary  character,  representing  phases  of 
policy  which  were  soon  to  be  modified  or  abandoned.  The  royal  legislators 
and  their  advisers  were  feeling  their  way  in  laying  down  rules  to  meet 
complicated  and  unprecedented  conditions ;  and  many  of  these  early 
cedulas  were  inspired  not  by  any  economic  theory,  but  by  a  rough  and 
ready  common-sense  which  attempted  to  make  prompt  provision  for 
immediate  necessities.  Such  decrees  were  often  withdrawn  or  altered,  to 
suit  practical  convenience  or  modifications  of  policy.  The  era  of  discovery 
and  conquest  was  necessarily  a  time  of  adaptation  and  experiment ;  and 
clearness  of  vision  concerning  the  Spanish  Empire  has  suffered  from  the 
preponderance  usually  given  by  historians  to  that  great  epoch  in  the  history 
of  the  world  :  in  this  way  the  initial  period  of  flux  and  movement  has  been 
made  to  overshadow  the  more  settled  system  of  the  succeeding  ages. 
Moreover,  the  discrepancy  between  intention  and  fact — a  discrepancy 
which  is  fully  brought  out  by  Mr.  Haring — is  hardly  less  disconcerting 
during  this  earlier  period  than  during  the  later  and  more  tranquil  genera- 
tions which  found  official  theories  to  be  constantly  at  variance  with  actual 
conditions  of  life. 

Mr.  Haring  treats  these  matters  in  due  proportion.  He  sets  forth  the 
official  regulations  and,  so  far  as  they  can  be  ascertained,  the  actual 
facts  concerning  the  early  period.    But  the  main  topic  of  his  book  is  the 


I 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  541 

system,  which,  in  its  main  features,  was  elaborated  about  the  middle  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  a  system  which  aimed  at  a  Spanish  monopoly  of 
trade  and  settlement,  together  with  the  precise  regulation  of  the  course 
of  trade  between  the  Peninsula  and  the  Indies.  The  central  feature  of 
that  system  was  the  organization  of  commerce  through  the  '  Plate  jleet ', 
or  rather  through  the  two  fleets — the  Flota  and  the  Galleons — which  sailed 
annually  from  the  Guadalquivir  or  from  Cadiz  for  New  Spain  and  Tierra 
Firme,  laden  with  European  goods,  to  be  exchanged  in  the  great  fairs  of 
Jalapa  and  Portobello  for  the  products  of  American  mines  and  planta- 
tions. The  return  of  the  flota  and  the  galleons,  with  their  precious  cargo, 
to  San  Lucar  or  Cadiz  was  the  greatest  national  event  in  the  Spanish 
calendar,  and  was  a  matter  of  keen  interest  to  all  Europe,  to  governments 
and  chanceries  as  well  as  to  corsairs,  smugglers,  and  interlopers.  The 
elaborate  regulations  concerning  this  course  of  trade,  the  system  of  pre- 
paration, supervision,  taxation,  insurance,  and  convoy,  as  well  as  the 
multifarious  duties  of  the  numerous  officials  concerned,  are  fully  expounded 
by  Mr.  Haring  in  his  exhaustive  treatise.  Due  space  is  given  to  the  depart- 
mental machinery  of  Spanish  economic  administration,  a  subject  which  has 
one  particularly  interestingsideintheco-operationbetween  the  Casa  de  Con- 
tratacion — the  official  trade  department — and  the  Consulado  or  chamber 
of  commerce  of  Seville,  an  arrangement  whereby  the  merchants  themselves 
were  in  some  degree  brought  into  touch  with  official  administration. 

The  facts  related  by  Mr.  Haring  sufficiently  prove  that  considerations 
of  safety  were  an  adequate  reason  for  the  organization  of  trade  in  great 
convoys.  And,  notwithstanding  bad  seamanship,  cumbrous  naval  archi- 
tecture, corrupt  administration,  and  great  laxity  in  regard  to  the  rules  of 
armament  and  defence,  the  main  object  of  security  was  in  general  attained. 
Single  ships,  it  is  true,  were  often  cut  ofi  from  the  convoy  by  corsairs ; 
but  only  on  three  occasions  was  the  whole  fleet  prevented  by  enemy 
action  from  reaching  Spain.  If,  however,  there  was  considerable  reason 
for  the  system  of  great  armed  convoys,  the  same  thing  cannot  be  said  of 
the  regulation  which  confined  the  trade  with  the  Indies  to  a  single  Spanish 
port.  The  monopoly  of  Seville  is  one  of  the  curiosities  of  economic  history ; 
and  Mr.  Haring  fully  expounds  the  story  of  that  monopoly,  of  the  long 
dispute  between  Seville  and  Cadiz,  and  of  its  final  settlement.  The  effort 
after  rigid  monopoly  was  carried  to  an  absurd  extreme  in  the  rule  which 
forbade  direct  intercourse  between  Europe  and  Buenos  Aires.  The 
attempt  to  prevent  European  goods  from  reaching  the  Kiver  Plate,  except 
by  the  preposterously  devious  route  of  Panama  and  Lima,  had  the  actual 
effect  of  putting  a  premium  on  contraband  and  encouraging  the  activities 
of  Dutch  and  Portuguese-Brazilian  smugglers. 

Mr.  Haring  faithfully  pictures  the  characteristic  pedantry  which  led 
Spanish  officialdom  to  cover  endless  folios  with  a  multiplicity  of  minute 
regulations,  and  he  exhibits  these  matters  with  a  certain  natural  gusto 
which  should  be  shared  by  his  readers.  The  orderly  completeness, 
the  careful  analysis,  the  clear  arrangement,  which  are  found  in  Spanish 
semi-official  treatises  and  royal  ordinances,  must  appeal  to  every  student. 
Indeed,  the  theoretic  system  of  Spanish  imperial  administration  can  be 
studied  with  a  comprehensive  consistency  which  probably  finds  no  parallel 


542  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

except  in  the  Eoman  empire.  Yet  the  heading  of  one  chapter  in  this 
book — '  Organization  versus  Efficiency  ' — is  suggestive.  The  caution 
enjoined  by  Mr.  Haring,  concerning  a  too  implicit  reliance  on  the 
laws  of  the  Indies  as  an  historical  source,  may  be  applied,  in  more  or 
less  degree,  to  the  whole  mass  of  documents  which  deal  with  regulations 
and  ordinances :  so  wide  is  the  gap  between  theory  and  practice. 
Thus,  a  history  of  trade  regulations  has  to  be  balanced  and  supplemented 
by  a  history  of  evasions  and  of  contraband.  All  this  can  be  gathered  from 
Mr.  Haring's  book,  although  he  does  not  allow  himself  to  be  drawn  away 
from  his  proper  economic  subject  into  discursive  and  picturesque  by-paths. 

The  second  promise  conveyed  in  the  title  of  the  book  is  fulfilled  by 
some  very  interesting  chapters  dealing  with  the  construction  of  vessels, 
seamanship,  the  study  of  navigation,  and  kindred  matters  ;  and  some  very 
valuable  statistical  tables  are  added.  Most  readers  will  turn  with  special 
interest  to  the  chapter  on  the  precious  metals,  and  they  will  find  their 
expectations  satisfied. 

The  book  is  avowedly  a  treatise  on  economics,  that  is  to  say  on  one 
aspect  of  Spanish  administration  ;  and  Mr.  Haring  has  avoided  historical 
generalization  with  a  self-restraint  which  the  reader  is  sometimes  disposed 
to  regret.  But  in  the  preface  he  marks  out,  in  a  few  clear  sentences,  the 
proper  setting  of  his  subject  in  the  general  frame-work  of  history ;  and  he 
adds  a  brief  expression  of  his  views  concerning  the  value  of  Spanish 
achievements  in  America.  F.  A.  Kirkpateick. 

Old  English  Scholarship  in  England  from  1666-1800,  By  Eleanor  N. 
Adams,  Professor  of  English  in  Oxford  College.  (New  Haven  :  Yale 
University  Press,  1917.) 

The  aim  of  this  book  is  *  to  discuss  the  beginnings  of  Old  English  scholar- 
ship, and  to  trace  its  progress  until  it  took  a  recognized  place  in  the  scholarly 
world'.  The  limits  chosen  are  the  publication  in  1566  of  Archbishop 
Parker's  Testimonie  of  Antiquitie,^  and  the  establishment  of  the  Kawlin- 
sonian  chair  in  1795.  The  author  hopes  that  her  work  may  '  serve  to 
connect  a  literary  movement  of  a  peculiar  kind  with  the  general  political, 
religious,  and  literary  history  of  England  '.  Miss  Adams  may  be  congratu- 
lated on  having  brought  together  and  arranged  much  interesting  material. 
Her  three  chapters  deal  with  successive  centuries.  She  begins  by  showing 
that  the  awakened  interest  in  Old  English  literature  in  the  sixteenth  century 
was  antiquarian  and  controversial.  The  Eeformers  wished  to  discover 
in  Old  English  liturgies,  homilies,  and  laws  precedents  for  their  own 
doctrines  and  practice.^  '  The  most  lasting  contribution  of  the  sixteenth 
century  to  Old  English  scholarship ',  says  Miss  Adams,  *  consisted  in  the 
manuscript  collections,'  and  she  does  full  justice  to  the  labours  of  Leland 

*  On  pp.  26,  27,  Miss  Adams  gives  reasons  for  supposing  A  Defence  of  Priests^ 
Marriages  to  have  been  printed  in  1567,  and  not  in  1562,  the  date  suggested  in  the 
Bodleian  and  British  Museum  catalogues.  A  Testimonie  of  Antiquiiie  would  thus,  she 
argues,  be  the  first  example  of  the  use  of  Anglo-Saxon  type.  See  Athenaeum, 
31  December,  1910. 

^  On  25  October,  1833,  FitzGerald  writes  :  '  I  hear  of  Kemble  lately  that  he  has 
been  making  some  discoveries  in  Anglo-Saxon  MSS.  at  Cambridge  that,  they  say,  are 
important  to  the  interests  of  the  church. ' 


1 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  543 

and  Bale.  An  account  follows  of  '  the  dominant  figure  among  sixteenth- 
century  "  Saxonists  "  ',  Matthew  Parker,  '  who  had  a  great  man's  genius 
for  making  others  work',  and  of  Joscelyn,^  Lambarde,  and  Laurence 
No  well.*  Four  contributions  in  print  are  singled  out,  Aelfric's  Homily  in 
The  Testimonie  of  Antiquitie,  the  Anglo-Saxon  laws  in  Lambarde's  Archaio- 
nomia,  1568,  The  Fower  Gospels,  with  a  preface  by  John  Foxe,  1571,  and 
King  Alfred's  translation  of  the  preface  to  Gregory's  Regula  Pastoralis  in 
Parker's  edition  of  Asser's  jElfredi  Regis  Res  Gestae,  1574.  The  Old 
English  scholarship  of  the  century  is  briefly  characterized  as  '  uncritical, 
controversial,  and  non-academic '. 

Chapter  ii,  treating  of  the  growth  of  the  study  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  describes  its  gradual  absorption  by  the  universities,  '  resulting 
in  the  foundation  of  a  lecture  in  the  language  (by  Sir  H.  Spelman, 
at  Cambridge,  1639)  and  the  publication  of  a  dictionary '  (Somner's, 
Oxford,  1659).  It  is  said  to  be  due  to  the  Elizabethan  Society  of 
Antiquaries  that  the  interest  in  the  subject  was  sustained  after  Parker's 
death.  Among  the  seventeenth -century  scholars  who  concerned  themselves 
in  varying  degrees  with  Old  English  are  Camden,  Verstegan,  L'lsle,^ 
Minsheu,  the  Spelmans,  Dugdale,  Selden,  Somner.  Of  special  interest  is 
the  account  of  Francis  Junius,  born  at  Heidelberg  of  a  French  father  and 
Flemish  mother,  *  who  gave  the  world  its  first  purely  literary  interest  in 
Old  English  by  the  publication  of  Caedmon,  1655 '.  Of  very  great  impor- 
tance was  *  the  profluvium  of  Saxonists  at  Oxford ',  mostly  at  Queen's 
and  University  College,  Marshall,  Nicolson,  Gibson,  Thwaites,  Christopher 
Eawlinson,  and,  above  all,  Hickes. 

'  In  general,'  says  Miss  Adams, '  the  Old  English  scholarship  of  the  seventeenth  century 
expended  itself  on  the  compilation  of  dictionaries  and  grammars,  and  on  the  historical 
and  legal  uses  of  Old  English  documents.  In  addition  to  these  there  were  made 
accessible  in  print  the  Psalms,  Bede,  the  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle,  the  Heptateuch,  and 
Boethius.  By  the  end  of  the  century  .  .  .  Old  English  had  become  a  university  study, 
instead  of  the  pastime  of  antiquaries. ' 

In  considering  the  contributions  to  Old  English  scholarship  in  the 
eighteenth  century  Miss  Adams  asks  why  so  little  advance  was  made, 
though  students  had  now  a  dictionary  and  grammar,  and  a  catalogue  of 
MSS.  She  finds  an  answer  in  '  the  fact  that  Latin  was  persistently  used 
as  a  medium  of  interpretation'.  Among  the  scholars  dealt  with  in  the 
third  chapter  a  chief  place  is  assigned  to  the  non-juring  Bishop  Hickes, 
whose  Institutiones  Grammaticae  (1689)  and  Thesaurus  « (1705)  are  described 
at  some  length.    '  Hickes ',  writes  Miss  Adams,  *  is  responsible  for  both  the 

3  On  p.  38  Joscelyn  is  called  a  Herefordshire  man.  He  was  certainly  for  a  time 
a  prebendary  of  Hereford,  but  he  came  from  Essex,  where  he  was  born  and  buried. 
His  college  is  misspelt  and  wrong  dates  are  given  for  his  Greek  and  Latin  lectureships. 

*  Nowell  is  said,  p.  39,  to  have  been  master  of  '  a  grammar  school  -'  at  Sutton 
Coldfield.  He  was  master  of  the  well-known  school  at  which  Robert  Burton  was 
afterwards  a  grammar-scholar. 

5  William  L'Isle's  date  is  given  by  Miss  Adams  as  1579  ?-I637.  If  he  was  bom  in 
1579  the  verses  by  W.  L.  in  Faerie  Queene,  to  which  she  refers,  were  published  when  he 
was  about  eleven.  Miss  Adams  appears  to  have  copied  the  Dictionary  of  National 
Biography  without  consulting  the  volume  of  errata,  where  she  would  have  found  the 
correction  of  1569. 

«  It  might  have  been  noted  that  this  book  was  studied  by  Thomas  Gray. 


644  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

faults  and  the  merits  of  all  eighteenth-century  English  scholarship.'  It  is 
especially  noted  that  his  study  of  the  various  dialects  enabled  him  to 
recognize  that  many  so-called  Old  English  charters  were  forgeries.  An 
account  is  given  of  Humphrey  Wanley  and  his  catalogue  of  Old  English 
MSS.  and  printed  books  that  was  included  in  the  Thesaurus.  Other  names 
are  William  Elstob  and  his  sister,  Hearne,'  David  Wilkins,^  Thomas 
Tanner,  Lye,  Manning,  and  Charlett,  the  master  of  University  College, 
who  was  a  generous  patron  of  these  studies.  By  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 
century  Old  English  scholarship  was  on  the  wane,  and  at  the  end  in  danger 
of  '  sinking  beneath  contempt '.  It  was  saved  from  this  fate,  Miss  Adams 
thinks,  by  two  circumstances,  the  appearance  of  Sharon  Turner's  History 
of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  which  '  roused  in  the  English  a  new  sense  of  patriotic 
pride  in  all  the  records  of  that  early  period ',  and  the  inauguration  of  the 
chair  at  Oxford.  *  The  task  of  nineteenth-cenbury  students  was  ...  to 
evolve  a  scientific  basis  for  the  study  of  Old  English.'  Appendix  i  supplies 
a  very  interesting  selection  of  letters  to  illustrate  the  difficulties  and 
progress  of  Old  English  scholarship  for  its  century  of  greatest  activity, 
1624-1720.  Some  are  taken  (not  always  quite  correctly)  from  Ellis  or  Bliss, 
some  are  printed  directly  from  the  Rawlinson  or  Ballard  MSS.  Appendix  ii 
gives  extracts  from  the  prefaces  of  L'Isle  and  Elizabeth  Elstob.  In  iii 
we  have  a  well-illustrated  history  of  Anglo-Saxon  types,  in  iv  an  account 
of  learned  societies  and  libraries  in  London. 

