See other formats

Full text of "Studies in English official historical documents"

STUDIES 

IN 

ENGLISH OFFICIAL 
HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 



CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
C. F. CLAY, MANAGER. 
: FETTER LANE, E.C. 
100, PRINCES STREET. 




l,etp>ifl: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 

Berlin: A. ASHER AND CO. 

ifttto Hork : G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS. 

Bombag anto Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. 



[All Rights reserved} 



STUDIES 

IN 

ENGLISH OFFICIAL; . 

HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 



BY 
HUBERT HALL, F.S.A. 

OF H.M. PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE 
READER IN PALAEOGRAPHY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 



CAMBRIDGE : 

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 

1908 




CD 
fr5 

\\3 



CamfariDgt : 

PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 



PREFACE 

AMONGST the numerous works which have dealt, at different 
-/~x times, with the history of the Public Records and with the 
description of their nature or uses, it is scarcely surprising that the 
great majority are due to the professional zeal of native archivists 1 . 
We should also be prepared to find that, with several important 
exceptions 2 , these works have been produced by private and not by 
official enterprise. The bibliography of this class of antiquarian 
literature is, indeed, extensive 3 , and includes, besides the elementary 
essays of i6th and i/th century official antiquaries, several valuable 
works produced during the Victorian period. Moreover, during the 
last thirty years, these unofficial printed books may be supplemented 
by numerous articles and other periodical essays which are not ex- 
clusively published in antiquarian journals 4 . 

At the same time none of these published books or articles will 
be found to deal in a comprehensive manner with the several aspects 
of the national Archives which concern the historical student 9 . The 
practical Guide to the official sources does not indulge in any dis- 
quisitions upon their formulas or scripts. Similarly the hand-book 
of Palaeography is not concerned with the historical aspect of these 
documents, nor does the essay in Diplomatic deal with the principles 
of their classification. Doubtless the next few years will witness a 

1 A notable exception occurs in the case of Edward Edwards' well-known Libraries and 
Founders of Libraries (1865). This author's Synoptical Tables of the Records, produced as 
an Appendix to the above-mentioned work, was in advance of his times. The hand-book of 
Mr Walter Rye and Mr W. J. Hardy's monograph on the Rolls House, &c. are conspicuous 
in more recent times. Treatises on genealogical and other special aspects of the Records are 
not included in this consideration. * 

2 e.g. the well-known officialxM'<& by Mr S. R. Scargill-Bird replacing the Hand-book of 
F. S. Thomas. Under this head w7)u1d-be-dnciu^ed_tljfi_Jft^r/ on the Rolls Chapel and the 
Catalogue of the Public Record Office Museum by Sir H. Maxwell Lyte. 

8 Cf. C. Gross, Sources and Literature (Section 12 and /awzw). Quite recently Mr L. O. 
Pike has published a notable monograph on the Public Records. 

4 e.g. by Sir H. Maxwell Lyte, Dr Jas. Gairdner, Messrs S. R. Scargill-Bird, C. Trice 
Martin, R. A. Roberts, the late W. N. Sainsbury and W. D. Selby and several of the 
younger members of the Public Record Office Staff. 

5 An exception may perhaps be made in the case of Mr Ewald's well-known work Our 
Public Records published in 1873 and dedicated to the Master of the Rolls. This deals not 
only with the history of the official Archives at large but also with their classification and 
philological aspect. 



vi Preface 

great activity in these directions 1 , and quite recently several in- 
structive essays have appeared of which the present writer has 
unfortunately been unable to avail himself fully 2 . 

In view of the frequent discussion of the subject in the past and 
the still closer attention which it has received in our own times, the 
author of this collection of desultory studies is fully conscious of their 
many and serious defects. The question to him was not, however, 
one of personal interest, but whether, in the absence of any other 
comprehensive treatise, such a work could be helpful to British 
students and to the foreign students whose teachers have so feelingly 
lamented the dearth of scientific writings on this subject. 

The substance of the present volume was in shape more than 
ten years ago, but the author found himself unable to give an assured 
answer to this question. He had indeed already resolved to await the 
opportunity for further study and revision that only retirement from 
official life could give, when a circumstance occurred which altered his 
resolution. A laudable ambition on the part of certain students to 
produce a much needed Formula Book of official documents 3 rendered 
it desirable, for obvious reasons, that the authority for the arrange- 
ment and conclusions of that work should be forthcoming. 

For the rest, the exceptional scope in respect of date and matter 
of these single-handed labours in a three-field domain of historical 
culture may serve as some extenuation of the many defects that a 
scrutiny, made under more favourable conditions, must reveal in the 
work of every pioneer. 

The author has to express his acknowledgment of the kindness 
of his friend Professor T. F. Tout in reading the proofs, and of 
the proprietor of the Athenceum and Mr Murray in permitting him to 
reproduce in the present work a few passages that were originally 
published in the above journal and in the Quarterly Review. He is 
under many obligations to the Printers and Reader of the Cambridge 
University Press for their attention to the typographical requirements 
of very technical matter. H. H. 

August, 1908. 

1 The article on Records for the new Encyclopedia Britannica should prove of special 
value. The Palaeography of the Records is also engaging scholarly attention. Record 
officers will be responsible for each of these, whilst they will also have encouraged the 
important studies of M. E. Deprez in the Diplomatic of the Records. But Diplomatic 
enterprises of an equally important character are promised by Professor T. F. Tout, 
Mr C. Davis and Professor Haskins. 

2 Amongst others by M. L. Delisle and Dr J. H. Round, Professor C. Gross and Messrs 
L. V. Harcourt and F. M. Powicke. 

3 A Formula Book of English Official Historical Documents. Part I. Diplomatic 
Documents. Selected and transcribed by a Seminar of the London School of Economics. 
Cambridge, at the University Press, 1908. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



PART I. 

THE SOURCES OF OFFICIAL HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS. 
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF OFFICIAL SOURCES. 

Definition of Historical Sources Documents in Archives Importance to students 
of their " discovery " as Sources if preserved and accessible or published 
The " unknown quantity " in these Sources discoverable by the " Science of 
Archives " Early neglect of Records Losses of Records Documents re- 
moved from official custody The partial use of Records by historians The 
question of a British Ecole des Charles The need of a historical "concord- 
ance " to the Archives. pp. 1 12 

THE HISTORY OF THE ARCHIVES. 

(a) Records. Evidences of the custody of Records in the pre-Conquest and post- 
Conquest periods History of the ancient repositories of Records at West- 
minster at the Tower of London at the Rolls Chapel and Temple Church, 
&c. Local repositories of Records Early Record establishments Official 
abuses Projects of reform The Public Record Office Act Modern develop- 
ments Local Records. pp. 13 29 

(V) State Papers. Distinction between State Papers and Records The transition 
period under Henry VIII The king's "Study" or Library at Westminster or 
Whitehall The early custody of State Papers Sir Thomas Wilson His 
office and career Sir Joseph Williamson Reorganization of the Office during 
the 1 8th century The Collector and Transmitter The Methodizers Position 
of the Papers in Whitehall John Bruce and the new Paper Office-VThe State 
Papers placed under the custody of the Master of the Rolls transferred to the 
Rolls repository. pp. 3043 

(c) Departmental Records. Growth of the State departments before the Re- 
storation and after Effect of their vicissitudes upon the preservation of 
Archives. pp. 4352 

THE CLASSIFICATION OF ARCHIVES. 

(a) Records. Existing systems of classification A " diplomatic " classification-^ 
"Judicial Proceedings"" Ministerial Proceedings" Diplomatic Documents 
Precedent Books Miscellaneous documents acquired or deposited Advan- 
tages of a "diplomatic" classification. pp. 5360 

(b} State Papers. Their definition, as distinguished from Records and from 
Departmental Papers The Secretarial collections System of classification 
adopted by Sir T. Wilson and by Sir J. Williamson Attempted classification 



viii Contents 

by the Methodizers (1763 1800) Early official Lists of the State Papers 
The "State Paper Office List" The Public Record Office Lists Theory of 
an historical classification of the State Papers. pp. 60 70 

(c) Departmental Records. Difficulty of classifying departmental Archives 
Theory of their classification Departmental groups Modern systems of 
official classification. pp. 70 74 

THE ANALYSIS OF ARCHIVES. 

(a) Records. The historical importance of Records recognized in modern times 
Limitations of this historical source Survey of the legal Records in con- 
nexion with historical study The use of Indexes and Lists Research -forms 
for the use of students Record sources still to be explored. pp. 75 82 

(b) State Papers. Their exceptional position as a later historical source owing 
to the series of published Calendars Miscellaneous contents of these collec- 
tions Their relationship to the legal Records and departmental Archives 
Distribution of the State Papers in the ijth and i8th centuries Their relative 
extent in official or private custody. pp. 82 89 

(c) Departmental Records. Difficulties of study due to the obscurity of 
their official history also to their unequal preservation and to official 
restrictions Characteristics of the several classes In-Letters Registers 
Minutes Reference Books Reports Out-Letters Letter-Books Warrants, 
Commissions, Orders and Instructions Precedent Books Miscellaneous or 
deposited documents The use of "Blue-Books" and other printed sources. 

pp. 89100 

THE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ENGLISH OFFICIAL HISTORICAL 
DOCUMENTS. 

Neglect of the subject of Archives in this country Classification of the existing 
Bibliography Features of the Bibliography of mediaeval Records of later 
legal Records, State Papers and Departmental Records Foreign and Colonial 
publications relating to British Archives Classification of the Bibliography 
of Archives Bibliography of Bibliographies Treatises on Archives Lists 
and Indexes Calendars Texts and Reproductions Original Compositions. 

pp. 101110 
APPENDIX I. 

A. Table showing the Evolution of the Public Record Office. p. HI 

B. Metropolitan Record Repositories (showing the distribution of the Records 
before the Public Record Office Act of 1838). pp. 112114 

C. Repositories of Welsh Records (before the removal of the Records to London 
>n 1854). p. 115 

D. Existing Repositories of legal Records. pp. H5, H6 

E. List of existing Repositories of legal Records, additional to the Public Record 
Office - pp. 117, 118 

F. Chronology of the Custody of Official Records. pp. 118120 

APPENDIX II. Chronology of the custody of the State Papers. pp. 121, 122 



Contents ix 

APPENDIX III. 

A. List of Public Departments whose historical Records (including those of 
abolished Offices under their jurisdiction) have been mainly transferred to 
the Public Record Office. pp. 123127 

B. List of Public Departments whose historical Records have not yet been 
transferred to the Public Record Office or only partially transferred. 

pp. 127, 128 
APPENDIX IV. 

A. Outline of the existing or proprietary Classification of the Records in the 
custody of the Master of the Rolls. pp. 129, 130 

B. A structural Classification of Records. pp. 130, 131 

APPENDIX V. 

A. Outline of the Classification of the State Papers, c. 1545. p. 132 

B. Outline of Sir Thomas Wilson's Classification of the State Papers, 1619 
1629. pp. 132, 133 

C. Outline of Sir Joseph Williamson's Classification of the State Papers [1682]. 

p. 133 

D. Outline of the Classification of the State Papers by the Methodizers, 1764 
1800. pp. 134, 135 

E. Outline of the State Paper Office Classification, 18481862. pp. 135, 136 

F. Outline of the Departmental Classification of the State Papers, 1873 1889. 

pp. 136, 137 

G. A structural Classification of the State Papers. p. 138 
H. Heads of a Proprietary Classification of the State Papers. pp. 138 140 
APPENDIX VI. The Classification of Departmental Records. pp. 141143 

APPENDIX VII. Specimen Research Form for a Historical Subject in various 
Official Sources. pp. 144146 

APPENDIX VIII. The several references to the State Papers of a single year (1697) 
remaining in official custody. pp. 147, 148 

APPENDIX IX. Outline of the principal sources from which the Departmental 
Records in official custody might be supplemented. p. 149 

APPENDIX X. Outline of the Bibliography of Official Historical Documents. 

pp. 150153 

PART II. 
THE DIPLOMATIC OF OFFICIAL HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS. 

INTRODUCTION TO THE DIPLOMATIC STUDY 
OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS. 

Causes of the neglect of the study of Diplomatic in this country Its recent 
progress The deficient "apparatus" Importance of the subject for the study 
of Palaeography Not specially treated of by foreign authors Value of the 
existing teaching Recognition of diplomatic formulas of legal Records- 
Limitations of the following essays. PP- 157162 



Contents 



THE ANGLO-SAXON CHARTERS. 

(a) The Old English Chancery. No mention of any official establishment before 
the Conquest with the exception of certain so-called " Chancellors " The 
position of these examined Possible allusions in charter formulas Absence 
of a royal seal The " Great Seals " of the Confessor examined The non-use 
of pre-Conquest seals recognized by mediaeval writers Continental analogies 
Conclusion as to the nature of pre-Conquest sealing No provision for the 
custody of royal Acts before the I2th century No class of professional writers 
known to exist Charters probably " home-made " by the churches. 

pp. 163177 

(6) Old English Diplomata. Chiefly known to us from printed Codices Their 
fitful preservation and unequal distribution Possible deductions from these 
circumstances Composition of the Codex examined- Question of the credi- 
bility of the Anglo-Saxon Charters Tests to be applied to them Their 
position in point of merit Mediaeval diplomatic criticism Motive for the 
preservation of "land-bocs" by the churches Possible connexion of this 
motive with their composition Inconsistencies of this theory Missing link 
in the practice with regard to lay grants. pp. 177 189 

(c} Old English Formulas. Obscurity of their origin Contrasted with conti- 
nental types Proposed re-arrangement The characteristic features of the 
Old English Formulas Survey of these Formulas between the 7th and nth 
centuries with special reference to the reign of Athelstan Appearance of a 
new type of diplomatic instrument The Old English Writ The resemblance 
to continental diplomata Its distinctive Formulas Possible derivation from 
the Old English " Convention." pp. 189207 



ANGLO-NORMAN CHARTERS AND WRITS. 

(a) Anglo-Saxon survivals. Analogy between the pre-Conquest and post-Con- 
quest Writs and Charters English and Latin "Versions" Confusion between 
"Charters" and "Writs" Bi-lingual Charters Evolution of a "new-model" 
Charter. pp. 208- 211 

(6) The Anglo-Norman Charter and Writ. Distinction between " Charters " and 
"Writs" Use of the Anglo-Norman Writ Development of diplomatic instru- 
ments, pp. 211214 

(c) The Anglo-Norman Diplomatic Apparatus. The post-Conquest Chancery 
and Camera Anglo-Norman Charters Methods of study Attachment of 
the seal How the parchment was cut. pp. 215219 

(d) Anglo-Norman Diplomatic Formulas. The Writ formulas Their influence 
on Charter formulas Evolution of the Writ-Charter Its formulas derived 
from vernacular Writs. pp. 219 222 

(e) Special Charter Forms. The post-Conquest Charter adapted to special 
purposes Grants in " Free alms " Grants of Office Grants of Markets and 
Fairs Forest Charters and " Assart " Writs Grants of Warren Distinctive 
features of the above specialized types Charters of Liberties Interpolations 
facilitated by recurring introits. pp. 222 224 



Contents 



XI 



(/) Private Charters and Deeds. More numerous than royal instruments in the 
post-Conquest period Characteristic Formulas of Charters of Feoffment and 
Confirmations Charters of Foundation and Frankalmoigne "Concords" or 
"Conventions" and Bonds Quit-claims, Releases or Surrenders Charters of 
Attornment The above not to be regarded as official instruments. 

pp. 225, 226 

LATER CHARTERS AND DIPLOMATIC INSTRUMENTS. 

(a) The English Chancery from the \~$th to the i6th century. Difficulties of 
study The Chancery at the beginning of the I3th century The Curia Regis, 
Exchequer, King's Chapel, Camera, Wardrobe and Council Chancery enrol- 
ments Estreats and Memoranda The significance of per The several 
series of Chancery Rolls Special enrolments The confused nomenclature 
of diplomatic instruments A remedy proposed. pp. 227235 

(b) Charters and Confirmations. Transition from the 1 2th century "Writ-Charter" 
to the "conventional Charter" of the I3th century Later modifications of its 
formulas Its functions usurped by Letters Patent The distinctive formulas 
of Charters and Patents Origin of royal Confirmations of earlier Charters 
Simplicity of the earlier forms Innovations during the minority of Henry III 
Analogy between the Inspeximus and the Vidimus Transition to the 
conventional Inspeximus The Inspeximus by Letters Patent The Exemplifi- 
cation, Constat and Innotesdmus Semi-official instruments based upon 
private instruments utilized by the Crown in the interests of the new State- 
craft Conveyances and Contracts Certificates Petitions Other types of 
private instruments used in the business of the State Conventions, Oaths, 
Fines and Recognizances; Affidavits, Mainprises and "Statutes Merchant"; 
official Certificates "Statutes Merchant" and "Statutes Staple" Significavits 
"Institutions" Petitions, Specifications, Parliamentary Proxies, Pensions 
and Corrodies. pp. 235248 

(c) Writs under the Great Seal. Evolution of the old "Executive Writ" The 
Writ and Returns of 1166 The same procedure followed in the I3th century 
Legal writs differentiated from this form Derivation of the term Letters 
Patent The formula Teste me ipso or Teste Rege Distinctive Formulas of 
Letters Patent Evolution of the conventional Formulas The enrolment of 
Letters Patent Their diplomatic nomenclature Later developments Ano- 
malous forms "Versions" in French The use of Latin or English in the 
composition of later Letters Patent The position of Letters Close Their 
distinctive Formulas Their official use Alternative Formulas of Letters 
Close shown in a Table The later history of Letters Patent and Close 
Letters or Writs under the Great Seal for special purposes Fiscal Writs 
Instruments relating to Ecclesiastical, Parliamentary and Military business 
Legal Writs enrolled in the Chancery Tendency towards the disuse of the 
Great Seal and the official use of the Smaller Seals and Sign Manual 
Notarial instruments under the Great Seal connected with the business of the 
Ecclesiastical and Admiralty Courts and the proceedings of Parliament. 

pp. 249-258 

(d) Instruments under the Smaller Seals (Missives). Origin of the use of a 
Smaller Seal by English kings The Privy Seal Personal Seals occasionally 
substituted for the Great Seal Distinction between Missives and Warrants 



xii Contents 

for Issue Early use of the Privy Seal to authenticate royal instruments Its 
early connexion with business of State transacted in the Exchequer or Ward- 
robe Convenience of the use of a Smaller Seal Formulas and language 
of these Missives Letters of Privy Seal Methods of affixing the Privy Seal 
or "Secret" Seal Dimensions of Privy Seals The Signet Its description 
and use Signet Letters Their character and Formulas Dormant Writs 
of Privy Seal Sign Manual Warrants Their characteristic Formulas 
Proclamations Their exceptional character. pp. 258 263 

(e) Warrants for Issue. How distinguished from Missives under the Smaller 
Seals and Sign Manual Distinction between Bills and Writs or Letters 
Origin of Chancery Warrants Irregularity of the early procedure Normal 
procedure during the I4th and I5th centuries Variations in practice 
Formulas of the Warrants Their tri-Iingual form The Fiat Departmental 
Warrants Neglect of the conventional procedure previous to the Act of 1535 
Objects of this Act Its effect Later procedure Departmental Docquets 
The use of " Immediate Warrants " and " Signed Bills." pp. 263269 

LETTERS, STATE PAPERS AND DEPARTMENTAL INSTRUMENTS. 

(a) Mediaeval and Modern Official letters. Transition from Diplomatic to 
Epistolary forms The early use of an Epistolary style Origin of the 
vernacular Letter Versions of earlier forms Evolution of the mediaeval 
Letter Changes of style between the I3th and I5th centuries Formulas 
and phraseology of the official Letter Later uses of the tri-lingual style. 

pp. 270274 

(b) Secretarial Instruments. Difficulty of distinguishing between later Diplo- 
matic and Secretarial instruments Transfer of State business from the 
Chancery to the Secretariat Diplomatic documents preserved in the Secretary 
of State's department Formulas of later ministerial Despatches Later Signet 
Letters and Sign Manual Warrants. pp. 275, 276 

(c) Departmental Instruments. The conventional official Letter produced by 
departmental Boards Its Formulas Departmental Warrants issued by the 
Secretaries of State and Household Officers Treasury, Admiralty and War 
Office Warrants Special forms of Warrants Departmental Orders and 
Instructions Departmental Commissions Subsidiary departmental Records 
Registers, Minutes, References and-Reports. pp. 276 280 

ROYAL SURVEYS, INQUISITIONS AND ASSESSMENTS. 

(a) Agrarian Surveys. Analogy of the post-Conquest Royal Inquest with the 
Prankish capitularies especially for agrarian Surveys Other continental 
analogies Traces of Old English Surveys The Domesday Survey I2th 
century Surveys I3th century Surveys known as royal Extents Their con- 
ventional development. pp. 281 284 

(ff) Fiscal Inquisitions. Frankish analogies and diplomatic relations of the 
"Geld" Inquest and its successors The Writ, Form of Inquisition and 
Return Diplomatic descriptions of the Domesday Inquest The relations 
of the Exchequer MSS. and "satellites" of Domesday Book The Inquisitio 
Cantabrigiensis, Inquisitio Eliensis and Liber Exonice I2th century Inquisi- 
tions Breviates of Domesday Book Official and local Hidage Books 



Contents xiii 

Inquisitions for the assessment of Carucage Assessments for local taxation 
The institution of Scutage Its Diplomatic aspect Equivalent assessments 
on the Knight's Fee Aid, Tallage and Compositions for Knighthood Assess- 
ments by Tithe or Poundage. pp. 284 295 

(c) Feudal Inquisitions. Their Diplomatic construction Feudal inquests of 
serjeanties, wardships, marriages, escheats, assarts, purprestures and lunatics 
Their Diplomatic features. pp. 295 297 

(d) Statutory or Political Inquisitions. Their Constitutional and Diplomatic 
relations Administrative or remedial Inquisitions of the I2th and I3th 
centuries Connexion between the Royal Inquisition and the "Old Chapters of 
the Eyre "Relations of the "New Chapters of the Eyre" and the "Hundred 
Rolls "of 1255 The remedial Inquisitions between 1255 and 1279 Relation- 
ship of the "Hundred Rolls" of 1255, 1274 and 1279 Connexion of the 
"Hundred Rolls" with the Inquisitions Quo Warranto, De Ragemannis and 
De Ministris The devolution of the Chapters of the Eyre Later statutory 
Inquisitions " Kirkby's Quest" and the Nomina Villarum Political or puni- 
tive Inquisitions of the i3th and i4th centuries Forfeited possessions of 
Normans and Bretons, of Jews and Templars, of "rebels " (1265), "Contrariants" 
(1322), "malefactors," &c. State Trials and later Special Commissions or 
Surveys. pp. 297306 

ROYAL ACCOUNTS. 

Antiquity of official reckonings The Frankish manorial inventories Diplomatic 
features of the Account Component parts of an Account Procedure of its 
preparation Subsidiary and miscellaneous forms. ' pp. 307 310 

JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. 

(a) Judicial Records. Definition of a Record Monastic Law Reports regarded 
as prehistoric Records Pleadings in diplomatic form The antiquity of curial 
Records Isolated survivals of I2th century Records. pp. 311 314 

(b] Judicial Inquisitions. The Diplomatic aspect of judicial proceedings The 
importance of Inquisitions and Returns Difficulty of distinguishing between 
Ministerial and Judicial Inquisitions Records composed in Diplomatic form 
Coroner's and Escheator's inquests Ancient Indictments Criminal Inqui- 
sitions Presentments to the Chapters of the Eyre Pleadings on fiscal 
Inquisitions Pleadings on an Agrarian Survey Judicial Inquisitions con- 
nected with the "Hundred Rolls" Inquisition on the "Robbery of the 
Treasury" (1303) Inquisitions connected with the State Trials of 1289 91 
Coroner's Inquests Dearth of later Eyre and Assize Records. 

pp. 315321 

(c} Pleadings on Inquisitions. The Diplomatic aspect of Pleadings Connexion 
of the Original Writ with judicial developments Pleadings connected with the 
Domesday Inquest Fragments of Pleadings under Henry II The Diplo- 
matic character of "Final Concords" Pleadings on Political Inquisitions in 
the 1 3th century The Templars' Corrodies The Inquisitions De Rebellibus 
(1266) Pleadings connected with "Kirkby's Quest" (1285) The expansion 
of Pleadings from official Memoranda Later developments. 

pp. 322326 



xiv Contents 

APPENDIX I. A Classified Table of Diplomatic Instruments. pp. 327338 

APPENDIX II. Early Diplomatic Criticism. pp. 339, 340 

APPENDIX III. The Charters of King Athelstan (Concordance of Formulas) 

pp. 341346 

APPENDIX IV. Table showing the Relationship of the Pre-Conquest and Post- 
Conquest Diplomata. P- 347 

APPENDIX V. Documents connected with the Issue of the Great Seal (1662). 

p. 348 

APPENDIX VI. Fees of the Seal. p. 349 

APPENDIX VII. Note on the Bibliography of English Diplomatic, pp. 350, 351 



PART III. 
THE PALAEOGRAPHY OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS. 

INTRODUCTION TO THE PALAEOGRAPHY 
OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS. 

Importance of the study of the Origins of the Handwriting of Western Europe 
The value of Palaeography for the study of English official documents 
Methods of Palaeographical study. pp. 355359 

PALAEOGRAPHY. 

(a) Old English Writing. The origin and development of English writing 
Majuscule writing Minuscule writing Cursive writing Mixed writing 
Influence of Half-Uncial and Half-Cursive writings on the English style 
Misconceptions with regard to Cursive writing Supposed conversion of the 
Anglo-Saxon Half-Uncial hand through foreign influences The alleged 
reforms of Alfred the Great Insufficiency of evidence for this Anglo-French 
writing in the loth and nth centuries Influence of the Anglo-Saxon school 
abroad explained by French scholars The predominance of vernacular writs 
in the nth century Possibility of a native reform of angular script 
Conclusion. pp. 360365 

(If) Mediaeval Writing in Latin. Influence of the Franco-Roman and "elegant 
Saxon" writings in the nth century Characteristics of I2th century official 
writing The writing of I3th century Rolls and Registers Appearance of 
Gothic writing "Clubbed" strokes and "Bows" Half-Cursive Gothic Later 
official writing. pp. 365368 

(c) Mediaeval Writing in Old French. Linguistic difficulties The orthography 
of Old French Contractions Versions. pp. 368, 369 

(d) Later Official Writing. Changes in the character of mediaeval writing 
Revival of Calligraphy in the i5th century Use of the vernacular Cursive 
Artificial writings "Court-hand" "Chancery" hand "Secretary" hand 
"Humanist" Calligraphy Survival of Gothic forms in the vernacular Cursive 
Characteristics of i6th and i;th century vernacular writing. 

pp. 369373 



Contents xv 

(e) The Royal Scriptoriiun. Effects of the non-existence of an Old English 
Chancery The Royal Scriptorium Clerical departments Clerical perform- 
ances Clericus and Scriptor Employment of official scribes Rules of the 
Scriptorium Capacity of mediaeval scribes" Register-hand." 

pp. 374-379 

(_/) Palaeographical Terms. Distinctions between the terminology of English 
and continental MSS. Confusion caused by synonyms Technical descrip- 
tions applied to official writings. pp. 379 382 

(g) Palaeographical Tests. Difficulty of determining the date of handwriting 
Rules in use for this purpose Defects in the script Peculiarities of scribes-^- 
Causes of error The identification of modern holographs and memoranda. 

pp. 382386 

(h) Contractions. Relative prevalence of Contractions in official and literary 
MSS. General characteristics of Official Contractions Distinction between 
the compendia used in Latin and Old French MSS. Duration of Contractions 
in official writings Special forms of Contractions in Departmental Records. 

pp. 386389 

(*) Extensions. Attitude of modern scholars towards the practice of extending 
Records Advantages and disadvantages of this practice The system em- 
ployed in official publications and in the publications of Learned Societies 
The position of Historical Students Archaic typography The future of 
Facsimiles. pp. 390394 

APPENDIX I. Table showing the Evolution of English Writing. p. 395 

APPENDIX II. Classification of the Bibliography of Palaeography. 

pp. 396, 397 

TABLE OF MATTERS pp. 399404 



ERRATA. 

p. 249 note i, For " Histoire de Diplomatique," read " Manuel de Diplomatique." 
p. 189 note 7, For "Lindsay," read " Lindsey." 
p. 299 last line but one, For " reve," read " reeve." 
p. 304 1. ii, For " Rhyddlan," read " Rhuddlan." 