Miss  Adams  has  shown  throughout  most  laudable  industry,  but  her 
generalizations  are  at  times  convenient  rather  than  convincing.  Her  view 
of  the  connexion  between  Old  English  studies  and  '  the  peculiar  grace  and 
vigour  of  eighteenth -century  prose  '  calls  for  proofs.  Among  such  a  large 
number  of  details  slips  are  inevitable.  On  pp.  45  and  175  Cooper  and  the 
Dictionary  of  National  Biography  are  followed  in  the  statement  that  the 
1605  edition  of  Parker's  Be  Antiquitaie  Britanniae  was  printed  at  Hanover. 
But  '  Hanovia  '  is  Hanau.  On  p.  59  Meric  Casaubon  is  said  to  have  been 
born  '  about  1599  '.  His  arrival  at  10  p.m.  on  August  14  of  that  year  was 
recorded  by  his  father  at  some  length.®  On  p.  187  Ussher  appears  to  be 
included  among  Archbishops  of  Canterbury.  It  is  curious  to  find  Bishop 
Gibson,  p.  76,  being  '  transferred '  to  London.  '  Prebend '  is  more  than  once 
used  for  Prebendary.  In  the  chronological  table  Bentley's  Remarks  on 
a  Late  Discourse  on  Freethinking  are  placed  under  1743.  They  appeared 
just  thirty  years  earlier.  It  is  surely  misleading  to  speak,  p.  196,  of  the 
'  accession  '  of  Frederick  I  of  Prussia  in  1701.  In  some  places  notes  are 
either  inadequate  or  wanting.  If  the  Pipe  Roll  mentioned  in  Wanley's 
letter  on  p.  126  is  meant  to  be  the  earliest  specimen,  it  is  known  to  be  of 
31  Henry  I.  It  is  useless  to  give  the  pressmark  MS.  Seld.  Arch.  B  without 
adding  the  Arabic  numeral.  On  p.  119,  '  whilst  your  College  is  now  in 
trouble '  needs  a  note  referring  to  the  famous  contest  between  James  II 

'  Mention  of  Ernulphus  and  the  Teztus  Roffensis  might  have  suggested  a  note  on 
the  occasion  of  the  most  frequently  quoted  remark  in  Tristram  Shandy.  See  Mod.  Lang. 
Rev.  xi.  341. 

*  On  p.  102  it  is  stated  that  Tanner's  Bihliotheca  Britannico-Hibernica  'was  published 
by  Bishop  Wilkins  in  1748 '.  Wilkins  was  no  bishop,  nor  did  he  actually  publish  the 
Bihliotheca,  if  he  died  in  1745  (p.  99). 

'  Ephemerides  Isaaci  Casauhoni,  1850,   i.  183  seq. 


I 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  545 

and  Magdalen  College.  Misprints  are  frequent,  there  being  many  victims 
among  proper  names,  especially  towards  the  end  of  the  book :  Brown 
Willis  (185),  Blockborough  in  Norfolk  (49)  for  Blackborough,  Brecke- 
ridge  (58)  for  Buckeridge,  Justus  Lipius  (59),  Edwardes  for  Edwardus  (79), 
Lugdivi  Bativornii  (176),  Boethi  (179),  Crowel  for  Nowell  (185),  Archai- 
nomia  and  Gasgoigne  (191),  Marsden  Moor  (193),  Lade  Jane  Grey,  Memories 
of  a  Cavalier,  and  Lettres  Persaues  (198),  Loba's  Voyage  to  Abyssinia,  and 
Lyttleton  (Lord  Lyttelton  is  meant)  (199),  Gotz  von  Berlichingen  (200), 
Camdem  (202),  iEfredi,  and  Standsby  (203),  Testamonie  of  Antiquitie 
(204) .  The  Latin  is  not  always  of  the  kind  encouraged  at  the  older  Oxford  : 
'  in  hoc  translatione  '  and  '  hac  quidem  omnia  '  (28),  '  ex  variis  chroniciis 
.  .  .  desumptse  '  (38),  '  Britannia  antiquia '  (178),  and,  p.  54  (in  a  book 
printed  at  a  university  press  !)  '  celeberrimae  Accademinae  Typographc* 

Edward  Bensly. 

Lancashire  Quarter  Sessions  Records.    Vol.  I.    Quarter  Sessions  Rolls,  1590- 
1606.    Edited  by  James  Tait.    (Chetham  Society,  1917.) 

This  volume  contains  in  a  condensed  form  the  record  of  the  work  of  the 
justices  of  the  peace  for  the  county  of  Lancaster  in  court  of  quarter  sessions 
for  the  years  1590-2  and  1601-6.  Few  similar  records  exist  of  so  early 
a  date.  In  an  excellent  introduction  Professor  Tait  describes  the  business, 
partly  judicial,  partly  administrative,  that  came  before  the  justices  in 
quarter  sessions.  The  judicial  entries  relate  especially  to  cases  of  assault, 
forcible  entry,  breach  of  the  game  laws,  recusancy,  and  unlawful  sports  : 
there  is  also  one  instance  of  an  ofience  against  a  statute  regulating  trade, 
namely,  the  act  39  Elizabeth  c.  10  '  against  the  deceitful  Stretching  and 
Tentering  of  Northern  Cloth  '.  The  numerous  cases  of  assault  and  forcible 
entry  show  that  the  lawlessness  for  which  Lancashire  had  been  notorious 
in  the  middle  ages  still  persisted ;  in  1592  no  fewer  than  47  cases  of 
forcible  entry  were  presented,  whereas  in  the  West  Riding  of  Yorkshire 
only  four  cases  are  recorded  in  nearly  five  years.  The  widespread  resis- 
tance to  the  religious  changes  of  Elizabeth's  reign  is  reflected  to  some 
extent  in  the  records,  but  there  is  only  one  reference  (p.  234)  to  a  seminary 
priest,  and  the  presentments  for  non-attendance  at  church  are  not  very 
numerous.  This  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  most  of  the  presentments 
under  the  act  of  1581  were  brought  before  the  justices  of  assize  at  Lancaster. 
Probably  the  Lancashire  justices  could  not  be  trusted  to  deal  with  recusancy ; 
in  the  State  Papers  Domestic  for  1591-4  there  is  a  list  of  14  of  them  who 
were  suspected  of  favouring  the  Pope.  The  records  throw  an  interesting 
light  on  the  debated  question  of  Sunday  amusements  in  Lancashire  before 
the  publication  of  the  Book  of  Sports.  For  example,  '  Margaret  Yat, 
daughter  of  Christopher  Yat,  and  Constance  Eccles  alias  Higham  both 
of  Gosenar  spinsters  on  12  July  1590  being  Sunday  at  Gosenargh  carried 
rushes  to  the  Church.  And  William  Craven  of  Clyderowe  piper  on  the 
same  day  at  Clyderowe  piped  '  (p.  16). 

Much  can  be  gathered  from  the  records  as  to  the  work  of  the  justices 
of  the  peace  in  local  administration.    *  Stacks  of  statutes  ',  as  Lambarde 
says,  had  been  laid  upon  them  since  the  beginning  of  the  Tudor  period. 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  N  n 


546 


REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS 


October 


Incidental  references  to  the  working  of  the  Poor  Law  of  1597  are  to  be 
found  on  the  roll  of  1601  ;  the  constables  of  Blackburn  had  not  examined 
beggars  and  vagrants,  and  the  churchwardens  had  not  met  at  church  to 
take  order  about  the  relief  of  the  poor.  At  times  the  justices  had  to  deal 
with  the  housing  problem  :  under  an  act  of  1589  cottages  might  not  be 
built  unless  four  acres  of  land  were  laid  to  each,  but  licences  might  be 
granted  to  others  than  substantial  agricultural  labourers,  e.  g.  a  village 
carpenter  or  tailor.  Permission  was  once  given  for  two  bays  of  a  barn 
to  be  converted  into  a  cottage  for  a  man  lacking  a  dwelling-house  (p.  260). 
The  act  was  often  evaded  by  the  reception  of  lodgers  or  '  inmates  '.  Among 
other  matters  dealt  with  by  the  justices  were  apprenticeship  (especially 
of  children  chargeable  to  the  parish),  licensing  of  alehouses,  control  of 
the  purchase  of  corn  by  badgers  or  dealers  in  time  of  scarcity,  and  over- 
sight of  the  collection  of  parliamentary  taxes.  They  had  also  to  enforce 
the  maintenance  of  roads  and  bridges,  no  easy  task  when  the  juries  mostly 
professed  to  be  ignorant  which  hundred,  parish,  &c.,  was  responsible  for  the 
repair  or  rebuilding.  Even  when  a  rate  had  been  levied  on  a  definite 
township,  the  money  was  often  hard  to  obtain  ;  nor  was  personal  service 
given  with  any  more  readiness. 

The  records  furnish  many  details  as  to  the  work  of  the  petty  constables 
and  surveyors  of  highways,  who  were  the  executive  agents  of  the  justices 
in  the  townships.  The  ofi&ce  of  petty  constable,  unpaid  and  onerous,  was 
so  little  desired  that  it  was  usually  taken  in  strict  rotation  by  house-row. 
Constables  had  to  collect  rates  and  taxes,  take  charge  of  lunatics,  arrest 
offenders,  carry  out  the  punishments  of  whipping-post,  stocks,  and  cucking- 
stool,  and  make  presentments  to  the  high  constables  in  the  hundred, 
who  met  about  a  month  before  quarter  sessions. 

Among  minor  points  of  interest  may  be  mentioned  the  survivals  of 
the  pre-Reformation  calendar.  Thus  we  find  Relick  Sunday  (p.  64), 
St.  Alphege's  day  (p.  43),  St.  Luke's  day  (p.  158),  and  St.  Bartholomew's 
day  (p.  220).  Another  curious  survival  is  the  mention  of  ox- money,  the 
composition  for  the  provision  of  oxen  for  the  royal  household  (pp.  292-3). 
Of  special  local  interest  is  the  mention  of  a  '  moss-room '  (p.  269),  from 
which  a  husbandman  stole  six  loads  of  turves,  and  of  the  '  gorses  '  or 
stacks  of  gorse  near  houses,  which  increased  the  danger  of  fire.  Useful 
entries  as  to  prices  of  various  articles  are  to  be  found  on  pp.  248,  258,  261, 
265,  273,  280,  286-8,  300.  The  value  of  the  records  to  the  local  genealogist 
and  topographer  is  obviously  very  great,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  before 
long  the  Chetham  Society  may  be  able  to  publish  under  the  same  able 
editorship  further  volumes  of  the  rolls  provided  with  equally  good  indexes. 

Caroline  A.  J.  Skeel. 


The  Lowland  Scots  Regiments  :  their  Origin,  Character  and  Services,  previous 
to  the  Great  War  of  1914.  Edited  by  the  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Herbert  Max- 
well, Bt.     (Glasgow  :  MacLehose,  1918.) 

This  volume,  which  has  been  edited  by  Sir  Herbert  Maxwell  for  the 
Association  of  Lowland  Scots,  tells  the  story  of  the  Scots  Greys,  the  Scots 
Guards,  the  Royal  Scots,  the  Royal  Scots  Fusiliers,  the  King's  Own  Scottish 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  547 

Borderers,  and  the  Cameronians.  The  editor  has  prefixed  a  useful  intro- 
duction in  which  he  gives  a  sketch  of  the  history  of  military  service  in 
Scotland,  describes  the  tactics  characteristic  of  the  old  Scottish  armies, 
and  pleads  for  a  more  considerate  treatment  of  the  Lowland  regiments 
by  the  War  Office.  He  remarks  on  '  the  singularly  intense  disfavour 
with  which  service  in  the  army  had  come  to  be  regarded,  certainly  in  the 
south  and  west,  and  probably  in  all  parts  of  the  Lowlands,  until  the  out- 
break of  the  great  war  in  1914 '.  The  existence  of  this  prejudice,  which 
*  was  swept  away  when,  in  August  1914,  the  drums  sounded  the  point 
of  war  ',  he  attributes  partly  to  Covenanting  tradition  and  partly  to  '  the 
appalling  severity  of  punishment  formerly  inflicted'  in  the  army,  the 
memory  of  which,  like  the  memories  of  the  Killing  Time,  survived  the 
evil  itself.  If  the  new  tradition,  created  before  the  adoption  of  conscription 
in  1916,  is  to  survive,  it  will  be  necessary,  Sir  Herbert  Maxwell  argues, 
to  place  Highland  and  Lowland  regiments  on  an  even  footing  in  the  matter 
of  recruiting,  and  to  avoid  the  delusion  that  '  all  persons  whose  names 
begin  with  "  Mac  "  must  be  of  Highland  descent  '—an  error  impossible 
for  any  one  who  knows  either  the  past  or  the  present  of  Galloway. 

The  various  chapters  are  contributed  by  Sir  James  Balfour  Paul, 
Captain  Balfour  of  Newton  Don,  Major  M.  M.  Haldane,  Lt.-Col.  Toogood, 
Brigadier-General  Montagu  Wilkinson,  and  Mr.  Andrew  Ross.  They  are 
all  competent,  and  sometimes  more  than  competent,  surveys,  written  with 
restraint  and  sometimes  with  unnecessary  modesty.  Colonel  Toogood's 
account  of  the  history  of  the  Royal  Scots  Fusiliers,  for  example,  scarcely  does 
justice  to  the  remarkable  services  rendered  by  a  portion  of  the  regiment 
in  the  battle  of  Inkerman,  both  in  holding  the  barrier  in  the  earlier  part 
of  the  day,  and  in  bringing  the  stubborn  conflict  to  its  satisfactory  conclu- 
sion, services  which  have  been  fully  recognized  both  by  Kinglake  and  by 
later  writers.  A  historian  less  embarrassed  by  soldierly  reluctance  to 
write  anything  in  the  nature  of  boasting  would  certainly  have  had  more 
to  say  about  this  exploit.  The  various  surveys  cover,  to  some  extent, 
the  same  ground,  but  this  is  not  without  its  advantages.  The  part  played 
by  Scottish  regiments  in  the  wars  of  William  III  and  Marlborough  is  im- 
pressed upon  the  reader  as  he  flnds  reference  after  reference  to  an  aspect 
of  Scottish  history  which  has  been  largely  forgotten.  The  Scots  Greys 
fought  at  Schellenberg,  Blenheim,  Ramillies,  and  Malplaquet ;  the  Scots 
Guards  at  the  Boyne,  Limerick,  Walcourt,  Steenkirk,  Landen,  Namur, 
Almenara,  Saragossa,  and  Brihuega  ;  the  Royal  Scots  (which  has  memories 
of  the  Thirty  Years'  War)  at  Walcourt,  Steenkirk,  Landen,  Namur,  Kaiser- 
werth,  Schellenberg,  Blenheim,  Helixhem,  and  Ramillies,  and  in  other 
actions  and  sieges  ;  and  the  Scots  Fusiliers,  the  King's  Own  Scottish 
Borderers,  and  the  Cameronians  have  not  less  distinguished  records. 

Regimental  tradition  receives  due  attention  in  the  volume,  and  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  origins  of  the  various  regiments  is  not  its  least  valuable  feature. 
Mr.  Andrew  Ross,  the  Ross  Herald,  contributes  an  important  review  of 
the  questions  concerning  the  origin  of  the  King's  Own  Scottish  Borderers, 
and  he  deals  not  less  effectively  with  the  origin  of  the  Cameronians.  It  is 
interesting  to  read  of  a  survival  of  the  oldest  traditions  of  the  last-named 
regiment.    '  Whenever  the  regiment  is  in  camp  or  billets  the  men  parade 

N  II  2 


548  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

for  divine  service  with  their  rifles  and,  usually,  five  rounds  of  ball  cartridge. 
A  piquet  is  sent  out  and  sentries  are  posted,  and  not  until  the  officer  in 
charge  of  the  piquet  reports  "All  clear  "  does  the  officer  commanding  the 
parade  inform  the  clergyman  that  he  may  proceed  with  the  service.'  The 
custom  is  derived  from  the  days  of  conventicles. 

The  Ross  Herald  contributes  a  most  valuable  chapter  on  Scottish 
regiments  disbanded  between  1660  and  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
a  topic  which  has  involved  considerable  research,  with  most  useful  results 
for  the  history  of  the  British  Army.  Mr.  Alexander  Inglis  gives  a  series 
of  regimental  marches,  with  the  necessary  references  to  authorities.  The 
book,  as  a  whole,  has  been  admirably  planned  and  most  successfully 
produced,  both  by  the  writers  and  by  the  publisher.  It  is  a  worthy  tribute 
to  a  great  national  tradition,  and  a  record  which  preserves  things  well 
worth  preserving.  Robert  S.  Rait. 


Documentary  History  of  Yale  University  under  the  original  Charter  of  the 
Collegiate  School  of  Connecticut,  1701-45.  Edited  by  Franklin 
BowDiTCH  Dexter,  Litt.D.  (New  Haven :  Yale  University  Press,  1916.) 

This  book  is  a  welcome  sequel  to  Dr.  Dexter's  ten  volumes  on  Yale 
graduates  and  officials,  and  an  important  contribution  to  the  history  of 
American  universities  in  general.  It  brings  together  the  more  important 
official  records  in  the  archives  of  the  university  and  the  State,  and  supple- 
ments them  with  a  large  number  of  private  letters  and  unofficial  docu- 
ments, all  of  an  earlier  date  than  the  present  charter  of  May  1745.  The 
series  is  remarkably  complete,  and  exhibits  with  great  clearness  every  stage 
in  the  early  history  of  the  university.  It  was  founded  in  1701,  by  an  act 
of  the  general  court  of  the  colony  of  Connecticut,  as  a  collegiate  school 
'  wherein  Youth  may  be  instructed  in  the  Aits  and  Sciences  who  thorough 
the  blessing  of  Almighty  God  may  be  fitted  for  Publick  employment  both 
in  Church  and  Civil  State  '.  The  long  controversy  about  its  site  was 
definitely  settled  in  favour  of  New  Haven  in  1717  ;  in  1718  it  took  the 
name  of  Yale  College  to  do  honour  to  a  benefaction  of  Elihu  Yale,  of 
London,  who  had  made  his  fortune  as  governor  of  Madras  and  as  a  governor 
of  the  East  India  Company,  and  in  his  old  age  remembered  the  country 
of  his  birth  ;  and  then  came  twenty-seven  years  of  steady  growth,  dis- 
turbed only  by  the  attempt  of  a  rector  to  lead  this  presbyterian  college 
over  to  episcopalianism.  It  was  a  modest  benefaction  that  gave  the  name 
to  what  is  now  one  of  the  most  richly  endowed  universities  in  the  w^orld- 
*  a  Large  Box  of  Books,  the  Picture  &  Arms  of  K.  George  and  two  hundred 
lb.  Sterling  worth  of  English  Goods,  all  to  the  valine  of  800^^,  in  ourj 
money'.  There  were  expectations,  it  is  true,  of  further  favours.  Yale'sj 
bounty  was  '  generous ',  but  it  was  also  supposed  to  be  '  growing  '.  The 
old  man  had  certainly  excellent  intentions,  though  he  needed  to  be  reminded 
of  them.  He  promised  in  1721  that  '  he  would  remit  200  lb.  Ster^  per 
annum  during  his  life,  and  make  a  setled  annual  provision  to  take  place 
after  his  death  '.  He  died  the  same  year,  leaving  a  will  that  was  success- 
fully disputed  bj'  his  sons-in-law.  The  college  received  nothing,  but  it 
continued  to  call  itself  '  Yale  College  ',  and  seldom  has  a  learned  institution 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  649 

perpetuated  the  name  of  a  patron  at  so  cheap  a  price.  The  one  document 
that  we  miss  is  the  invalid  will.  We  wish  it  had  been  possible  for  Dr. 
Dexter  to  have  given  some  indication  of  the  legacy  which  was  designed 
for  the  college. 

Few  things  are  more  interesting  in  this  volume  than  the  record  of  gifts 
for  the  library.  *  Sir  Richard  Blackmore',  says  Jeremy  Dummer,  who 
may  be  described  as  the  London  agent  for  the  college, '  brought  me  in  his 
own  chariot  all  his  works  in  four  volumes  '  (p.  58) — that  famous  chariot  to 
the  rumbling  of  whose  wheels  his  epics  had  been  composed.  Isaac  Watts 
sent  a  donation,  and  procured  from  a  friend  the  gift  of  a  pair  of  globes.  Most 
interesting  of  all  is  the  connexion  of  Bishop  Berkeley  with  Yale.  In  1730 
he  sent  copies  of  his  own  works,  the  Princi'ples,  the  Theory,  the  Dialogue, 
and  inquired  if  the  writings  of  Hooker  and  Chillingworth  would  be  accepted 
by  this  presbyterian  body  (p.  285)  ;  and  three  years  later  he  '  further 
expressed  his  great  generosity  and  goodness  to  this  College  in  procuring 
and  sending  a  very  valuable  collection  of  books  contained  in  eight  boxes ' 
(p.  305).  Such  were  the  beginnings  of  a  library  that  is  now  famous  for  its 
Elizabethan  treasures.  Books  were  not  Berkeley's  greatest  gift.  He  gave 
the  college  his  farm  at  New  Port,  Rhode  Island,  in  1732.  '  It  is  my  opinion ', 
he  wrote,  '  that  as  human  learning  and  the  improvements  of  Reason  are 
of  no  small  use  in  Religion,  so  it  would  very  much  forward  those  ends,  if 
some  of  your  students  were  enabled  to  subsist  longer  at  their  studies,  and 
if  by  a  public  tryal  and  premium  an  Emulation  were  inspired  into  all ' 
(p.  292).  It  is  thus  the  proud  boast  of  Yale  that  its  first  prize  or  scholar- 
ship was  endowed  by  one  of  the  greatest  of  English  philosophers. 

Yale  is  particularly  fortunate  in  possessing  so  many  early  records.  It 
is  also  fortunate  in  having  been  able  to  entrust  their  publication  to  so 
pious  a  son,  and  so  experienced  an  editor,  as  Dr.  Dexter. 

D.  NiCHOL  Smith, 

Warren- Adams  Letters.  Vol.i.  1743-77.  (Massachusetts  Historical  Society, 

1917.) 
We  could  have  wished  for  some  larger  introduction  to  so  important 
a  volume  of  letters  as  this  than  Mr.  Worthington  Ford's  brief  prefatory 
note.  Though  the  majority  of  the  correspondents  are  well-known  persons, 
as  James  Otis,  John  Dickinson,  John  and  Samuel  Adams,  and  James 
Warren,  some  others  are  more  obscure,  and  in  any  case  it  would  have  been 
helpful  to  know  what  part  each  was  playing  in  the  disturbed  times  and  in 
the  great  movement  which  their  letters  so  well  illustrate.  There  is  one 
letter  of  date  1743,  written  by  the  young  Otis  from  college  to  his  father  ; 
the  remainder  belong  to  the  years  1766-77,  and  are,  perhaps  without  excep- 
tion, concerned  with  the  struggle  with  Great  Britain.  The  writers  are  the 
strongest  adherents  of  the  colonial  cause.  Though  they' distinguish 
between  the  people  of  England  and  the  Ministry,  and  place  the  blame  for 
the  trouble  primarily  upon  the  king,  who  is  '  Nerone  Neronior  ',  they  show 
no  consciousness  of  any  other  point  of  view  than  their  own.  They  are 
absorbed  in  a  struggle  for  what  they,  both  men  and  women,  believe 
intensely  to  be  the  right.  The  correspondence  thus  takes  us  straight  to 
the  heart  and  mind  of  the  extreme  section  amongst  the  colonists,  of  men 


550  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

who,  like  James  Warren,  *  fear  nothing  now  (1775)  so  much  as  the  small 
Pox  in  our  army  .  .  .  and  proposals  of  a  conciliatory  nature  from  England. 
The  first  would  be  dreadful,  but  the  last  more  so.'  Perhaps  that  is  the 
principal  historical  value  of  these  letters,  though  they  also  give  us  a  good 
deal  of  scattered  information  on  the  doings  of  the  Continental  Congress — 
*  the  beauties  and  sublimities  of  a  Continental  Congress  ' — of  which  John 
and  Samuel  Adams  were  both  members,  and  of  the  Massachusetts  General 
Court,  and  much  frank  and  well-informed  comment  on  persons  and  events, 
and  some  insight  into  the  problems  of  recruiting  for  the  army  and  of 
military  and  naval  administration.  With  the  exception  of  General  Glover, 
who  writes  two  letters  on  the  retreat  from  Saratoga  (August  1777),  none 
of  the  writers  was  actually  with  the  forces,  and  so  far  as  regards  the 
fighting,  the  letters  reflect  only  the  hopes  and  fears  of  the  civilians.  The 
two  Adamses  were  generally  in  Philadelphia,  James  Warren  in  Watertown, 
Boston,  or  Plymouth,  and  the  general  object  of  the  correspondence  was 
the  exchange  of  views  and  information  between  friends,  though  occasional 
letters  contain  systematic  discussions  of  problems  of  government  and 
foreign  policy. 

Broad  issues  of  the  day  appear  in  casual  remarks  and  particular 
instances.  John  Adams  gives  us  a  curious  illustration  of  the  mutual 
distrust  of  the  colonies.  '  The  other  Colonies ',  he  writes,  *  are  more 
fond  of  sending  Men  than  I  expected.  .  .  .  They  have  a  Secret  Fear, 
a  Jealousy,  that  New  England  will  soon  be  full  of  Veteran  Soldiers,  and 
at  length  conceive  Designs  unfavourable  to  the  other  Colonies.'  But  if 
New  England  was  a  little  distrusted,  she  was  also  profoundly  respected. 
'  Whenever  the  Cause  of  American  Freedom  is  to  be  vindicated,  I  look 
towards  the  Province  of  Massachusetts  Bay ',  writes  John  Dickinson  in 
1767.  And  New  England  was  felt  to  be  in  an  especial  degree  '  the  object 
of  her  (England's)  fury  ' .  The  military  importance  of  Canada  is  emphasized 
in  the  correspondence.  '  The  unanimous  voice  of  the  Continent  is  Canada 
must  be  ours ',  writes  John  Adams  in  1776,  because  from  Canada  the 
English  '  can  inflame  all  the  Indians  upon  the  Continent ',  as  well  as  pour 
down  Kegulars,  Canadians,  and  Indians  upon  New  England ;  and  elsewhere 
he  discusses  the  delicate  problem  of  its  government  when  conquered. 
Amongst  other  military  matters  referred  to  it  is  interesting  to  note  the 
difficulties  the  colonists  had  in  getting  powder  and  saltpetre  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  war,  and  the  feeling  that  existed  between  the  new  army  and 
the  militia.  And  it  is  worth  observing,  too,  how  ill  an  efi^ect  the  jobbery 
of  our  home  politics  had  on  colonial  opinion.  '  The  Ministry,  the  beggarly 
prostituted  Voters,  high  and  low,  have  no  principles  of  public  Virtue  on 
which  we  can  depend ',  wrote  John  Adams  in  1774,  and  it  was  not  his  only 
allusion  of  the  kind.  So  we  get  a  picture  of  a  group  of  men,  fervent,  dis- 
interested, intelligent,  hard,  determined  to  resist  tyranny,  without  large 
views,  but  strong,  and  forming  the  core  of  the  movement  which  judged 
and  condemned  the  old  colonial  policy  and  broke  in  pieces  our  first  colonial 
empire.  And  the  men  were  ably  seconded  by  the  women.  Some  of  the 
most  interesting  letters  are  those  of  Mercy  Warren,  Abigail  Adams,  and 
Hannah  Winthrop.  A  little  artificial  in  style,  they  yet  bear  witness  to  good 
education  having  been  within  their  authors'  reach.     And  in  the  midst  of 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  551 

revolution  the  woman's  movement  raised  its  head.  If  a  new  constitution 
was  to  be  made  the  political  status  of  women  should  be  reconsidered.  *  We 
would  not  hold  ourselves  bound  by  any  Laws  in  which  we  had  neither 
a  voice  nor  representation ',  threatened  Mrs.  Adams,  half  in  jest,  half  in 
earnest. 

The  book  is  well  printed,  contains  some  interesting  illustrations,  and 
makes  available  some  most  valuable  historical  material .    E.  A.  Benians. 


Warren  Hastings  in  Bengal,  1772-4.  By  M.  E.  Monckton  Jones. 
(Oxford  Historical  and  Literary  Studies.  IX.)  (Oxford :  Claren- 
don Press,  1918.) 

This  book  is  a  study  of  the  work  of  Warren  Hastings  from  1772  to  1774  when 
he  was  Governor  of  Bengal,  before  the  Eegulating  Act  of  Lord  North  gave 
him  as  Governor-General  a  position  of  greater  dignity  and  wider  nominal 
powers,  but  shackled  him  at  the  same  time  with  a  council  of  intolerant, 
vindictive,  and  impracticable  colleagues.  It  is  illustrated  by  original 
documents,  some  printed  for  the  first  time,  others  only  accessible  in  old 
and  voluminous  parliamentary  reports.  It  was  a  piece  of  work  well  worth 
undertaking,  and  Miss  Monckton  Jones  is  on  the  whole  to  be  heartily 
congratulated  on  the  skill  and  ability  with  which  she  has  performed  her 
task.  A  very  striking  merit  of  the  book  is  its  lucidity.  It  contains  a  clear 
and  readable  account  of  several  obscure  and  difiicult  points  in  the  Indian 
history  of  the  time,  the  economic  conditions  of  the  early  English  settle- 
ments in  Bengal,  the  actual  trading  methods  of  the  Company,  the  functions 
of  their  native  agents,  the  banyans,  gomastahs,  and  dadnis,  and  the  acquisi- 
tion of  the  Diwani — '  the  great  stewardship  of  India  '  as  Burke  called  it, 
which  in  the  words  of  Kaye  was  '  the  greatest  step  in  the  progress  of  Anglo- 
Indian  administration  ever  made  by  the  Company — the  greatest  adminis- 
trative revolution,  perhaps,  to  which  Bengal  had  ever  been  subjected '. 
The  account  of  the  prosecution  and  acquittal  of  Mahomed  Eeza  Khan 
and  Shitab  Roy  is  the  best  and  most  complete  we  have  seen  of  that  curious 
episode.  But  Miss  Monckton  Jones  has  not  only  a  rare  faculty  in  threading 
her  way  through  a  mass  of  confusing  and  rather  repellent  detail ;  she  rises 
to  a  fine  conception  of  Hastings's  work  and  aims  as  a  whole,  and  her  noble 
and  well -justified  appreciation  of  his  character  at  the  end  of  the  volume 
loses  nothing  by  the  restrained  and  austere  style  in  which  she  pays  her 
tribute. 