PART I 



THE SOURCES 

OF 

OFFICIAL HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 



INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF 
OFFICIAL SOURCES. 



A DEFINITION of the subject-matter of historical study appears 
to be both simple and desirable. But unless our phrase is very 
closely guarded, we run the risk of appearing to discuss the vexed 
definition of history at large. This is certainly not the intention of 
the present essay. It will be readily conceded that the historian 
may present any fact that bears upon the history of the human race, 
and it must follow that he may place his own interpretation on this 
fact. Though the correctness of this interpretation may be a matter 
of opinion ; even though its presentment may indicate an imperfect 
method of study, the author may be assured of a patient hearing. 
But there is one stipulation that is made by modern science that 
the historical fact shall be, as far as possible, a scientific fact. It is 
not enough that these facts shall be weighed and tested by the most 
perfect apparatus that the historian's craft has devised. Every 
possible precaution must also be taken that individual facts are not 
forthwith discredited by rebutting evidence. Now it has come to be 
accepted as a general proposition that history, or historical com- 
position, is founded upon facts that are usually derived from historical 
documents. Therefore, in connexion with historical study and the 
search for facts which it entails, our attention is forcibly directed to 
the documents which play such an important part in the whole 
matter. 

These documents, as we know, are of various aspects and of several 
eras; but we are here concerned only with the national Archives of this 
country. These, again, may be regarded, from the student's point of 
view, according as they are (i) existent or non-existent, (2) accessible 
or inaccessible, (3) printed or inedited. Of the above types it may be 
remarked that the existent and non-existent documents are equally 
an unknown quantity. 

The use of the term " Heuristic " to distinguish the method of 
discovery of the recognized sources of history from the methods of 
H. i 



2 Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

historical analysis and composition is in keeping with the marked 
tendency to treat history as a science, which has been a frequent 
subject of discussion in the present day. Whatever the value of 
such terms may be, any method that will facilitate the discovery 
of the true sources of history clearly deserves our close attention ; for 
without recourse to such a method the historian is in danger of being 
carried away by the literary impulse of his art The result of this is 
seen in the waste editions and worthless texts which lie scattered 
through our streets, the wrecks of many able enterprises upon the 
stubborn rocks of fact. 

This tendency to evade the preliminary investigations, which we 
are all agreed should be exhaustive, is probably the result of the 
necessary refinement which must be made in the definition of history 
as a science. In collecting the facts which will be used for the pur- 
pose of historical composition, we are unable, in most cases, to 
proceed by actual observation. Instead, we are compelled to infer 
the facts from the evidence of documents, and so, from the outset, 
the rigid requirements of scientific study can be dispensed with, and 
the most conscientious student is rapidly demoralized. It is in vain 
to urge that, before we proceed to analyze and use the facts that 
have been distilled from a mass of documents, it is desirable that the 
whole crop should be gathered, sorted out, and strictly accounted for. 
The man of letters who has made these quasi-scientific researches is 
naturally reluctant to spend the best years of his life in this drudgery; 
and so the documents continue to be taken more or less at random 
to supply the exigencies of each new occasion. 

Nevertheless, the mere discovery of documents connected with 
any historical period or subject can only possess an importance that 
is relative to the extent of the whole of the existing sources of 
information ; that is to say, we must not be content to assume that 
only certain sources are available ; far less are we at liberty to limit 
the scope of our researches herein at pleasure. We must examine, if 
we do not utilize, every known historical document that concerns the 
period or subject under treatment ; and we should, for the purpose of 
estimating the value of the evidence available, even take into account 
such documents as are known to have formerly existed. For the latter, 
though not necessarily capable of supplying material facts, may still 
possess a scientific value. Thus the student may have occasion to 
ascertain what documents formerly existed for a given subject, just 
as it is of importance for the study of comparative anatomy to 
ascertain the existence and construction of extinct forms. 



Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 3 

The accidental or deliberate destruction of documents is, however, 
a subject that is commonly disregarded, though it is one that is 
calculated to give rise to serious reflections. The inferences that we 
are accustomed to make from documents do not depend wholly upon 
the existing sources apart from their environment. We associate 
Master Brown with the "Third Roll "of the twelfth-century Exchequer, 
although we are ignorant of its real contents. On the other hand, 
whilst we attach a sentimental value to certain fragments of ancient 
records which we have discovered through desultory researches, we 
disregard others which would throw much light on the constitutional 
procedure of early times. A whole treatise might be written on the 
ubject of these lost sources of history, and the hypotheses that might 
>e based upon their partial evidence can be easily imagined. 

It is a commonplace that, by the loss of documents, certain 
listorical sources have been eliminated. This bare statement, how- 
ever, requires some qualification. A document is only valuable 
elatively to its importance and its unique character, and the de- 
truction of large masses of documents containing duplicate or trivial 
nformation may prove of actual benefit to the student. It is well 
cnown, indeed, that the wealth of sources for the later period of 
uropean history is viewed with some dismay by writers on historical 
method, and nothing short of a rigorous selection will enable the 
tudent to overcome this congestion of materials. But it is essential 
hat this selection should be made intelligently and with a full appre- 
iation of the requirements of posterity, whilst the arrangement of 
locuments is to be regarded as a necessary prelude to their safe 
ustody. The mere mechanical process of sorting will serve as the 
best protection against the decay which has been the fate of many 
uried treasures. Their numeration and classification will guard 
hem from wholesale spoliation or ignorant destruction as well as 
rom undeserved neglect. These administrative questions, to which 
he continental text-books attach much importance, do not directly 
oncern the historical student, except so far as they enable him to 
ippreciate the actual or potential value of the sources. In the next 
Dlace, it is necessary for him to ascertain what documents are 
iccessible and what are not, in order that he may make his dis- 
positions accordingly. 

It has been assumed by continental writers that for the most part 
listorical documents are preserved in public institutions. This as- 
-umption, however, is scarcely justified in the case of our own national 
ources. Yet their actual ownership is a small consideration to the 



4 Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

practical student, provided that the documents themselves have been 
carefully preserved and are accessible under reasonable conditions. 

Here, as in the preceding aspect of historical research, the student 
has ever been at the mercy of the forces majeures wielded by official 
bodies and lawful owners. In his negotiations with these irresponsible 
powers he will assuredly gain nothing by a clamorous insistence on 
a public right. It is true that the inherent title of the State to 
control the preservation or disposition of national documents might 
easily be vindicated. But even if the removal of official papers by 
former ministers of State could be shown to amount to a public mis- 
demeanour, a sweeping Act of Resumption could not be enforced 
without recourse to an inquisitorial process that would be not only 
costly, but also ungracious in view of the facilities afforded by many 
enlightened owners. Something has, indeed, been done during recent 
years to encourage the voluntary restitution of official documents or 
to effect their purchase when exposed for sale. Much more, however, 
is needed to secure the reversion of these documents to the nation as 
well as to render them immediately accessible to students ; for it is 
intolerable that permission to examine such documents should be 
refused, because their value for the purpose of private sale to foreign 
libraries might be depreciated. 

The further consideration as to the form in which the existing 
documentary sources are available is also to some extent connected 
with this proprietary consideration. It is well known that the chief 
agencies whereby, at different times and for distinct purposes, the 
original documentary sources were produced have been the State 
departments and the great corporations which employed a similar 
clerical method. Below these, at a considerable interval, may be 
placed the muniments of private persons, of whom some few, indeed, 
deserve special recognition as statesmen or clerks, lawyers or men 
of business ; we must not forget, too, that the literary activity that 
produced the mediaeval chronicles was largely applied to the com- 
pilation of official records and registers. Now just as the first of 
these two classes has bequeathed to us a great store of records and 
official muniments, and the other a miscellaneous mass of documents 
of varying quality, so, in the course of time, each class has concerned 
itself with the reproduction of these original sources. It is only 
natural to expect that the State should take the lead in this enter- 
prise, although it is by no means certain that this lead will be 
maintained in an age of individual activity. As yet, however, the 
disparity between the production of printed texts or abstracts of 



Introduction to the Study of Official Sotirces 5 

historical documents by the State and private owners, respectively, 
remains considerable. A keener competition will be found to proceed 
from the learned zeal of those who have no vested interests in the 
subject-matter of their labours the private workers or learned 
societies who print all documents within their reach that contain 
matter of academic interest. And so in one direction we have 
already reached the climax of the mechanical procedure which gives 
us printed Law Reports and Parliamentary Papers, by-laws and 
official forms. In another direction we still complain of an insuffi- 
ciency of printed matter in the shape of texts and inventories, which 
constitute the printed sources of history ; though in respect of com- 
mentaries of various kinds we are perhaps suffering instead from 
a plethora of materials. 

It has often been remarked that earlier historians carried out their 
preliminary researches at a great disadvantage by comparison with 
the resources of modern scholarship. The statement is obviously 
correct, although it should not be forgotten that we possess some 
exhaustive and valuable historical treatises that are based upon 
a unique series of documents. Again, some of these early texts 
must stand in the place of the original document, which is not extant 
or else is seriously mutilated. This indeed is a position that we 
have scarcely yet realized, although the realization will some day 
move the nation profoundly. On the whole, therefore, the distinction 
between the printed and inedited sources is still very real. But we 
have this advantage in dealing with the former, that it is at least 
possible to account for all the published forms which have been 
based, to a greater or less extent, upon documentary evidence. For 
this we have to thank the authors of the great historical bibliographies 
of our own time, which have far outdistanced the repertories of original 
documents actually available for permanent reference. 

But to render his investigations effective it is essential that the 
student should be able to form some conception of the unknown 
quantity in the shape of documents that he will have to reckon with. 
Certainly the most practicable means of arriving at this knowledge is 
the use of a scientific scheme of classification in which every species 
of historical document will find a place. For this purpose it is 
necessary to include at least the whole body of national documents 
in our survey, and the magnitude of this undertaking will perhaps 
explain the want of such a classified list, and the consequent defects 
of the various "Lists of Authorities" which are prefixed to most 
modern historical compilations. 



6 Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

The admitted deficiency of repertories would doubtless be regarded 
by many learned scholars as a sufficient answer to a plea for more 
strenuous methods of research. " We must wait," we shall be told, 
"until these repertories have been completed." There was a time 
when editors were accustomed to concern themselves with such 
codices only as librarians chose to lay upon their tables. That 
time has long gone by; but those editors would have been justified 
in their own generation by the want of proper facilities for their work. 

We read in the latest text-book on the " literature and sources " 
of our national history that this country unfortunately possesses no 
adequate treatise on its unrivalled archives, whereas considerable 
attention has been given to the subject abroad. The same remark 
has more recently been repeated in the official introduction to the 
admirable Report of the Treasury Committee on Local Records, but 
its full significance appears to have escaped the attention of English 
scholars. To foreigners the fact has long been known, and has 
frequently been the subject of unflattering comment. But although 
the moral which our own officials have offered for our consideration 
is sufficiently obvious, it must in justice to ourselves be remem- 
bered that even on the Continent the "science of Archives" is a 
comparatively new one. Moreover, we could point to much solid 
work accomplished by official antiquaries since the reign of Queen 
Elizabeth, while throughout the whole of the eighteenth century 
greater attention was probably paid to this subject in England than 
could be spared by the militant and evanescent states upon the 
Continent. Finally, the prodigious feat accomplished in the last 
century by the centralization and rearrangement of the Public Re- 
cords, has excited general admiration, and the merits of the modern 
official inventory or " Guide " have been gracefully acknowledged in 
many lands. Even holiday students are unconsciously imbibing the 
rudiments of the new science. The manuscript exhibits in the British 
Museum and in the Record Office Museum founded by the present 
Deputy Keeper have proved an invaluable object-lesson to the 
masses, whilst many " educated " persons are now aware that Magna 
Carta was not signed by King John with a quill-pen, and that Domes- 
day Book is not inscribed in " black-letter." 

It might be thought, therefore, that hitherto we have, on the 
whole, got on very well without a " science of Archives," and that the 
impatience of the modern student of history with the present rate of 
progress in the discovery and arrangement of sources is due to a 
failure to appreciate the conditions under which the work must in^t 



Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 7 

evitably be performed. The neglected bibliography of our own 
" archive economy " would perhaps reveal the appalling crisis through 
which we have yet scarcely passed. In the works of older antiquaries 
we have complacent references to the just appreciation of the Records 
by intelligent sovereigns as " the chiefest jewels of their crowns." In 
all times the sanctity and authority of these legal evidences have been 
admitted and maintained by every party in the State, and on occasion 
they could serve as a bond of interest to unite the whole nation in 
opposition to foreign pretensions or internal abuses, whilst their 
authority has been eagerly cited on either side in every constitutional 
crisis of the State. Yet in the face of this general recognition of the 
value of the national Records, we have the damning evidence of the 
irreparable losses which they have sustained. These were due partly 
to the personal neglect of their official custodians, and equally to the 
wanton refusal of Parliaments and ministries to adopt the simplest 
precautions for their safe keeping. The whole scheme of the custody 
and arrangement of the Records was subordinated to the exaction of 
fees by Patent officers and their needy deputies. The Repository 
became a commercial warehouse where the articles for which there 
was a ready demand were duly preserved, and even temptingly dis- 
played in official catalogues. The residue, consigned to some dusty 
attic or noisome vault, was allowed to moulder and rot unheeded. 
At length the day came when the Government ceased to haggle over 
the refitting of the lofts and cellars, the tanks and stables, which had 
become the last refuge of the greatest national treasure possessed by 
any country in the world. What was left of our national Archives 
was transferred to a central repository, and we began to count our 
losses. These were indeed heavy ; but they were not the only ones 
that had been suffered. When, after centuries of neglect, the Archives 
were to some extent arranged and catalogued, it was found that the 
injury sustained by the nation could not be measured by these gaps 
alone. In one direction the local Archives had been pillaged by 
enterprising antiquaries. In another quarter the official correspond- 
ence of the State continued to be carried off by successive ministers 
almost down to our own times, and from this private custody number- 
less documents have found their way into some great library or 
national collection. 

The results of this devolution have, on the whole, been surprisingly 
favourable from the point of view of the preservation of these sources. 
At the same time, this independent survival is attended with one great 
disadvantage to private students. The originals of these historical 



8 Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

manuscripts are often inaccessible, and they have in many cases been 
inadequately described in memoirs or reports, whilst their relationship 
with the parallel series in official custody has rarely been indicated. 
It will be evident that these grave irregularities, which were only too 
easily condoned, have thrown a heavy burden upon the modern 
archivist and student alike. The one has had to evolve order out of 
chaos, and to close the gaps which he can no longer fill up. The 
other, after he has grasped the endless intricacies of an official classifi- 
cation based on an Edwardian system, when he is at length acquainted 
with the official sources which exist for a particular episode in the 
history of the last two centuries, has still to reckon with the external 
documents which fill the gaps in the official series, or which supple- 
ment its evidence. For this purpose he must embark upon a new 
enterprise, not unlike some that will be familiar to the readers of 
a modern detective romance. He must connect a certain statesman 
or official body with the possession of these papers, and then trace 
their descent, often through numerous ramifications. Failing this, he 
must watch for their inevitable devolution to the national Archives or 
to a public library. 

For it is not enough that we should merely find and use a docu- 
ment ; we should also know its manuscript relations. By treating 
every document as a separate unit we are in danger of making " docu- 
mentary " history in a spasmodic and desultory manner. When a 
new document has been "discovered" our histories are made to 
accord with its evidence. Then another document is found, and our 
latest views must be modified, and so on, without any assurance of 
finality. These new discoveries and new views, ever shifting with the 
progress of research, are not only prejudicial to the reputation of the 
historian, but also exercise a demoralizing influence on our historical 
method. 

The above reflection is not intended to convey the vague proposal 
of an impossible ideal, or to obscure the limits of historical research 
imposed by the requirements of literary proportion. The student of 
history must of necessity be sternly practical ; but that he should 
secure himself against possible surprises would seem a measure of 
common prudence. Otherwise he would resemble a general advancing 
into the interior of an enemy's country by easy stages along a broad 
highway, leaving on either side woods and defiles unreconnoitred 
the Archives that may conceal an army of hostile facts. 

The fact is that whilst all that pertains to the ethical or philo- 
sophical consideration of historical facts or problems, to analytical and 



Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 9 

synthetic criticism, and to the auxiliary studies necessary for the 
equipment of the thinker, the worker, or the critic, has been brought 
to a high degree of perfection ; whilst time and money and still more 
precious scholarship have been lavished upon the publication and 
republication of historical texts which possess a conventional or a 
sensational interest, comparatively little attention has been paid to the 
outlying sources. In this particular instance, however, we have not 
sinned alone. The historians of every country in the past have dis- 
played a notorious lack of initiative in the discovery of materials. 
Even editors and commentators have preferred to ring the changes 
upon a few groups of famous Records or MSS., whilst bibliographers 
and cataloguers have seldom found an interest in describing or classi- 
fying documents the historical or literary value of which was not well 
established. 

There lies a famous manuscript, as sound and fresh as though this 
were the decade of its compilation. It is sumptuously bound and it is 
protected by a glass case. It has been honoured by countless sittings 
to photographers and artists, and it has been painfully transcribed by 
many generations of eager antiquaries. It has been printed and 
edited with all the skill and learning known to modern historical 
science, and, again, it has been utilized as the groundwork of many an 
original treatise, the materials of which have been selected with the 
nicest scholarship and its plan constructed by a master mind. Finally, 
the manuscript itself, its facsimiles, its transcripts, its published texts 
or commentaries, have been described and classified by archivists and 
bibliographers in many works of reference. Here we see the recogni- 
tion of a single document, but it is a process that has occupied the 
attention of several generations of scholars. As far as preliminary 
researches are concerned, the student's work is already done for him ; 
but what proportion do these edited pieces bear to the whole mass of 
historical documents ? If we sift the corn from the chaff by with- 
drawing obsolete texts and worthless inventories, the handful of grain 
is a small one. 

These instances of the disadvantages under which our archivists 
have laboured, as well as of the capricious zeal which our scholars 
have frequently displayed in the cause of historical research, are by 
no means exhaustive. But if we admit that the existing conditions 
under which that research is carried on are unsatisfactory, it naturally 
concerns us to seek for some remedy, whether it be partial or 
complete. 

Now anyone concerned with the general subject of the adminis- 



io Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

tration of our national Archives, would doubtless be able to offer us 
numerous suggestions inspired by the scientific literature which, 
as our official mentors have reminded us, is devoted to this subject 
abroad. He might, for instance, suggest the necessity for a de- 
scription of the manuscript sources of our national history, like 
that which has recently been produced in France under very able 
direction. He might urge the practical success of the foreign 
missions historiques, both public and private, as an inducement for 
attempting to produce a comprehensive inventory of historical sources 
abroad. He might endorse the recent dictum of MM. Langlois and 
Seignobos that historical MSS. are of comparatively little use to 
students outside of a public collection, or he might emulate the courage 
of these admirable authorities when they broadly hint that although an 
archivist should be the first to discover a rare document, he is, whilst 
catalogues remain on hand, the last person by whom it may be edited. 
He might still further occupy our attention with a variety of abstruse 
and purely technical subjects which are handled with consummate 
skill by foreign experts ; but it is obviously undesirable to discuss 
these administrative questions here. 

Indeed a passing reference to this matter need not have been 
made if there was not an apparent disposition in some quarters to 
regard an Ecole des Chartes, with the drastic reforms in our archive 
economy which its establishment would necessarily involve, as a 
panacea for our national shortcomings. But the continental and 
the English Archive systems have scarcely a single condition or a 
single feature in common, and we are tempted to wonder if this rudi- 
mentary fact is generally known. We have no Ministry of Public 
Instruction, no national college of professors or doctors of history, 
and no departmental Archives providing the chief employment of 
archivists. 

Surely there is no opening here for an Ecole des Chartes ; but if 
for us French science is unattainable, we can still call German learning 
to our aid. There is a middle course between the worship of fortune 
and the cult of Archives, and that leads to the plain study of sources. 
For after all what chiefly concerns the student is that he may be able 
to ascertain with speed and certainty the existence of particular 
sources, and their precise description for the purpose of reference. 
This information he will be able to obtain, in the case of printed 
sources, from the scientific bibliography which should furnish him 
with a key to every historical library. But with the exception of the 
general headings in official inventories, there exists no key to the 



Introduction to the Study of Official Sources \ i 

historical subjects respecting which information may be found 
amongst our Public Records. 

One explanation of this omission may be that the modern student 
is, comparatively speaking, a new-comer to our Archives. In former 
days these were regarded as the special province of the legal practi- 
tioner and the legal antiquary, who shared with the zealous genealo- 
gist and the laborious topographer the mercenary attentions of their 
ill-trained custpdians. Some devoted scholars there doubtless were 
whose learned monographs still excite our wonder and despair ; but 
these men were neither trained historians nor efficient archivists, 
and their historical method was necessarily limited by the meagre 
resources at their command. 

At length, some fifty years ago, the modern historian appeared 
upon the scene, as a patron of Archives, but not as yet an original 
investigator. Like the dexterous crustacean that finds a covering for 
its vulnerable parts amongst the debris of the shore, our historian 
made shift to fortify his conclusions with the derelict texts and 
calendars of the old Record Commission. Later still, his wants have 
been supplied through an enlightened official regime by faultless texts, 
exhaustive calendars, and descriptive catalogues. It is, therefore, 
scarcely surprising that the need for an historical subject-index to the 
Archives at large has been scarcely felt until our own time. But now 
the history schools of our own, and still more of foreign universities, 
have begun to send out a daily increasing army of students bent on 
exploring the innermost recesses of our Archives. The time, then, 
has surely come when some attempt must be made to bring the mere 
student into touch with the skilled archivist. Abroad, as we have 
seen, it is contrived that each should understand the technical language 
of the other ; for in default of such a system, it is scarcely reasonable 
to expect that the historical student should manifest a deep interest 
in a purely professional subject, or that the archivist should be pre- 
pared to grasp at once all the bearings of an abstruse historical thesis. 
Here, then, there seems to be room for a complementary study of the 
science of Archives which may one day furnish us with an historical 
inventory and concordance of subjects and sources. The usefulness, 
if not the necessity of such a work, will scarcely be denied, but of 
its feasibility some doubts may well be entertained. And yet the 
problem has been fairly solved by a foreign scholar in the case of our 
mediaeval printed sources. Our historical bibliography is the product 
of half a century of painful experiment, and its beginnings were suffi- 
ciently humble. This would furnish a ground-plan for such a work 



12 Introduction to the Study of Official Sources 

as we have contemplated ; for the sources that we have in view are 
but historical texts yet unpublished, and for the most part they will 
merely supplement our printed literature. The difficulty will lie in 
the concordance of technical terms with historical ideas. 

But although the harvest is so large the labourers are still few. It 
would seem that for the present we must largely rely on alien workers, 
but fortunately some of our ablest teachers have both the knowledge 
and the will to provide the preliminary instruction which facilitates 
the use of these original sources. The better equipment of our 
students from the light of our own hard-earned experience is a duty 
that we owe to ourselves and to posterity. 



THE HISTORY OF THE ARCHIVES. 



(a) Records. 

THE ancient treasury of the English kings with its multiform 
contents in the shape of money and plate, regalia, relics and records 
has been described with considerable minuteness by many generations 
of native antiquaries and the titles and duties of its custodians have 
been set forth in numerous establishments 1 . Further than this, the 
eventful transfers of records to new repositories or from one centre of 
official activity to another have been duly noted, together with the 
causes and effects of the periodical reforms in the method of their 
custody 2 . Finally, after tracing the gradual recognition, in later 
times, of the interest of the whole community in the safe-keeping 
and accessibility of the national Archives, the great transformation 
scene in the early years of the past century has been illustrated by 
a wealth of official and polemical literature 3 . 

At the same time the story of the housing of the Public Records 
is one which has given rise to few reflections and it remains without 
a moral. This circumstance, however, is of less moment than the 
loose and indefinite descriptions of the position and contents of the 
ancient record repositories of the Crown which pervade the voluminous 
official Reports on the Public Records published during the first half 
of the nineteenth century. 

After wearily turning some thousands of folio pages, the modern 
antiquary who seeks more definite information than the chance 
allusions which may be found in the official memoranda of con- 

1 Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls), pp. cclxxxviii sq., ccciii sq., cccxxxi sq.; Black 
Book of the Exchequer (Exchequer T. of R.), Vol. II. passim; Palgrave, Calendars and 
Inventories of the Excheqtter, Vol. I., Introduction ; Antiquities and Curiosities of the 
Exchequer, p. 77 sq. 

- Ibid, and Edwards, Libraries and their Founders, p. 211 sq.; Thomas, History of 
Public Departments, p. 1 1 7 sq. 

3 See below, p. 25 sq.; and C. Gross, Sources and Literature, section n. 



14 The History of the Archives 

temporary archivists, will probably find himself without any exact 
ideas upon the subject. 

Perhaps it would be impossible, at this late date, to supply the 
deficiency or to attempt a reconstruction of these early repositories 
from existing remains. Yet something more may be learnt from 
a careful examination of such notices as are still available. 

Not less than a thousand years ago, if we may believe the 
traditions of its guardians 1 , the royal treasury contained a hoard of 
records of which some few fragments have been happily preserved 
though the greater part is lost to us for ever. How far these 
traditions are borne out by the evidence of contemporary documents, 
or how far, again, they are based on forgeries or interpolations of 
a later age are questions which can only be decided by a critical 
examination of the existing texts. Taking these evidences, however, 
as they stand, we find the existence of such royal Archives positively 
asserted in several Old English charters dating from the ninth 
century 2 . 

These documentary allusions do not of course enable us to ascer- 
tain the position and nature of the collections referred to, but we can 
gather that they were preserved with the royal treasure and relics in 
charge of an official who appears in later times as the recognized 
custodian of the Public Records 3 . 

On the other hand it might perhaps be suggested that it is scarcely 
necessary to take the evidence of these early notices too seriously. 
The incidental description of an Anglo-Saxon "duke" engaged in 
researches amongst the royal Archives 4 , or of the Confessor's " Bed- 
thegn " watching over a repository of treasure and records, are 
characteristic pieces of by-play in the serious business of diplomatic 
composition. 

Doubtless there must have existed from a period long antecedent 

1 Dialogus de Scaccario, I. 14, and below, Part II. 

2 C.S. 575, preserved in the late nth century cartulary of Worcester. CD. MCCLXXXVII, 
which begins in I2th century fashion Domino meo karissimo Regi Anglorum Edgaro. CD. 
DCCCCXXXil, an Ely charter in which we read Hac scripta tripliciter consignttntur ; unum 
est apudEly; aliudin Thesaurum Regis; tertium Leojieda habet. What purports to be an 
original charter of Cnut (A.S. Foes. ill. 41) has the statement et harum brevium tria sunt ; 
unum in ecclesia Christi; alterum in monasterio Sancti Augustini ; et tertium in thesauro 
Regis cum rellquuis Sanctorum. In C.S. 421 two copies of the record of the Council at 
Kingston (A.D. 838) are ordered to be preserved by the kings present cum hereditatis eorum 
scripturis. Cf. below, Part 11. 

3 Ejusdemque scripli medietatem in gazophilacio, ubi quacunque habebat pracipua et 
prtciosa erant refosita, ab Hugulino Cubiculario suo diligenter conservari (Chron. Rames. 
p. 171). For the significance of this gazophilacium cf. Wattenbach, Schriftwesen (1871), p. 359. 