The  book  is  on  the  whole  so  good  and  so  likely  to  become  an  important 
authority  for  the  period  with  which  it  deals  that  it  is  the  more  necessary 
to  point  out  certain  errors  which  need  correction.  On  p.  23  there  is  a 
mention  of  '  Thomas  Pitt  and  his  fellow  deputies  in  1714  at  the  Court  of 
Farrukhsiyar '.  This  appears  to  be  a  confused  reference  to  tlie  embassy 
of  Surman  and  Stephenson  to  Delhi  in  1714-17.  Thomas  Pitt  had  indeed 
many  years  before  this  suggested  sending  an  embassy  to  the  imperial 
court,  but  he  left  India  finally  in  1709,  and  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
actual  mission.  On  p.  25  there  is  a  more  serious  error.  We  are  told  that 
'  under  Akbar,  Bengal  contributed  nearly  fifteen  crores  of  rupees,  or  one- 
sixth  of  the  revenue  of  the  empire  '.   Now  this  sum  amounts  to  £15,000,000, 


552  BEVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

and  no  good  authority  sets  the  total  imperial  revenue  at  this  time  at 
a  higher  figure  than£17,500,000-£20,000,000.  It  is  obvious,  therefore,  that 
Miss  Monckton  Jones  must  have  misread  '  rupees  '  for  '  dams  '  in  one  of 
her  authorities.  Fifteen  crores  of  dams  would  be  £3,750,000,  which  is 
obviously  the  correct  amount.  On  p.  55  there  is  another  important 
mistake  in  the  statement  that  the  Treaty  of  Allahabad  promised  to  restore 
Shah  Alam  to  Delhi.  That  course  was  indeed  suggested  by  Eyre  Coote 
and  others,  but  Clive  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  On  p.  93  '  June  ' 
should  be  read  for  '  May  '  as  the  month  in  which  the  campaign  of  Plassey 
was  fought.  William  Pitt  was  twenty-four,  not  twenty-one,  as  stated 
on  p.  94,  when  he  became  Prime  Minister.  In  one  or  two  passages, 
by  an  obvious  slip,  the  famous  phrase  to  *  stand  forth  as  Diwan ', 
is  wrongly  quoted  as  '  to  start  forth  '.  There  is  a  curious  inconsistency 
on  p.  9.  We  are  told  in  relation  to  the  land  revenue  that  '  under 
native  rule  the  limit  of  extortion  was  commonly  the  point  of  ex- 
haustion, and  that  only  ',  while  the  same  page  records  the  statement 
that  '  under  the  Mogul  empire  the  ryot's  welfare  was  carefully 
cherished  and  oppression  checked '.  Certain  omissions  may  also  be 
noticed.  On  p.  9  it  should  have  been  mentioned  that  Akbar's  original 
twelve  suhahs  were,  on  his  conquest  of  paro  of  the  Deccan  before  the  end 
of  his  reign,  increased  to  fifteen.  The  best  authorities,  by  the  way,  give 
the  proportion  of  the  produce  exacted  by  Todar  Mai  as  one-third,  and  not 
one-fourth  as  stated  on  p.  8.  On  p.  96  it  was  perhaps  worth  recording 
that  the  deposition  of  Mir  Jafar  was  largely  due  to  Holwell,  who  had  always 
been  an  enemy  of  the  Nawab.  Though  Clive  left  for  England  in  February, 
Vansittart  did  not  arrive  from  Madras  till  July,  when  he  found  that 
Holwell,  the  temporary  governor,  had  practically  committed  the  Company 
to  a  second  revolution.  In  regard  to  the  withholding  of  the  tribute  from 
Shah  Alam  by  Hastings  (p.  167)  it  might  have  been  added  that,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  it  had  not  been  paid  since  the  famine  of  1769-70. 

The  work  done  by  Warren  Hastings  in  these  momentous  two  years  was 
in  many  ways  a  magnificent  achievement,  and  Miss  Monckton  Jones 
claims  with  truth  that  '  it  is  in  the  civil  administration  set  up  at  this  time 
that  the  foundations  of  our  system  in  India  were  laid  '.  But  there  is 
occasionally  apparent  in  these  pages  a  natural  tendency  to  overrate 
the  personal  part  of  Hastings  himself  and  underrate  the  support  he  received 
from  others.  In  the  otherwise  admirable  account  of  the  controversy  as 
to  the  inland  trade  it  would  hardly  appear  from  the  statement  on  p.  99 
that  Vansittart  himself,  attended  by  Hastings,  proceeded  to  Monghir  in 
November  1762  and  negotiated  the  treaty  with  Mir  Kasim  which  attempted 
to  afford  that  ill-used  ruler  some  redress.  Hastings,  it  is  true,  gave  his 
chief  splendid  support,  but  it  was,  after  all,  the  governor  himself  who 
authorized  the  policy  and  had  to  bear  the  responsibility  for  it.  Again,  it 
hardly  seems  fair  to  say  of  the  directors,  on  p.  220,  that  it  was  some  years 
before  they  saw  the  need  of  caring  for  the  ryots'  welfare  as  plainly  as 
Hastings,  when  we  see  that  in  the  dispatch  in  which  they  decided 
*  to  stand  forth  as  Diwan  ',  they  laid  stress  on  this  very  point  (p.  136). 
Miss  Monckton  Jones  overestimates,  I  think,  the  results  Hastings  was 
enabled  to  achieve  in  his  attempts  to  purify  the  civil  service  of  Bengal 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  653 

He  undoubtedly  did  his  best,  but,  as  he  said  himself  (p.  259),  there  were  too 
many  '  sons,  cousins,  or  eleves  of  Directors  '  among  the  collectors  for  him 
to  carry  any  very  drastic  reform,  and  in  later  years  he  seems  to  have 
more  or  less  acquiesced  in  a  state  of  things  he  found  it  impossible  to  alter. 
Certainly  the  real  reform  of  the  civil  service  had  to  await  the  hand  of 
Cornwallis  enjoying  powers  never  granted  to  his  predecessors.  Cornwallis 
himself  largely  apportioned  the  blame  to  the  directors  of  this  time,  '  who 
knew  that  these  shocking  evils  existed,  but  instead  of  attempting  to 
suppress  them,  were  quarrelling  whether  their  friends  or  those  of  Mr. 
Hastings  should  enjoy  the  plunder  '. 

Perhaps  Hastings's  one  real  administrative  failure  in  these  two  years 
was  the  quinquennial  settlement  of  the  land  revenue  in  1772.  Failure  was 
no  doubt  excusable,  for  some  sort  of  experiment  had  to  be  made,  and  there 
were  insufficient  data  upon  which  to  go,  but  to  say  that  *  the  fiscal  results 
of  this  first  experiment  are  well  known  to  have  been  disappointing  '  is 
too  mild  a  statement  in  view  of  the  revelations  made  by  Mr.  F.  D.  Ascoli 
in  his  recent  excellent  monograph  on  The  Early  Revenue  History  of  Bengal, 
*  The  adoption  of  this  system  ',  he  says,  '  was  ruinous  ;  not  only  had  the 
whole  collecting  agency  been  abolished,  but  now  even  the  revenue  payers, 
who  had  acquired  the  experience  of  generations  in  collecting  the  rents  .  .  . 
were  discouraged  from  taking  the  settlement  of  estates.'  Estates  were 
knocked  down  to  speculators  at  a  revenue  which  they  could  not  possibly 
bear.  The  assessments  were  excessive.  '  The  only  hope  of  the  new 
farmers  was  to  extort  what  they  could  from  the  cultivators  during  the 
term  of  the  lease,  and  leave  the  estate  ruined  and  deserted.' 

P.  E.  Roberts. 


Tilsit :   France  et  Russie  sous  le  Premier  Empire  ;  la  Question  de  Pologne 
(1806-9).    Par  Edouard  Driault.    (Paris  :  Alcan,  1917.) 

This  volume  is  a  continuation  of  M.  Driault's  series  of  works  on  the  foreign 
policy  of  Napoleon  ;  and  in  particular  it  supplements  the  volume  Sebastiani 
et  Gardane  {1806-8),  which  dealt  with  the  efforts  of  Napoleon  in  the  East. 
The  same  theme  occupies  a  large  portion  of  this  volume,  which,  however, 
is  more  general  in  scope.  After  describing  the  position  of  the  Polish  and 
Turkish  questions  down  to  1806,  M.  Driault  suggests  the  essential  opposition 
of  French  and  Russian  policy  in  regard  to  them.  France  desired 
to  strengthen  the  Polish  barrier ;  Russia,  to  weaken  or  overthrow  it : 
France,  to  secure  an  ascendancy  in  the  East  Mediterranean,  which  was 
incompatible  with  Russian  aims  on  Constantinople.  In  passing,  we  may 
note  that  M.  Driault  (p.  24)  considers  that  de  Boigne  and  other  French 
adventurers  in  India  had  a  fair  chance  of  success  in  their  challenge  to 
British  supremacy,  which  he  pronounces  '  fragile  '.  But  surely,  after 
Trafalgar,  still  more  after  the  British  capture  of  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
any  French  attempt  to  oust  the  British  was  foredoomed  to  failure  unless 
it  was  backed  up  by  a  Franco-Russian  army  far  larger  than  that  which 
Napoleon's  imagination  early  in  1808  conjured  up  as  marching  unopposed 
through  Mesopotamia,  Persia,  and  Afghanistan.  All  such  projects,  after 
1806,    appear    thoroughly    unsound,    and    I    am   not   convinced   that 


554  BE  VIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

Napoleon's  famous  letter  of  2  February,  1808,  is  to  be  taken  seriously. 
M.  Driault  quotes  it  at  length  (pp.  275-7),  and  then  comments  on  '  ce 
mirage  oriental '.  Certainly  the  scheme  was  no  less  colossal  than  its 
execution  of  lightning  celerity  :  the  plan  for  the  partition  of  the  East 
was  to  be  signed  by  March  15,  and  by  May  the  Franco-Russian  forces 
were  to  be  in  Asia  and  the  Russians  at  Stockholm.  Can  this  be  taken 
seriously  ?  Was  it  not  a  piece  of  rodomontade  calculated  to  excite  the 
impressionable  brain  of  Alexander,  and  lead  him  on  to  some  more  prac- 
tical scheme  of  partition  of  the  Near  East  ? 

M.  Driault  describes  the  scheme  by  which  Austria  would  absorb  Serbia. 
He  also  throws  new  light  on  the  difficulties  which  even  then  had  arisen 
between  Napoleon  and  Alexander  by  quoting  some  hitherto  unedited 
French  dispatches,  especially  a  report  of  Champagny,  dated  22  February, 
1808,  in  which  that  minister  points  out  that  a  dispute  about  the  possession 
of  Constantinople  must  inevitably  bring  about  war  between  France  and 
Russia.    It  is  clear  also  that  Napoleon  approved  that  report ;  for  thence- 
forth his  instructions  to  Caulaincourt  at  Petrograd  assumed  a  very  guarded 
tone,  and  friction  between  the  two  empires  became  more  and  more  pro- 
nounced.   What  would  have  happened  if  the  Spanish  rising  had  not  taken 
place  it  is  useless  to  speculate  ;  but  that  event  placed  Napoleon  at  a  grave 
disadvantage  during  the  imperial  interview  at  Erfurt,  and  not  all  his 
gasconnades  could  bend  the  will  of  Alexander.     M.  Driault  states  that 
Napoleon  had  no  reason  to  be  dissatisfied  with  the  result  of  the  interview, 
but  the  postponement  of  the  Eastern  Question  and  the  almost  defiant 
attitude  of  Austria  must  have  irritated  him  extremely ;  and  his  distrust 
of  the  Tsar  was  thenceforth  deep-rooted.    M.  Driault  does  not  endorse 
the  extreme  judgements  of  some  writers  as  to  the  '  treason  '  of  Talleyrand 
at  Erfurt.    He  rightly  judges  that  Alexander's  change  of  front  was  dictated 
by  circumstances,  but  suggests  that  Talleyrand  supplied  the  formula  for 
the  occasion.     To  M.  Driault's  assertion  (p.  364)  that  Talleyrand,  in 
opposing  Napoleon  at  Erfurt,  opposed  France,  I  cannot  subscribe.    For 
surely  the  emperor's  policy  of  dominating  Europe  was  so  impracticable 
that  a  discerning  Frenchman  was  doing  his  duty  in  setting  limits  to  it. 
And  why  claim  '  que  la  politique  de  Talleyrand,  en  pretendant  ramener 
la  France  au  Rhin,  la  ramena  aux  frontieres  de  1792  ?  '    It  was  surely 
Napoleon's  perversity  which  threw  away  the  chances  of  preserving  the 
Rhine  frontier.     Respecting  the  Treaty  of  Schonbrunn,  M.  Driault  well 
says  that  it  was  not  a  peace,  and  he  extends  this  judgement  to  all  Napoleon's 
treaties.    But  that  is  to  pass  the  severest  censure  on  the  emperor's  policy. 
M.  Driault  repeats  (p.  477)  the  old  stories  about  the  continental  powers 
shedding  their  blood  for  the  behoof  of  England  who  paid  them  to  do  it  ; 
and  he  adds  that  she  acted  only  where  she  could  gain  something,  namely, 
at  Copenhagen,  Lisbon,  Constantinople,  Alexandria,  in  America,  and  at 
Walcheren.    But  she  gained  nothing  at  those  places  except  the  Danish 
fleet.     Nor  is  the  Peninsular  War  fitly  described  in  the  statement  that  it 
was  merely  action  at  Lisbon  in  order  to  gain  something.    Napoleon  did 
wage  the  campaigns  of  Eyiau,  Friedland,  and  Wagram  in  order  to  gain 
nothing.    M.  Driault  states  with  pride  that  in  1809  Napoleon  strengthened 
Poland,  chased  the  Russians  from  the  Mediterranean,  formed  a  French 


1918  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  555 

barrier  in  Illyria,  and  pent  up  Austria  as  a  land-locked  state.  But  whether 
(apart  from  the  first)  these  feats  were  compatible  with  sound  statesmanship, 
he  does  not  discuss,  though  he  admits  that  the  French  thrust  towards  the 
East  led  to  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  balance  of  power  and  a  definite 
menace  to  Kussia.  J.  Holland  Rose. 


Select  Constitutional  Documents  illustrating  South  African  history,  1795-1910. 
Edited  with  an  Introduction  by  G.  W.  Eybers,  M.A.  (London : 
Routledge,  1918.) 

There  can  be  no  question  but  that  a  collection  of  South  African  constitu- 
tional documents  meets  a  real  want ;  and  Mr.  Eybers  is  to  be  congratulated 
on  the  zeal  and  thoroughness  with  which  he  has  accomplished  his  task. 
The  volume  is  arranged  under  the  separate  heads  of  Cape  Colony,  Natal, 
the  Orange  Free  State,  the  South  African  Republic,  and  the  Union  of  South 
Africa.  The  documents  dealing  with  the  Orange  River  Free  State  and  the 
Transvaal  are  the  most  interesting  and  valuable,  because  they  are  less 
accessible.  Most  of  the  Free  State  laws,  here  printed,  are  to  be  found,  we 
are  told,  nowhere  in  London  except  in  the  South  African  library  collected 
by  the  late  Mr.  S.  Mendelssohn.  In  the  Natal  section  are  also  contained 
'  several  papers  relating  to  the  great  Trek  which  have  probably  never  been 
seen  by  anybody  alive  outside  official  circles  except  two  or  three  historians  '. 

So  far  as  Cape  Colony  and  Natal  are  concerned,  the  material  is  divided 
into  papers  relating  to  the  Central  Government,  Local  Government,  and 
the  Administration  of  Justice.  Some  of  the  space  devoted  to  the  two  latter 
headings  might,  perhaps,  have  been  more  usefully  employed  in  further 
developing  the  more  general  constitutional  questions.  The  portion  of  the 
work  dealing  with  the  Union  is  especially  disappointing,  both  in  the 
introduction  and  in  the  text.  We  should  have  been  grateful  for  a  reproduc- 
tion, in  part  at  least,  of  Sir  G.  Grey's  suggestive  dispatches,  of  the  abortive 
South  African  Act  of  1876,  and  of  Lord  Selborne's  impressive  Memorandum 
of  1907,  which  deserves  to  take  rank  as  a  state  paper  with  Lord  Durham's 
Canada  Report.  Instead,  we  are  given  merely  the  text  of  the  Union  of 
South  Africa  Act  without  note  or  illustration.  In  the  introduction 
Mr.  Eybers  seems  mainly  interested  in  claiming  the  credit  of  the  Union 
for  his  Dutch  kinsfolk.  '  The  idea  of  union  was  a  very  familiar  one  to 
South  Africans  when  out  of  the  mists  of  war  the  new  century  dawned  on 
them.  Up  to  that  time,  with  the  exception  of  individual  men  of  non- 
indigenous  stock  like  Sir  G.  Grey,  Lord  Carnarvon,  and  Cecil  Rhodes,  the 
movers  towards  the  unification  of  the  white  people  were,  in  the  main,  of 
Dutch  extraction.  They  joined  forces  across  the  Drakensberg  in  the  early 
years,  they  amalgamated  to  the  south  of  the  Limpopo,  they  tried  to  join 
hands  across  the  Vaal,  they  worked  for  a  united  Cape  Colony  from  1836 
till  1854,  and  in  1872  they  prevented  the  splitting  up  of  the  Cape.  There 
was  very  little  coercion  in  these  notable  achievements,  and  in  no  case  was 
the  foundation  laid  in  the  blood  of  their  fellow-countrymen.' 