4 C.S. 575. 



The History of the Archives 15 

to the Conquest some repository for the regalia and relics which 
graced the state even of the rudest monarchy. If the existence of 
such a repository can be assumed we need look no further for 
a muniment room in which the hereditarii libri of Anglo-Saxon 
kings were deposited 1 . To these might be added later, if we could 
credit the earliest establishment of the royal treasury with definite 
official functions, such rescripts as formed the nucleus of the later 
series of Chancery enrolments 2 . This, however, is necessarily a pure 
supposition. The real significance of these legendary notices does 
not lie in their reference to particular documents which are no longer 
preserved in official custody, and which are for the most part only 
represented by later copies derived from a tainted source. They 
serve to remind us of the indisputable fact that the records of the 
State were still preserved at a considerably later date according to 
a precisely similar method. In the royal castle of Winchester and 
beneath the royal abbey of Westminster ; in the tower of Caesar and 
beside the Hall of Rufus ; in the very wardrobe and "chamber" of 
the court, which followed the king in the days when the king's house 
was prepared in many shires ; in each of these in turn the royal 
treasury would be found near to the royal presence ; for where the 
king's treasure lay, there would his heart be also 3 . 

After all, however, the evidence which exists as to the preservation 
of actual Records before the reign of the first Angevin king is some- 
what vague and inconclusive. We know indeed that the record of 
the Domesday survey was placed in the royal treasury at Winchester 
by order of the Conqueror 4 , and that it was officially referred to in 
the reign of Henry I 6 . Then there were Tallies and Pipe-rolls and 
other official instruments of the ancient Exchequer during the same 
reign 6 , and Exchequer buildings which were already ruinous in the 
middle of the century 7 . 

It is true that these references are meagre and indistinct, and that 
they are derived in some cases from secondary authorities ; but only 
twenty years later we have a graphic and circumstantial description 
of the preservation and employment of an elaborate series of fiscal 
and judicial records, which can, to a large extent, be identified with the 
existing series 8 . Even at this date, however, there does not appear 

1 Above, p. 14, n. 4. 2 Dialogus, I. xiv. 

3 Dialogus, I. vi. 4 See below, Part II. 

8 Chron. Abingdon, II. 116. Cf. J. H. Round, Feudal England, p. 143. 
8 Dialogs, I. i. and xi. ; Red Book, p. 659. 

7 Pipe Roll, i Henry II (1155), London. 

8 Dialogus, I. xiv. Cf. below, Part II. 



1 6 The History of the Archives 

to have been any repository of Records in the modern sense. This 
indeed was the characteristic feature of their custody 1 , and one which 
was equally characteristic of the custody of treasure including relics 
of intrinsic worth. Like the miser's hoard 2 these were secreted in 
many wrappings within divers uncouth receptacles, and here some 
have remained until the present day 3 . Bags and pouches, hanapers 
and skippets, filled with deeds and conventions under seal, with rolls 
and files of writs, were placed in pixes and chests, and these in turn 
were stowed away in the great arks 4 or hutches which stood in the 
ante-rooms of the treasury or chamber, to be removed on occasion 
with the coined treasure, plate, and regalia, from one administrative 
centre to another. 

It is essential for a clear perception of the nature of the divided 
custody of the State Archives, prior to the Public Record Office Act 
of 1838, to distinguish between the official jurisdictions of the several 
repositories in use from the close of the I2th century to the beginning 
of the I9th. In addition to the earliest hoarding of Records in the 
royal treasury or in any one of its branches, we find the term 
" treasury " used from the 1 3th century to denote several independent 
repositories associated with distinct classes of Records. There was 
a " treasury " of this kind in the Tower of London and " treasuries " 
of the King's Bench, of the Common Pleas and of the Receipt of the 
Exchequer within or adjoining the palace of Westminster, besides the 
ancient royal treasury in the cloisters of the Abbey 5 . 

Again there are further repositories to be accounted for, such as 
the Wardrobe, which also had its branches at the Tower and at 
Westminster, together with the royal chapels or churches (other than 
the Abbey itself) where Records were certainly deposited from a very 
early date. 

1 Literary manuscripts, on the other hand, were preserved in monastic libraries in presses 
such as are still used for private muniments. 

* The monkish satirist compares Harold to a usurer gloating over his treasure (Lives of 
Edward the Confessor (Rolls), p. 151). 

3 These have been described by Sir F. Palgrave (Calendars, <SrY., Vol. I. Preface), but 
much more accurately by Sir H. Maxwell Lyte in his Catalogue of the Museum of the 
Public Record Office (1902). 

* Archa was the nth century designation of these receptacles, and "hutch" was 
apparently the ijth century official rendering of the later term "huchea." A fine specimen, 
though of later date than the nth century, is still preserved as the so-called "Domesday 
chest" at the Public Record Office. The " Ark of the Judaism " at York conveys an even 
wider meaning, equivalent to the modern "Archives." 

8 For the archaeology of the ancient palace of Westminster and its precincts see 
Archaologia, LX. (i) p. 131 sq. and H. Hall, Court Life, p. 114 sq., and Antiquities of the 
Exchequer, ch. I. III. 



The History of the Archives 1 7 

These several repositories have been very loosely distinguished by 
ancient and modern writers alike ; but although their contents in the 
shape of Records and treasure are frequently seen to interchange 1 it 
is possible to make some important distinctions. 

In the first place, we have the central treasury found in historical 
times at Westminster and comprising the two main " treasuries " of 
the Exchequer of Receipt adjoining the Palace and the "great 
treasury" in the cloisters of the Abbey. The former of these was 
probably, in early times, merely the strong room of the Exchequer 
during the sessions of the court, becoming eventually the permanent 
receptacle of the more important Records in frequent use. The latter 
was apparently used by the Exchequer officials for the safe custody 
of the Regalia and the original instruments which might be regarded 
as the title-deeds of the crown 2 . 

Besides these two ancient treasuries at Westminster, there were, 
as we have seen, the departmental " treasuries " of the King's Bench 
and Common Pleas also situated within the Palace precincts. These 
may be regarded as mere "over-flows" of the Exchequer treasuries 
to which the judicial Records had always been consigned for pre- 
servation when handed over by the justices. 

Before the i6th century the royal treasury described by the author 
of the Dialogus had split up into four well-marked "treasuries" within 
the precincts of the Abbey and the Palace of Westminster 3 . These 
were eventually reduced to one, the chapter-house, as the older functions 
of the treasury were superseded by the "general repository" and 
" Record office " of later times. From this converted treasury the 
original diplomatic instruments of the crown with the great bulk 
of the fiscal and judicial Records were transferred to the Public 
Record office together with many of the chests and pouches in 
which they had been preserved for some 500 years. In this sense 
therefore the history of the ancient royal treasury can be traced from 
first to last ; but in another direction we have to follow out the 
gradual formation of other central repositories containing in time 
a still larger and even more important class of historical Records, 
those which were derived directly or indirectly from the Chancery of 
the English kings. 

1 The 1800 Report on the Public Records shows that a few Chancery Rolls were still 
preserved in the Chapter House whilst a considerable number of judicial records had found 
their way to the Tower. Cf. Cooper, Proposals for a General Record Office, for an account of 
the Tower Records in 1832. 

2 Palgrmve, Kalendars, I. 156. Powell's Repertorie (1631) mentions the ancient keys of 
this treasury as still preserved in the custody of the Exchequer officials. 

3 Powell, Repertorie, p. 15. 

H. 2 



1 8 The History of the Archives 

The close connexion of the Chancery of the Prankish and Norman 
kings with the royal chapel is well known 1 . In the same connexion 
we find from a very early period the Wardrobe or ante-chamber of the 
primitive Camera serving as a bureau or secretariat in which Records 
of the Chancery and Exchequer were frequently deposited for imme- 
diate use 2 . It was through this channel that a considerable portion 
of the contents of the old royal treasury was drafted into new 
repositories. But although for certain purposes of state the Wardrobe 
provided the machinery for the custody and distribution of the royal 
treasure and Records alike, the latter were presumably compiled by 
the king's clerks in the Chancery or chapel 3 . Long after the other 
courts of law had taken up a permanent habitation at Westminster, 
the Chancery continued to follow the king, so that like the king's 
court itself, in an earlier period, it was compelled to deposit the bulk 
of its Records in some central treasury. 

Here again a distinction seems to have been made between 
Records which concerned the dignity of the Crown, and those which 
were required for official use. The former were consigned to the 
" great treasury " of the Wardrobe in the Tower of London, while the 
latter were bestowed in some temporary repository, such as the 
Temple Church. The connexion of both these repositories with the 
Wardrobe can be clearly recognized and, as of old, the custody of 
Records was associated with that of treasure and regalia. Even 
as early as the reign of Edward I the Wardrobe appears to have 
had the custody of a large collection of royal plate together with 
the relics in contemporary repute 4 , and we may also suspect that 
the notices of Records in several local repositories must refer to 
temporary branches of the "removing Wardrobe." 

But although the position of these repositories of the Chancery 
Records can be identified from the reign of Edward I 6 , no attempt 
has apparently been made to locate the same class of Records in 
a still earlier period. Now a considerable mass of these Records 
must have accumulated since the reign of King John 6 and it is only 

1 Du Peyrat, Hist. EccUsiastique de la Cour ; Wattenbach, op. cit. ; Red Book of the 
Exchequer, pp. xix sq., ccciii sq. and 807 sq. ; Palgrave, Kalendars, Vol. I. xv. 

2 Red Book, p. xxi. 

8 As late as the reign of Edward III we find the Chancery clerks at work in the Church 
of St Peter at York, the court and seat of government being then at York. (Close Roll, 
7 Edw. Ill P' I. m. 3 d ; Ibid. P' II. m. 4 d). 

4 Palgrave, Kalendars, I. Appx.; Hall, Antiquities of the Exchequer, p. 28. 

6 Close Roll, 33 Edw. I m. 3. 

6 Of Chancery enrolments alone the number must have amounted to some hundreds, and 
in addition to these there was an extensive collection of writs and returns and miscellaneous 



The History of the Archives 19 

reasonable to assume that some permanent repository was provided 
for such Archives during the greater part of the I3th century. We 
know indeed from the evidence of these very Records that throughout 
the reign of John and again during the first years of the reign of 
Henry III the king's "houses" or "chambers" both in the Tower 
and in the New Temple were used for the preservation of treasure 
whilst the former was also the principal seat of the Wardrobe 1 . 
Again the Temple Church had been utilized as a branch treasury 
as early as the reign of Henry II 2 , and Chancery Records were 
certainly deposited here during the reign of Edward I. 

On the other hand there is no direct reference to the preservation 
of Records either in the Tower or the Temple before the latter reign, 
and it is by no means inconceivable that during the whole preceding 
period the Chancery Rolls were preserved in the Exchequer, where 
the fiscal work of the Chancery was transacted in the I2th century 8 , 
or in the ancient treasury within the Abbey where there was also 
a branch treasury of the Wardrobe 4 . However this may be, it is 
clear that the Chancery itself still followed the Court and that its 
Records were not regarded as a fixture as were those of the 
Exchequer. The latter were examined on occasion by the royal 
writ directing search to be made by their custodians in situ ; but 
when reference was required to the Chancery Rolls we find that they 
were usually despatched bodily to the king wherever he might be. 
The distinction is certainly significant 8 . 

documents, apart from the documents in the custody of the Clerk of the Wardrobe or the 
Keeper of the Privy Seal (cf. Foedera, I. 521). 

1 Calendar of Close Rolls John and Henry HI (Record Commission), pp. I4i b , 35 1, 450, 
508. 

2 Exchequer Receipt Roll (1185), pp. vi, 31. Cf. Pat. 9 Henry III m. 5 for the use of the 
strong-rooms of religious bodies by the Crown. In the reign of Henry III we find Hubert de 
Burgh's private treasure stored in the New Temple and seized there by the king (Matt. 
Paris, Chron. Majora, III. 232). An important political convention was executed here in 
1281 (Liber B. fol. 3O9 b ). Wat Tyler's rebels are reputed to have burnt records here. Cf. 
also Close, 20 Edw. I m. 13 d . 

8 Dialogus, I. v., vi. The diplomatic work of the Chancery was doubtless performed in 
the Camera Clericorum, which would be found in every royal palace. 

4 Above, pp. 16 and 18. Payments made during the reign of Henry III for the working 
expenses of the Chancery and Chapel occur in the same entries with payments for the 
Palace and Exchequer at Westminster (Close, 55 Hen. Ill m. 7). Madox however regards 
the separation of the two establishments as dating from the beginning of John's reign. 
Cf. Antiquities of the Exchequer, p. 83. 

8 Searches were made in the Chancery Rolls as distinguished from Exchequer Records in 
the reign of Edward II (Red Book, p. 953). Original treaties together with Papal Bulls 
appear to have been regarded as worthy of preservation with the traditional treasures of the 
realm. These instruments however properly concerned the Chancery alone. In fact it 
appears from an official memorandum in the i8th year of Edward II that the originals were 

2 2 



2O The History of the Archives 

It is in this aspect, as we have seen, that the Chancery Records 
are associated with the Wardrobe during the second half of the 
1 3th century. In another aspect the departmental activity of the 
Chancery is seen to be transferred before the close of this century to 
a new centre, the later Chapel of the Rolls, which may thus be regarded 
as superseding the old official establishment of the king's chapel at 
Westminster or elsewhere. The nature of this change is involved in 
the greatest obscurity, but it is perhaps possible to connect it with 
the financial operations of the Crown associated with the Temple and 
the strategical importance of the Tower during the civil wars of the 
period 1 . At the same time this settlement of Chancery clerks in the 
houses adjacent to the Domus Conversorum must not be regarded as a 
migration from an earlier judicial centre at Westminster, since the con- 
nexion of the Chancery itself with that palace cannot be clearly proved. 

It is certainly curious, however, that the later judicial overflows 
both of clerks and Records were in the same direction 2 . In both 
cases probably the neighbourhood of Chancery Lane was the site most 
readily available for this purpose. In any case the fact remains that 
the three modern repositories, or Record offices, situated in the Abbey 
of Westminster, the Tower and the Rolls Chapel respectively, were the 
lineal successors of mediaeval repositories on the same sites, and that 
distinct classes of Records were preserved in each of these repositories. 

From the end of the I3th century, then, we find the Chancery 
Records in current use preserved in the vicinity of the Inns of Court 
where the Chancery masters and clerks had their habitation 8 . Owing 
to the departmental character of the business of this Court, the 
custody of writs and returns, petitions and pleadings, was naturally 
assumed by particular clerks or groups of clerks. Probably the line 
which divided the king's clerks from a college of notaries and the 
latter in turn from a corporation of cursitors was not very sharply 
drawn in the I4th century 4 . Thus the successors of the clerks who 

allowed to accumulate in the hands of the king's clerks before they were transmitted to the 
Exchequer Treasury (Red Book, p. 1042). Cf. also Palgrave, Calendars, I. 2. 

1 The New Temple was accessible both from the Tower and Westminster by water. 
The House of the Friars Minor in Chancery Lane was another repository of bonds connected 
with these financial transactions in which the City merchants were subsequently concerned 
and which were entirely managed by the Chancery and Wardrobe. There was also in the 
1 3th century a close connexion between the king's clerks and the Church of St Paul's. 

1 Cf. Appendix n. 

8 For the history of the clerical settlement in Chancery Lane see G. J. Turner, 
Lincoln's Inn. 

4 The famous dictum of Matthew Paris Ars notaria non habetur in Angliamust 
certainly be discounted before the close of the Middle Ages. 



The History of the Archives 2 1 

dwelt about the Chapel of the Rolls in the I3th century were still 
found there in the ipth with current Records in their private custody 1 . 
But as these Records accumulated it must have been found desirable 
from a very early date to collect the more important classes in a local 
repository where they could be readily accessible 2 . 

Now the Chapel, of the Domus Conversorum, a familiar landmark 
even in the time of Matthew Paris, served this purpose admirably. 
From the year 1307 we can date the long succession of Chancery 
clerks who were at once keepers of the Domus Conversorum and of 
the Rolls of Chancery 3 , both of those preserved in the Chapel of the 
Rolls and of those from time to time transferred to the Tower. 

This assimilation of the offices of Keeper of the Converts and 
Master of the Rolls was formally completed in the year 1377*. 

We are indeed assured by older antiquaries 5 that the Master of 
the Rolls was charged with the custody of the Chancery Rolls dating 
from the reign of Richard III, the earlier rolls being preserved in the 
Tower, which thus served as the ultimate repository of the Chancery 
Records. To this repository transmissions were made between the 
reigns of Edward III and Richard III', but in course of time these 
Records were placed in the custody of a separate keeper, and a fierce 
dispute was carried on in the i6th century between the latter and the 
Master of the Rolls with regard to their respective jurisdictions 7 . 

The history of the provincial repositories of Records is a subject 
which properly belongs to the department of the local historian. It 
is possible indeed to trace the more important transfers of the Records 
from one strong-place to another since the reign of Henry II. With 

1 1800 Report of the Commissioners of Public Records; Red Book of Exchequer, p. 1042. 

2 Searches made by the Keeper of the Rolls for departmental purposes are referred to as 
early as the i9th year of Edward II (Red Book, p. 956). 

3 Adam de Osgodeby, who had been appointed Master of the Rolls in 1195, was made 
Keeper of the House of Converts in 1307. The two offices may have been held togethtr from 
a still earlier date. 

4 Pat. 51 Edw. Ill m. 20. For the history of the Rolls Chapel see the accounts by 
Sir H. Maxwell Lyte in the Fifty-seventh Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records 
and by Mr W. J. Hardy in Middlesex &c. Notes and Queries, II. 49. 

8 Powell, Repertorie of Records, p. 5. 

6 Ayloflfe, Calendar of Tower Rolls, p. xxvi. Cf. Pat. 1 1 Edw. IV P* I. m. 34. The 
accounts of the clerk of the Hanaper contain inventories showing that a "king's messenger" 
with a pack-horse and groom were regularly maintained on the establishment of the Chancery 
for this purpose. 

7 Edwards, Libraries, p. 247; Cooper, Proposal for a General Record Office, Appx. D. 
The question seems to have been decided in favour of the Master of the Rolls in the case 
of Sir Roger Wilbraham, whose independent appointment as Keeper of the Tower 
Records was vacated by the Privy Council in 1604 but only in virtue of the jurisdiction of the 
Master over the Chancery Rolls (R. Hist. Soc. Cam Jen Miscellany, Vol. x. p. 80 n.). 



22 The History of the Archives 

the exception, however, of the temporary removals of the whole or 
the greater part of the curial records in connexion with the transfer 
of the administrative machinery to the north or west during the wars 
with Scotland and Wales respectively 1 , these removals have no 
influence upon the continuous custody of the State Archives in the 
capital itself. At one time or another Winchester, Northampton, 
Southampton and other strongholds were utilized as repositories 
of treasure and Records alike, but no traces of their position have 
survived 2 . 

More interest, perhaps, attaches to the transfers of Records from 
Scotland 3 and Ireland 4 to London, and to the preservation of Welsh 
Records in the Edwardian Castles or later Sessions Halls 5 , but these 
questions concern the history of other national establishments. 

It has been previously stated that the history of the mediaeval 
Record repositories in this country can be traced in outline from the 
middle of the I2th century. It might even be conjectured that in 
a still earlier period the " Keeper of the Chapel and Relics " was 
responsible for the safety of the few manuscript treasures which were 
preserved in the immediate vicinity of the itinerant court, although 
we can scarcely suppose that the Magister Scriptorii, who appears in 
the reign of Henry II, had a position analogous to that of the Gustos 
Rotulorum in a later period. 

Naturally we learn a great deal more about the personnel of the 
Exchequer treasury than about the corresponding staff of the 
Chancery repositories, but in each department we find great officers 
of State associated in the charge of the Records whose lieutenants 
gradually assume the sole responsibility for their safe keeping 6 . In 
the one case we have the Treasurer and the Chamberlains, and in the 
other the Chancellor and the Keeper of the Rolls. Below these are 
the ushers and Serjeants who have the actual handling of the Records, 

1 Cf. Dialogue (Oxford ed.), p. 44 ; Hall, Antiquities of the Exchequer, p. 74. Cf. Pat. 
16 Ric. II P II. m. 21 ; Close, 28 Edw. I m. 6d; Ibid. 20 Edw. I m. 13 d; Ibid. 7 Ed. Ill 
P I. m. 12 d; Ibid. 15 Ric. II m. 3d ; Ibid. 16 Ric. II m. to; Ibid. 22 Ric. II P' I. m. 13. 

3 Hall, p. ii. Cf. Pat. 16 Edw. II P I. m. 28. 

3 Cf. M. Livingstone, Guide to the Public Records of Scotland, pp. vii xviii, and the 
authorities cited in that work, and in J. Bain, Calendar of Scottish Documents, Vol. I. 
Preface; F. Palgrave, Scottish Documents, Intro. ; J. Ayloffe, Calendar of Ancient Charters, 
Intro.; W. Robertson, Index of Scotch Records, p. i ; W. Thomson, Acts of the Parliaments 
of Scotland, Vol. I. p. 107. 

4 Red Book, p. 976. 8 See Appendix I, c. 

6 Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls), p. cclxxxvii sqq. ; Antiquities of the Exchequer, 
p. 77 sqq. 






The History of the Archives 23 

or who contract for supplying the necessaries of the Office. In the 
earliest period, however, we notice a tendency towards specialization, 
whereby the custody of particular classes of Records is entrusted to 
special officers, such as the Exchequer marshall and the keeper of the 
Chancery Hanaper. Later still, during the early part of the I4th 
century, we find the Exchequer divided for administrative purposes 
into several distinct departments, each of which retained the entire 
control of its own Records 1 . The example of the Exchequer was 
followed by the other courts in turn, until in the first year of the 
1 9th century we find the Public Records scattered through no fewer 
than sixty official repositories 2 . 

From a very early period the custody of the Records of the 
Crown involved some attempt in the direction of their arrangement 
and the description of their contents for convenience of reference. 
For this purpose a number of writs were issued at different dates, 
from the beginning of the I4th century onwards 3 . We may certainly 
suspect that these operations were directed by the Crown with a view 
to vindicate its prerogative in various quarters. From another point 
of view the officials had a direct interest in the preservation of 
precedents which might affect their privileges and perquisites 4 . 
Finally we can distinguish the germ of the later constitutional 
theory that the Records at large were preserved by the Crown for 
the benefit of the whole community 8 , and from this position it is only 
one step (in point of principle) to the establishment and maintenance 
of a central Record office at the national expense. This single step 
proved, however, to be a long one, for it was not actually taken until 
the middle of the I9th century. 

On the whole few more praiseworthy intentions can be placed to the 
credit of our earliest sovereigns than this solicitude for the safety and 
utility of those Records which they rightly estimated as the " chiefest 
jewels of their crowns 8 ." At the same time, in spite of a general 

1 The offices of the two Remembrancers may be given as instances, and one of these has 
still the custody of certain Records (Red Book, p. 863 sq.). 
8 Deputy Keeper } s *yd Report, Appx., p. 60. 

3 De supervidendo rotulos. De rotulis, S*c., in recto ordine ponendis. De bullis, chartis, 
&c., in kalendario certo ponendis, &>c. In the reign of Edward II the arrangement of the 
Tower records was reserved for the king's clerks (Abbrev. Plac. p. 343). See Appendix I, F. 

4 These were frequently entered in a separate form in registers such as the Red and Black 
Books of the Exchequer. Cf. Red Book, p. 821 sq. 

5 Rot. Parl. a- 314. 

6 Prynne, Parliamentary Writs, Vol. IV. (Dedication); Ayloffe, Calendars, p. iii sqq. 
In 1853 a War Office report on the Tower garrison states that the Records are the most 
valuable of its contents and the best deserving military protection. In addition to the wnts 



24 The History of the Archives 

agreement upon the principles to be pursued in dealing with the 
national Records we have to deplore almost incalculable losses 
through premature decay and systematic abstractions. These losses 
are chiefly due to the deliberate neglect of later official custodians 
and to the still more wanton refusal of the parliaments and ministries 
of the 1 8th and even of the ipth century to adopt the simplest pre- 
cautions for their safe-keeping 1 . 

The explanation is simple. As long as the Records were regarded 
as part and parcel of the contents of the treasure of the Crown they 
were guarded with the same jealous care as the other contents of the 
royal treasuries 8 , but the growth of the departmental system gave 
opportunities for abuses which could not be easily checked. In fact 
the clerks of the rolls and writs and their subordinates came to regard 
these Records as a source of income by means of office fees. Such 
Records as could obtain access to the light and air survived, and, 
as with the Sibyl's books, their market value was enhanced by the 
destruction of their fellows. 

Certainly the anxiety displayed by enlightened antiquaries to 
save some specimens of historical evidence from these putrid heaps of 
parchment brought grist to the mills of their custodians. The missions 
of Brequigny and other foreign scholars are instances in point. By 
dint of groping on his hands and knees amidst the dust and corrup- 
tion of the low-roofed cock-lofts of the Exchequer treasuries and by 
driving hard bargains with the patent officers of the Rolls Chapel 
and the Tower, a great French antiquary was able to rescue some 
twelve thousand historical documents from oblivion and probable 
destruction 3 . These official abuses were severely stigmatised by Sir 
Harris Nicolas 4 , though the excuse pleaded, that the officers received 
inadequate salaries from the Crown, may perhaps shift the responsi- 
bility from the individual to the State. 

alluded to above, the proceedings taken in the political trials of 1289 (Assize Rolls, Nos. 541* 
and 54i b ) and 1399 (Rot. Parl. in. 418) and the statutes against their falsification may be noticed 
as early vindications of the importance of Records. Earlier still their value in connexion with 
the constitutional disputes with the Papacy and the Scottish nation was clearly recognized. 

1 Cf. above (Introduction), p. 7. It would probably be a matter of some difficulty to 
compile even an approximate list of disasters to Records by fire or wanton destruction, still 
more of losses through negligent custody or ignorant suppression. The subject, however, is 
one that is sure to receive more attention as the value of the surviving Records becomes 
enhanced. 

1 This is well seen in the indentures executed for the delivery and return of Records from 
the Treasury during the Middle Ages (Palgrave, Kalendars and Inventories'). Cf. stat. 5 Hen. 
IV c. 14 on the "imbesilled" Notes of Fines in official custody. 

* Delpit, p. xvi; Black Book of Exchequer, s.a. 1672; Carte, Rolles Gascons (Preface). 

4 State of Historical Literature, p. 9 sq. 



The History of the Archives 25 

At the same time it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that this 
increasing interest in original authorities and constitutional precedents 
led to the wholesale abstraction of public documents from official 
custody. The rich spoils of the monastic muniment rooms were 
largely appropriated by private collectors, and the eventual loss 
sustained by the nation is not to be counted only by the destruction 
wrought through the inadequate housing of its Records. As for such 
Records as were still preserved in provincial repositories, but a small 
percentage had survived at the beginning of the last century. The 
cause of this further loss is not difficult to find when we know the fate 
of the great collection of local Records once deposited in Dover 
Castle 1 . Almost within living memory the public Records have been 
sold for glue by the soldiers and workmen employed to remove them 
from one pestilential vermin-haunted den to another 2 , and to this day 
ancient Records are still preserved in isolated repositories in spite 
of the Act of 1838. 

The story of these offences against the national honour has often 
been told in the plain, unvarnished language of the indignant modern 
antiquary 3 . It must not be supposed, however, that this scandalous 
neglect of a public duty was allowed to pass without a protest or 
some proffered remedy. So far the Crown had done little more than 
indulge in platitudes concerning the sacredness of legal records, 
varied by the occasional employment of some learned clerk to close 
up the gaps in the series. But other interests were at length awakened. 
The great lawyers of the school of Dyer presented a petition to Queen 
Elizabeth for rebuilding and enlarging the Record treasuries at West- 
minster. Antiquaries like Stowe and Camden vied with zealous 
officials such as Agarde and Bowyer in calling attention to the 
subject. In the next reign we find men of learning and discernment 
like Francis Bacon propounding a scheme for a "general Record 
office," which was actually authorised by letters patent in the year 
i6i9 4 . 

The failure of the Parliaments of the Commonwealth to devise any 

1 Archaeologia Cantiana, I. 53, 54. 

2 Par/. Papers, 1836, Vol. xvi. See also the Report of the House of Lords Committee 
in 1840 on the destruction and sale of Exchequer Records. 

3 F. W. Maitland, Memoranda de Parliament (Rolls), p. xiii; A. C. Ewald, Our Publu 
Records, p. 14 sq. For the earlier official view of the matter cf. Q.K. Vol. XXXIX. and Frasfr's 
Magazine, 1862. 

4 Although the business of this new office was concerned only with the registration and 
verification of titles to land, this obviously involved the proper arrangement and preservation 
of a large class of Records. The whole scheme however fell to the ground (Edwards, 
Libraries, p. 247). For the Elizabethan agitation, cf. S. P. Dotn. XLVII. 17. 



26 The History of the Archives 

means for the better custody of the Records which had proved of 
such value in justifying their cause, must always be regarded as 
a deep reproach to the party of progress. We are scarcely surprised, 
however, to find that after the Restoration matters went from bad to 
worse. Devoted scholars like Prynne, Madox, and Le Neve laboured 
with their own hands to cleanse and arrange the Records and to 
make their contents available for historical study. No real progress 
was made during the remainder of the I7th century, but with the 
reign of Anne we have the beginning of a protracted enquiry, which 
was not concluded till the year 1837. 

For this new movement the nation was indebted to the scholarly 
instincts of Robert Harley, though the solemn warnings of the great 
antiquaries of the Restoration period had indeed caused a general 
uneasiness to be felt on the score of the safety of the Records. The 
official enquiry, which occupied the whole of the reigns of Anne and 
George I, resulted in the Reports of the Committees of the Lords and 
Commons in 1719 and 1732, but although the effect of these Reports 
was enhanced by the shock of the great fire at Ashburnham house, 
the condition of the Records had not been perceptibly ameliorated 
when the next great survey was made in the year 1800. 

Indeed by far the saddest part of the story of this national dis- 
grace is that which reveals the perfect consciousness of the authorities 
as to the real state of affairs. On the whole the burden of blame 
must be borne by the ministers of the Crown and by the later Parlia- 
ments which allowed the urgent recommendations of their committees 
to remain unheeded. Again and again we find the officials of some 
temporary repository of legal Records representing the absolute 
necessity of removing its contents to a place of safety. After years 
of delay the necessary order is given, and after a further period of 
official procrastination, illumined by various destructive fires, the 
Records are still found in festering heaps in the same position. 

It is true that in 1763 certain learned antiquaries were appointed 
to " methodize " the Records 1 , but thirty years of " methodizing " 
produced no more beneficial result than the publication of a few 
imperfect calendars or texts. 

In 1772 the report of a Committee of the House of Commons led 
to the establishment of an official . copying department in connexion 
with the Rolls Chapel to avoid the practice of removing Records 
to the private residences of the officials, which had been usual since 
the 1 3th century 2 . 

1 Edwards, op. fit., p. 270, and below, p. 41. 2 C.J. xxxm. 791. 



The History of the Archives 27 

In 1788 and 1789 yet another committee reported strongly on the 
state of the Record repositories surrounding Westminster Hall, and, 
after a further report in 1793, some of these houses were pulled down 
to improve the approach to the Hall itself, and their contents were 
removed to somewhat safer quarters in Somerset House 1 . 

It is not necessary to go outside the report of the Record Com- 
mission in 1837 for an explanation of the failure of Parliament to deal 
with this vital question, neither is it desirable to review here the 
merits of the bitter controversy to which the policy of the Commission 
had given rise 2 . But when we read the complacent verbiage of this 
Report we cannot but reflect that from the death of Charles I to the 
accession of Queen Victoria nothing had been done to ensure the 
safety, the necessary repairs and the proper arrangement of the Public 
Records. Whilst the ministers of that day were intent on cheapening 
the humble accommodation demanded by experts for the security 
of the national Archives at the crisis of their fate, the officials 
who should have been engaged in their jealous preservation were 
employed as sub-commissioners in preparing worthless texts, im- 
perfect calendars, and misleading indexes at a total cost to the 
nation of some hundreds of thousands of pounds. And then we 
recall the days when, with a stroke of the pen, even kings like 
Edward II could require the contents of their Record treasuries to 
be arranged, and could find a bishop designate to do the work with 
his own hands 3 . 

The famous Commission on the Public Records was probably 
allowed to expire in 1837, in consequence of the unfavourable report 
of a Select Committee of the House of Commons in the preceding 
year 4 . Meanwhile the party of reform was preparing to bring in a 
private Bill for the establishment of a general repository for the Public 
Records, but the matter was allowed to drop upon an assurance being 
given by the Government that a public Bill for this purpose would be 
introduced at the first opportunity. Thus the Public Record Office 
Act of 1838 was passed "to establish one Record Office and a better 
custody, and to allow the free use of the said Records 5 ." 

The immediate effects of the Act were not, however, great. The 

1 C./. xi.vin. 848. 

a Cf. Sir H. Nicolas, State of Historical Literature, p. 85. 

8 Palgrave, Kalendars and Inventories, I. p. i. 

4 Parl. Papers, 1836, xvi., and the evidence separately published (Papers and Documents, 

1837)- 

5 i and 2 Vic. c. 94 in connexion with the second section of which must be considered 

Order in Council of 5 Mar. 1852. 



28 The History of the Archives 

Rolls Chapel was practically recognized as the centre of the future 
establishment, and all the Records of the Chancery were forthwith 
transferred to the custody of the Master of the Rolls. But before the 
remainder of the scattered Records could be transferred to the same 
custody a new central repository had to be provided, together with 
an adequate clerical staff. Even now the transfer might have been 
indefinitely protracted but for the firmness of Lord Langdale, then 
Master of the Rolls 1 . At length in 1839 a start was made in a 
humble way with an establishment which had its headquarters at the 
Rolls House, whence a general supervision was exercised over the old 
repositories, which were now regarded as branch offices. Many years 
of course elapsed before the bulk of the Public Records was safely 
housed, and the work was not then nor is it even now completed. It 
has kept pace with the extension of the great repository in Fetter 
Lane, and it has involved the seemingly interminable task of the 
arrangement and description of newly discovered treasures. 

It is perhaps in this direction that the progress effected during the 
late reign appears most striking ; but the credit of opening up this 
mine of knowledge to the whole body of students does not belong to 
the Government alone. We are indebted, it is true, to official industry 
for the long and valuable series of Deputy Keeper's reports and for 
the hundreds of calendars and chronicles which have made the 
" Rolls Series " famous throughout the world. More recently still 
immense improvements in the method of official publications have 
been introduced by Sir Henry Maxwell Lyte. The desultory ap- 
pendices to the Deputy Keeper's reports and the ragged manuscript 
lists, which were formerly in use in the public search rooms, are giving 
place to a new series of printed inventories 2 which bear evidence 
of a concentrated arrangement of the Records, which was impossible 
so long as they were preserved in isolated repositories and which has 
been accomplished none too soon. 

It is possible, indeed, that the very publicity and facility of access 
which have resulted from these striking reforms may eventually 
prepare a fresh danger, which will demand in turn an extraordinary 
remedy. In the dark days of ignorant neglect the Records at least 
escaped the wear and tear of frequent reference. But the Record, we 

1 Deputy Keeper's First Report, pp. 67 73. The Treasury held out for another ten 
years in the expectation that the Victoria Tower at Westminster would be found available for 
this purpose. 

2 Public Record Office " Indexes and Lists." A good account of these important 
innovations by Mr E. G. Atkinson of the Public Record Office will be found in the 
Revue Internationale des Archives (1895 6). 



The History of the Archives 29 

are told, was made in order that it might be searched 1 . To be worn 
out in the public service is a fate which it can no more escape than 
its custodians. All that can be done to prolong its existence is being 
rapidly accomplished by means of wise precautions and ingenious 
devices. 

Whether the publication of Record calendars is calculated to avoid 
the necessity of referring to the original MS. is an academic question 
upon which the authorities disagree, whilst the relative merits of texts 
in record type, of extensions and of an English version cannot be 
easily decided. Of one thing, however, there can be no doubt at all ; 
that if the vast sums which have been squandered since the beginning 
of the 1 8th century upon publications which fail to bring us into 
touch with the original Record were now available, the reproduction in 
facsimile of the whole series of our earliest Records would afford 
a practical solution of the difficulty, and one which will perhaps be 
sought for in our own time. 

There is one more question to be considered in connexion with 
the custody of the Public Records, and it is one which deeply con- 
cerns the preservation and especially the accessibility of the modern 
series of these historical materials for the use of future students. The 
conventional view of the custody of the Public Records of this country 
can only compass the official environment of the royal Archives in 
the ancient buildings of the metropolis ; but Records of an admittedly 
official character are stored outside these limits in the personal 
custody of local magnates and officials. More than this : the wider 
view of the public interests which was first permitted by the great 
political reforms of the last century has, in our own day, enabled us 
to realize that the " Local Records " which were once regarded as 
purely private muniments, and which are still treated accordingly, are 
part and parcel of the nation's title-deeds 2 . That this view has led 
to a widespread interest in the better preservation of these local 
Records, on purely historical grounds, and to an admirable scheme of 
permissive legislation for this purpose must be regarded as a highly 
satisfactory achievement 3 . It has also drafted a new chapter in the 
history of the custody and classification of the Public Records which 
lies beyond the scope of our present enquiry*. 

1 Scrutare rotulos is a formula as old as the I3th century. 

3 This obvious devolution has been effected without question in the administration of the 
decrees for the centralisation and custody of the national and provincial Archives in France, 
Belgium and the Netherlands. 

3 Report of Committee on Local Records (1902). 

4 See Appendix I, E. 



30 The History of the Archives 

(b) State Papers. 

In one aspect the history of the State Papers closely resembles 
that of the legal Records ; in another aspect these documents will 
indicate a new development in the composition and custody of the 
State Archives. For the former view we were to some extent prepared 
by the purely ministerial character of a large section of mediaeval 
diplomatic documents, and from these the ministerial papers of the 
1 6th and i/th centuries might seem to have been lineally descended. 
The analogy, however, could not be very successfully maintained. It 
is true that a letter is a letter, whether it was penned in the I3th 
century or in the i6th, and whether it is expressed in Latin, in 
Old French or in the vernacular which was able to survive all 
foreign agencies. Again a close resemblance might perhaps be 
traced between the modern State Papers relating to domestic, foreign, 
and colonial or provincial affairs and their mediaeval counterparts in 
the shape of the Chancery enrolments dealing with public administra- 
tion, finance, commerce, ecclesiastical matters and the kingly state ; 
or with foreign and colonial relations, according to a geographical 
arrangement which endured for many centuries. These official enrol- 
ments were even continued in a few instances 1 down to modern times, 
but this very continuity only accentuates the altered character of the 
great mass of later correspondence. 

In spite of the clerical activity of the shadowy " Prothonotary " of 
the early Chancery, and the traditional descent of the later Secretary 
of State from the household Secretary of the Plantagenet kings, 
nothing can be more clear than the distinction between the ministerial 
Records of the mediaeval Chancery and the " Papers of State" which 
are gathered into a new collection from the reign of Henry VIII. 
In some respects a much closer connexion existed between the office 
of the later Secretary of State and that of the earlier Keeper of the 
King's Signet, a connexion which even involved the custody of 
diplomatic instruments as formal in their construction as those of the 
Chancery itself. But here once more we have to make a distinction 
between official instruments and official correspondence. Although 
both classes of documents were executed and received by the same 
department in mediaeval or modern times alike, the former were in 
most cases merely the first drafts of royal acts that were finally 
recorded in the Chancery, whilst the latter were chiefly muniments 
transmitted from the first into the Treasury or some other recognized 

1 e.g. the Patent, Close, French, Dispensation and Coronation Rolls. 



The History of the Archives 3 1 

repository 1 . Thus the continuity of the custody of State Papers 
in the Treasury of the Exchequer is really unconnected with 
their execution or enrolment by the Chancery, and it is noticeable 
that this fact was persistently alleged by the old official archivists, 
and that it is confirmed by the preservation in modern times of a 
large mass of actual State Papers in the Chapter House at West- 
minster 2 . 

But although it would be unwise to push the analogy between the 
construction and preservation of the ancient and modern State Papers 
too far, it must certainly be admitted that mediaeval forms and 
usages were projected far into the period of modern history as usually 
defined. In the reign of Henry VII we meet with little else than 
formal instruments composed in Latin and French, and even the 
manor hall and the merchant's counting-house could produce speci- 
mens of the cursive, vernacular writings less laboured than those 
proceeding from the Privy chamber or the Wardrobe. 

It is from the reign of Henry VIII therefore, and from the new 
political epoch which it inaugurated, that the modern series of State 
Papers must properly be dated, and there can be little doubt that the 
collection as a whole owes its existence to the new importance of the 
Secretary of State's office in that reign. From this time onwards the 
"papers and Records of State," as distinguished from the judicial 
Records of the Courts of Law and the private muniments of the 
Household, Parliament and Council, are found in and about the 
Courts of Whitehall or St James. Before long a separate repository 
is erected for their custody, the king's Library or Study, in theory, 
although, in fact, the meanest garret could be glorified by the 
designation of " the Office of Papers of State." 

The " Study " at Westminster is mentioned in the reign of 
Henry VIII as a repository in connexion with the department of the 
Secretary of State. It is possible and even probable that for West- 
minster we should understand that outwork of the ancient royal 
palace, better known as Whitehall 8 . The collection here referred to 
was apparently in the official custody of Secretary Paget, and 

1 The Liber Memorandorum of the Exchequer, in which these transmissions were 
registered, extends to the 38th year of Henry VIII. 

2 These formed the chief contents of the "Second Treasury" in Agarde's time 
(Repertorie, p. 28). 

8 Whitehall was regarded in the reign of Henry VIII as included in the Palace 

of Westminster. It seems clear, however, from a memorandum by William Honnyng 

in 1544 (Cal. of Letters, &c. Vol. xx(il). 864 and 982) that the Westminster gate-house was 
the site of this " Study." 



32 The History of the Archives 

included some Records of more ancient date than the reign of 
Henry VIII. The bulk of it was, however, of this period, and, from an 
allusion which is found in the " remains " of a later keeper, we gather 
that the papers of Sir Ralph Sadleir were added at a later date 1 . 

We have no further details of this early establishment until 
the beginning of the next century, for, although the statement 
that the State Paper Office was established by Letters Patent in 
1578 occurs in every standard work of reference dealing with this 
subject, it can perhaps be shown that it has been made and repeated 
without sufficient warrant. At least some documentary authority 
might seem desirable for the verification of such an important event ; 
and in any case the terms of alleged establishment would be highly 
interesting in themselves. At present, however, no better reference to 
this eventful instrument is forthcoming than a cautious allusion made 
by an interested party, a personal testimony of no good fame 
vouched at an interval of half a century 2 . 

Our existing knowledge of the antiquities of the State Paper 
Office previous to the appointment of its first authentic keeper in the 
reign of James I is in fact derived from the unverified assertions 
of that functionary himself. 

1 See a cancelled passage in Sir T. Wilson's famous autobiographical narrative in 
S. P. Docts. i. 53. 

3 The authorities above referred to, which have been followed on numerous occasions by 
periodical writers, give us with great deliberation and frequent repetitions the following 
circumstantial statement: That Dr Wilson, "the first Keeper," was appointed " Clerk" of the 
Papers in 1578, by Letters Patent, to prevent their embezzlement, by the appointment of a 
certain place and a fit man chosen and sworn for registering and keeping the same in order 
and with due secrecy. Now apart from the fact that these details are merely borrowed from 
Sir Thomas Wilson's interested version of the antiquity of his own office, based on the 
recollections of his boyhood, it will be found that Wilson in fact makes no such statement 
as this. The year 1578 is not even mentioned by him, and we find that this eventful date has 
apparently been evolved by subtracting the 45 years, which Wilson tells us had elapsed since 
an incident of his youth, from the purely conjectural date 1623 assigned to his autobiographical 
note. Now as Wilson tells us here that his "uncle" was not yet Secretary of State at the date 
of this incident, and as we know that he was made Secretary on i January, 1578, this cannot 
in any case be the year indicated. Moreover Wilson merely states that the office was at that 
time in existence, and he elsewhere traces it back to the reign of Edward VI. Again the 
supposed reference to the object of the establishment of the office at this date is not to the year 
1578 at all, but to the establishment of the office in the reign of James I. Of a piece with 
these remarkable misconceptions are the further references in our authorities to the official 
career of Sir Thomas Wilson himself, who is sometimes described as "Clerk" and at others 
as "Keeper" of the Papers either "at the beginning of the reign of James I" or on the 
surrender of Sir T. Lake about 1606, the real date of his joint patent being 15 March, 
7 James I. Even those authorities who have referred to this patent have failed to render the 
date correctly, Devon giving the year as 1609 and Palgrave as 1608 instead of 1610. 
However, as this was strictly a reversionary grant, the date of his actual office is really 
2 5 July, 1614. 



The History of the Archives 33 

Sir Thomas Wilson whose tenure of this office is connected with 
so many romantic incidents is certainly the last person whose assertion 
on such a subject can be implicitly accepted. To do Wilson justice, 
however, the assertion in question is merely inferred from a privileged 
narrative, made with every circumstance of heat and inaccuracy, which 
exists in his handwriting among the State Paper Documents 1 . 

This autobiographical note is nevertheless of considerable interest 
and it is to be regretted that whilst the inaccuracies which it contains 
have escaped correction, some valuable hints which it affords have 
been allowed to remain unnoticed. As our present knowledge of the 
position and establishment of the State Paper Office previous to the 
year 1619 is at the best extremely limited and as even the few data 
which exist have been erroneously presented to us, a brief outline of 
the development of the Office down to the reign of Charles I may be 
attempted here. 

From the close of the reign of Henry VIII to the accession of 
James I we find the Papers of State in the immediate custody of 
Secretaries of State like Sadleir and Paget or of confidential clerks, 
who rose in turn to that office, like William Cecil and Thomas 
Wilson 2 . Of these Papers the earliest in date with such as had been 
recovered from recent Secretaries were apparently preserved in the 
palace of Whitehall 3 with the Records of the Signet and the Council 4 . 
It is perfectly conceivable therefore that these early Papers were 
placed under the supervision of such an expert as Dr Thomas Wilson 
between the dates of his appointments as Master of St Katherine's 
Hospital in 1561' and as Secretary of State in 1578", especially as 
in the year 1569 he received an annuity of .100 for making himself 
generally useful 7 . It is equally probable that after his appointment 
as Secretary of State, he relinquished the supervision of these Papers 

1 See previous note. It was long ago pointed out by Edwards {Libraries, p. 181) that 
this inference is unwarranted. 

2 The six great Secretaries of State to whose connexion with the State Papers Sir Thomas 
Wilson alludes, in the reign of James I, were probably Paget, Sadleir, Cecil, Walsingham, 
Wilson and Lake. 

8 For a more concise description of these official arrangements see the Athetueum, 
16 Dec. 1903. 

4 We learn, on the authority of Sir Thomas Wilson, that it was the practice until the end 
of the reign of James I for the Council Records not in current use to be transmitted to the 
Paper Office, and as early as 1597 both Dr James and Sir Thomas Lake seem to have kept 
the Records in their charge in a repository under Queen Elizabeth's Banqueting Hall, which 
was rebuilt about 1606 (Hatfield MSS. Calendar, p. 431). 

5 Pat. 3 Eliz. P 6. Pat. 20 Eliz. P 10. 

7 Pat. 13 Eliz. P l i. The immediate motive of this grant was probably to reward Wilson 
for his exertions in investigating conspiracies against the Crown. 

H. 3 



34 The History of the Archives 

to another learned Doctor, William James, who like himself was 
attached to Leicester's interest. It does not appear that any grant 
of office passed in either case and it is significant that although 
a grant under the Great Seal is alluded to by Sir Thomas Wilson in 
the next reign, the reference in support of this assertion, "by the 
Letters Patentes and the copyes of them which remayne heer," has 
been erased with his own hand 1 . Now as Sir Thomas has elsewhere 
cited such grants on every possible occasion (and not always with 
complete justification), we may fairly surmise that he had failed to 
identify this particular grant on which as we have seen rests the 
familiar statement that the State Paper Office was established in the 
year 1578*. We may perhaps venture to surmise still further that if 
any such grant exists, it will be found to take the form of an annuity 
more or less directly connected with the extra-official task of reducing 
the early State Papers to order. This stipend is in fact stated by Sir 
Thomas Wilson to have amounted to an annual fee of 40. We 
know nothing apparently of the conditions of the employment of 
Dr Wilson's successor, but the above theory of the evolution of the early 
Keepership receives considerable support from the recorded appoint- 
ment of Sir Thomas Lake in the first year of James I. Here again we 
have a reputed office, though Sir Thomas Wilson confines himself to 
the rather vague statement that Lake "got it" in succession to Dr James. 

There is, however, a grant by Letters Patent 3 on this occasion 
which, although not technically regarded as an " Office " but as an 
" Annuity," certainly expresses the consideration for the grant to be 
Sir Thomas Lake's pains in "Keeping, airing and digesting" certain 
" Records of matters of State " passed in the days of the king's 
progenitors and remaining in the palace of Whitehall ; the charge 
of which has been and is committed by the Secretary of State to the 
said Sir Thomas. 

In this instrument we have at last a clear statement of the 
position of the office down to this date as being an employment 
within the patronage of the Secretary of State. The recognition of 
this employment for the first time as a distinct office is also clearly 
implied in the further provisions of the above Patent which explains 
that the king thinks it meet that a competent allowance should be 
made for Lake's charges and pains therein and concludes with an 
assurance to have and enjoy the keeping of the said Records together 
with the said annuity for life. 

1 S. P. Docts. i. 53. 2 See a bove, p. 32, n. i. 

3 Pat. i James I P' 18, m. 19, i June 1603. 



The History of the Archives 35 

From this point the history of the office may be traced without 
much difficulty, though numerous misstatements continue to disfigure 
the received account. It has been assumed, as we have seen, on the 
strength of his own assertion, that Sir Thomas Wilson was the first 
Keeper of the Papers under a definite appointment. This, however, 
was not exactly the case, for, although Wilson's name was joined 
with that of Levinus Munck in an original patent of 15 March, I6IO 1 , 
it stands second and therefore his personal interest was strictly 
speaking a reversionary one. For Munck, as Salisbury's private 
Secretary (just as Lake had acted in the same capacity to 
Walsingham), had a prior claim to the new office, though doubt- 
less its duties were executed by Wilson in virtue of a mutual 
understanding 2 . 

It is probable also that Munck, who like Lake and Wilson was 
a clerk of the Signet 3 , succeeded in rotation to Lake's custody of the 
Papers upon the latter's preferment. 

In fact there appears to have been a more or less definite 
system of promotion within the Secretariat whereby the minister's 
servants were required to surrender certain appointments on suc- 
ceeding to others of greater value, and in accordance with this 
practice Wilson himself gave up his clerkship of the Signet on 
receiving the above patent 4 . Four years later Wilson seems to have 
made a further arrangement with his co-patentee as the result of 
which the patent of 1610 was surrendered and cancelled and a new 
grant was made to himself and his son-in-law Ambrose Randolph, or 
Randall 6 . This instrument recites the previous grant which was 
made with a view to collect the Papers of State " into a sett form 
of Lybrary " in some convenient place within the palace of Whitehall, 

1 No Sign-manual warrant, Privy Seal or enrolment of this patent appear to be known, 
and the cancelled original has been filed instead (Privy Seals, i 24 March, 7 James I). 

! Wilson appears, according to his memorials on the subject, to have drawn half the salary 
of the office and to have discharged all the duties of the same. In a later period the patentee 
mentioned second in the grant was regarded as the deputy of the person first mentioned. 

3 Pat. 3 James I, P* 10. Signet Docquet, July 1603. We also find that Dr Wilson and 
Sir Thomas Lake were both Masters of Requests and that SirThos. Wilson considered himself 
entitled to a similar preferment. Singularly enough this system of preferment lasted till the 
end of the i8th century. Cf. below, p. 41, n. i. 

4 He also surrendered his writership of the Bills of Imposts (not "Imports" as given in 
the Dictionary of National Biography) on receiving the second patent in 1614. 

8 The patent of 1610 was surrendered in Dec. 1613 and the new grant is dated 15 July 
following (S. P. Dom. Sign Manuals, Vol. iv. No. 45, and Pat. u James I, P' 8, No. 17. 
This Ambrose Randolph was the son of the famous English agent in Scotland during the late 
reign. According to Wilson's own statement of the transaction Randolph seems to have 
found the money to buy Munck out. 

32 



36 The History of the Archives 

to be at all times the readier for the king's own use and that of his 
Secretaries, for the better enabling them to do the king service. It 
is also noticeable that the previous grant was subject to the proviso 
that the grantees might be at any time removed on the recommenda- 
tion of the Earl of Salisbury. The patent of 1614 continued the 
previous fee of $s. ^d. per diem or 60 per annum, as against the ^50 
enjoyed by Lake and the ,40 assigned to his predecessors from 
tradition. 

In both patents the office granted is described as that of the 
"Keepers and Registers of Papers and Records of State," henceforth 
to be collected and arranged in an official Library. The Papers are 
also described in the patent of 1614 as those formerly remaining in 
the custody of Sir T. Lake, together with those recovered from the 
Earl of Salisbury, and any other Papers to be received from time to 
time from the Secretaries of State. The duty of providing accommo- 
dation for these documents seems to have devolved upon the new 
Keeper himself. Hitherto they appear to have been kept under the 
Banqueting Hall in Whitehall with the Records of the Council and 
the Signet which were injured there in the fire of 1619. Apparently 
they had been placed here by Lake, but we have no information 
regarding the date of their transfer from the " Study" at Westminster 
where we find them in the reign of Edward VI 1 . We also learn that 
these Papers were placed in "boxes" which may be identical with 
the chests used for this purpose in Paget's time 2 . In order to carry 
out the "sett order of a lybrary " contemplated by the patent of 1614 
space was required for arranging the Papers on shelves. It can be 
inferred as we have seen from Wilson's memoranda amongst the 
State Paper Office Documents that the Papers were twice removed 
to a new repository within the Palace for this very purpose but owing 
to the misdating of these memoranda, their incoherent nature, and 
the confused tradition of a later period contained in the reports of 
subsequent Keepers it is difficult to form an exact idea of their 
position previous to the year i6i9 s . It would appear however that 

1 Above, p. 31. 

2 The Council Chest itself was used for some time to come as the receptacle for Papers of 
the Council in current use in the custody of the clerk. A box containing Records of the 
Council of Wales is also referred to in the reign of Elizabeth in the same connexion. It may 
be suggested that it was the Council and Signet Office Records (which were probably left 
where they had been found on Sir T. Lake's surrender of his office), and not the State Papers 
that were hastily removed and injured in the fire of 1619. This fact will explain an apparent 
discrepancy which has often been noticed in Wilson's letter to the king on this occasion. 

8 From a careful examination of the existing correspondence we may infer that when 
Wilson received his appointment in 1614 he obtained very suitable accommodation for the 



The History of the Archives 37 

soon after Wilson's appointment as Keeper a proper office was fitted 
up for the first time in some building adjoining the Privy Garden in 
Whitehall and that the Papers were again removed in the year 1618 
just before the destruction of the old Banqueting House. During 
the remainder of the century the State Papers were housed in the 
tower of the Whitehall Gateway in two rooms opening into three 
closets and three turrets 1 . 

To the zeal and energy of Sir Thomas Wilson the permanent 
establishment and organization of the State Paper Office has been 
justly ascribed. His personal share in these official innovations is 
represented by a number of precedents in his own hand including the 
terms of his patent of office, the oath of the keeper, warrants and 
orders of various kinds for issuing Records, for making searches and 
copies and for impounding outstanding Papers, from which perhaps 
we may gather that the red-tape with which this department was 
henceforth enswathed was chiefly devised by the first patentee with 
a view to enhance the importance of his office. 