Mr.  Eybers  has  schooled  himself  to  an  attitude  of  severe  and  rigid 
impartiality,  and  it  is  only  occasionally,  as  in  the  words  just  quoted,  that 
we  can  gather  his  private  beliefs.    Equally  suggestive  is  the  account  of  the 


656  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS  October 

Orange  Free  State  :  *  The  farming  community  was  spared  the  disadvan- 
tages of  the  commercial  and  materialistic  spirit  which  degraded  politics 
and  retarded  education  elsewhere.  Its  idealism  remained  unimpaired,  and 
it  will  be  strange  if  it  does  not  turn  out  to  be  the  bearer  of  ideas  to  the 
other  communities  in  the  present  century.'  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  reason 
given  for  the  preference  by  South  Africa  of  a  union  to  a  federation  seems 
not  very  convincing.  It  is  that  the  weak  points  of  each  of  the  existing 
federations  were  demonstrated,  so  that  a  union  was  resorted  to  faute  de 
mieux.  Yet  more  ingenuous  is  the  comment  on  the  claim  of  the 
Transvaal  Volksraad  to  prevent  the  judges  from  questioning  the  validity 
of  its  resolutions.  *  The  incident  .  .  .  mainly  served  to  bring  to  light  the 
sound  common-sense  arrangement  of  the  Constitution. .  .  .  The  absence  of 
a  similar  'provision  in  the  United  States  Constitution  has  in  past  years  led  to 
much  trouble.^  (Chief  Justice  Marshall  must  turn  in  his  grave  at  this 
obiter  dictum  on  the  work  of  the  Supreme  Court.) 

There  are  some  excellent  remarks  regarding  the  extreme  individualism 
of  the  Dutch  South  African  temperament ;  and  yet,  in  summing  up  the 
causes  of  the  great  Trek,  along  with  '  the  unwillingness  to  be  ruled  over  by 
a  foreign  Power ',  '  the  absolutism  of  the  rule  ',  '  the  loss  of  their  local 
governing  bodies  ',  and  '  the  refusal  to  grant  them  representative  institu- 
tions ',  are  placed  at  the  head  of  the  grievances.  Contrast  with  this  the 
language  of  the  Trekkers  themselves.  In  the  manifesto  of  the  Emigrant 
Farmers,  of  February  1837,  amongst  the  ten  alleged  motives  for  emigrating, 
there  is  not  a  word  about  the  loss  of  their  local  system  of  government  or 
the  absence  of  representative  institutions  ;  and  the  same  thing  is  true  of  the 
more  detailed  memorial  of  the  Emigrants  at  Port  Natal  to  the  Cape  Gover- 
nor (1839).  It  must  be  admitted  that  in  1842,  after  mature  reflexion 
on  their  position  in  the  face  of  British  pretensions,  they  came  to  the 
conclusion  that '  all  these  evils  we  ascribe  to  this  single  cause — the  want, 
namely,  of  a  representative  government '  ;  but  this  conclusion  seems  to 
have  been  reached  through  the  special  difficulties  of  the  situation. 

There  is  one  respect  in  which  the  value  of  the  volume  might  have  been 
improved.  Considering  the  importance  of  the  native  question  in  South 
African  affairs  a  separate  department  of  the  book  should  have  been  allocated 
to  this  subject.  As  it  is,  whilst  there  is  frequent  reference  to  the  native 
question,  and  whilst  the  annexations  of  native  territories  are  adequately 
dealt  with,  important  legislation  (e.  g.  the  Glen  Grey  Act)  remains,  unless 
we  are  mistaken,  unrecorded.  It  is  easy,  however,  to  criticize ;  and 
assuredly  no  student  of  imperial  politics  will  wish  to  part  with  the  volume 
without  once  more  expressing  his  recognition  of  the  sterling  work  of  which 
it  is  the  outcome.  H.  E.  Egerton. 


1918  557 


Short  Notices 

M.  Francois  Picavet,  well  known  as  a  learned  and  zealous  investigator 
of  the  history  of  medieval  thought,  has  published  in  the  Annuaire  of  the 
Section  des  Sciences  religieuses  of  the  Ecole  pratique  des  Hautes  l^tudes 
for  the  year  1917-18  an  essay  of  some  fifty  pages  on  the  influence  exerted 
by  the  philosophy  of  Plotinus  on  Christian  theology,  and  especially  by  his 
teaching  concerning  the  rpcts  apxi-Kal  vTroarrda-eL^  upon  the  development 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (Hypostases  Plotiniennes  et  Trinite  Chretienne, 
Paris  :  Imprimerie  Nationale,  1917).  In  it  he  has  called  attention  to  the 
importance  of  the  subject,  and  collected  a  number  of  interesting  quotations 
in  illustration  of  it ;  but  neither  the  philosophical  discussion  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  the  theology  which  issued  from  the  reaction  of  Neo-Platonism 
upon  Christianity  nor  the  exhibition  of  the  links  in  the  chain  of  tradition 
which  connects  the  speculations  of  the  great  schoolmen  of  Latin  Christen- 
dom with  those  of  Plotinus  is  carried  very  far.  It  would  no  doubt  be 
unreasonable  to  expect  a  fuller  treatment  of  the  theme  within  so  small 
a  compass  ;  but  M.  Picavet  might  perhaps,  by  more  precisely  indicating 
the  purpose  and  scope  of  his  essay,  have  avoided  seeming  to  promise 
something  more  than  he  can  be  said  to  have  performed.     C.  C.  J.  W. 

Of  late  years  fresh  and  more  intelligent  interest  has  been  taken  in 
Christian  missions  :  their  whole  history  along  with  problems  of  methods 
past  and  present  has  come  under  more  careful  study.  The  work  on 
The  Conversion  of  Europe,  by  Dr.  Charles  Henry  Eobinson,  Hon.  Canon 
of  Ripon  and  editorial  secretary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation 
of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts  (London :  Longmans,  1917)  is  one 
more  sign  of  this  new  interest.  The  name  of  the  Society  to  which  the 
writer  belongs,  and  of  the  periodical  (East  and  West)  in  which  some  parts 
of  the  book  appeared,  show  this  to  be  the  case.  Much  missionary  literature 
in  the  past  has  not  aimed  at  historical  completeness  or  accuracy,  and  some 
important  fields  of  investigation  have  been  quite  neglected.  Dr.  Robinson 
has  chosen  a  good  subject,  which  has  great  interest  in  itself  :  in  treating 
it  he  has  the  advantage  of  many  special  studies  of  which  the  student  of 
missions  should  be  made  aware.  A  good  choice  of  guides  for  the  various 
parts  of  such  a  book  is  essential ;  in  most  cases  Dr.  Robinson  has  chosen 
wisely  :  the  purely  missionary  student  will  have  a  chance  of  learning  much 
from  him  even  if  the  historical  student  might  desire  to  learn-  even  more. 
But  the  subject  has  many  difficulties.  The  Balkan  Peninsula,  for  instance, 
abounds  in  traps  for  the  historian  as  for  the  politician,  and  it  would  be 
too  much  to  say  that  the  author  has  avoided  them  all.  A  more  serious 
defect  is  that  the  bibliographies  are  not  as  complete  or  as  much  up  to  date 
as  might  be  :  the  student  is  too  often  referred  to  Migne  when  far  better 
texts  should  be  used.    This  is  the  case,  for  instance,  with  the  Lives  and  the 


558  SHORT  NOTICES  October 

Epistles  of  St.  Boniface.  In  most  cases,  however,  the  best  (or  at  any  rate 
very  useful)  modern  writers  are  referred  to.  But  the  later  monographs 
about  SS.  Cyril  and  Methodius  should  have  been  indicated,  although 
a  reference  to  Professor  Bury's  latest  work  would  have  been  enough  to 
safeguard  the  inquirer.  This  defect  could  easily  be  repaired  in  a  revision 
of  a.  book  which  is  fortunate  in  its  conception  and  its  subject,  and  which, 
within  the  perhaps  inevitable  limits  of  a  single  volume,  is  planned  upon 
right  lines.  J.  P.  W. 

Signor  A.  Gaudenzi's  dissertation  on  the  monastery  of  Nonantola,  the 
duchy  of  Persiceta,  and  the  church  of  Bologna,  which  fills  almost  the  whole 
of  nos.  36  and  37  of  the  Bullettino  delVIstituto  Storico  Italiano  (Eome,  1916), 
contains  a  critical  edition  of  more  than  forty  documents,  the  majority — 
and  all  the  most  important — of  which  were  forged  at  Nonantola  between 
the  latter  part  of  the  tenth  and  the  thirteenth  centuries.  Among  them, 
however,  is  a  genuine  unpublished  bull  of  Innocent  III  of  4  July  1209 
(doc.  xxx).  As  the  spurious  documents  are  arranged  not  by  their  professed 
dates  but  by  the  dates  at  which  the  editor  believes  them  to  have  been 
fabricated,  a  table  of  reference,  which  we  do  not  find,  is  urgently  necessary. 
Signor  Gaudenzi  adds  the  text  of  a  fabulous  Nonantulan  version  of  the 
Life  of  Hadrian  I,  written  in  the  eleventh  century,  of  which  only  extracts 
have  hitherto  been  printed.  Its  interest  consists  in  four  formulae  from  the 
Liber  Diurnus  which  it  contains  :  these  the  editor  believes  to  have  been 
transcribed  from  a  copy  in  the  possession  of  Hadrian  III,  which  was  appro- 
priated by  the  monks  of  Nonantola  at  his  death  in  885,  and  which  he  holds, 
contrary  to  Sickel's  opinion,  to  be  different  from  the  Vatican  MS.  of  the 
Liber.  He  then  in  appendix  i  explores  the  probable  contents  of  that 
pope's  travelling  library.  In  appendix  ii  he  discusses  the  controverted 
question  of  the  origin  of  the  minuscule  hand,  which  he  traces  to  the  schola 
cantorum  at  Kome,  and  inclines  to  find  symptoms  of  Byzantine  influence 
in  its  formation.  Lastly,  in  appendix  iii  he  treats  of  the  union  of  the 
Exarchate  with  the  kingdom  of  Italy,  and  of  the  literary  and  legal  pro- 
ductions of  Ravenna  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries.  This  learned  and 
important  contribution  was  left  unfinished  at  the  author's  sudden  death 
on  25  March  1916.  R.  L.  P. 

An  Abbot  of  Vezelay,  by  Miss  Rose  Graham  (London  :  Society  for 
Promoting  Christian  Knowledge,  1918),  forms  one  of  a  series  of  '  Studies 
in  Church  History '  now  being  published.  Thick  paper  and  large  type 
disguise  its  slightness,  yet  it  is  quite  adequate  for  its  subject.  Why  that 
subject  should  have  been  chosen  out  of  countless  others,  often  more 
picturesque  and  quite  as  edifying,  for  the  instruction  of  the  English 
general  reader,  it  is  difficult  to  guess.  The  story  is  common  enough  ; 
a  secular  and  litigious  abbot,  a  bishop  who  tries  to  exercise  jurisdiction, 
a  commune  aiming  at  independence,  a  neighbouring  count  planning  to 
extend  his  authority.  Miss  Graham  is  an  experienced  narrator,  but  she 
has  failed,  doubtless  through  the  fault  of  her  materials,  to  make  it  very 
interesting,  though  she  inspires  confidence.  From  the  annals  of  any  of 
our  English  monasteries  she  might  have  drawn  scenes  identical  with  this. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  559 

But  there  too  she  would  have  found  it  difficult  to  connect  the  spirit  of  the 
architecture,  of  which  she  gives  some  excellent  photographs,  with  the 
temper  prevalent  among  the  inmates  of  the  monasteries.  E.  W.  W. 

Useful  little  books  on  great  subjects  are  of  two  sorts.  Either  they  are 
collections  of  elementary  facts,  or  they  condense  and  generalize  the  results 
of  wide  and  deep  study.  The  former  kind  are  school-books  ;  the  latter 
are  for  readers  who,  although  they  may  not  know  much  of  the  theme  in 
hand,  have  mature  and  trained  minds.  Dr.  George  Burton  Adams's 
Outline  Sketch  of  English  Constitutional  History  (New  Haven,  Connecticut : 
Yale  University  Press,  1918)  is  a  favourable  specimen  of  the  second  class. 
In  a  series  of  brief  chapters  he  sums  up  all  that  is  most  essential  in  each 
period  of  English  constitutional  history.  Details  are  almost  wholly 
omitted,  yet  we  feel  ourselves  guided  by  a  scholar  who  could  with  far  less 
trouble  have  written  a  far  more  elaborate  book.  Clearness  of  style,  a  true 
sense  of  proportion,  and  a  sober  historic  judgement  characterize  this 
outline  of  the  longest  and  most  complex  of  constitutional  histories.  One 
or  two  petty  slips  may  be  noted  for  correction.  Not  two  but  nearly  four 
years  elapsed  between  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  and  the  king's  sur- 
render to  the  Scots.  He  did  not  surrender  himself  to  the  Parliament. 
At  the  death  of  Charles  II  parliament  had  been  intermitted,  not  for 
five  years,  but  for  rather  less  than  four.  F.  C.  M. 

The  editor's  part  in  Sir  John  Fortescue's  Commendation  of  the  Laws  of 
England,  a  reprint  of  the  eighteenth-century  translation  of  Francis  Grigor 
(London  :  Sweet  &  Maxwell,  1917),  is  confined  to  a  bibliographical  note, 
not  absolutely  impeccable  in  point  of  accuracy,  and  to  excerpts  from  Foss's 
Judges  and  Holdsworth's  History  of  English  Law  by  way  of  biography  of 
the  author  and  appreciation  of  his  work.  How  far  the  somewhat  antiquated 
version  will  be  completely  intelligible  to  law  students,  for  whom  we  sup- 
pose it  to  be  intended,  without  notes  or  opportunity  of  comparison  with 
the  original  Latin,  may  be  matter  of  doubt.  That  it  stands  in  need  of 
some  revision  is  amusingly  evidenced  by  the  passage  in  chap.  49,  where 
by  a  misapprehension  of  the  meaning  of  inferialibus  Diehus  the  translator 
makes  the  students  of  the  Inns  of  Court  and  Chancery  devote  themselves 
to  singing  and  revels  generally  in  term  time  and  to  law  out  of  term.  Some- 
thing of  the  kind  is  half -jestingly  said  of  the  modern  university  student 
with  social  tastes,  but  no  one  will  suspect  Fortescue  of  humorous  paradox. 