If all the precedents which we find in this collection are to be 
regarded as authentic, we should have some cause for wonder at 
Sir Thomas Wilson's achievements. It should, however, be pointed 
out that in some cases these instruments do not appear to have been 
executed, and we are even tempted to speculate whether some at 

Papers in a new building which he fitted up at his own expense with wainscot cupboards or 
presses toft, high and having 250 ft. run, together with two wainscot studies, desks and other 
furniture, all of which seem to have been removed to the new office in 1619. We know 
that this building was entered from the gallery and also by stairs which were not approached 
from the Privy Garden as another entrance was. There were several rooms here, and Wilson 
had extended his accommodation by bargaining for a larder belonging to the Earl of Worcester 
on the lower floor. If this building is identical with the "fair building," also newly erected, 
which Wilson applied for at this time, it was situated opposite the garden gate, near to the 
building where the Papers were placed in Lake's time. But the office coveted by Wilson was 
built of stone and that from which the Papers were removed in 1619 was of wood. In any 
case it is certain that the Paper Office was situated on the floor above Lord Worcester's 
lodgings in Whitehall, some time between 1614 and 1619, and that this floor was afterwards 
the lodging of the Earl of Carlisle. We may suspect that the sudden removal of the office in 
1619 was due to the interest of Buckingham employed on behalf, probably, of the Earl of 
Carlisle himself, though the greater security of the Papers in the Stone Tower of the Whitehall 
Gateway is alleged as the reason for the change (S. P. Docts. I. 32, 33, 86). 

1 This new office, which was on the floor immediately above the Duke of Lennox's 
lodging, was officially described as consisting of one great chamber which was apparently 
sub-divided. Wilson's original intention was to place the foreign Papers in the turrets and to 
obtain another room on a lower level underneath the passage between the two galleries 
which connected Whitehall Gate with the western area, whilst accruing Papers were to be 
provided for by building a room over the gallery next the tilting yard. It is interesting to 
find that Sir Christopher Wren recommended these expedients as an alternative scheme when 
the question of abandoning the Whitehall Tower was raised in 1 706. 



38 The History of the Archives 

least of the warrants for Sir Thomas Wilson, drawn by Sir Thomas 
Wilson, or of the numerous confidential letters which purport to have 
been addressed by the same enterprising official to the king and to 
the great officers of State are anything more than trial drafts for his 
fixed design to educate official opinion upon the urgent question of 
the writer's personal merits and the dignity of his office. 

But in spite of a pushfulness in which the knight excelled even 
his contemporaries, the recognition of his services was somewhat 
scanty. His office was a new one and its importance was scarcely 
appreciated, but in any case it was probably felt that with this patent 
and allowances for "extraordinaries," together with a political pension 
of 100, Sir Thomas might be regarded as decently provided for, in 
view of the crowd of hungry suitors who remained unsatisfied with 
reversionary presentations 1 . 

These sordid details have a real importance for the history of the 
office, because here, as in the case of the legal Records, an efficient 
custody is found to depend to a very large extent upon a suitable 
official establishment. Keepers of Records and State Papers who 
were not in receipt of a living wage, or whose wages were paid with 
extreme irregularity, will usually be found devising some other means 
of subsistence to the grave detriment of their charge. Thus Wilson, 
whose salary was at one time seven years in arrear, was reduced 
to beg and cringe in an unseemly manner and to curry favour with 
the Court by the discovery of papers and books belonging to attainted 
or discredited courtiers. 

Judged by his own admissions Wilson might not appear to us as 
an official custodian to whom marketable antiquities could have been 
safely entrusted, but as a matter of fact his bitter jealousy of other 
official antiquaries and his strong sense of self-importance proved of 

1 In addition to his interest in the patent salary of jj. \d. per diem as Keeper, Wilson 
seems to have claimed 60 yearly for the clerical establishment and expenses of his office 
under a dormant Privy Seal of 6 Nov. 1608, but this allowance was very irregularly paid, and 
it is not clear whether Wilson elected to be paid under this warrant or by the bills of 
costs for extraordinary expenses in making transcripts, searches and binding MSS. which he 
presented from time to time as lump sums. Wilson himself informs us that he kept two 
clerks engaged in searching and transcribing as well as a binder (S. P. Docts. I. 41, 43, 45, 
5*> 5 2 75)- 1 tne next patent granted in 1629 to Wilson's successors the salary was raised 
to 8s. 9f</. per diem, or 160 yearly, at which figure it remained till the beginning of the last 
century, the proportion due to the Keeper for salary being apparently reckoned at .60, with 
100 for office expenses. As a matter of fact it is more probable that the establishment of 
ji6o was taken from that propounded by Wilson himself during the last years of his keeper- 
ship, the proportions being 60 for his office and ,100 for his fee. The next Keeper, 
Raymond, was put in the same position as his predecessor by the grant of a pension of ^100, 
and thus a definite precedent for the salary of 160 was founded. 



The History of the Archives 39 

inestimable service in recovering and securing the State Papers of his 
own time. 

Moreover he chose to make an ostentatious honesty his chief 
recommendation for advancement as an official pluralist, and, failing 
due recompense for his labours by the State, he had conceived an 
ingenious scheme for receiving fees from the public by instituting two 
branch offices in connexion with his post as archivist 1 , an expedient 
which was successfully resorted to by the greatest of his successors 5 . 

The interval between the death of Sir Thomas Wilson in 1629 
and the appointment of Sir Joseph Williamson in 1661 is chiefly 
interesting for the efforts made by each of the political parties in 
power during the period to recover State Papers which were in 
danger of falling into private hands. These efforts, however, were 
attended with very slight success 3 , and it is not altogether reassuring 
to find that Sir Joseph Williamson, good scholar and zealous official 
as he was, contented himself with noting from time to time the 
alarming deficiencies in the transmissions of Papers to the office at 
Whitehall. Williamson indeed appears to have regarded the Papers 
in his custody as a source of historical and official information in his 
capacity of Secretary of State, chiefly using for this purpose those 
which passed through his own department. Thus, although he was 
able to endow the Office with an enormous number of curious but 
really useless commonplace books as the result of his life-long 
industry, the State was the poorer by many hundreds of volumes 
which passed out of official custody during this period 4 . Similarly 
whilst we may bestow some praise upon the comprehensive classifica- 
tion of the Papers which Williamson laid down and to some extent 
carried out by an actual arrangement 5 , we learn that at his death the 
Papers were found in a very neglected state, whilst no catalogue of 
any sort existed. 

In fact, if we may credit the statements of his successor in the 
Office, Williamson seems to have treated his appointment as a 
sinecure, employing the clerks who should have attended to the 
Papers in the lucrative business of publishing the London Gazette 

1 A search office in connexion with the monastic cartularies, largely "embezzled" by his 
enemy Sir Robert Cotton, and a registry of the orders of knighthood. 

2 The London Gazette and the Office for Newsletters managed by Sir Joseph Williamson. 

3 S. P. Docts. II. 58. 

4 "Sir Joseph Williamson's" collection has now been broken up, but many miscellaneous 
volumes can still be identified amongst the "State Papers Miscellaneous." Some of his MSS. 
were apparently received by Queen's College, Oxford. 

5 See the plans of the office in 1682 in S. P. Docts. \\. 49. 



4o The History of the Archives 

and in writing Newsletters to subscribers in the provinces 1 . Both 
these departments of the Office were apparently conducted with 
a sole view to the profit which they afforded, though at this date 
it would probably have proved impossible to maintain a clerical 
establishment without some such device for making good the de- 
ficiencies of a bankrupt Exchequer. 

With the reign of Queen Anne 2 we find the condition of the 
Paper Office a matter of concern to the Lords' Committee for 
considering the state of the Public Records, and in the year 1706 
steps were taken to improve their housing and a new repository was 
prepared at considerable expense, in the Cockpit, from the plans of 
Sir Christopher Wren 3 . This building, which was afterwards known 
as the Middle Treasury Gallery, became in turn the repository of the 
Treasury Records. The accommodation thus provided was insufficient, 
but the change averted the imminent destruction of the Papers 
in the unglazed attics which were henceforth abandoned as pigeon- 
lofts 4 . 

Throughout the i8th century the history of the State Paper Office 
runs on parallel lines with that of the repositories of legal Records. 
There is indeed this general distinction to be observed that, whereas 
the latter were continuously preserved in an official custody which 
permitted the worst ravages of damp and vermin, the former suffered 
still heavier losses, not from natural causes but from their permanent 
abstraction from a custody which was plainly enjoined. To find 

1 Cf. 5. P. Docls. II. 30 and Edwards, Libraries, p. 193. 

2 No mention occurs in any of our authorities of the appointment by William III of John 
Chamberlayne to succeed Sir J. Williamson. This statement occurs in the former's well- 
known State of Great Britain, 1704, p. 147. 

3 The Report of John Tucker on the state of the office as received by him at Williamson's 
death is in the S. P. Docts. n. 69, and full particulars of the enquiry will be found in the 
Lords' Journals and in the records of the Treasury and Board of Trade. This new receptacle 
comprised the floor with an area of 80 ft. long by 25 ft. wide over the Lord Chamberlain's 
lodgings in the " White Building " in the Cockpit ; but it has also been described as the floor 
over the Treasury Chambers which had been recently used for the sittings of the Commissioners 
for the Union of England and Scotland (S. P. Docts. n. 108). It was better known at a 
later date as the Middle Treasury Gallery, which led from the Treasury to the Board of 
Trade. 

4 Some of the Council Records and miscellaneous State Papers were left behind and were 
rescued from their perilous position in 1763 or 1764 according to the received account, though 
as the Whitehall Gateway is said to have been removed in 1759 this statement must be 
accepted with caution. The Methodizers themselves state in their report of 1764 that the 
Gateway was removed some years ago (cf. below, p. 42, n. 2). In Hawkin's Index to the 
Records published in 1739 the Paper Office is stated to be "over the Gate by the Tilt- Yard," 
whilst the Records of the Council were kept in the Council Chamber in the Cockpit. 
In 1732 we also have a list of the Foreign Papers of recent date then preserved "in the 
Turret" which can only refer to the Whitehall Gateway (S.P. Docts. n. 116). 



The History of the Archives 41 

a parallel we must imagine the systematic removal of the rolls of the 
courts by the judges to their country seats ; but it must be admitted 
that the possibility of such losses was chiefly due to the inept pre- 
cautions devised during this period by the party of reform. Here 
again we have a close parallel with the proceedings and undertakings 
for the better arrangement of the legal Records. 

Instead of utilising all their available resources for the improvement 
of the housing of Records and State Papers, for their thorough repair, 
and for their systematic arrangement, the Committees and Com- 
missions of the 1 8th century preferred to serve the immediate 
interests of literature and history by employing experts to " digest " 
and "methodize" the contents of the State Archives 1 . At the same 
time a dual control was established in the case of the State Papers 
by the re-appointment of a "Collector and Transmitter" to secure the 
regular consignment of the Papers to official custody 2 . 

The result of these experiments was disastrous in the extreme, 
for the Collector and Transmitter appears to have enjoyed a virtual 
sinecure in respect of both collection and transmission, while the 
methods of the " Methodizers " were beneath contempt. The dis- 
tribution of the Papers between two independent repositories simply 
facilitated the process of abstraction by officials of all classes, and 
the recognized Keeper finding himself stripped of many of the 
former privileges and powers of his office resigned himself with a 

1 These "Methodizers" were not actually appointed as generally supposed, in consequence 
of the discovery of papers in the abandoned repository at Whitehall, but as the result of 
enquiry into the condition of the legal Records which was extended to the State Papers. 
The term "methodize" is found in the 1732 Report, and it is only fair to admit that the 
system was useful in the case of private collections. It was also hinted in certain official 
quarters that the reform was intended to prevent a recurrence of such an incident as the 
supposed abstraction of papers by the elder Pitt on resigning office in 1761. 

- The most extraordinary misstatements have been made and accepted with regard to the 
date of the first institution of this office, which has been assigned to the year 1713, Edward 
Weston being described as the first Collector and Transmitter. Elsewhere the date is given 
as 1714, and this has been conjecturally emended as 1741 in the 1800 Report. The first 
appointments were however as follows: George Tilson by Patent dated 20 Jan. 1725; 
Edward Weston and Andrew Stone by Patent dated 18 May, 1738; Edward Weston and 
John Couraud by Patent dated 26 June, 1741; John Couraud and T. Ramsden by Patent 
dated 4 Jan. 1742. As Couraud and Stone were successively Keepers of the Papers, in 1738 
and 1741 respectively, it would appear that the two offices were held more or less in common. 
The Transmitter received a salary of .400 ^600. The ostensible object of the new system, 
namely to ensure the regular transmission of the contents of the Secretaries' Offices to the 
Paper Office, seems to have been completely lost sight of at an early date. The practical 
effect of the change was that the Transmitter's Office, which became the headquarters of 
the "Methodizers," got possession only of such modern papers as were spontaneously trans- 
mitted to them, and transmitted these when Required for reference to the ministers of the 
Crown, by whom they were not in all cases returned (p. 52 n.). 



42 The History of the Archives 

good grace to draw his scanty official salary 1 without rendering any 
perceptible services. 

The exact position of the repositories of State Papers during the 
1 8th century has been the subject of further misapprehension. It 
would appear that upon the removal of the Papers to the Cockpit in 
1706, the accommodation provided in the middle story of the Treasury 
Chambers was found inadequate, and the Papers subsequent to the 
Revolution 2 were accordingly deposited in rooms situated probably 
below the office of the Secretary for the adjoining Board of 
Trade Office. To these were added the accruing Papers transmitted 
by the Collector and those discovered in some Whitehall turret in 
1763. 

It was with this collection that the "Methodizers" were principally 
concerned on their appointment in the year 1764, though they also 
invaded the Paper Office proper and practically discharged the 
functions of the Keeper, who regarded his post as a sinecure. In 
1782 when the old Board of Trade was abolished the Transmitter's 
Paper Office was removed to another suite, and in 1786' it was again 
removed to an old house in Middle Scotland Yard where presses 
were provided for the Papers 3 . 

The last chapter but one in the history of the State Paper Office 
begins with the appointment of John Bruce as Keeper in the year 
1792. This accomplished scholar was by the force of circumstances 
placed in a position of antagonism to the existing system of official 
custody and thus he proved himself not only a laborious and con- 
scientious public servant, but also a very capable administrator 4 . 

1 The three Commissioners appointed to methodize the State Papers, &c. drew 
salaries of the total value of 700, as against the 160 allowed to the regular 
Keeper. 

2 This is the received account and from a glance at the Inventory of the Transmitter's 
Office in the 1800 Report it would seem to be correct. As a matter of fact, however, it is 
highly improbable that any such chronological division was made, as an inventory of the old 
State Paper Office shows that most of the series preserved there end with the year 1 706 or 
thereabouts. This seems to indicate that all the Papers then removed from the Whitehall 
Gate Tower were placed in the new office in the Cockpit, and that the existence of papers 
of an earlier date than 1706 in the Transmitter's Office was due to the subsequent transmission 
of specimens which had been retained in the Secretaries* Offices in addition to those discovered 
in 1763. 

8 S.P.Docts. in. 87. 

4 At the same time we must not lose sight of the fact that the agitation for the reform of 
the custody of State Papers carried on by Bruce for more than ten years was a distinct bid for 
his own employment in the Service. He was moreover completely misinformed as to the 
early history of the Office and made numerous assertions with regard to it which are 
ludicrously inaccurate. Many of these have unfortunately been accepted without 
investigation. 



The History of the Archives 43 

During the eight years' struggle which ensued between the new 
Keeper, who insisted on the efficiency of his office, and the " Metho- 
dizers" and Transmitter, the former was stoutly backed by Pitt and 
Dundas against the covert hostility of Grenville and Portland. 
Certainly Pitt could have had no great reverence for an innovation 
which was commonly regarded as having been directed against his 
father's alleged suppression of diplomatic documents 1 , and moreover 
the obvious incapacity of these official interlopers was a serious 
hindrance to his own ministerial activity. 

At length, in 1798, Bruce's scheme for a new establishment and 
increased efficiency of the Paper Office was approved, and a warrant 
was issued two years later for its execution. 

It is well known that this important reform was accompanied by 
the issue of the First Report of the Commission on the state of the 
Public Records, which made an end of the whole fraternity of Trans- 
mitters and Methodizers. 

The State Papers which had been detached by the Transmitter 
still remained at Scotland Yard till 1819 when they were transferred 
to a house in Great George Street. Finally in 1833 the whole of the 
Papers were removed to the new Paper Office in St James' Park, 
where they remained until the amalgamation of the State Papers 
with the Records in 1848" was completed in 1862 by the transfer of 
the whole collection to the Rolls Office. 



(c) Departmental Records. 

This is not the place in which the history of the State depart- 
ments at large can be treated of directly. A sufficient reason may be 
found in the mere fact that by no means all the departments which 
have survived are possessed of historical documents in official custody. 
At the same time the evolution of the existing departmental collec- 
tions is a subject which necessarily involves some examination of the 
circumstances of their earlier custody. For this reason we may at 
least endeavour to ascertain the distribution of the Records in suc- 
cessive periods, even if we must limit this examination to a brief 
enumeration of the departments concerned. 

1 Knox, Extra Official State Papers, p. n. The original Report is in the Records of 
the Board of Trade. Dundas had been favourably impressed by Bruce's efficiency in 
supplying Papers connected with the urgent question of Internal Defence. Many of these, 
unfortunately, were not returned to the State Paper Office. 

2 Treasury Minute, 8 Aug. 1848. The transfer was effected by the Order in Council of 1851. 



44 The History of the Archives 

In the earliest period of the royal administration in this country 
all offices outside the King's household were executed by a class 
of ministers or special agents, who in many cases were merely 
royal clerks, detached for such service from the Court itself 1 . 
For all other purposes the feudal machinery of the Court and 
Household sufficed to supplement and control the local system 
of self-government. This effectually provided for the economy 
of the king's house and chamber, the administration of justice, the 
collection of the revenue, military operations and other matters which 
now chiefly engage the attention of the public departments 2 . Some 
of these official duties continued to be discharged for several centuries 
by a similar agency 3 , but from an early date it was found desirable 
to supplement the operations of the great hereditary offices of State 
by the employment of clerical experts, whilst the development of an 
extraordinary revenue and of international relations created a large 
staff of special agents as ambassadors, clerks, surveyors, paymasters, 
collectors, comptrollers, receivers, keepers, farmers 4 , &c. In course of 
time these special agents, or official patentees, are grouped together 
for certain purposes, each of these groups forming the nucleus of 
a later department, the individual patentees being in some cases still 
recognizable as the heads of sub-departments 5 . By the side of these 
new-modelled departments, several of the old patent officers, agents 
and contractors are still employed as before 6 , but during the i/th 
century there is a marked tendency for the great offices of State 
to be placed in commission, a policy which facilitated the clerical 
organization of the departments involved 7 . At the same time we 
shall look in vain for any continuous or considerable collection of 
Departmental Records in official custody outside the royal Household 
and the Courts of Law previous to the Restoration. That such 
Records existed from the middle of the i6th century is, however, 
certain, for a considerable number may still be found interspersed 
with the general series of State Papers and preserved in certain 
private collections. The departments to which these refer may pro- 
bably be distinguished as follows : the Royal Household in its main 

1 Cf. Stubbs, Oxford Lectures, vi. 

2 Cf. Dialogus de Scaccario, I. v. ; Red Book of Exchequer, Vol. ill. Preface; Ordinances 
of the Kings Household (Soc. Antiq.); Archceologia, Vol. xxviu. 

3 See below, p. 45. 

4 See the original and enrolled or declared Exchequer Accounts from the I3th to the 
1 7th centuries. 

8 e.g. in the Ordnance, Mint, Works, &c. 

8 See the Declared Accounts of the Pells and Audit Office, passim. 

7 See below, p. 46. 



The History of the Archives 45 

divisions of the Lord Steward's or Lord Chamberlain's departments, 
including the branch offices of the Wardrobe and Jewel House, the 
Board of Green Cloth, and a network of subordinate departments ; 
the Admiralty and the Ordnance offices (including the Armoury), the 
Custom House, the Mint, the Works, and the combined establish- 
ments of the Secretaries of State and the Privy Council. It will be 
seen that the departments which were the first to be evolved from 
the mediaeval official system are those connected with the Household 
itself, with the collection of the revenues of the Crown, including 
the supervision of public works, and with the currency and the 
national defence, all of which had shown a tendency towards a 
distinct organization from a comparatively early date. 

The establishment of the Mint dates from the I3th century. 
The remaining departments, which were evolved in a later period, 
were represented in the Tudor and early Stuart periods either by the 
personal agency of patentees and their deputies, farmers and special 
agents, or by some more or less independent branch of the Royal 
Household. 

Others, again, such as those concerned with the management of 
the Crown lands and forests, the first-fruits and tenths and the royal 
treasure were still administered by special courts of law 1 , whilst all 
matters relating to local government, trade, agriculture, and the 
plantations were within the general jurisdiction of the Council 2 . One 
noticeable omission from the above list occurs in the case of the War 
Office which, before the era of a standing army and a commander-in- 
chief, was sufficiently represented by the Ordnance and Armoury, for 
the provision of military stores and by the periodical employment of 
special agents as paymasters, contractors, and treasurers-at-war 3 . 

Between the Restoration and the Revolution important additions 
to the clerical establishment of the Crown were made by the appoint- 
ment of a Secretary at War and a Paymaster General of the Forces ; 
by the expansion of another device of the civil war time, the Excise, 
and by the permanent establishment of the Board of Trade and 
Plantations and the General Post Office. At the same time some 
progress was made in the direction of the organization of minor 

1 The Court of General Surveyors and the Treasury (including the Audit Office), which 
still had its headquarters at the Exchequer, of which the "First Fruits and Tenths" continued 
to form a department until the reign of Queen Anne. 

2 In the case of trade the Council seems to have made use of the advice and assistance of 
private experts, especially in the middle of the i?th century, and this will account for the 
preservation of contemporary records in the archives of the Royal Society and elsewhere. 

3 Cf. Pipe and Audit Office Declared Accounts, passim. 



46 The History of the Archives 

departments, such as the Office of Woods and Forests 1 , whilst the 
Treasury itself, together with the Inland Revenue, were in the process 
of development 2 . Few of these early departments, however, are 
represented by anything approaching to a continuous series of 
Records in official custody. In some cases, as in those of the Excise 
and the Mint, the departmental Archives appear never to have been 
transferred to a general repository 3 . In other cases the bulk of the 
existing Records has been destroyed by fire, such as that by which 
the Customs Records were decimated in 1814. Presumably the 
surviving papers of the Admiralty and War Office for this period 
are in private custody, whilst fragments of the correspondence of the 
old Boards of Trade previous to 1696 are to be found amongst the 
Domestic State Papers. By far the most complete of the official 
Records are those of the Ordnance Office, the Navy Board and the 
Treasury. After the Revolution, with an organized Civil List and 
under the growing system of departmental Boards, a better state of 
things is found to exist. 

The great series of Admiralty Records, including numerous 
branch offices, dates practically from 1689. Other Government 
Boards which are continuously represented from the same period 
are the Treasury and the Board of Trade and Plantations 4 . A 
special feature of the period is seen in the great development of 
the Inland Revenue as a source of taxation, and new offices appear 
in the case of Greenwich Hospital and Queen Anne's Bounty. The 
regular series of War Office Records is unfortunately imperfect before 
the reign of George III, but a certain number of Precedents and 
Letter-books exist from the reign of Charles II, and special volumes 
of military Despatches and Commissions are preserved amongst the 
Domestic and Foreign State Papers from the reign of Queen Anne. 

From the accession of the House of Hanover to the official 

1 For the history of this office see Thomas, History of Public Departments, p. 107. There 
was an establishment. of four surveyors in 1663. 

2 The Records of the Tax Department created by the 4 Will, and Mary c. i are chiefly 
represented on the Exchequer side (Land and Assessed Taxes K.R. & L.T.R.). For the 
business of the Treasury at this date see Calendars of the Treasury Books, Prefaces by 
W. A. Shaw, passim. 

3 Certain Inland Revenue Records appear to have been utilized by Mr Dowell in his 
History of Taxation, but only those of the Estate Duty Office seem to have been transferred 
to the Public Record Office. Those formerly preserved in the City branches are stated to 
have been destroyed as useless, but a certain number from the old offices in Somerset Place 
appear to have been incorporated with the Miscellanea of the Treasury. (Cf. D. K. \ tfh Report, 
p. 5, and nth Report, p. 8.) As to the records of the Mint cf. D. K. ^yd Report, p. xi, and 
35/// Report, p. xvii. 

4 The Board of Trade and Plantations was reconstituted in 1695. 



The History of the Archives 47 

reformation consequent on Burke's Act in 1782, few new departments 
were erected, though the existing establishments were greatly ex- 
panded, owing especially to the naval and military activity of the 
time. The Records taken over by the later National Debt Office 
were largely compiled during this period which also witnessed the 
important operations of various trading Companies and Commissions 
whose Records were destined to fall into the hands of the Crown. 
But the chief event in the contemporary history of the departments 
is undoubtedly the creation of a third Secretaryship of State for the 
administration of the Colonies in 1768. The period of resolute minis- 
terial government which succeeded the constitutional agitation of 
1782 and lasted until the era of decadence which preceded the Reform 
Bill in 1832 was responsible for important changes in the public 
departments. The loss of the American Colonies was followed by 
the abolition of the Board of Trade and Plantations, together with 
the new Colonial Secretaryship. The Records of the former depart- 
ment are now merged in the Archives of the later Colonial Office, by 
virtue seemingly of an order made in 1842, whereby all the Records 
of the old Board of Trade, previous to 1782, were transferred to the 
State Paper Office, an order which was only partially carried out 1 . 
From one point of view, however, the Board remodelled in 1 784, from 
which date a new series of Trade Papers begins, is the lineal successor 
of the old Commission. 

Closely related to this department, and in one aspect to the 
Ordnance Survey, is the old Board of Agriculture, whose records un- 
fortunately have not descended to its modern successor. Another 
important modification of departmental jurisdiction has resulted in 
the modern aspect of the old office of the principal Secretary of State, 
the earlier distribution of business between the Northern and Southern 
Departments being superseded by the new division between Home 
and Foreign affairs*. Nevertheless, for some time to come, the Home 
Office retained the prestige of the old Secretaryship through its 
general control of military and even Colonial matters, in addition to 
its supervision of all matters that concerned the lives and liberties of 
the subjects and the dignity of the Crown. To some extent also this 

1 Originally the business of Trade and Plantations was distinct, but the two departments 
were thrown together after the Restoration, though a distinction continued lo be made 
between Colonial affairs and domestic and foreign trade to the end. For some years after 
the reforms of 1782 Colonial affairs were managed by an "Office for Plantations" in the 
Home Department. 

* Cf. Sir Ed. Hertslet, The Old F. O., Appx., and Sir W. Anson, ConstitiUional History 
(ed. 1907), Vol. ii. Part i. (1907), and below, Appx. III. 



48 The History of the Archives 

department might be regarded as rightfully possessed of the entire 
series of State Papers prior to 1782, but this is an academic question 
which need not be discussed here. However, it is material to note, in 
connexion with the Records of the period, that the War Office con- 
tinued to be attached to this department till the year 1794, when a 
new Secretaryship for War (dealing with the regular army only), was 
created, being continued as a joint department with the Colonies 
from 1 80 1 to I854 1 . The reorganization of some other departments, 
including the Offices of Works, Woods and Forests, and the Mint 
during the same period does not affect the custody of their existing 
Records 2 , but since 1816 the Commissariat was left in a doubtful 
position towards the War Office and the Treasury respectively. 
Certain semi-isolated Offices like the principal Revenue departments 3 , 
the Victualling Office, and the important fraternity of Auditors, 
Comptrollers and Imprest officers can be conveniently relegated to 
the central departments of modern times 4 . 

The new offices erected towards the close of the i8th century and 
in the early part of the iQth were to some extent of a similar nature, 
the Emigration Board and Alien Office Records having been absorbed 
by the Colonial and Home Offices respectively and those of the 
Board of Control being subsidiary to the main collection in the India 
Office. The National Debt and Stationery Offices have, however, 
continued to exist as separate establishments, though no Records 
from the latter have come to hand. 

The sweeping reforms effected in 1832 brought several interesting 
series of Departmental Records to an abrupt close. Amongst these 
were the Correspondence and Accounts of the Navy Board and its 

1 The military business assigned to the new War Department in 1794 was sharply 
distinguished from the control of the auxiliary military forces which was exclusively 
exercised by the Home Department down to the year 1854. On the other hand the 
management of Colonial affairs was relinquished by the latter department in 1801 in favour 
of the combined War and Colonial Department. From 1816 this department confined its 
attention more especially to Colonial affairs, its official supervision of the War Office being 
continued only till the office of Secretary- at -War was merged in that of a new Secretary of 
State for War. 

* The Offices of Woods and Works were amalgamated between 1832 and 1851 under a 
single Board of Commissioners. For the history of the Mint see the well-known Report of 
the Commission of 1848. 

8 e.g. the Tax Office, Stamp Office, Hawkers' and Pedlars' Office, Hackney Coach Office 
and Salt Office. There were three Boards for Excise, Stamps and Taxes respectively. 

4 i.e. the Exchequer and Audit Office, which unites since 1867 the old functions of the 
Comptroller General of the Exchequer and the Auditor General, who in turn replaced the 
several Commissions for the Audit of the Public Revenue and Expenditure, including the 
Commissioners for Auditing Public Accounts, Auditors of Colonial Accounts, Auditors and 
Comptrollers of Army Accounts, &c. 



The History of the Archives 49 

subordinate departments, which were transferred to the department 
of the Accountant General of the Navy as a branch of the Admiralty 
Office 1 . Some twenty years later the Ancient Board of Ordnance 
shared the same fate, whilst a number of smaller offices, hitherto semi- 
detached and semi-independent, were gradually merged in the central 
organization of naval and military administration. At the same time 
the remodelled departments of the Paymaster General 2 and Auditor 
General 3 absorbed other isolated branches of the Ancient Exchequer 
of Receipt and Account, though for some not very obvious reason the 
nominal duties of the King's Remembrancer and of the Comptroller 
of the Receipt of the Exchequer were continued down to modern 
times*. Again the Office of Works, as we have seen, was temporarily 
united with that of Woods and Forests in 1832 and the various 
branches of the Inland Revenue were finally amalgamated, whilst 
the nearly related business of Probate and Registration was brought 
into close proximity to the Revenue departments at Somerset 
House. 

On the other hand the Commissariat department was separated 
in 1853 from the Treasury, by which it had been administered since 
1816, but the Records of the Commissariat and Treasury Chest were 
continued till 1876. It is interesting to notice that the Commissariat 
as an independent department, from 1790 to 1816, occupied the 
same auxiliary position towards the military service of the country 
as was held by the old Victualling Office in connexion with the 
Navy. 

A large number of new departments have been added during the 
last half century to the old establishments of the Civil List and the 
public service. 

Two of the most noticeable additions, however, the two Secretary- 
ships for India and War had existed for a long time previously in 
other forms 5 . The same observation, indeed, applies to other depart- 
ments which were formally erected in this period. The scheme 
sanctioned in 1838 for a Public Record Office, with which the State 

1 Five new departments were created at this date, Accountant General, Surveyor General, 
Storekeeper General, Comptrolling of Victualling and Physician General. 

2 The Paymaster General's Office was reformed in 1782 and remodelled in 1836 to 
consolidate the several departments of the Paymaster General of the Forces, the Treasurer 
of Chelsea Hospital, the Treasurer of the Navy, the Treasurer of the Ordnance and the 
Paymaster of the Civil Service. 

3 Cf. above, p. 48, n. 4. 

4 Cf. below, p. 117, n. i. The Office of the Exchequer Seal was not abolished until 1849 
and its Records were not transferred till 1904. 

8 The Board of Control and the Secretary at War. 

H. 4 



5O The History of the Archives 

Paper Office was incorporated in I854 1 , merely consolidated the 
existing keeperships and repositories of the legal Records with which 
the Archives of the public departments were now conjoined 2 . From 
a general point of view the Public Record Office might be regarded 
as a department of the Courts of Law, but its true descent is from the 
Household, and moreover, as a public department, its Archives must 
be distinguished from the Records at large 8 . 

Of the more recent departments whose establishments swell the 
pages of the modern official Calendars, it is enough to remark that 
with few exceptions they do not possess Archives which are likely to 
prove of any historical value, a circumstance which is presumably due 
to their purely administrative and political nature and to the fact that 
the chief information which their Records could convey has for the 
most part been printed by the Government press. It may indeed be 
accepted as a general principle that, just as the place of the State 
Papers is taken in the i8th century by the Records of the public 
departments, so the historical use of the latter is superseded in turn 
by the printed Blue Books. This is a consideration which may 
materially affect the eventual survival of the modern Departmental 
Records, and it is one which has in fact already led to the judicious 
clearance of an accumulation of superfluous documents and official 
forms. At the same time, owing partly to the conservative instincts 
of the race, and partly to the ceremonial requirements of international 
relations, there are certain exceptions to this rule. The most notice- 
able of these is found in the case of the diplomatic and Colonial 
correspondence, which has clearly shown no tendency to diminish 
either in volume or in importance during the last century, and which 
cannot for obvious reasons be neglected for historical reference. In 
addition to these it must be remembered that there are archives of 
the British Legations in the capitals of Europe which in a few cases 
only were transmitted to London before the close of the Napoleonic 
wars, whilst some are still outstanding. 

With the exception of such isolated documents as were preserved 

1 The Signet Office, which like the State Paper Office itself had been for three centuries a 
sub-department of the Secretaries of State's Office, was abolished by the Act of the 14 and 15 
Victoria c. 82. The Privy Seal Office, which enjoyed an independent existence as a department 
of State, was abolished by the same Act. 

Nothing can be said here on the subject of the several departmental "Paper- 
Rooms," which were chiefly responsible for the custody of Records previous to their transfer 
to the Public Record Office. Most of these departmental Registries or Libraries in fact still 
exist. 

3 These administrative Records include those of the State Paper Office dating back to the 
1 6th century. 



The History of the Archives 51 

in company with the old State Papers, the Departmental Records 
now preserved in the Public Record Office were mainly transferred to 
that safe custody between the years 1846 and 1860. Since the latter 
date new additions have been made to this central collection from 
time to time, the details of which will be found in the periodical 
Reports of the Deputy Keeper. The very serious questions which 
will inevitably arise whenever a complete survey of these later sources 
shall be attempted cannot be mooted here. Such an enquiry would 
include the circumstances connected with their official custody and 
the causes of the irreparable losses which so many of the series have 
obviously sustained. Here again we should find a repetition of the 
flagrant abuses which have been unsparingly condemned in earlier 
official Reports dealing with the preservation of the legal Records 
and State Papers. Unfortunately no pains and penalties were in- 
curred by the abstraction or wanton destruction of these later 
Records, nor was the mischief likely to be ended until the intention of 
the Public Records Acts had been fully realized. Several important 
private collections have, however, been recovered or deposited from 
time to time, and these are notified in the Deputy Keeper's 
Reports. 

The chief conclusions at which we shall necessarily have arrived 
from the above rapid survey of the chief incidents connected with the 
evolution of the public departments and the custody of their Records 
may perhaps be stated as follows : 

In the first place we have found that certain departments have 
now ceased to exist, and that their Records have been transferred to 
some other custody in which they may be identified with varying 
success. 

Secondly, other departments appear to have been absorbed or 
reorganized by a natural process, their Records being in nearly every 
case transferred or retained without loss from that cause. 

Again a third class of public departments has preserved its 
departmental position unchanged, with its Records intact, and these 
have been either transferred to the national Archives or retained in 
the possession of the department itself. 

Finally it may be presumed that, with a few exceptions, no 
Departments constituted since 1858 are possessed of Archives in 
official custody which would prove indispensable to historical students 1 . 

1 For the convenience of certain of these departments a few documents of value, though 
of no historical importance, have been received at the Public Record Office for safe custody. 
These are noted in the Deputy Keeper's Reports. 

42 



52 The History of the Archives 

A nearer view of the condition and prospects of the modern 
Archives of the State is forbidden by the well-known rule whereby 
certain State Papers of the past century are withdrawn from a critical 
examination. But events move rapidly in this direction. Less than 
a hundred years ago few even of the legal Records or of the more 
ancient State Papers could be inspected without a license or the 
payment of almost prohibitive fees, whilst the chief opportunity of 
inspecting Departmental Papers was by reading their context in the 
memoirs of some public official who had removed them from his 
own department 1 . Possibly before the close of another century the 
historical value of these contemporary documents will have ceased 
to exist ; but before that time has come it is also possible that many 
gaps in the earlier and more essential series will have been filled. 

1 See Memoirs of J. W. Croker and D. K. ioth Jteport, p. xxi. But this is nothing to the 
void caused by the abstraction of official papers in the first quarter of the i9th century, some 
of which are offered for sale every day, whilst others are bestowed in family collections that 
are inaccessible to the student. Fortunately (as remarked above) the tendency is for these 
collections to be acquired by the British Museum. Thus the important State Papers and 
departmental Records formerly acquired by the founders of the great Stowe collection have 
been fortunately preserved to the nation, though not it is true in the custody contemplated by 
the Act of 1838 and the reiterated ordinances of earlier times. 



THE CLASSIFICATION OF ARCHIVES. 



(a) Records. 

A CLASSIFICATION of our national Records has already been to 
some extent attempted by the able officials who have from time to 
time described their nature and extent. This official classification, 
however, has been necessarily confined to a technical and artificial 
arrangement of the contents of the old Record repositories, and a 
purely scientific or " diplomatic " reconstruction of these Archives 
has not yet attracted the attention of English antiquaries. We are 
still content to take the Records as we find them. Rolls and 
Registers, Charters, Writs and Warrants, Inquisitions and Returns, 
Accounts, and all the rest, are what they have been since they were 
first written. There is no room for abstruse theory in the closely 
printed pages of the encyclopaedic handbook which forms such an 
admirable Guide to the existing arrangement of the Public Records. 
The relationship of one class to another, the construction of the 
subsidiary documents from which the formal Record is derived, the 
position of the derived documents which may be grouped around 
these, and the history of the mere excrescences, no longer nourished 
by the parent stock and clogging its avenues of light and air, none of 
these considerations has entered into the philosophy of the ancient or 
modern archivist. 

It might be objected with some force that such questions are 
neither very practical nor very urgent, and that there is no demand 
for a scientific classification of Archives. But it is not even sug- 
gested that the existing arrangement might be superseded with any 
real advantage. The student of history has certainly no cause for 
gratitude to those who rashly remove the landmarks of antiquity. 
If the old proprietary classification of the Records of the Courts of 
Law is an artificial one necessitating a multitude of cross-references it 
also has its uses. It will at least be found to have preserved a clue to 
the provenance of the several series, whilst it allows ancient references 



54 The Classification of Archives 

to be preserved intact. Neither of these advantages can perhaps 
be claimed for the system of specialization which has already 
made considerable inroads on the departmental collections of the 
Courts of Justice. On the other hand this system certainly facili- 
tates the production of detailed lists forming a series of scholarly 
monographs which are duly appreciated by the public. Moreover of 
late years there has been a tendency towards grouping the main 
divisions of Records under their characteristic subjects. Thus the 
Plea Rolls of the Courts of Law have been distinguished by 
the title of "Judicial Proceedings," whilst for composite groups 
such convenient catch-words have been devised as " Ecclesiastical 
Matters," " Monastic Foundations," " Feudal Tenures," " Escheats 
and Forfeitures," " Army, Navy and Ordnance," " Parliamentary Pro- 
ceedings," " Forests," &c. Such a system of recognized passwords 
for the chief sources of our institutional history may in the near 
future enable us to scrutinize the contents of the darkest recesses of 
the repository by a reflected light. The old press references will 
remain, but they need not possess any greater significance than the 
titles of the Roman emperors with which a famous antiquary embel- 
lished his stolen volumes. Eventually there are certain problems 
to be solved in connexion with the intricate system of Record com- 
position that will require nothing less than a complete structural 
classification of the ancient Records of the realm ; the relationship of 
one class to another, and the part that each distinct species of Record 
is designed to play in the economy of the mediaeval Scriptorium, 
Such a reconstruction, however, will be regarded as a purely Utopian 
scheme, and the utmost that may be attempted here is an innocent 
re-grouping of the several classes of Records in the interests of 
diplomatic study. 

Let us begin with the essential Records, the " Protokollrolle " 
or final acts of the Courts of Record themselves. These can be dis- 
tinguished at a glance when they are produced to us, and we know 
that they lie in their thousands on the shelves of the Repository, an 
unequalled series of term-rolls of the Courts of Law, extending from 
the reign of Richard I to that of Queen Victoria. 

These form the most important portion of the " Judicial Proceed- 
ings " above referred to, and for the purpose of convenient subdivision 
they may still be allowed to remain under their respective Courts. 
Here are the "Plea Rolls," distinguished by the several titles of "Curia 
Regis," " Coram Rege," " Crown," " Controlment," and " Assize," which 
last includes of course the ordinary business of the Eyres, " Oyer and 



Tke Classification of Archives 55 

Terminer," " Gaol Delivery " and " Nisi Prius," together with the 
extraordinary business connected with " Quo warranto," " Trail- 
baston," " Rageman," " Labourers," or Special Commissions, such as 
that which investigated the judicial scandals of 1289* and the State 
trials contained in the so-called Baga de Secretis. These are for the 
king's Courts alone 2 . For the Common Pleas we have the " De Banco " 
Rolls and their sequel in the " Plea " and " Recovery " Rolls of a later 
period, and there are also those abnormal Records the Fines. The 
Exchequer Court furnishes a closely allied series of Plea Rolls, whilst 
its Memoranda Rolls (if we must exclude Pipe Rolls) are possibly 
the most ancient of all judicial Records 3 . In later times its equitable 
jurisdiction has produced a long series of Decrees and Orders 4 . Then 
there is the Chancery with its slow judicial development 5 and its 
eventual encroachments, affording, instead of Rolls, a few early Pro- 
ceedings and a mass of later Decrees 8 . All these are familiar types; 
but the list is not yet complete. For the purpose of a logical classifi- 
cation we must certainly include the Plea Rolls of the "Judaism" and 
of the Forests, together with the formal proceedings of the Palace 
Courts, and 'the pleadings within palatine jurisdictions. Possibly too 
we ought to include the Placita Parliamentaria, although the depart- 
mental connexion of these pleadings is with the Chancery, whilst the 
Acts or Sentences of the Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Courts are 
still further removed owing to their alien characteristics. In any case, 
however, they should be enumerated in a diplomatic collection of the 
final instruments of a judicial system. 

So far we have, on the whole, been able to keep our classification 
within the beaten track ; but the remaining " Records," as they are 
commonly regarded, those other "judicial proceedings," the Indict- 
ments, Bails, Essoins, Affidavits, Interrogatories, Bills, Answers and 
the rest, together with the Writs and Returns, Petitions and other 
documents of a diplomatic construction, besides the great army of 
Accounts; all these, which we have declined to place "cheek by jowl" 

1 See below, p. 144 sq. 

2 Some of the above, such as the proceedings under the Statute of Labourers, are really 
Rolls of the Justices of the Peace. 

3 See Part n. 

4 The departmental Courts of Augmentations, General Surveyors and First Fruits and 
Tenths and the cognate jurisdiction of the Court of Wards and Liveries are included under the 
Exchequer in the modern classification of the Records. 

5 From the "Common Law" practice recorded in the "County Placita" 

6 The special jurisdictions of the Courts of Star Chamber and Requests are closely 
allied to that of the Chancery. The surviving Records are however chiefly subsidiary 
proceedings. 



56 The Classification of Archives 

with the completed Record, remain to be disposed of. These, as we 
have premised, must be regarded as " subsidiary judicial proceedings," 
leading through successive stages and by divers processes to the con- 
summation of the Record. 

An exception should perhaps be made in the case of the Accounts 
which are subsidiary to the compilation of the Great Roll and which 
also furnish the chief subject matter for the legitimate business of the 
Exchequer Court. The whole of this class however, though it is 
easily recognized by its general characteristics, presents many diffi- 
culties owing to our present imperfect knowledge of the minute 
details of the judicial and administrative systems of an earlier period 1 . 
For several reasons these Accounts may be included in the following 
class of Ministerial Proceedings. 

The class of Records referred to above may be distinguished 
broadly from the remaining Archives by their judicial environment, 
but it must be remembered that amongst these judicial Records there 
are certain types which present a purely diplomatic construction 
although these instruments were nevertheless employed solely in 
a judicial connexion. A well-known instance occurs fn the case 
of the Final Concords, whilst the Coroners' Rolls are returns to 
inquisitions in diplomatic form. Finally there are the innumerable 
Writs and other diplomatic instruments which constitute a large 
portion of the recognized judicial proceedings of the Courts. 

These forms, however, are truly represented in the next section of 
our classification, which will include the originals or enrolments of 
diplomatic documents, including a large number of Inquisitions and 
Returns. The relationship in which these diplomatic documents 
stand towards the true judicial Records and their satellites is not 
easily explained. From one point of view few if any of them should 
be included amongst " Records " at all, for they are for the most part 
the products of the Chancery and Exchequer in their secretarial or 
ministerial capacities and include the well-known mediaeval " State 

1 In theory, at least, every branch and item of the Revenue was returnable in the 
Treasurer's budget, and each was authenticated by " Particulars of Account," a large 
proportion of which has survived to form one of the most extensive classes of our Public 
Records. These are the vouchers not only for the sheriff's farm, but also for the accounts of 
individual debtors, returnable through one or the other as accountants. In course of time the 
main sources of the Revenue ceased to flow through this main channel and were intercepted by 
"Foreign "enrolments and later still by "Declared Accounts, "prepared and examined by new 
fiscal departments. These later enrolments, however, were based in turn upon "particulars" 
and "ledger-books" which have been more or less capriciously preserved. From this one 
source then we have a vast mass of disconnected documents, the accounts of sheriffs, bailiffs, 
clerks, ministers and receivers, customers, collectors and escheators. 



The Classification of Archives 57 

Papers," of which some are still preserved amongst the modern series 
which bears that title. And yet the originals of these diplomata were 
received, preserved and occasionally enrolled by the Courts themselves 
which by degrees reproduced their formulas in the composition of 
their own Records. In fact for certain purposes the apparatus of the 
Chancery was not more efficient than that of the Exchequer or the 
Courts of Common Law. From the reign of Henry II (if not earlier) 
the King's Court and the Exchequer possessed distinctive seals, and 
several of the great inquests of the I2th and I3th centuries were 
apparently carried out through the sole agency of the latter juris- 
diction 1 . In the case of other Inquisitions the Chancery certainly 
exercised a sole or at least a dual control, and by degrees, especially 
with the decay of the feudal system, the activity and political impor- 
tance of the king's clerks superseded the functions of the Barons in 
this direction. The " Petty Bag " becomes a permanent institution, 
like the " Hamper," and the Exchequer confines itself to " special 
commissions " and obsolete inquests. But although the natural com- 
munity of mediaeval clerical labour will easily account for the occasional 
interchange of Records between the two courts, the Chancery in its 
secretarial capacity has an absolute control over the composition 
and preservation of the domestic and foreign State Papers. Of 
these the originals and drafts, where they have been preserved, 
form the great class of Diplomatic Documents, whilst the copies 
alone constitute a considerable proportion of the Chancery Enrol- 
ments. 

It is as we have seen a matter of some difficulty to draw a sharp 
distinction in any scheme of classification between the diplomatic 
forms of certain legal Records such as Fines and Recognizances and 
the Inquisitions and Returns which present like forms without any 
judicial connexion. This difficulty may, however, be to some extent 
obviated by the reflection that Pleadings and Returns alike have 
a common diplomatic origin as the products of a royal writ, which is 
here merely distinguished according to its judicial or administrative 
nature 2 . Moreover the proprietary claims of the Courts in respect of 
many important examples of ministerial proceedings are very ill- 
defined, and here as in other cases documents have been assigned 
to particular jurisdictions from the confusion attending their early 
custody. 

1 e.g. the feudal inquests preserved in the Red and Black Books of the Exchequer and the 
Testa de Nevill. 

a See below, Part n. 



58 The Classification of Archives 

Less difficulty may be felt in disposing of the group of Records 
now under consideration since royal charters and writs, with their 
Returns, and Royal Letters, with divers ordinances and notarial 
instruments, may clearly be classed together in accordance with 
their structural and technical characteristics. Indeed as we have 
seen it might be fairly questioned whether their mere environment 
should suffice to distinguish many of these reputed Records from the 
State Papers and Departmental Records of a later period, for after 
the lapse of a few centuries the latter in turn may appear as archaic 
as the Patent and Close Rolls of the 13th century. 

Purely diplomatic forms are also represented by a third class of 
documents, which must not be placed on the same footing with 
judicial Records or even with diplomatic documents on account 
of the informality of their execution and preservation, although in 
many cases they will not be found to differ from either of the above 
in their form and purpose. These are the well-known Precedent 
Books, or " Books of Remembrance," semi-official compilations which 
have preserved valuable and authoritative, in some cases unique 
copies or notes of judicial and political proceedings. Although for 
the most part compiled in the shape of books, some rolls are found 
in this class which is chiefly represented amongst the Records of the 
Exchequer and the Chancery. Doubtless many cause-books and 
precedents were in daily use in the courts of law, but it is scarcely 
surprising that so few of these have been preserved in official custody, 
though numerous examples have survived in private collections. 

Amongst these Precedent Books we may perhaps distinguish 
between works which are practically transcripts of official Records, 
such as Domesday Book itself, the Testa de Nevill, Kirby's Quest 
and other well-known Feodaries and Surveys, the Vetus Codex for 
proceedings of the Parliament, or mere transcripts of Statutes, and 
compilations of a wider scope and utility which in many cases were 
the work of more than one generation of clerks. Familiar instances 
will be recalled by the titles of the Red and Black Books of the 
Exchequer and the Libri Munimentorum, whilst of one sort and 
another some hundreds of these Precedents are to be found amongst 
the Miscellaneous Books, Rolls and Documents of the several courts. 

Below these in historical, but not in official merit, are the common- 
place books in official use, including Formulas, Calendars, Inventories, 
Establishments, Treatises and other office properties, which have been 
compiled and continuously preserved in the repositories of Records. 
Some of these are of great antiquity and considerable interest. 



The Classification of Archives 59 

Bishop Stapeldon's famous Calendar and the other contents of the 
Liber Memorandorum together with the repertories of early judicial 
proceedings have a value apart from age, whilst the " remains " of 
Agarde, Ayloffe, Palmer and other official antiquaries are still in 
current use. But by no means all the existing specimens of this 
class are now preserved in official custody. 

The fourth and last division of Records in this scheme of classifi- 
cation will include a considerable number of documents which though 
in many cases of diplomatic construction are not in their origin official 
Records, for the very reason that they have been mainly composed 
by private hands, and have been acquired from external sources. 
Such are the original charters, writs, and cartularies ; the court rolls, 
surveys and other title-deeds which have been deposited or "exhibited " 
chiefly in the course of Chancery suits and proceedings in the Ex- 
chequer, or which have come into the hands of the Crown in 
consequence of the death or delinquency of their original possessors. 
These deposits had begun to accumulate in the royal treasury as 
early as the reign of Henry II 1 and to them was added later a vast 
mass of correspondence, accounts and family papers. Some of these 
documents such as " court-rolls," " ministers' accounts," Surveys and 
Registers have already been incorporated with the corresponding 
series of official Records, and if this process of absorption were 
continued the artificial distinction of the whole class would soon be 
at an end. 

In summing up the results of this outline of a structural classifica- 
tion of our Public Records, it will be evident that the key to the 
position is the restriction of the term " Record " to the class of 
judicial proceedings to which it lawfully pertains. This simple 
limitation not only enables us at once to disentangle the true 
Record from the confused mass of state documents with which it 
has been casually associated in the existing proprietary classification, 
but also to resolve these latter documents into certain natural divisions 
which have not hitherto been recognized. At the same time it suggests 
a useful distinction between the final Record and its subsidiary 
documents. Again it will be noticed that the immediate effect of 
this natural arrangement is to bring into prominence not only the 
individuality but also the continuity of the composition and preserva- 
tion displayed by the several types. The continuity of official writings 
is in fact a vindication of their morphological classification, for, with 
certain inevitable modifications, the forms of Records are continuous 

1 Dialogus, I. xiv. 



60 The Classification of Archives 

from first to last, and so, in their distinctive shape, are the diplomatic 
forms which have been preserved beside them. Finally it may be 
suggested that an important result of some such scheme of recon- 
struction would be to facilitate the use both of Records and diplomatic 
documents as historical sources, and this, it is almost needless to say, 
is the chief, if not the only purpose of the present essay. 



(b) State Papers. 

The classification of the State Papers might be fairly regarded as 
a much easier task than that which is imposed on us in the case of 
the legal Records. This supposition is perhaps correct ; but at the 
same time if there is less scope for reconstruction in the former 
direction, we are unfortunately hampered by numerous early mis- 
conceptions which were probably the cause of the misplacing of several 
items of the existing collections of the State Papers. 

At the outset we have to define the extent and scope of our 
materials. Which of these are State Papers and which are Records 
or Departmental Papers ? There is scope for considerable confusion 
between these three classes of official MSS. That is to say we 
meet with a certain number of diplomatic instruments in the form 
of drafts or originals with the corresponding Entry Books, some of 
which, such as the Secretary of State's Warrant Books, bear it is 
true a close resemblance to the general character of the State 
Papers, though they must be regarded equally as a diplomatic 
source 1 . 

Other forms of ancient Records will be found interspersed with 
the typical State Papers, and for the reign of Henry VIII free use 
has been made in the official Calendar of the contents of Record 
Sources which are not obviously connected with the office of the 
contemporary Secretaries of State. This practice may perhaps be 
explained by the transitional character of a period in which the 
existing State Papers undoubtedly present a somewhat miscellaneous 
appearance 2 . By degrees, however, and especially with the gradual 

1 As warrants for the issue of more formal instruments they are of little value, but as 
missives under the Sign Manual or by the delegated authority of the Secretary of State they 
have a new importance. 

2 This anomalous aspect is rendered still more striking by the arbitrary titles applied to 
individual documents by earlier writers. Thus we should have some difficulty in identifying 
"Chancellor Goodrick's Leger" referred to by Strype (Eccl. Mem. II. (2) 223) with S.P. Dom. 
Edward VI, vol. xix. but for the possibility of identifying the entries by means of the Patent 
Rolls and Particulars for Grants. 



The Classification of Archives 61 

recognition of the departmental position of the Law Officers of the 
Crown the subsidiary Records of the Chancery and Bench are of 
less frequent occurrence, and with the differentiation of the Council 
Chamber and Signet Office their absorption is completed. 

The use which may be found for these delated Records by the 
student of history will be considered elsewhere ; but with regard to 
the present question of their classification it would be futile to deny 
them a position which should have belonged to the purely ministerial 
Records of an earlier period. In fact the constitutional pretensions 
of the sovereign and his Secretaries of State would have covered a far 
more extended use and custody of what were termed, with greater 
accuracy than our own, the " Records and Papers of State," and 
moreover both the Chancery and Exchequer had long abandoned 
their departmental activity. When we find the Secretary of State 
under George III issuing his warrant for the preservation, amongst 
the Papers of State of a quantity of Exchequer Records we need not 
be surprised at any incongruity which may exist in the procedure of 
their early custody 1 . 