J.  T. 

The  recent  establishment  at  Madrid  of  a  chair  of  the  History  of  Social 
Economy  in  Spain  has  led  to  the  initiation  of  a  series  of  university  publica- 
tions, the  first  volume  of  which  consists  of  a  selection  of  Documentos  de 
Asunto  economico  correspondientes  at  Reinado  de  los  Reyes  catolicos  {1475- 
1516)  prepared  for  publication  by  half  a  dozen  students  under  the  direction 
of  Professor  Eduardo  Ibarra  y  Kodriguez  (Madrid,  1917).  The  documents 
thus  edited  are  drawn  from  two  Madrid  collections  of  manuscripts,  and 
illustrate  the  leading  aspects  of  the  economic  policy  of  Ferdinand  and 
Isabella.    The  main  purpose  of  the  publication  is  avowedly  an  educational 


560  SHORT  NOTICES  October 

one — to  train  a  school  of  young  historians  in  palaeography  and  diplomatic ; 
and  the  selection  makes  no  claim  to  be  fully  representative,  as  is  indicated 
by  the  fact  that  two-thirds  of  the  documents  belong  to  the  year  1508. 
Within  the  limits  thus  modestly  self-imposed  by  those  responsible,  the 
work  seems  to  be  excellently  done  and  to  give  promise  of  more  ambitious 
enterprise  in  the  near  future.  If,  however,  the  labours  of  the  new  school 
are  to  cast  valuable  light  on  the  most  important  subject  of  the  origins 
of  Spanish  mercantilism  they  must  be  based  on  a  wide  comparative  study 
of  the  published  records  of  Spain,  Portugal,  and  Italy.  In  this  connexion 
the  economic  policies  of  Koger  of  Sicily  and  of  Charles  of  Anjou  are  specially 
worthy  of  attention.  G.  U. 

The  War  of  Chupas,  which  has  been  translated  and  edited  by  Sir 
Clements  K.  Markham,  K.C.B.  (London  :  Hakluyt  Society,  1918),  forms 
part  iv,  book  ii,  of  the  Civil  Wars  of  Peru  by  Pedro  de  Cieza  de  Leon. 

I  am  weary  of  trying  to  comprehend  the  events  which  happened  in  the  realm  at 
this  time.  .  .  .  God  is  my  witness  to  the  vigils  I  have  kept  and  the  little  ease  I  have 
enjoyed.  I  only  want  one  reward,  that  the  reader  will  look  upon  me  as  a  friend,  and 
will  bear  in  mind  the  many  journeys  I  have  made  to  investigate  the  notable  events 
in  these  realms. 

So  writes  Cieza  de  Leon  on  getting  half-way  through  this  section  of  his 
voluminous  narrative  and  descriptive  work  concerning  the  early  history  of 
Peru ;  and  the  reader  feels  that  he  is  indeed  parting  from  a  friend  as  he 
closes  the  work  of  this  admirable  story-teller,  intelligent  eye-witness, 
patient  and  conscientious  investigator.  Moreover,  it  is  with  the  same 
feeling  of  gratitude  to  a  friend,  together  with  an  added  sense  of  personal 
loss,  that  one  takes  leave  of  the  editor.  The  impulsive  annotations,  the 
touches  of  reminiscence  in  the  introduction,  the  genial  voice  which  one 
can  almost  hear,  are  consonant  with  the  spirit  of  the  old  Spanish  con- 
quistador. The  late  president  of  the  Royal  Geographical  Society  translated 
and  edited  this  narrative  at  the  age  of  eighty-five,  but  did  not  live  to  revise 
the  proofs.  His  first  work  on  Peru  appeared  so  long  ago  as  1856,  and  down 
to  the  moment  of  his  sudden  death  he  was  still  working,  with  fresh  and 
vigorous  enthusiasm,  the  same  picturesque  vein  which  had  been  his  early 
choice.  The  main  subject  of  the  present  volume  is  the  revolt  of  the  young 
Almagro  ;  the  murder  of  the  Marquis  Francisco  Pizarro,  '  that  great 
captain  who  had  never  tired  of  discovering  kingdoms  and  conquering 
provinces  ' ;  the  subsequent  civil  war  ;  and  the  defeat  of  Diego  Almagro, 
with  the  '  men  of  Chile '  in  the  battle  of  Chupas  by  the  captains  who 
followed  Vaca  de  Castro,  the  royal  governor  newly  sent  from  Spain.  The 
volume  concludes  with  the  appointment  of  a  viceroy  and  the  promulga- 
tion of  the  '  New  Laws  for  the  Indies  ',  of  which  the  text  is  given  in  full. 
But  not  less  interesting  than  the  central  thread  of  this  tragic  story  are  the 
long  digressions,  describing  expeditions  of  conquest  and  discovery,  in  one 
of  which  Cieza  de  Leon  had  himself  taken  part.  F.  A.  K. 

Dr.  N.  Japikse's  address  entitled  Waardeering  van  Johan  De  Witt,  Rede 
uitgesfrohen  op  12  Juni  1918  in  pulchri  studio  (The  Hague  :  Nijhofi,  1918), 
gives  an  appreciation  of  De  Witt,  bringing  out  strongly  his  sincerity, 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  561 

capacity,  courage,  and  patriotism.  It  does  not,  of  course,  pretend  to  give 
any  new  information  or  advance  any  new  view  of  De  Witt.  Indeed  the 
picture  presented  is  very  much  that  which  Dr.  Japikse  gives  in  his  excellent 
Life  of  De  Witt  which  was  reviewed  by  us  in  January  1917.  H.  L. 

Students  of  political  theory  already  owe  a  great  debt  to  Dr.  C.  E. 
Vaughan  for  his  edition  of  Eousseau's  Political  Writings.  Dr.  Vaughan 
has  added  to  that  debt  by  producing  an  edition  of  the  Contrat  Social 
(Manchester :  University  Press,  1918)  :  for  this  new  volume,  though  it 
belongs  to  the  series  of  Modern  Language  Texts  which  are  meant  primarily 
to  serve  an  educational  purpose,  does  not  confine  itself  within  the  limits 
of  a  schoolbook.  It  contains  a  serviceable  text  and  useful  notes,  together 
with  a  bibliography,  a  valuable  introduction,  and  a  suppressed  portion 
of  the  first  draft  of  the  Contrat  Social  printed  as  an  appendix.  The  intro- 
duction adds  something  to  what  Dr.  Vaughan  has  previously  published 
in  his  larger  volumes,  and  the  student  ought  not  to  neglect  it.  A  fresh 
attempt  is  made  to  throw  light  on  the  relation  between  the  individualistic 
side  of  Kousseau  and  its  opposite,  and  two  long  notes  are  added,  one  on 
the  contract  theory,  making  a  careful  distinction  between  its  use  to 
explain  the  origin  of  society  and  to  explain  the  origin  of  government, 
the  other  on  the  influence  exerted  by  Eousseau  on  the  successive  con- 
stitutions of  the  French  Eevolution.  One  important  omission  occurs. 
Just  as  in  his  large  edition  Dr.  Vaughan  pays  no  attention  to  the  words 
of  Dr.  Figgis,  so  neither  does  he  refer  to  that  author  here.  The  result  is 
unfortunate  in  two  ways.  On  the  historical  side  Dr.  Figgis  has  done 
more  than  any  recent  writer  to  make  us  familiar  with  the  affiliation  to 
one  another  of  the  works  on  political  theory  written  in  the  later  sixteenth 
and  early  seventeenth  centuries  :  Dr.  Vaughan  would  have  helped  the 
student  by  suggesting  reference,  through  his  bibliography,  to  places 
where  Dr.  Figgis  has  done  this.  On  the  theoretical  side,  surely  the  theory 
of  the  communitas  communitatum,  which  descends  from  Althus,  should 
have  been  mentioned.  We  may  well  doubt  whether  Althus  is  not  now 
exerting  a  greater  influence,  through  his  modern  followers,  than  Rousseau 
himself ;  and  the  main  question  at  issue  between  them  is  one  which  no 
reader  of  Rousseau  should  overlook.  P.  V.  M.  B. 

A  handsome  volume  published  by  the  Carnegie  Endowment  for  Inter- 
national Peace  contains  the  texts  of  The  Declaration  of  Independence^ 
The  Articles  of  Confederation,  and  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
(New  York  :  Oxford  University  Press,  1917).  It  is  edited  by  Mr.  James 
Brown  Scott,  who  contributes  a  preface  dealing  specially  with  the  powers 
of  making  treaties.  The  documents  are  printed  without  notes,  except  that 
particulars  are  given  with  respect  to  the  acceptance  of  the  successive 
Amendments  to  the  Constitution.  A  very  full  index  to  the  contents  of 
the  Constitution  is  a  valuable  addition  to  this  useful  book.  A. 

In  Napoleon  Journaliste  (Paris  :  Plon,  1918)  M.  A.  Perivier  has  written 
an  interesting  account  of  Napoleon's  personal  work  in  directing  and  writing 
to  the  press,  and  of  his  censorship  while  emperor.     The  book  contains 
VOL.  XXXIII. — NO.  CXXXII.  O  O 


562  SHORT  NOTICES  October 

valuable  details  as  to  the  three  papers  he  controlled  during  his  campaigns 
in  Italy  and  Egypt,  as  to  his  own  numerous  contributions  to  the  Moniteur, 
and  as  to  the  once  famous  Peltier  case  (1803).  Napoleon's  acute  sensitive- 
ness to  foreign  criticism,  to  what  he  described  (1805)  as  '  phantoms  born 
of  English  fog  and  spleen  ',  is  well  known,  and  he  was  fantastically  careful 
as  to  what  should  or  should  not  be  published  even  with  regard  to  matters 
of  no  moment.  M.  Perivier,  while  doubtful  of  the  wisdom  of  Napoleon's 
rigid  censorship,  regards  him  as  a  writer  '  of  the  first  rank '  in  respect  of 
both  style  and  ideas.  The  lies  and  libels,  with  which  the  Moniteur 
and  other  officially  inspired  papers  were  filled,  are  hard  to  reconcile 
with  such  a  claim.  He  was,  however,  the  first  statesman  in  modern 
Europe  to  realize  the  potentialities  of  newspaper  propaganda,  and  few 
men  have  undertaken  the  task  with  more  astuteness  and  zeal.    G.  B.  H. 

In  La  Di'plomatie  de  Guillaume  II  (Paris  :  Bossard,  1917)  M.  Emile 
Laloy  essajs  the  task  of  sketching  the  diplomatic  history  of  the  years 
1888-1914,  especially  from  the  emperor's  point  of  view.  It  is  necessarily 
based  only  on  printed  sources,  and  those  used  are  of  very  unequal  value. 
In  the  first  chapter,  dealing  with  the  emperor's  character,  scarcely  any 
use  is  made  of  the  works  of  Hinzpeter  and  Lamprecht  on  that  subject, 
and  review  articles  are  extensively  quoted.  M.  Laloy's  good  sense  leads 
him  to  reject  (p.  55)  the  much  advertised  theory  as  to  the  '  encircling ' 
of  Germany  by  Edward  VII ;  he  rightly  describes  it  as  a  series  of  agree- 
ments for  ending  Britain's  differences  with  France  and  Eussia.  He  is  wrong, 
however,  in  ascribing  to  Eeventlow  regret  that  Germany  did  not  join  the 
Anglo- Japanese  Alliance  of  1902  ;  for  Eeventlow  distinctly  says  (^wsi(;ar<igre 
Politik,  p.  178)  that  to  do  so  would  have  enabled  England  to  check  Germany's 
naval  construction,  thereby  ending  her  Flottentraum.  Neither  was  Schie- 
mann  really  favourable  to  the  Anglo-German-Japanese  Alliance  wished 
for  by  us  and  Japan.  The  emperor's  naval  plans  are  here  discussed, 
and  the  author  believes  that  the  German  fleet  on  August  1,  1914,  was  ready 
to  bombard  Havre  and  Cherbourg  and  cover  a  landing  at  Morlaix  for  the 
seizure  of  Brest.  The  authority  for  this  statement  is  M.  Georges  Blanchon 
in  the  Revue  des  Deux  Mondes.  The  question  as  to  the  times  and  circum- 
stances of  the  mobilizations  ordered  by  the  Continental  Powers  on  July  31- 
August  2,  1914,  is  well  handled  according  to  the  evidence  now  available. 
M.  Laloy  is  right  in  stating  that  the  general  mobilization  of  Austria  was 
ordered  a  few  hours  before  that  of  Eussia.  Whether,  as  he  says,  Eussia 
did  not  know  of  the  mobilization  at  Vienna  is  doubtful.  In  an  interesting 
Note  (pp.  410-11)  he  combats  the  view  of  M.  Muret  (L' Evolution  belliqueuse 
de  Guillaume  II)  that  the  emperor  was  sincerely  peaceful  but  was  overcome 
by  the  warlike  tendencies  of  the  German  people.  M.  Laloy  holds  that 
he  skilfully  posed  as  the  friend  of  peace  but  merely  awaited  the 
favourable  conjuncture  for  declaring  war,  which  occurred  in  July- August 
1914.  There  is  much  to  support  this  contention.  J.  H.  Ee. 

Sir  John  Scott  Keltic's  perseverance  in  continuing  the  publication 
of  The  Statesman's  Year-Booh  (London :  Macmillan)  during  the  war 
claims  recognition,  and  his  issue  for  1918  is  as  usual  verv  carefullv  corrected. 


1918  SHORT  NOTICES  563 

It  is  not  his  fault  that  the  statistics  he  gives  are  often  defective  and  in 
many  cases  antiquated,  for  much  information  is  naturally  unobtainable, 
and  much  is  for  good  reason  withheld.  Among  the  introductory  tables 
the  summaries  of  recent  treaties  will  be  found  useful,  and  the  diary  of  the 
principal  events  of  the  war  is  continued  as  late  as  27  May  of  this  year. 

B. 

There  are  few  more  difficult  literary  tasks  than  to  comprise  in  one 
small  volume  an  account  of  English  political  institutions  of  every  kind, 
which  shall  be  at  once  readable  and  correct.  Absolute  success  is  impossible, 
but  Dr.  David  Duncan  Wallace,  in  his  book  on  The  Government  of  England, 
National,  Local,  Imperial  (New  York :  Putnams,  1917),  has  succeeded  in 
large  measure.  His  knowledge  is  considerable,  his  arrangement  is  clear, 
and  his  style  is  easy.  He  always  endeavours  to  be  fair  in  his  judgements. 
On  certain  subjects  natives  and  foreigners  almost  necessarily  difEer.  But 
Dr.  Wallace  is  generally  more  inclined  to  eulogy  than  many  Englishmen 
would  be.  His  book  will  tend  to  correct  certain  unfounded  or  exaggerated 
notions  still  too  common  in  America.  Some  errors  we  must  expect.  To 
say  that  parliament  may  direct  the  judges  to  change  their  interpretation 
of  the  law  is  apt  to  create  a  false  impression.  '  Warden '  of  the  Chiltern 
Hundreds  should  of  course  be  '  Steward '.  It  sounds  odd  to  English  ears  to 
say  that  the  Lord  Chancellor  '  appoints  many  preachers  of  the  Church  of 
England  '.  Only  a  writer  accustomed  to  American  distances  could  describe 
the  City  as  extending  '  to  a  point  a  little  short  of  Westminster  Abbey  '. 
That  Irish  patriots  want  to  be  '  placed  more  nearly  on  an  equality  with 
other  parts  of  the  United  Kingdom '  is  a  singular  proposition.  The 
statistics  on  p.  348  give  a  wholly  erroneous  impression  of  the  percentage 
of  Roman  Catholics  in  England.  An  estimate  of  the  number  of  landowners 
in  the  United  Kingdom  made  in  1875  is  necessarily  misleading  now. 

F.  C,  M. 

Under  the  title  of  Dansk  Historisk  Bibliografi  (Copenhagen  :  Gad), 
Messrs.  Erichsen  and  Krarup  have  begun  the  publication  of  a  work  in  three 
substantial  volumes,  which  will  be  of  great  service  to  all  who  occupy  them- 
selves with  Danish  history  and  biography.  The  third  volume,  containing 
*  Personal  History',  was  issued  complete  in  1917,  and  consists  of  more  than 
800  pages,  in  which  over  fifteen  thousand  biographical  books  and  articles 
are  registered  under  the  names  of  the  persons  to  whom  they  relate  ;  the 
names  throughout  are  arranged  in  alphabetical  order,  so  that  consultation 
is  a  simple  matter.  A  brief  introduction  to  this  volume  explains  the  scope 
of  the  whole  work,  together  with  the  necessary  limitations  which  the 
compilers  have  set  themselves  in  such  an  extensive  task.  Of  the  earlier 
portions  of  the  work  only  the  first  part  of  vol.  i  has  been  issued  (1918), 
dealing  with  Danish  history  down  to  the  reign  of  Frederick  VI  (1808-39)  ; 
the  second  part  will  contain  the  continuation  of  this  to  1912.  As  the 
books  and  articles  in  the  first  two  volumes  will  be  grouped  according  to 
subjects  and  periods,  it  is  gratifying  to  note  that  an  alphabetical  index 
is  promised  as  a  conclusion  to  the  whole  work,  which  will  obviously  com- 
prise an  immense  mass  of  valuable  material. 