At the same time we are not compelled to recognize this archaic 
procedure in any scientific scheme of classification. The " Signed 
Bills " at least cannot be regarded as State Papers, whatever view we 
may take of the position of the Signet Office, and the same remark 
applies still more forcibly to the department of the Privy Seal. The 
instruments which properly belong to the later Secretariat are suffi- 
ciently numerous and important without confusing them with parallel 
forms. 

The still larger admixture of the earliest Departmental Records 
with the purely Secretarial State Papers is due to circumstances 
which were perhaps inevitable. Here, at least, there was no pre- 
existing jurisdiction by which the custody of these Records could be 
claimed, and it was only by slow degrees that a departmental pro- 
cedure was evolved to supplement the functions of the Wardrobe and 
Household or those of individual patent offices. 

The reference is to the Papers relating to naval and military 
matters in particular, for the Records of the Treasury and Board of 
Trade were almost from the first under the charge of separate 
establishments, and we have seen that the same remark to some 
extent applies to the departments of the Council and the Household. 

1 The reference is to the well-known case of the Records of the Exchequer of Receipt 
appropriated by John Anstis. Cf. the list of incongruous Records transferred to the Paper 
Office in 1770 by order of the House of Lords, given in D. K. list Report, p. vi. 



62 The Classification of Archives 

As for the Foreign and Colonial Papers which until quite recently 
have been regarded as purely Departmental Records these like the 
Archives of the Home Office itself formed an integral part of the 
State Papers down to the reign of George III. We may therefore 
regard certain Records which are included amongst the State Papers 
of the 1 6th and I7th centuries as merely antecedent to the respective 
departmental series. Conversely we must continue to regard as 
State Papers those other documents which must have been detached 
from the main collection in modern times to form the earliest portion 
of the series of Foreign, Colonial and Home Office Records 1 . 

After these necessary explanations we shall be able to make rapid 
progress with the outline of our classification which, with certain 
modifications, will be found substantially the same in the earlier and 
later periods alike. 

The principles of this classification may be briefly stated as 
follows : three main divisions of State Papers are easily recognizable, 
namely Domestic, Foreign and Colonial. These again may be sub- 
divided according to a simple political, geographical or chronological 
arrangement combined with a distinction of subjects. Thus there 
are distinct headings for Ireland, Scotland and the Channel Islands, 
the English Political Papers and Entry Books being arranged in 
order of date under the several sovereigns' reigns, whilst the remaining 
Papers are arranged under subject headings. 

These subject headings will be found to vary according to the 
contents of the collection at different dates and the taste of the age 
in which they are framed. Such headings as " Army " and " Navy," 
" Trade," " Church," " Law," " Petitions," " Proclamations," and " War- 
rants" are however found throughout, with the inevitable "Various" 
and "Miscellaneous " collections. The Foreign Papers with their Entry 
Books are naturally arranged under countries, with separate sections 
for Treaties and Treaty Papers, Royal Letters and miscellaneous 
subjects. The business of the Plantations, apart from Trade, was not 
distinguished till a later date and their official administration was 
shared by an independent department. The plan of their arrange- 
ment will however be found to be the same as in the case of the 
preceding series. 

1 As the several offices of the Secretaries of State resolved themselves into the existing 
departments between 1782 and 1801, the fact that their Papers continued to be preserved as 
a matter of convenience in the general repository of the State Paper Office (wherever situated) 
is of no real moment. Similarly the circumstance of the erection of new Secretaryships of 
State in a still later period does not give those departmental collections the character of State 
Papers. 



The Classification of Archives 63 

Although the earliest existing classification of the State Papers 
dates from the reign of James I. there are certain indications that the 
main principles of the scheme propounded at that time by Sir Thomas 
Wilson were recognized at a much earlier date. In an original 
inventory of the Papers remaining in the Study at " Westminster 1 ," 
penned, as we have seen, in the year 1544, we meet with many of 
the headings with which we are so familiar in the later period, and 
from these we can reconstruct the same conventional scheme without 
much difficulty 2 . 

These titles were evidently in common use amongst the statesmen 
and antiquaries of the latter half of the century, and, divested of their 
prolix style and quaint Latinity, they have for the most part survived 
the vagaries of three centuries of official scholarship. 

Some credit must certainly be given to Sir Thomas Wilson for his 
expansion of the existing outline of this classification. Few new 
features are indeed presented by his creation of twelve divisions 
of State Papers embellished with pedantic Latin titles. Of these 
the first two are assigned to England, north and south of Tweed, and 
the next seven to the European States including Ireland. The tenth 
division, however, deals with the Mahommedan States and two new 
classes are devoted to Treaties and Miscellaneous. 

From the explanatory remarks appended to Wilson's list we 
obtain fresh details of the existing arrangement of the Domestic 
series of Papers comprised under the title of South Britain, and these 
with one or two exceptions can be identified with classes of Papers 
which are still preserved 3 . 

The headings in question are those for Law, the Church, Army, 
Admiralty, Council, Trade and Miscellaneous. The chief subjects of 
another heading " the Crown " (Regalia) stand now under Warrants, 
Proclamations and Petitions, but some of the other contents of this 
subdivision have been dispersed. The heading " Criminal," though 
well represented in the most recent classification, was not consistently 
preserved throughout the i8th century 4 , while Trade and the Exchange 

1 Possibly meaning Whitehall. Cf. above, p. 31, n. 3. 

2 Two more meagre lists are preserved before Sir T. Wilson's Keepership, namely a list 
of "Books remaining at the Court" in 1598, and a note of the books in SirT. Lake's custody 
at Whitehall, written between the years 1603 and 1605. Both show traces of a similar 
arrangement (S. P. Docts. I. 5 and 6). 

3 Below, Appendix v. 

4 It would seem that the Papers which Wilson and Williamson had in view under this 
heading were chiefly connected with State Trials. A well-known instance occurs in the case 
of the "Gunpowder Plot Papers." 



64 The Classification of Archives 

are not distinguished during the same period because independent 
official establishments existed in both cases. All these headings are, 
however, represented in our own chronological series of Letters and 
Papers. 

Perhaps the weak point in Wilson's classification is found in its 
general subordination to the official traditions of the period. We are 
told in fact that all but the last of the above divisions refer to the 
modern or Cecil collection and that the last or miscellaneous division 
comprised the old State Papers derived from preceding Secretaries of 
State 1 . This curious proprietary view of the State Archives will be 
found to underlie the whole scheme of their arrangement during the 
greater part of the i/th century. 

The next attempt at a comprehensive classification of the State 
Papers is that prepared by Sir Joseph Williamson about the year 
i682 2 . This will be found to be substantially the same as the scheme 
propounded by Sir Thomas Wilson. Certain improvements are, 
however, visible, though the general plan is scarcely as effective as 
that of the first Keeper. Scotland and Ireland now stand next to 
England but are separated from the Channel Islands and Wales 
by the titles of the Foreign States and the principal sections of the 
Domestic Papers 3 . These last are practically the same as before, but 
there are new headings for the Household, Offices 4 , London, Usurpation 
(signifying the Commonwealth Committees), Commissions, Letters of 
Secretaries of State, and Royal Letters. The old Records of the 
Signet Office and Council Chamber form here a separate class. There 
is again a separate section for the prae- Elizabethan papers with the 
heading " Anglia Vetera." 

According to Williamson's own assertion, each of these divisions 
was arranged in considerable detail under appropriate sub-headings 
and more or less in chronological order. On the other hand we have 
the apparently truthful and unprejudiced report of his successor which 
implies that great confusion was found to prevail in the general arrange- 
ment of the Papers at the time of Williamson's death, and it is certainly 

1 These would probably have included the Domestic and Political Papers referred to in the 
inventory of 1544, but we may suppose that the Foreign Papers of that date are included with 
the modern series. The period given for this series, 1522 1590, is not probably intended to 
include the collection of the elder Cecil, a large part of which must have descended to his son 
apart from the Papers seized by the Crown. 

2 See below, p. 133. 

3 This unintelligent order has been ignored in the outline given below. 

4 Apparently corresponding to the later official headings of "Public Offices" and 
" Departmental." 



The Classification of Archives 65 

strange that the detailed arrangement to which Williamson refers 
should not have been set out in a catalogue of some kind. As it was, 
nearly a century passed before such a catalogue was completed 1 and 
in the meantime no further classification was attempted, though it is 
only fair to observe that the dispersal of the collection in 1706 would 
have made the task a difficult one. 

The special facilities afforded to the commissioners appointed in 
1763 for the purpose of methodizing the Records at length resulted 
in the preparation of a fairly detailed inventory of the State Papers, 
which was re-issued as an Appendix to a Report made in the year 
i8oo 2 . This is in two distinct parts, following the existing location 
of the Papers themselves ; Part I dealing with those preserved in 
the Paper Office in the Cock-pit, and Part II with those preserved 
in the adjoining department of the so-called "Transmitter." The 
former of these contained the old collection of State Papers pre- 
served before 1706 in the gateway of Whitehall, and the latter all 
the Papers which had accrued since that date together with some 
of an earlier date subsequently transmitted or recovered. Thus 
the basis of the present classification was naturally enough an 
alphabetical one, with a chronological arrangement which would 
enable the respective contents of the two separate collections to be 
easily compared. 

At the same time this general plan might, with great advantage 
and without great difficulty, have been modified in accordance with 
the ancient and natural division of the State Papers into a Domestic 
and a Foreign section. Moreover the descriptions of the individual 
sources appear to be singularly unintelligent. 

These defects are especially noticeable in the case of the inventory 
of the old collection, in which a number of new headings make their 
appearance. The greater part of these, however, will be found to refer 
not to the actual State Papers but to the common-place books compiled 
and bequeathed by Sir Joseph Williamson. On the other hand the 
Papers deposited in the Transmitter's Office are classified here with 
greater precision, and these are divided into two distinct series of 
Foreign and Domestic, which were even preserved in different rooms. 
The Treaties are also distinguished from the Foreign Correspondence, 

1 John Tucker, who succeeded Williamson in 1702, stated that he had caused a catalogue 
to be undertaken, but if it was completed it. does not appear to have survived. He has left 
several drafts for a classification of the contents of the Office which are merely expansions of 
the existing scheme, with a few fanciful suggestions such as the use of letters to represent 
the different headings. 

2 Report of the Commissioners on the Public Records (1800), p. 68 seq. 

H. q 



66 The Classification of Archives 

and there is a further heading for " Whitehall," which is purely local 
and artificial. The sub-divisions of the Domestic section are, to a 
large extent, based on those of the I7th century classification, but 
some new headings occur, and the bulk of the Colonial Papers, 
including those connected with the East India and South Sea 
Companies, seem to have been preserved in this department 1 . 

In the 1837 Report we find still further improvements effected as 
the result of the official labours of three accomplished Keepers. 

Several general descriptions of the contents of the Paper Offices 
during the i8th century have been recorded in the form of reports 
or plans 2 ; but with the exception of a plan of the interior of the old 
office in the Whitehall gateway, drawn by John Tucker about the 
year 1705, these are of little value or interest. In fact the further we 
proceed, after leaving the original classification of the State Papers in 
the 1 7th century, the more unscientific and unmethodical appear the 
subsequent attempts in this direction until we reach the reconstructed 
official hand-lists of our own time. The modern official classification of 
the State Papers is based upon a List of the collection prepared at the 
office in St James' Park between the years 1848 and 1862. This List 
was printed as far as the year 1688, to which date the Papers were 
then open to inspection, and must be regarded as a great improve- 
ment on the inventories of the I7th and i8th centuries. Although 
the sub-divisions are grouped and arranged without the display of 
much intelligence, the natural divisions of Domestic and Foreign 
Papers are clearly indicated, whilst a third division has at last been 
made for the Plantation Papers with those relating to Trade 3 . With 
regard to the Domestic Papers, the political and chronological ar- 
rangement is still further developed, and two familiar headings appear 
for "Various" and "Miscellaneous" Papers, the latter containing the 
bulk of Sir Joseph Williamson's private collection. 

The Foreign Letters and Papers with their respective Entry Books 

1 These headings probably refer to the correspondence of the Secretary of State's depart- 
ment only. The Archives of the East India Company were not annexed till 1857, and those 
of the South Sea Company were controlled by the Treasury. 

2 S. P. Docts. Vol. n. 

8 The Board of Trade papers were transferred to the State Paper Office in 1842 by order 
of the House of Lords, but this is no reason why they should be regarded as State Papers. 
The Records of the Board of Trade are arranged on a strictly departmental plan, character- 
ised by the use of minutes on which all the proceedings of the commissioners are based, and 
herein they differ widely from State Papers. They are in fact analogous to the Records of 
the Navy and Ordnance Boards, the departmental nature of which has been fully recognized. 
The inclusion of the Navy Board Records in the Calendar of Domestic State Papers has 
now been discontinued for this reason. 



The Classification of Archives 67 

are arranged under the countries to which they respectively relate and 
a class of " Various " is formed here also for miscellaneous documents 
and official compilations. 

The contents of the Colonial series are only indicated by general 
headings since the Papers were in course of arrangement, and there is 
an apparent sub-division between the East and West Indies which 
was followed in the official Calendar. 

The early State Papers transmitted from the ancient Treasury of 
the Receipt are wisely distinguished as Chapter House documents, 
but in many instances extraneous matters have been included in 
the general series. This in fact is the chief defect of the whole 
arrangement, the several series of State Papers proper being en- 
cumbered by the insertion in order of date of a large number of 
irrelevant MSS. and printed books, some of which may have been 
inclosures or pieces justificatives, though others are to be regarded as 
casual acquisitions. Soon after the transfer of the great State Paper 
Office collection to the Public Record Office in the year 1862, a 
general rearrangement seems to have taken place, which resulted in 
the preparation of three printed Lists between the years 1873 and 
1883. These, however, were only issued for official circulation and 
for the use of students frequenting the repository, although a limited 
number of copies are in the possession of private scholars and learned 
institutions. Under these circumstances a detailed description of 
the Lists in question is undesirable owing to the difficulty of verifi- 
cation. An outline of the scheme of classification employed will be 
found in the official Guide and will be familiar to students who have 
consulted these Papers during the last thirty years. It will be seen 
from the outline referred to that the principle of this arrangement 
is a proprietary one, the Papers being here regarded as the earlier 
portion of the respective Records of the Home, Foreign and Colonial 
departments. These ancient State Papers are moreover included 
in a general alphabetical arrangement, and in many cases have been 
transferred to a subject-heading or departmental section. 

The latest official classification of the State Papers is contained in 
a list published in 1894 and therefore accessible for the first time 
to historical students. In respect of convenient arrangement and 
precision this excellent production leaves little to be desired. Based 
upon the official List of 1873, i* s scope is necessarily limited to the 
Domestic State Papers prior to the year 1782, leaving the Foreign 
and Colonial Records with those of the Board of Trade, and others 
which were originally included in the State Paper collection to be 



68 The Classification of Archives 

dealt with as departmental Archives. In addition to its lucidity and 
accuracy, this final list of the State Papers possesses the further 
advantage of ignoring most of the useless and irrelevant deposits 
with which the earlier schemes of classification were encumbered, 
these being now relegated to classes known as " Domestic Miscel- 
laneous " and " Miscellaneous State Papers." 

Having thus traced the evolution of the existing official classi- 
fication of the " State Papers Domestic " from the earliest times, it 
only remains for us to consider the basis of a theoretical classification 
of the several sources which at one time or another have been and to 
some extent are still regarded and referred to as " State Papers." 

Such a classification must clearly embrace the whole series of 
Papers of State in official custody between certain dates. The dates 
can, however, only be ascertained in virtue of a general agreement 
which would probably recognize the period between the beginning of 
the reign of Henry VIII and the year 1782 as a practicable division 
between the era of ministerial Records on the one side and the 
departmental jurisdiction of the Secretaries of State on the other. 

It will be necessary also to distinguish broadly between the 
several classes of Papers and to indicate the several sub-divisions 
in each class according to their subject-matter. It might also be 
desirable to reject certain extraneous materials and to include others 
which must be sought for elsewhere, but this is not a matter that can 
be regarded as within the scope of the present essay. If we were agreed 
as to the principles of such a classification, the execution of its details 
would be comparatively easy. It can scarcely be doubted that its main 
divisions should be those hitherto adopted, namely Domestic and 
Foreign State Papers with the addition of a third title for the Colonial 
Papers which had already become excrescences in the Domestic 
series before the creation of a new Secretariat in 1768. This ar- 
rangement, moreover, would not encroach upon the departmental 
jurisdictions of the modern offices of state, the constitutional origin 
of which cannot be placed earlier than 1782. 

It is true that the Home Office, as the virtual representative of 
the peculiar constitutional functions of the dual Secretariat of an 
earlier time, might conceivably claim a continuous procedure and 
nomenclature in respect of its Records. This position is, indeed, 
indicated by the fact that the Royal Warrant has continued to be 
issued by the authority of the Home Secretary whose department 
is still the proper depository of all Petitions and Addresses to the 
Crown. It is clear, however, that no proprietary title can be based 



The Classification of Archives 69 

upon a survivorship which has not been recognized in respect of 
the official custody of the Foreign and Colonial Records. 

It may therefore be fairly assumed that the State Papers at large, 
previous to the year 1782, form practically a common source which 
may be utilised according to the requirements of historical study. 
Having indicated the above divisions on this assumption, the sub- 
division must chiefly follow a chronological sequence. Thus the 
inclusion of Scotland prior to 1603 amongst the State Papers Foreign 
is just as correct as the recognized position of Hanover in the 
Domestic series ; but we should perhaps hesitate to place the corre- 
spondence of Corsica in the latter category, though the island was 
for a time formally annexed to the English Crown. In any case the 
matter is of no moment since the State Papers relating to Corsica 
were long ago abstracted and now probably repose in some family 
collection. The instance is only given as an illustration of a reason- 
able procedure to be adopted in like cases. 

The classes of Domestic State Papers officially described as State 
Papers and " Addenda " contain the large collection of private or 
semi-official MSS. which has been brought to light in recent years 1 . 
These have been distinguished from the " Domestic Miscellaneous," 
a division which is largely composed of the common-place books of 
Sir Joseph Williamson. 

To some extent the " Miscellaneous " class of the Domestic, 
Foreign and Colonial State Papers serves to include the abnormal 
forms which cannot be classified with any recognized series. There 
are, however, certain series of State Papers in all three divisions 
which appear to have been arbitrarily included in the general col- 
lection, although from their nature they should have been originally 
placed either amongst the legal or with the departmental Records. 
Thus a large number of military and naval despatches are to be 
found amongst the Foreign and Colonial correspondence, leaving in 
many cases inconvenient gaps in the departmental collections of the 
War Office and Admiralty. These extraneous documents cannot of 
course be now excluded from any list of State Papers proper, but the 
existence and character of such a class may be usefully noted in a 
structural classification. 

In addition to this casual inclusion of certain Papers, others have 
been removed, for some cause or other, from their true position and 
inserted in a class to which they do not properly belong and the 

1 Some of these, e.g. the Cely, Darrell, Stonor and Johnson Papers, have been partly 
printed or described in private publications. 



70 The Classification of Archives 

existence of such delated MSS. may be indicated in the same 
manner. (Appendix V F.) 

The remaining heads in this classification require no explanation 
beyond the remark that although only a fragmentary collection of 
Legation Archives previous to the ipth century exists in official 
custody, this class is well represented in the Departmental Records 
of a later period and must therefore be included here, especially 
as many similar collections for the earlier period exist in private 
custody. 



(c) Departmental Records. 

A satisfactory classification of any collection of official documents 
must depend to a large extent upon an adequate knowledge of their 
environment. That is to say we must clearly understand both for 
what purposes they were prepared and to what extent they have been 
preserved in official custody. In the case of the legal Records and 
State Papers we have to do with collections that have been mainly 
preserved in such custody whilst their contemporary relations have 
been exhaustively described. The position with regard to these 
" Departmental Records " is, however, a widely different one. They 
have in many cases been transferred to the general repository 
burdened with numerous excrescences in the shape of Commissions 
and other official agencies of which the objects and procedure are 
now somewhat obscure. To increase the confusion caused by this 
obscurity, some portion or other of the official collections of ministerial 
correspondence has usually failed to find its way into official custody. 
Again it must be remembered that, as in the case of the later legal 
Records, not all the contents of the departmental Archives are of 
any considerable historical interest. It is, moreover, well known that 
by no means the whole of the collections in official custody is avail- 
able for the purpose of research. Indeed it would be found that 
although a large and rapidly increasing proportion of these Archives 
has been already placed on the same footing as the legal Records 
and the early State Papers, no description or details of the arrange- 
ment of certain series has yet been published. It will be evident 
therefore that our knowledge of the contents of such collections, 
derived from various summaries printed in the Deputy Keeper's 
Reports or from the inventories compiled by privileged students, 
will be inadequate for the purpose of a proprietary classification. 
At the same time, however, it may not be difficult to suggest the 



The Classification of Archives 71 

main outlines of their internal arrangement on a structural plan. 
In fact, in some respects, these official documents exhibit a greater 
regularity and consistency in point of diplomatic construction than 
the more important series of the State Papers. This circumstance 
is perhaps due to the formal constitution of the departmental Boards 
whose procedure was to some extent modelled upon that of the 
Courts of Law 1 . Thus we have as a characteristic feature of the 
departmental collections such well-defined types as Letters, Minutes 
and Warrants, together with a number of subsidiary and miscel- 
laneous forms which are not altogether unfamiliar to the student of 
mediaeval Diplomatic. 

On these lines, at any rate, we may attempt something like a 
comprehensive arrangement of the scattered types of Departmental 
Records. The main classification must necessarily be, as far as 
possible, a proprietary one, but the sub-divisions, at least, may follow 
a structural plan. Moreover this arrangement is to a considerable 
extent facilitated by the independent procedure of the several de- 
partments which can display a complete series of official Records 
from a very early date. Besides these regular and quasi-diplomatic 
forms there will nevertheless be found in nearly every department 
other Records of a very miscellaneous nature. These may be either 
of internal or external origin in their relations with the department 
in which they are now preserved. Some have been both compiled 
and kept in the same official custody throughout. Others have been 
merely deposited there by design or chance. These miscellaneous 
documents certainly remind us of the very similar types found in the 
corresponding class of the legal Records. In the latter case they 
have been arranged under the general subject-headings of " Pre- 
cedents" and "Miscellaneous." In the present instance they might 
be more aptly described as "Books of Reference" and "Miscellaneous," 
that is to say compilations prepared for the conduct of the routine 
business of the department together with other compilations or 
original documents deposited or exhibited for official information or 
otherwise. The Miscellaneous documents here referred to will be easily 
identified by the mention of such familiar specimens as intercepted 

1 Although a regular sequence of Records may be looked for in the case of a public 
Board of any importance, it will be remembered that the later departments of the Secretaries 
of State for Home, Foreign and Colonial affairs continued to produce State Papers of a very 
similar character to the earlier series so styled. Besides these important exceptions, several 
of the modern departments have produced no Records of any historical value though they 
have preserved papers of great interest in the shape of deposits or returns to official enquiries. 
The Records of the Charity, Ecclesiastical, and Forfeited Estates Commissions are examples 
in point. 



72 The Classification of Archives 

letters, prize papers and the lapsed collections of the old chartered 
companies or expired royal commissions. 

The effect of a structural classification of these Departmental 
Records may be observed in another direction. The normal divisions 
indicated by the titles of the In-Letters, Minutes, Out- Letters or other 
proceedings are not always clearly defined. In one form or other 
they can, however, be distinguished in the great majority of cases. 
These titles then may be conveniently employed to indicate certain 
forms of documents which possess common characteristics in respect 
of their construction, whatever the nature of their subject-matter may 
be. On the other hand the great classes composed of " Books of 
Reference" and "Miscellaneous" can only be arranged according to 
the subject-matter of their contents. 

In another direction a natural grouping of the chief departments 
according to the nature of their official business may be easily dis- 
cerned. One such group will comprise the Secretaryships of State. 
Another, comprising the Treasury, Exchequer and Audit Office, 
Paymaster General's Office, Customs, Inland Revenue, National Debt 
Office, Mint, and Woods and Forests is concerned with the national 
finance. The Admiralty and War Office are responsible for the 
national defence, whilst the royal state is maintained by the depart- 
ments of the Lord Chamberlain, Lord Steward and the Keeper of 
the Privy Purse. Modern departmental groups, constituted by royal 
commissions or evolved from ancient committees of the Privy Council, 
are charged with the care of the nation's interests in respect of trade 
and agriculture, local government, public works, education, and eccle- 
siastical or charitable endowments. That the nature of this official 
business should determine the form of certain Records of the indi- 
vidual departments is therefore not at all surprising. The large and 
important class of Books of Reference which forms one of the two 
remaining divisions of the Departmental Records is in fact largely 
composed of various familiar types, the form and subject-matter of 
which are sufficiently indicated by their titles 1 . To these, however, 
must be added many other Records the nature of which is by no 
means clearly expressed by this official nomenclature 2 . The fact 
that a considerable proportion of these official compilations can thus 
be assigned to their appropriate subjects, or even to their respective 
departments from their titles alone may certainly be utilised for the 
purpose of a structural classification. Thus one class of Depart- 

1 e.g. "Registers," "Journals," "Lists," "Returns," "Ledgers," &c. 
3 e.g. " Pay- Books," "Log-Books," " Muster- Rolls," " Bill- Books," "Cash-Books," 
"Estimates," "Establishments," "Debentures," and many others. 



The Classification of Archives 73 

mental Records will refer to the Pay, Pensions, Salaries, &c. of 
persons employed by the State, and another to their Appointments 
or Services. The Revenue Records form a separate group, whilst 
near to these come the Inventories, Prices and Surveys connected 
with public works and stores. At the bottom of the scale we find 
a certain number of common-place books, together with a great mass 
of semi-official correspondence. 

On the other hand, many of the miscellaneous Departmental 
Records, which are not official compilations at all, admit of no such 
presumptive method of classification. These, as we have seen, consist 
for the most part of Deposits or Exhibits relating to matters outside 
the routine work of the department 1 . As in the case of similar 
collections amongst the legal Records and State Papers these docu- 
ments must constitute the most remote class of the Departmental 
Records. Moreover it must not be forgotten that the muniments of 
dissolved corporations, which form an important section of this class, 
are based upon the practice of the merchant's counting-house rather 
than upon the ancient procedure of the royal courts, and the corre- 
spondence preserved in the same quarter is chiefly of a private and 
familiar character. 

From the above brief examination of the theory on which the 
student may proceed for the purpose of a scientific classification of the 
Departmental Records, it will be evident that, in spite of the survival 
of certain regular types and a notoriously conservative procedure, the 
existing contents of the departmental Archives are so over-laden with 
adventitious forms and confused wreckage that nothing like a com- 
prehensive or detailed reconstruction can be attempted until the 
elucidation of the origin and devolution of these historical sources is 
accomplished. At present therefore the old proprietary classification, 
with its subject-headings, must suffice for the purpose of our studies. 

Apart from this theoretical classification, further reference must 
be made to an artificial arrangement which has to some extent 
superseded the usual method of sub-division in the case of certain 
departmental collections. Here the whole contents of each collection 
are arranged under subject-headings in alphabetical order without 
any indication of their relative structural nature. This device which 
is characteristic of the more recent collections may perhaps be 

1 It is true that ships' "Logs" and naval or military " Muster- Rolls" are actually 
vouchers required in connexion with the payment of salaries or provision of stores, and 
their classification as " Books of Reference " is rather due to their official use than to their 
actual form. It must be remembered, however, that the logs of merchant vessels, though 
not preserved in official custody before the Act of 5758 Vic. c- 60, have always enjoyed a 
prescriptive authority. 



74 The Classification of Archives 

regarded as an attempt to dispense with the primary grouping of 
documents as Letters, Minutes and the rest in favour of a mere 
alphabetical order which might be more properly regarded, like the 
chronological order of the documents, as a purely subsidiary arrange- 
ment. That this system, which presents persons, places and subjects 
in common with the diplomatic descriptions of the documents, is 
wholly unintelligent, goes without saying. Unfortunately it is to a 
great extent inevitable owing to the existing lettering of the several 
series, which dates from a period when the Isle of Wight used to be 
indexed under I and the Duke of Wellington under D. In such 
cases, however, something can be done in the direction of a scientific 
classification by means of cross-references. 

It is notorious that in every State a modern innovation bids 
fair to alter the general aspect of the Departmental Records of the 
future. Here instead of separate series of Letters, Letter-Books, 
Minutes, and so forth, the original or In-Letter, with all proceedings 
taken upon it, is preserved in the shape of a File of loose papers, 
classified under a serial number, and referred to by means of a 
Register. Herein we may observe an interesting return to the well- 
known practice of the mediaeval repositories as illustrated in the 
official " Kalendars " of the period, registration by a serial number 
being merely substituted for a cypher or pictorial design, and the 
more convenient file 1 for a hamper or deer-skin pouch. 

The latest system of official classification, as indicated by the 
published " List of Admiralty Records," may be regarded as the 
antithesis of an alphabetical and structural classification alike. Here 
certain Records formerly compiled or preserved in an ancient depart- 
ment are officially ascribed to the modern representative of that 
department. Under this proprietary heading they are arranged in 
the following classes : In-Letters, Out-Letters, Minutes, Accounts, 
Registers and Miscellanea; every species of Record that is not assign- 
able to one or other of the first four classes being relegated to one 
or other of the last two classes. The above arrangement naturally 
simplifies the difficult task of discovering the exact official position 
of many subsidiary classes of these Records, whilst it must greatly 
facilitate their production. From a historical and archaeological 
point of view, however, the new system of classification naturally 
possesses less interest for the student. 

1 The term "pouch" is curiously enough still retained in this connexion for the modern 
box in which departmental papers are filed (cf. D, K. 56th and following Reports s.t. 
"Transfers"). 



THE ANALYSIS OF ARCHIVES. 



(a) Records. 

IT is fortunately unnecessary in the present day to demonstrate 
the value of the legal Records as materials for the making of History. 
The fact is one that has been frequently enlarged upon and its 
importance is a commonplace to every modern student. Indeed 
it is not obvious from what other source the history of the latter part 
of the Middle Ages could be satisfactorily compiled. For the earlier 
period we have, in default of Records, the familiar chronicles and 
treatises of which the best examples actually embody the evidence 
of Records and State Papers which have long since perished. But 
with the systematic preservation of State Archives the mediaeval 
chronicler falls into the background, whilst from the middle of the 
1 4th century his very art undergoes a rapid deterioration. Probably 
this great change in the nature of our historical evidence mattered 
little so long as the conception of History itself was confined to the 
patriotic legends and past politics which formed the staple of the 
historian's craft in the later Georgian and early Victorian periods. 
All this was changed when the value of Economic and Local History 
was clearly recognized, and especially when archaeology and kindred 
studies could give a learned distinction to historical science. 

For the use to which these Records may be put is plain enough. 
They are contemporary legal and impartial evidence, and moreover 
they possess the charm of rarity and literary quaintness in addition 
to their unimpeachable authority. They fortify the text in the shape 
of footnotes and they will furnish forth a whole Appendix to clinch a 
weighty argument. 

It is not surprising therefore that the national Archives should 
have become the favourite prospecting ground of the historical 
searcher. And in truth the repository of Records is a mine of 
information from which the whole body of workers may take their 
profit. Here the lawyer, the antiquary and the archaeologist can 



76 The Analysis of Archives 

labour side by side with the topographer, the genealogist, the biographer, 
the philologist, the economist and the palaeographer. Some one or 
other of the auxiliary branches of History will find employment 
also for the numismatist, the sigillographer, the statistician and the 
chronologist. The professed historian indeed is seldom to be found 
in the ante-rooms of Archives but his place is taken by the specialist 
in the details of the institutional history of the nation, its naval and 
military achievements, the making of its supremacy in trade and of its 
colonial empire, its social and religious and its local life and intellectual 
progress. These specialists, we are told, are the journeymen of history 
whose individual labour supplies the materials for the master's art, 
which knows both what to use and what to neglect in this great heap 
of matter, what is pure metal and what is dross, and how the gold 
shall be refined and assayed by the tests of criticism and then made 
current by the impress of his genius. 

But there is one consideration that we must keep in view if we 
would work this mine to the best advantage. The source is practically 
inexhaustible, but it by no means follows that it will supply exhaustive 
materials for any given subject of historical enquiry 1 . There are some 
indeed for which it will prove wholly sterile, whilst, for many others, 
important materials will be found elsewhere. In the case of early 
Diplomatic Documents, as in that of later State Papers, the public 
Archives are, in fact, a secondary source. For the history of 
corporations and the biography of unofficial persons they would 
naturally be regarded as a source comparatively remote. Again 
a Record, even when the mere ability to read it is presumed, 
cannot be regarded, like a printed book, as a simple unit amongst 
the materials of history. Its evidence is seldom self-contained and 
may easily lead the student from one class of documents to another 2 . 
Moreover the subject itself cannot always be sharply distinguished 
and cross-references to cognate subjects must be allowed for. This, 
indeed, is no more than we are accustomed to find in a scientific 
bibliography; but there we are not hampered by a complex classifica- 
tion and terminology. 

The morphology of books, which has such interest for the 
bibliophile, need not distract the attention of the student. To him 

1 Compilations like those by E. Edwards (Synoptical Table) and C. P. Cooper (Account of 
the Public Records) are now entirely superseded by the official Guide. 

2 Thus the great historian of the Exchequer was ignorant of the existence of the long 
series of Records of the Receipt which can now be dated back to the reign of Henry II, 
these being deposited in a department to which he had no facilities of access. Cf. Devon, 
Issues of the Exchequer ; Vol. I, Preface. 



The Analysis of Archives 77 

it is all one if tne printed text be in folio or duodecimo, ' Gothic letter' 
or ' roman letter,' so that the edition is the right one; but in the case of 
the Record the distinction between a volume and a bundle, a roll 
and a file, a membrane and a folio, may prove of real importance. 

Some knowledge of these technicalities must therefore be regarded 
as indispensable, and to this must be added an acquaintance with the 
general principles which govern the official classification of Records. 

This, perhaps, is not a task that will present many difficulties 
to an intelligent student, if he regards the subject, in both cases, from 
a scientific point of view. On the one hand we have the legal 
Records arranged under the four great courts of law and several 
minor tribunals; on the other the various subjects of historical 
interest with which we are concerned. Here are the Charters, Deeds, 
Writs, Patents, Confirmations, Exemplifications, Privy Seals, Warrants, 
Inquisitions and Returns, Surveys, Extents, Rentals and Accounts, 
the Pleadings, Judgments, Decrees and Sentences, the Bills and 
Answers, Interrogatories and Depositions, Indictments, Estreats, 
Bails and Essoins, the Memoranda, Precedents and Miscellanea of 
the several courts in the actual forms of Rolls, Registers, Books, 
Docquets, Volumes, Bundles, Files, Bags and Boxes ; there are the 
names, dates, events, institutions, arts and crafts, manners and customs, 
health and wealth, religion and politics of the national history which 
may be verified or explained by the evidence of Records. 

It may be suggested that, for the purpose of an exact survey 
of these extensive sources, a scientific definition and grouping of 
historical subjects should first be undertaken. Unfortunately in this 
country at least the study of Historical Method is still in its infancy 
and no recognized terminology or classification is available for this 
purpose. Nevertheless the main features of such an arrangement 
can be distinguished without much difficulty. 

Under the heading of History proper, we should include the 
several departments of Political, Constitutional, Economic and Social, 
Ecclesiastical and Local History. Then come the " auxiliary studies " 
of History, including Geography, Law, Philology, Palaeography and 
Diplomatic, Biology and Archaeology. 

To one or other of these main divisions every conceivable subject 
of legitimate historical enquiry may presumably be relegated. The 
arrangement indeed is purely artificial and its value is chiefly scientific, 
for most of the subjects of historical enquiry with which we are really 
concerned have a separate and an independent position in relation to 
the Archives. To a student of the national Taxation, for example, 



78 The Analysis of Archives 

this title forms a sufficient catch-word without the further consideration 
that the subject concerns, from a different aspect, each of the 
departments of History that have been indicated above. It might 
suffice, therefore, to consult the several sources for this subject 
without paying any regard to a detailed classification of the subject 
itself. Moreover these sources could doubtless be distinguished in 
the well-known official Guide which furnishes us with such suggestive 
headings as " Exchequer," " Revenue," " Subsidies," " Accounts," 
" Customs and Excise," and surveys the whole subject in an admir- 
able article under this very heading of "Taxation." 

This is sufficiently plain; but we should not overlook the fact 
that the student of the future must be, if he is not already, a specialist, 
whose chosen subject, though of limited extent, would demand the 
closest survey of all cognate sources. Such an examination would 
certainly be assisted by the existence of some recognized classification 
of historical subjects such as has been suggested above. For whereas 
the history of Taxation alone might be regarded as a purely con- 
stitutional question, it is one which concerns also in a special degree 
more than one of the other divisions of historical study. In each of 
these, which would include Economic, Ecclesiastical and Local History, 
valuable sources of information would occur in a particular connexion; 
whilst, even from the standpoint of the constitutional historian, many 
new subject-headings would be suggested for the purpose of supple- 
menting those which we might reasonably expect to find in an 
official catalogue. 

But something still remains to be done in another direction 
where as yet the historian is compelled to ask or feel his way through 
the vast labyrinth of the public Records. The preparation of a 
classified list of memoranda for a monograph or thesis is a task 
which he can probably accomplish best unaided, but to connect these 
subjects with their appropriate sources must put a heavy strain on 
his limited experience. The subjects of his choice are ready to hand, 
but the sources have yet to be ascertained, and to make an exhaustive 
scrutiny of the whole corpus some inductive method will be followed 
with advantage. 

It is here that use might be found for a scientific classification 
of subjects and sources in the shape of reference-forms resembling 
the specimen printed in an Appendix. In these tables besides the 
columns used to denote the structural and historical classification of 
the subjects and sources respectively, others serve to indicate the 
printed references and parallel MSS. connected with the subject as 



The Analysis of Archives 79 

well as the reference to the official source and its diplomatic description. 
The form of such a table, however, could easily be modified to suit 
individual requirements, and indeed some such method is already 
extensively used by continental students. The specimen form given 
below was used by the present writer for the purpose of special 
research which has been effectually supplemented and developed by 
more competent workers 1 . 

But there is still another method of investigation within reach 
of every student who is not solely concerned with a particular subject 
of historical investigation. It is not too much to say that an 
intelligent use of lists and indexes of Records forms the most 
effective method of present-day research. It may be that the energy 
and resourcefulness of individual workers is stimulated to a large 
extent by the difficulties under which they labour. A mere sprinkling 
of printed texts of very unequal merit, a considerable but unevenly 
distributed series of Calendars of recognized merit, a shelf of 
invaluable Indexes and another of equally indispensable Lists, with 
the usual medley of obsolete or temporary inventories that are to 
be found in the Archives of every country, completes the student's 
equipment. Besides these he is fortified with the aes triplex of the 
official Guide; but it can scarcely be said that he is armed cap a pie" 
for his assault upon the Records. 

For a long time past foreign experts have been accustomed to 
insist that a complete inventory of Archives, however summary, is 
essential for the successful pursuit of these investigations. This remote 
ideal has become an immediate desideratum and to this one pressing 
need all other considerations will everywhere be subordinated in our 
own time. Meanwhile much may be effected by individual enterprise. 
Already local historians and genealogists have begun to learn the 
lesson of self-help, and the official series of Record Indexes has been 
supplemented by many monographs, the value of which has received 
an official recognition. It is now the turn of the general historian to 
provide himself with some of those much-needed compilations which 
the industry of early scholars was unable to compass owing to the 
scattered state of the Archives of their own day. 

1 Appendix vn. This form was used for the purpose of investigating the subject in 
question in connexion with an edition of the Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls Series, 
Vol. in. Preface, p. cccxv sq.), an investigation which led to the suggestion of an edition of 
the Plea Rolls relating to the trial of the Edwardian judges (1289 97) which has recently 
been produced by Professor Tout and Miss Hilda Johnstone {R. Hist. Soc. Camden (3rd 
Ser.) Vol. x.), to whom the present writer is indebted for permission to reproduce the results 
of their valuable researches. 



8o The Analysis of Archives 

We shall see 1 that the " Index " and " List " of Records must be 
carefully distinguished from the well-known " Calendar," whilst each 
type also fulfils a distinct purpose. The main object of the List is to 
afford a general indication of the nature, date and position of the 
scattered sources, and that of the Index is to furnish information 
respecting the contents of single collections, or to serve as a table of 
contents in the case of a single MS. which contains a number of diverse 
entries 2 . It will be apparent, therefore, that whilst the preparation 
of Lists or inventories of Archives is ostensibly the business of 
archivists, the compilation of Indexes, like the preparation of Calendars 
or the transcription of texts, is a matter which chiefly concerns the 
historical student. 

It would be a mistake to suppose however that these adventitious 
aids will enable the most diligent or ingenious student to dispense 
with the assistance of the official Guide with its admirably precise 
and technical survey of the legal Records. A future generation may 
evolve a more ponderous hand-book, or its learned editor may even 
be enabled, by further reconstructions of the Archives, to improve 
upon its plan in future editions, but for the time being it stands 
absolutely alone in its importance. 

The object of the present essay is merely to prepare the historical 
student to utilise the contents of this vast thesaurus for his own 
purposes; but in making his selection of a subject he might also 
incidentally contribute to the elucidation of individual sources. In 
more than one instance it would be possible to supplement our 
existing sources by the collection of related documents now scattered 
by the caprice of a former official custody amongst several distinct 
classes of Records. For example, students of Constitutional and 
Economic History alike would find their account in a complete table 
of the royal inquisitions which form notable land-marks in the history 
of the administrative and fiscal system of this country from the 
Conquest to the Commonwealth. A large proportion of these inquests 
have been published or described in several places, but much remains 
to be known concerning their origin and purpose, and the Records 
themselves are by no means easily accessible. Some are entered in 
famous registers and the originals are here and there preserved in 
their contemporary form or in that of an intermediate enrolment. 

1 Cf. below, p. 1 06. 

2 e.g. Precedent Books, such as the well-known "Books of Remembrance" and the 
"Miscellaneous Books" of the Chancery, Exchequer and Augmentation Office. Even in 
the mediaeval period such registers were frequently furnished with a table of contents. 



The Analysis of Archives 81 

Others again exist only in the shape of returns to original writs of 
several kinds. Many are to be found in the Miscellanea of the 
Exchequer and the remainder are distributed amongst the records 
of the Chancery and other courts. 

Another profitable piece of reconstruction might be found in the 
case of the vast accumulations of " Exhibits " and " Deposits " which 
are now included in the proprietary arrangement of the legal Records. 
These documents which, as we have seen, properly form an independent 
class can scarcely be adequately appreciated until they have been 
thoroughly sifted by a diplomatic process. 

The subject of the manorial economy would make still larger 
demands upon the student's industry; but it is one which stands in 
special need of illustration from Records, and the appropriate sources, 
which are frequently buried in some remote series, can only be 
distinguished by an investigator trained in this department of 
Economic History. Again, thanks to the provision of calendars and 
texts made by official authority at several dates, or by private 
enterprise, a complete table of existing Royal Charters might now. 
be compiled by the cooperation of many willing hands under the 
direction of a few experts. Another much-needed list of Early 
State Trials should also take a chronological form. It would be 
difficult to over-estimate the value of such a list to the Political 
historian, who would thereby be enabled to ascertain the nature and 
extent of the proceedings of the various tribunals at a given date; 
for the political significance of these proceedings can scarcely be 
distinguished in an ordinary class list. 

But it is not enough merely to identify and note these scattered 
evidences. It is also necessary to comprehend the relationship of the 
principal and subsidiary documents with their cognate sources if we 
would truly understand the workings of the whole system of our 
institutions. There is no more striking instance of our haphazard 
methods of research than the general disregard of the importance 
of these relations which prevails amongst highly intelligent workers 
in the field of Records. Except in a few familiar instances, such as the 
procedure in ecclesiastical elections and the issue of Letters Patent, 
the sequence of the several instruments in common use as historical 
sources is either not understood or else insufficiently appreciated. 
In the case of such historical documents as the Hundred Rolls and 
their satellites this neglect may have somewhat serious consequences 1 ; 
but apart from isolated researches, it would be very desirable to 

1 Cf. Part ii. 
H. 6 



82 The Analysis of Archives 

ascertain the relationship of any series of Records to which we may 
have occasion to refer. For this purpose no possible experiment 
could be more instructive than the reconstruction of the actual 
machinery of the central and local government of this country in a 
given year by the arrangement and publication, in full or in part, 
of the contemporary Records. The business and policy of the Court, 
as illustrated by the documents of the Chancery or Wardrobe, the 
procedure of the Judicature, the system of the Exchequer, the 
relations with the Church, and the conditions of the agricultural and 
industrial communities, could be more clearly realized from such an 
exposition than from numerous editions of progressive excerpts. It 
is possible, for example, to study the fiscal system of the mediaeval 
kingdom in many learned works illustrated by copious references to 
contemporary treatises and to Record texts without acquiring more 
than the most superficial knowledge of the subject. To obtain a 
fuller perception of the system employed during more than seven 
centuries, some such work of reconstruction would have to be 
. attempted. Moreover the practice of official book-keeping has varied 
from one generation to another. There are of course many other 
points connected with the contents of the historical Records on which 
we could wish more light to be thrown. Some of these, however, 
concern the archivist rather than the student, and for the present we 
are dealing only with the elements of Record-searching as it may 
be practised by the laity. The time however may be near at hand 
when some immediate difficulties will have to be faced by students 
concerned with the study of institutional problems which still remain 
unsolved for lack not of ability or industry, but of that resourcefulness 
which is such a noticeable result of the training afforded by other 
countries. 

(b) State Papers. 

It will have been gathered from the preceding account of the 
custody and classification of the State Papers of this country that their 
position as a historical source is quite exceptional. The earlier series 
of official documents are perhaps still best known to us from a few worth- 
less texts and imperfect Indexes published in the dark days of Record 
scholarship and from the admirable Lists and Calendars prepared 
under a new regime. The post-mediaeval series of the legal Records, 
together with the modern series of Departmental Records, are however 
almost wholly destitute of any detailed Lists or Calendars that can 



The Analysis of Archives 83 

be conveniently consulted by historical students 1 . In striking contrast 
to both the mediaeval and the modern series, the intervening group of 
" Records and Papers of State " has been almost completely described 
in the elaborate official Calendars above referred to. The value of 
this unusual assistance is still further enhanced by the circumstance 
that, during the era of personal monarchy, the new administrative 
department of the Secretaries of State supplies our chief information 
regarding the political and social life of the nation, superseding 
herein the functions of the Courts of Law whose Records henceforth 
become of secondary interest. 

It is scarcely to be wondered, then, if students of History have 
come to regard the State Papers as the all-important source of in- 
formation for the 1 6th and i/th centuries, and this being the case 
that they have also regarded the printed Calendars as the equivalent 
of the Papers themselves. 

This indeed is the process of research which is followed in almost 
every instance, and its convenience will be as obvious as the fact that 
it is not at the same time either exhaustive or conclusive. So long, 
however, as we are not required to look beyond the pages of the 
printed Calendars there will be little difficulty in supplying our needs 
from this single source. It would even be superfluous to suggest 
headings for a reference list of subject-matters which every student 
can compile for himself from the ample Indexes to these volumes. 
But the specialist who is concerned with the intricacies of some 
political, constitutional, or economic problem cannot afford to take 
matters quite so easily. Even the general historian does not accept 
everything that he finds in a printed text. Moreover apart from the 
occasional necessity for further investigation, an enquiring mind would 
naturally wish to know what these State Papers are, under what con- 
ditions they were written, received, and preserved in official custody, 
and what relationship each series of Papers bears to the others and to 
external sources. 

The definition of a State Paper, from an official point of view, may 
be gathered from the previous account of the custody and arrangement 
of the class, and to a considerable extent the important subject of the 
environment of these official documents may be studied in the same con- 
nexion. For practical purposes, then, the student will have to bear in 
mind that the State Papers of the i6th, i/th and iSth centuries will 

1 The few important exceptions to this statement only serve to accentuate the disparity 
in question, but for the present purpose of historical methodology the official Guide will be 
found all-sufficient. 

62 



84 The Analysis of Archives 

be found to exist in official custody in such documentary forms and 
in such a state of completeness as the varying conditions of their 
execution and preservation may have permitted. That is to say in 
the earliest period he will expect to meet with numerous transitional 
forms representing the encroachments of the new Secretariat upon 
the jurisdictions of the Chancery and Exchequer 1 . These will also 
indicate the active intervention of the new state-craft in such matters 
as local or ecclesiastical administration, commercial or industrial 
policy, and the technical subjects of the national health and defence. 
By degrees these abnormal instruments disappear or assume a purely 
ministerial form 2 , whilst the fiscal and technical business of the State 
is relegated to distinct departments 3 . Finally it will be observed, as 
a special feature of their official environment, that the very extent of 
these State Papers varies from time to time according to the facilities 
that may exist for their safe custody 4 , so that the completeness of our 
historical materials from this source will depend on conditions which 
are not apparent from the existing inventories. 

The method of study that is indicated by the above considerations 
is neither very abstruse nor very severe. Our first object must clearly 
be the identification of the sources and an examination of their 
official environment. For this purpose we should wish to know in 
what repositories the documents with which we are concerned have 
been preserved, or from what departmental collections they may have 
been drawn, in order that we may ascertain whether they are complete 
in themselves, or whether they form only a portion of certain contem- 
porary proceedings, the remainder of which must be sought for else- 
where. In short, we must first account for the whole of the existing 
documents, wherever they may be, carefully noting such as appear 
to have once existed but cannot now be traced. Then, and not till 
then, we shall be free to make such use of the printed Calendars or 
texts as our purpose may require 5 . 

1 In the Elizabethan and early Stuart periods warrants or licences to pass the sea are 
still registered (Exch. K. R. licences to pass the sea) but from that date they appear amongst 
the State Papers. 

2 The collection of original warrants is considerable only for the reigns of Elizabeth 
and James I. Before long these instruments assumed an epistolary form in the shape of 
departmental Orders, Instructions, &c. 

3 The Admiralty, Navy Board, War Office, Ordnance Office, Board of Trade, Treasury, 
Audit Office, Mint, Post Office, &c. in the i yth century. 

4 See/?. K. ytfh Report, p. 212 sq., for instances of the non-transmission of secretarial papers 
into official custody and of their " embezzlement " by public officials. Cf. also below, p. 88. 

6 A very valuable analysis of the State Papers of the early Stuart period and inter- 
regnum by Mrs S. C. Lomas will be found in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 



The Analysis of Archives 85 

To accomplish this object we should receive much assistance from 
a knowledge of the environment of the documents themselves and 
from the classification of these and kindred types. For example a 
diplomatic description will enable us to ascertain from the form, date, 
superscription, address, and subject-matter of a certain document by 
what official personage it was received and in what official collection 
it was preserved 1 . From these particulars we can further discover 
whether related documents exist in other official or private collections. 
Thus if our document is a Warrant or draft Privy Seal, we shall find 
its confirmation or its sequel in the Chancery or Exchequer Records ; 
if it relates to naval or military or other departmental matters, the 
records of those departments may with advantage be referred to. 
Again a State Paper relating to a conspiracy against the Crown 
might be duplicated in the Baga de Secretis, amongst the Records of 
the King's Bench, or in one of the collections of Law Papers in 
departmental 2 or private 3 custody. So too the correspondence of a 
long succession of ministers is supplemented by the collections that 
were at one time in their private possession. 

It will be evident therefore that the State Papers, as they are set 
forth in the printed Calendars, cannot for a moment be regarded as a 
self-contained series. If we would use them aright, we should be 
prepared to verify or supplement their evidence on occasion from 
other sources. These supplementary sources are well known to us, 
two, the legal and departmental Records, being official collections, 
and the third comprising the great external class of MSS. which are 
not, now, at least, in official custody. 

With the first of these we have already dealt, and with the second 
we shall have to deal hereafter, whilst the third is beyond the limits 
of our present survey. " But how," it might be asked, " are we to 
employ these sources to the best advantage?" 

Perhaps the simplest view of the matter would be to regard the 
State Papers as a special and privileged source, and subject to the 
limitations that have been indicated above. This is the least pre- 
caution that can be taken by us, and it implies the consciousness of a 

N. S. Vol. xvi. For other important notices see Mr Brewer's preface to Vol. I. of the 
Calendar of Letters and Papers, Henry VIII ; Mr Bruce's preface to the Calendar of State 
Papers Domestic, 1625 1626; Mr Sainsbury's notices in D. K. $oth Report, and the well- 
known works of Scargill-Bird, Thomas and Edwards. 

1 Most valuable assistance in this connexion has recently been given to the student of 
the Foreign State Papers by the publication under the supervision of Professor C. H. Firth 
of systematic lists of English ambassadors abroad. 

* e.g. H. O. Law Papers. 3 e.g. Brit. Museum. 



86 The Analysis of Archives 

method of research which is seldom recognized. To complete the 
process by our own investigations is a matter that must be left to the 
conscience or ability of each of us. 

But there still remain a few odd points of procedure which may 
be noted for the benefit of the uninitiated. The parallel evidence of 
the legal Records and State Papers may be studied in one direction 
in the "Letters and Papers" of the reign of Henry VIII 1 and in 
another direction in the Records of the Chancery and Exchequer 
down to the reign of George III 2 . That of the Departmental 
Records may be gathered from the official lists 3 and from the 
history and sources of the several departments referred to in the 
following section. The novice who consults the printed Calendars 
of State Papers will perhaps not fail twice to note the existence of 
Addenda for the periods between 1547 and 1670, whilst the existence 
of uncalendared " State Papers Supplementary " and " Miscellaneous" 
has been already referred to 4 . The curious technical arrangement of 
the "Commonwealth Committees" is worth the careful attention of 
those who may make a study of that period 5 . Students of the reign 
of Charles II will find the papers of the Navy Board uncalendared 
after the year 1673, and they must look outside the official Archives 
for the Admiralty 6 and War Office 7 papers of the I7th century. 
"King William's chest" will be found to furnish a valuable supple- 
ment to the dwindling State Papers of the later Stuart period, in 
which the last gap remains to be closed in the long series of printed 
Calendars 8 . The Foreign series it is true have only been proceeded 
with to a little more than half-way through the reign of Elizabeth, 
but the remaining originals, which had been arbitrarily included 
amongst the departmental papers of the Foreign Office have now 
been very properly replaced as " Foreign State Papers." A similar 
reconstruction still remains to be accomplished in the case of the 
Colonial State Papers previous to the year 1782, and it will be noted 

1 See the Calendar, Vol. I., Preface, and passim. That this edition also takes cognizance 
of external sources is a fact of the deepest significance. 

2 See S. R. Scargill-Bird, Guide to the Public Records, where a very valuable digest of the 
contents of the miscellaneous collections incorporated with the State Papers will be found. 

3 See ibid, s.v. Departmental Records. 

4 To these the "Exchequer Commonwealth Papers" might well be added without 
making the list exhaustive. 

6 This has been well explained by Mrs Lomas in the Essay mentioned above. 

8 e.g. the Pepysian MSS. at Cambridge, utilised with such valuable results by Dr J. R. 
Tanner. 

7 e.g. the Blathwayt MSS. at the British Museum. 

8 Cf. Calendars of S. P. Dom. 1680 1693. 



The Analysis of Archives 87 

that the Calendar of the series for the East Indies remains in suspense 
pending the operations of the India Office upon the larger series of 
State Papers in its departmental custody 1 . It will be noted further 
that Tangier and Dunkirk have not been provided for in this distri- 
bution of the Colonial Calendar, but the omission has to some extent 
been made good by private enterprise 2 . 

These miscellaneous notices bring our examination of the State 
Papers down to the beginning of the i8th century, after