W.  A.  C. 


564  SHORT  NOTICES  October 

The  eleventh  volume  of  the  Transactions  of  the  Royal  Historical  Society 
(third  series,  1917)  contains  a  presidential  address  by  Professor  C.  H.  Firth, 
in  which  he  surveys  the  relations  between  England  and  Austria.  Mr.  H.  P. 
Biggar  writes  on  Charles  V  and  the  discovery  of  Canada,  and  Miss  I.  D. 
Thornley  on  the  treason  legislation  of  Henry  VIII  [1531-4:].  Dr.  Henry  Gee 
examines,  for  the  first  time  in  detail,  the  Derwentdale  plot  of  1663 ;  Mr. 
William  Foster  gives  a  history  of  the  India  Board,  1784-1858  ;  and  Dr.  J. 
Holland  Rose  discusses  the  mission  of  Thiers  to  the  neutral  powers  in  1870. 
Papers  by  Mr.  A.  Forbes  Sieveking  on  duelling  and  militarism,  and  by 
Professor  Claude  Jenkins  on  the  historical  manuscripts  at  Lambeth, 
conclude  the  volume.  C. 

Another  volume  of  the  Danish  Historisk  Tidsskrift  (Hagerup  :  Copen- 
hagen, 1915-17),  forming  the  sixth  of  Series  viii,  is  now  complete,  and 
contains  various  items  of  interest.  Taken  in  the  order  of  the  dates  or 
periods  to  which  they  refer,  the  principal  articles  are  the  following  : 
'  Saxo's  Chronicle  of  Valdemar  and  his  Danish  History  ',  by  Professor  K. 
Fabricius — an  important  contribution  to  the  question  of  the  order  in 
which  the  various  books  of  this  famous  work  were  written  ;  '  Some  remarks 
on  Danish  students  at  German  Universities  in  the  Middle  Ages  ',  by  Miss  E. 
Jorgensen,  who  is  steadily,  in  successive  articles,  investigating  the  older 
scholastic  links  between  Denmark  and  the  rest  of  Europe  ;  '  Older  Danish 
Sea-books  and  Charts,'  by  Professor  J.  Steenstrup  ;  '  The  After-results 
of  Element's  Rising  (in  1534),  a  contribution  to  the  history  of  the  peasant 
class  ',  by  T.  B.  Bang  ;  '  Estate  Management  in  the  second  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century  ',  by  H.  Pedersen  ;  '  Contributions  to  the  history  of 
Trade  and  Shipping  in  Denmark  and  Norway  in  1800-7  ',  by  A.  Linvald  ; 
and  '  The  diary  of  Countess  Danner  for  1853-4 ',  by  Dr.  L.  Moltesen.  Among 
the  more  important  reviews  are  those  of  Schiick's  '  History  of  the  Swedish 
People  ',  L.  Weibull's  '  Liber  Census  Daniae ',  L.  Bobe's  '  History  of  the 
Ahlefeldt  Family  ',  P.  Lauridsen's  '  When  South-Jutland  wakened ',  and 
K.  Erslev's  '  The  Augustenborg  Claims  (to  Slesvig)  '.  The  obituary  notices 
include  appreciations  of  four  prominent  Scandinavian  scholars  :  Edvard 
Holm  (died  18  May  1915),  Yngvar  Nielsen  (2  March  1916),  Johan  E.  Sars 
(26  January  1917),  and  Axel  Olrik  (17  February  1917).  This  volume  also 
includes  the  usual  lists  of  historical  literature  relating  to  Denmark  for 
the  years  1914  and  1915.  W.  A.  C. 

In  the  Bijdragen  voor  Vaderlandsche  Geschiedenis  en  Oudheidkunde, 
5th  series,  iv.  3,  4  and  v.  Miss  S.  J.  van  den  Berg  continues  her  list  of 
documents  of  interest  for  the  history  of  the  Netherlands  noticed  in  the 
appendixes  to  the  Reports  of  the  Historical  Manuscripts  Commission,  i-xv, 
from  1649  to  1795.  D. 


INDEX 

TO 

THE    THIRTY-THIRD    VOLUME 


ARTICLES,  NOTES,  AND  DOCUMENTS 


AssENDELFF,  Hugo  de,  and  others, 
Memoranda  of  :  by  P.  S.  Allen,  225 


'  Barons  '   and  '  Peers '  :    by  J.  H. 

Round,  453 
British  policy  towards  the  American 

Indians  in  the  South  :    by  C.  E. 

Carter,  37 
Bruce,  Robert,  The  rebellion  of,  in 

1306  :   by  C.  Johnson,  366 


Canute,  A  charter  of,  for  Fecamp : 

by  C.  H.  Haskins,  342 
Castle  officers  in  the  twelfth  century  : 

by  G.  Lapsley,  348 
Centuriation  in   Middlesex :     by   M. 

Sharpe,  489 
Centuriation  in  Roman  Britain  :    by 

F.  Haverfield,  289 
Chapel   Royal,    Queen    Mary's :     by 

W.  H.  Grattan  Flood.  Mus.D.,  83 


Danes,  The,  of  York  and  King  Ed- 
mund I :  by  M.  L.  R.  Beaven,  1 

Dionysius,  The  earliest  use  of  the 
Easter  cycle  of :  by  R.  L.  Poole, 
56  (cf.  431),  210 

Dominicans,  the  English,  Provincial 
priors  and  vicars  of,  1221-1916  :  by 
the  Rev.  W.  Gumbley,  243 

by  A.  G.  Little,  496 


Edmund  I,  King,  and  the  Danes  of 
York  :  by  M.  L.  R.  Beaven,  1 


Edward  II — A  political  agreement  of 
1318  :  by  E.  Salisbury,  78 

Elizabethan  act  of  uniformity,  Fines 
under  the :  by  W.  P.  M.  Kennedy, 
517 


FiiCAMP,  A  charter  of  Canute  for :  by 
C.  H.  Haskins,  342 


Hayman,  Robert,  and  the  plantation 
of  Newfoundland  :  by  G.  C.  Moore 
Smith,  21 

Hundred-Pennies,  The  :  by  Miss  E.  B. 
Demarest,  62 


Indians,  American,  in  the  south, 
British  policy  towards  the :  by 
C.  E.  Carter,  37 

Ireland,  A  letter  on  the  state  of,  in 
1797  :  by  B.  C.  Steiner,  378 


Leo  Tusctjs  :  by  C.  H.  Haskins,  492 
Lyons,  The  sources  for  the  first  council 
of,  1245  :  by  W.  E.  Lunt,  72 


Malachy,  Friar,  of  Ireland :  by 
M.  Esposito,  359 

Mary,  Queen,  The  chapel  royal  of: 
by  W.  H.  Grattan  Flood,  Mus.D.,  78 

Medici  archives.  The  :  by  E.  Arm- 
strong, 10 


566       INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY-THIRD   VOLUME 


Mercian  kings.  The  supremacy  of  the  : 

by  F.  M.  Stenton,  433 
Middlesex,   Centuriation  in  :    by  M. 

Sharpe,  489 
Morice,  William,  and  the  restoration 

of  Charles  II  :    by  Miss  M.  Coate, 

367 


Naples,      Some      sixteenth-century 

travellers  in  :  by  M.  Letts,  176 
Navy,  The,  under  Henry  VII  :    by 

Captain  C.  S.  Goldingham,  472 
Newfoundland,  li,obert  Hayman  and 

the  plantation  of  :   by  G.  C.  Moore 

Smith,  21 


Roman  Britain,  Centuriation  in  :    by 
F.  Haverfield,  289 


Sheriff,  The  office  of,  in  the  early 

Norman  period  :   by  W.  A.  Morris, 

145  (cf.  431) 
Sokemen  and  the  village  waste  :    by 

F.  M.  Stenton,  344 
Staplers,  merchant.  The  early  history 

of  the  :  by  Miss  G.  F.  Ward,  297 
Stratford  Langthorne,  Cardinal  Otto- 

boni  and  the  monastery  of  :    by 

Miss  R.  Graham,  213 
Swift  and  Stella,  The  graves  of  :    by 

the  Rev.  H.  J.  Lawlor,  89 


OsENEY,  The  Annals  of  the  abbots  of  : 
by  the  Rev.  H.  E.  Salter,  498 

Ostend  in  1587  :  by  Miss  V.  F.  Boy- 
son,  528 

Ottoboni,  Cardinal,  and  the  monastery 
of  Stratford  Langthorne  :  by  ]\Iiss 
R.  Graham,  213 


Uniformity,  Fines  under  the  Eliza- 
bethan act  of:  by  W.  P.  M. 
Kennedy,  517 


ViLLART,  Pasquale  :  by  E.  Armstrong, 
197 


*  Peers  '   and  '  barons '  :    by  J.   H. 

Round,  453 
Post,  The  secrecy  of  the  :    by  E.  R. 

Turner,  320 


Wolf,   Philip,   of   Seligenstadt :     by 
R.  L.  Poole,  500 


Roads  in  England  and  Wales  in  1603 
by  Miss  G.  Scott  Thomson,  234 


Year,  The  beginning  of  the,  in  the 
Alfredian  Chronicle  (866-87)  :  by 
M.  L.  R.  Beaven,  328 


INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY-THIRD  VOLUME       567 


LIST  OF  REVIEWS  OF  BOOKS 


Acton  {the  first  lord).  Selections  from 

the  correspondence  of ;  ed.  by  J.  N. 

Figgis  &  R.  V.  Laurence,  i,  140 
Adams    (Eleanor    N.)     Old    English 

scholarship  in  England  from  1566 

to  1800  :  by  E.  Bensly,  542 
Adams  (G.  B.)  Outline  sketch  of  English 

constitutional  history,  559 
Aeliana,  Archaeologia,  3rd  ser.,  xiv : 

by  the  Rev.  H.  E.  D.  Blakiston,  132 
Allenou  (J.)  Histoire feodale  des  marais, 

territoire  et  eglise  de  Dol :   by  J.  H. 

Round,  260 
American  Society  of  Church  History, 

Papers  of  the,  v,  431 
Anderson  (G.)  &  Subedar  (M.)  The  ex- 
pansion of  British  India,  1818-58, 

424 
Anderson  (J.  C.)  A  jubilee  history  of 

South  Canterbury,  288 
Annual  register.  The,  for  1917,  427 
Armstrong  (E.  C,  R.)  &  Lawlor  (H.  J.) 

The  Domnach  Airgid :    by  G.   H. 

Orpen,  531 


Ball    (W.     W.     Rouse)     Catnbridge. 

papers,  428 
Baptist  Historical  Society,  Transactions 

of  the,  for  1917,  430 
Barbour  (Violet)  Henry  Bennet,  earl  of 

Arlington,  137 
Bartlet  (J.  V.)  &  Carlyle  (A.  J.)  Chris- 
tianity in  history;  a  study  of  religious 

development,  417 
Bemont  (C.)  Chronique  Latine  sur  le 

premier  divorce  de  Henri  VIII,  281 
Bijdragen  voor  vaderlandsche  geschie- 

denis  en  ondheidkunde,  5th  ser.,  iv, 

3,  4,  V,  564 
Blok  (P.  J.)  Geschiedenis  eener  Hol- 

landsche  stad,  iii :   by  G.  Unwin,  405 
Bolingbroke  (viscount)  Letters  on  the 

spirit  of  patriotism  and  on  the  idea 

of  a  patriot  king,  reprint,  138 
Bray,  Henry  de,   of  Harleston,    The 

estate   book   of;    [ed.    by   Dorothy 

Willis  :  by  the  Rev.  E.  W.  Watson, 

100 

Calhoun  (A.  W.)  Social  history  of  the 
American  family,  i,  282 


Cambridge  Antiquarian  Society,  Pro- 
ceedings of  the,  Ixviii,  428 

Cambridge,  The  historical  register  of  the 
university  of;  ed.  by  J.  R.  Tanner, 
286 

Channing  (E.)  History  of  the  United 
States,  iv,  138 

Chapman  (C.  E.)  The  founding  of 
Spanish  California  (1687-1783),  137 

Cieza  de  Leon  (Pedro  de)  The  war  of 
Chupas  ;  transl.  by  Sir  C.  R.  Mark- 
ham,  560 

Coolidge  (A.  C.)  The  origins  of  the  triple 
alliance  :  by  J.  H.  Rose,  414 

Coulton  (G.  G.)  Social  life  in  Britain 
from  the  conquest  to  the  refarmation, 
419 

Creighton  (Mrs.)  Life  and  letters  of 
Thomas  Hodgkin,  284 


Dalton  (J.  N.)  the  collegiate  church  of 
Ottery  St.  Mary  :  by  the  Right  Rev. 
Bishop  Robertson,  101 

Davenport  (Frances  G.)  European 
treaties  bearing  on  the  history  of  the 
United  States  and  its  dependencies 
to  1648,  ed.  by,  421 

Dexter  (F.  B.)  Documentary  history 
of  Yale  university :  by  D.  Nichol 
Smith,  548 

Driault  (E.)  Tilsit;  France  et  Bttssic 
sous  le  premier  empire  ;  la  question  de 
Pologne  (1806-9):  by  J.  Holland 
Rose,  553 

Duguit  (L.)  The  law  and  the  state; 
transl.  by  F.  J.  de  Sloovere  :  by 
P.  V.  M.  Benecke,  415 

Duhem  (J.)  The  question  of  Alsace- 
Lorraine;  transl.  by  Mrs.  Stawell, 
425 


Edgar  (Robert)  Introduction  to  the 
history  of  Dumfries ;  ed.  by  R.  C. 
Reid  :  by  Miss  Theodora  Keith,  134 

Egerton  (H.  E.)  British  foreign  policy 
in  Europe  :   by  W.  A.  Phillips,  118 

Ely —  Vetus  liber  archidiaconi  Eliensis ; 
ed.  by  C.  L.  Feltoe  &  E.  H.  Minns  : 
by  the  Rev.  H.  E.  Salter,  533 


568      INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY -THIRD  VOLUME 


Erichsen  (B.  V.  A.)  &  Krarup  (A.) 
Dansk  historisk  bibliografi,  563 

Eybers  (G.  W.)  Sekct  constitutional 
documents  illustrating  South  African 
history,  1795-1900  :  by  H.  E.  Eger- 
ton,  555 


Ho  worth  (sir  H.  H.)  The  golden  days  of 
the  early  English  church  :  by  F.  M. 
Stenton,  255 

Hughes  (Dorothy)  Illustrations  of 
Chaucefs  England,  ed.  by,  421 


Firth  (C.  H.)  Then  and  now  ;  a  com- 
parison between  the  war  with  Napo- 
leon and  the  present  war,  285 

Flower  (C.  T.)  Public  works  in  medieval 
law,  ed.  by  :  by  J.  H.  Clapham,  105 

Fortescue  (Sir  John)  Commendation  of 
the  laws  of  England,  English  transL, 
reprint,  559 

Fortescue  (J.  W.)  History  of  the  British 
army,  viii :  by  J.  E.  Morris,  125 


Gatjdenzi  (A.)  11  monastero  di  Nonan- 

tola,  il  ducato  di  Persiceta,  e  la  chiesa 

di  Bologna,  558 
Gauvain  (A.)  V Europe  aujour  lejour, 

ii,  iii,  427 
Gerosa  (P.)  Sanf  Agostino  e  la  deca- 

denza  delV  impero  Romano,  418 
Gosses  (I.  H.)  De  rechterlijke  organisa- 

tie  van  Zeeland  in  de  middeleeuwen, 

420 
Graham  (Rose)  An  abbot  of  Vezelay, 

558 
Grotius  (Hugo)  The  freedom  of  the  seas ; 

transl.  by  R.  Van  D.  Magoffin  :   by 

E.  Bensly,  115 
Guerre,  Traite  de  la,  en  general,  new 

ed.,  283 
Gwatkin  (H.  M.)  Church  and  state  in 

England  to  the  death  of  queen  Anne  ; 

ed.  by  E.  W.  Watson  :  by  the  Rev. 

W.  Hunt,  94 


Haring  (C.  H.)  Trade  and  nuvigatioii 

between  Spain  and  the  Indies  in  the 

time  of  the  Hapsburgs :    by  F.  A. 

Kirkpatrick,  539 
Haskins  (C.  H.)  Norman  institutions: 

by  J.  Tait,  388 
Hearnshaw  (F.  J.  C.)  Main  currents  of 

European  history,  1815-1915,  139 
Historical  Society,  Royal,  Transactions 

of  the,  3rd  ser.,  xi,  564 
Historisk  Tidsskrift,  8th  ser.,  vi,  564 
Historit,  Tii,  viii,  282 
Holinshed's  Chronicles;    Richard  II 

and  Henry  V;  ed.  by  H.  S.  Wallace, 

422 


Ibarra  y  Rodriguez  (E.)  Documentos 
de  asunto  economico  correspondientes 
al  reinado  de  los  reyes  catolicos,  ed. 
by,  559 

Inquisitions,  miscellaneous  (chancery) 
Calendar  of,  i,  ii :  by  J.  H.  Round, 
395 

Irish  Academy,  Proceedings  of  the 
Royal,  xxxiii  (c),  143 


Japikse  (N.)  Waardeering  van  Johan 

De  Witt,  560 
Jastrow  (M.)  The  war  and  the  Bagdad 

railway,  426 
Jenkinson  (W.)  London  churches  before 

the  great  fire,  428 
Jessurun  (J.  S.)  Kiliaen  van  Rensselaer 

van  1623  tot  1626,  282 
Jeudwine   (J.    W.)    Tort,   crime,   and 

police  in  mediaeval  Britain,  142 
Jorga  (N.)  Notes  et  extraits  pour  servir 

a  Vhistoire  des  croisades  au  XV^ 

Steele,  iv,  v  [1453-1500]  :    by  the 

Rev.  J.  P.  Whitney,  108 


King's  mirror.  The  [Konungs  Skugg- 
sja)  ;  transl.  by  L.  M.  Larson,  419 

Klein  (A.  J.)  Intolerance  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth  :  by  the  Rev.  W.  H.  Frere, 
113 


Laffan  (R.  G.  D.)  The  guardians  of  the 

gate,  280 
Laloy   (E.)    La   diphmatie   de   Guil- 

laume  II,  562 
La  Mantia  {G.)  La  secrezia  o  doganu  di 

Tripoli,  280 

Messina  e  le  sue  prerogative,  136 

Lancashire  quarter  session  records,  i, 

1590-1606;    ed.   by  J.   Tait:    by 

Miss  C.  A.  J.  Skeel,  545 
Larmeroux  (J.)  La  politique  exterieure 

de  V Autriche-Hongroie,  1875-1914, 

i,  426 
Laski  (H.  J.)  Studies  in  the  problem  of 

sovereignty,  142 
Legg  (J.  Wickham)  Essays  liturgical 


I 


INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY-THIRD  VOLUME       569 


Liberate  rolls.  Calendar  of  the,  Henry 
III,  i,  1226-40  :   by  A.  G.  Little,  98 

Lincoln  Record  Society  'publications  for 
1917,  286 

Little  (A.  G.)  Studies  in  English  Fran- 
ciscan history  :  by  J.  P.  Gilson,  266 

London  topographical  record,  xi,  287 

Lucas  (Sir  C.  P.)  The  beginning  of 
English  overseas  enterprise:  by  G. 
Unwin,  275 


McCabe  (J.)  Crises  in  the  history  of  the 

papacy,  418 
Magna  Carta  commemoration  essays; 

ed.  by  H.  E.  Maiden  :    by  J.  Tait, 

261 
Maxwell  (Sir  H.)  The  Lowland  Scots 

regiments ;    their  origin,   character, 

and  services,  ed.  by  :  by  R.  S.  Rait, 

546 
Means  (P.  A.)  History  of  the  Spanish 

conquest  of  Yucatan  and  of  the  Itzas, 

421 
Mierow   (C.    C.)   Description  of  MS. 

Garrett  Dep.   1450,  Princeton   Uni- 

versity  Library,  279 
Monckton  Jones  (M.  E.)  Warren  Has- 
tings in  Bengal,  1772-4  :    by  P.  E. 

Roberts,  551 
Moore  (Edward)  Studies  in  Dante,  iv  : 

by  W.  P.  Ker,  267 


Otero  (J.  P.)  La  revolution  Argentine, 
1810-16:     by  F.   A.   Kirkpatrick, 

408 


Paetow  (L.  J.)  Guide  to  the  study  of 

medieval  history  :   by  C,  W.  Previte 

Orton,  385 
Panella  (A.)  GliMudi storici  in  Toscana 

net  secolo  xix :    by  E.  Armstrong, 

120 
Pease  (T.  C.)  The  leveller  movement, 

136 
Perivier  (A.)  Napoleon  journaliste,  561 
Perroud  (C)  La  proscription  des  Giron- 

dins,  283 
Philippe- Auguste,  Recueil  des  actes  de, 

i,  1179-94  ;  ed.  by  H.  L.  Delaborde  : 

by  F.  M.  Powicke,  392 
Picavet  (F.)  Hypostases  Plotiniennes  et 

Trinite,  Chretienne,  557 
Pipe  roll  of  33  Henry  II,  280 
Pitman  (F.  W.)  The  development  of  the 

British  West  Indies,  1700-63  :    by 

H.  E.  Egerton,  406 


Pittard  (E.)  La  Roumanie,  278 

Pontissara,  Johannis  de,  Registrum, 
1282-1304,  ii-v  ;  ed.  by  C.  Deedes  : 
by  Miss  H.  Johnstone,  535 

Poole  (R.  L.)  Benedict  IX  and  Gre- 
gory VI,  278 

Pope  (R.  M.)  Introduction  to  early 
church  history,  277 

Porter  (Robert  P.)  Japan  ;  the  rise  of 
a  modern  power,  424 

Postgate  (J.  P.)  Lu/xtni  de  bello  civili 
liber  viii,  277 

Powell  (C.  L.)  English  domestic  rela- 
tions, 1487-1653  ;  a  study  of  matri- 
mony and  family  life  as  revealed  by 
the  literature,  law,  and  history  of  the 
period  :   by  A.  F.  Pollard,  109 

Prestage  (E.)  0  conde  de  Castelmelhor 
e  a  retrocessdo  de  Tanger  a  Porttvgal 
423 


Reid  (H.  M.  B.)  The  divinity  princi- 
pals of  the  university  of  Glasgow, 
1545-1654:  by  the  Rev.  H.  A. 
Wilson,  274 

Renaudet  (A.  )Prere/orme  et  humanism 
a  Paris  pendant  les  premiers  guerres 
d' Italic  [1494-1517]  :  by  P.  S.  Allen, 
112 

Riddell  (W.  R.)  The  constitution  of 
Canada  in  its  history  and  practical 
working,  285 

Robinson  (C.  H.)  The  conversion  of 
Europe,  557 

Rott  (£.)  Histoire  de  la  representation 
diplomatique  de  la  France  aupres  des 
cantons  Suisses,  vi,  423 

Rousseau  (Jean  Jacques)  Le  contrat 
social ;  ed,  by  C.  E.  Vaughan,  561 


Salter  (H.  E.)  Cartulary  of  the  hospi- 
tal of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  Oxford, 
iii,  287 

Scotland,  Accounts  of  the  lord  high 
treasurer  of,  xi,  1559-66  ;  ed.  by 
Sir  J.  B.  Paul :  by  R.  S.  Rait,  403 

Smith  (V.  A.)  Akbar,  the  great  Mogul : 
by  T.  W.  Arnold,  272 

Spofford,  Thome,  Registrum  ;  ed.  by 
A.  T.  Bannister  :  by  C.  L.  Kings - 
ford,  271 

Staffordshire,  Collections  for  a  history 
of  (William  Salt  Society),  for  1916, 
429 

Statesman's  year-book,  for  1918,  562 

Stern  (A.i)  Oeschichte  Europas  von  1848 
his  1871,  i :  by  Sir  A.  W.  Ward,  126 


570       INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY-THIRD  VOLUME 


Summers  (F.  H.)  The  ancient  earth- 
works of  the  New  Forest,  287 

Swete  (H.  B.)  Essays  on  the  early 
history  of  the  church  and  the  ministry y 
ed.  by  :  by  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop 
Robertson,  382 


Thoreshy  Society,  Publications  of  the, 

for  1915  and  1916,  286 
Tout  (T.  F. )  Mediaeval  town-planning, 

136 
Treat   (P.    J.)    The  early  diplomatic 

relations  between  the   United  States 

and  Japan  (1853-65) :  by  the  Right 

Hon.  Sir  E.  Satow,  130 
Treaties,  The  great  European,  of  the 

nineteenth  century  ;  ed.  by  Sir  A.  H. 

Oakes  &   R.    B.   Mowat :     by   the 

Right  Hon.  Sir  E.  Satow,  410 
Trotter  (L.  J.)  A  history  of  India  from 

the  earliest  times  to  the  present  day, 

3rd  ed.,  144 


United  Provinces  (India),  Journal  of 
the  Historical  Society  of  the,  \,  430 

United  States  of  America — The 
declaration  of  independence,  the 
articles  of  confederation,  and  the 
constitutionof  the  United  States  ;  ed. 
by  J.  B.  Scott,  561 


Unwin  (G.)  Finance  and  trade  under 
Edward  III,  ed.  by  :  bv  C.  Johnson, 
537 


Veneto,  Nuovo  archivio,  144 
Vernier  (J.  J.)  Charles  de  Vabbaye  rf« 

JumAeges,  135 
Vrieland  (H.),  jr.,  Hugo  Grotius,  422 


Wallace  (D.  D.)  The  government  of 

England,  563 
Ward  (Sir  A.  W.)  &  Wilkinson  (S.) 

Germany,  1815-1900,  ii,  284 
Warren-Adams    letters,    i,     1743-77  : 

by  E.  A.  Benians,  549 
Wiener   (L.)    Contributions   toward   a 

history  of  Arabico-Gothic  culture  :  by 

H.  Bradley,  252 
Williams  (L.  F.  R.)  History  of  the  abbey 

of  St.  Albans  :  by  C.  Johnson,  96 


Yakchitch  (G.)  IJ  Europe  et  la  resur- 
rection de  la  Serbie  [1804-34]  :  by 
W.  Miller,  123 

Year-books  of  Edward  77,  xii  (1312) ; 
ed.  by  W.  C.  Bolland  :  by  T.  F. 
Tout,  401 

Yule  (Sir  Henry)  Cathay  and  the  way 
thither  ;  ed.  by  H.  Cordier  :  by  the 
Rev.  D.  S.  MargoUouth,  268 


INDEX  TO  THE  THIBTY-THIRD  VOLUME       571 


LIST  OF  WRITERS 


Allen,  P.  S.,  109,  225 
Armstrong,  E.,  F.B.A.,  10,  120,  197 
Arnold,  T.  W.,  C.I.E.,  Litt.D.,  272 


Johnson,  Charles,  96,  366,  537 
Johnstone,  Miss  Hilda,  535 


Beaven,  Murray  L.  R.,  1,  328 

Benecke,  P.  V.  M.,  415 

Benians,  E.  A.,  549 

Bensly,  Professor  Edward,  115,  547 

Blakiston,  the  Rev.  H.  E.  D.,  D.D., 

President  of  Trinity  College,  Oxford, 

132 
Boyson,  Miss  V.  F.,  528 
Bradley,  Henry,  D.Litt.,  F.B.A.,  252 


Carter,  Clarence  E.,  37 
Clapham,  J.  H.,  Litt.D.,  105 
Coate,  Miss  Mary,  367 


Keith,  Miss  Theodora,  134 
Kennedy,  Professor  W.  P.  M.,  517 
Ker,  Professor  W.  P.,  LL.D.,  F.B.A., 

267 
Kingsford,  Charles  Lethbridge,  271 
Kirkpatrick,  F.  A.,  408,  539 


Lapsley,  Gaillard,  Ph.D.,  348 
Lawlor,   the    Rev.    Professor   H.    J., 

D.D.,  Litt.D.,  89 
Letts,  Malcolm,  176 
Little,  A.  G.,  98,  496 
Lunt,  Professor  W.  E.,  Ph.D.,  72 


Demarest,  Miss  E.  B.,  62 


Egerton,  Professor  H.  E.,  406,  555 
Esposito,  M.,  359 


Flood,  W.  H.  Grattan,  Mus.D.,  83 
Frere,  the  Rev.  W.  H.,  D.D.,  113 


Gilson,  J.  P.,  266 

Goldingham,  Captain  C.  S.,  R.M.L.L 

472 
Graham,  JMiss  Rose,  213 
Gumbley,  the  Rev.  W.,  O.P.,  243 


Haskins,   Professor   C.    H.,   Litt.D., 

342,  492 
Haverfield,     Professor     F.,     LL.D. 
I  F.B.A.,  289 


Mabgoliouth,  the  Rev.  D.  S.,  D.Litt., 

F.B.A.,  268 
Miller,  William,  123 
Morris,  J.  E.,  D.Litt.,  125 
Morris,  W.  A.,  145 


Nichol  Smith,  D.,  549 


Orpen,  Goddard  H.,  531 
Orton,  C.  W.  Previte,  385 


Phillips,  Professor  W.  Alison,  118 
Pollard,  Professor  A.  F.,  Litt.D.,  109 
Poole,  Reginald  L.,  LL.D.,  Litt.D., 

F.B.A.,  56,  210,  500 
Powicke,  Professor  F.  M.,  392 


Rait,  Professor  R.  S.,  403,  546 
Roberts,  P.  E.,  551 


572       INDEX  TO  THE  THIRTY-THIRD  VOLUME 


Robertson,  the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  A., 

D.D.,  101,  382 
Rose,  J.  Holland,  Litt.D.,  414,  553 
Round,  J.  H.,  LL.D.,  260,  395,  453 


Tait,  Professor  James,  261,  388 
Thomson,  Miss  Gladys  Scott,  234 
Tout,  Professor  T.  R,  F.B.A.,  401 
Turner,  Professor  Edward  Raymond, 
Ph.D.,  320 


Salisbury,  Edward,  78 
Salter,  the  Rev.  H.  E.,  498,  533 
Satow,  the  Right  Hon.   Sir  Ernest, 

G.C.M.G.,  D.C.L.,  130,  410 
Sharpe,  Montagu,  489 
Skeel,  Miss    Caroline  A.   J.,   D.Lit., 

545 
Smith,  G.  C.  Moore,  Litt.D.,  21 
Steiner,  Bernard  C,  Ph.D.,  378 
Stenton,  Professor  F.  M.,  255,  344, 

433 


Unwin,  Professor  George,  275,  405 

Ward,  Sir  A.  W.,  LL.D.,  Litt.D., 
F.B.A.,  Master  of  Peterhouse,  Cam- 
bridge, 126 

Ward,  Miss  Grace  Faulkner,  297 

Watson,  the  Rev.  Professor  E.  W., 
D.D.,  100 

Whitney,  the  Rev.  J.  P.,  D.C.L.,  108 

Wilson,  the  Rev.  H.  A.,  274 


BINDING  SECT.       APR  2  01982 


The  English  historical 
review 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY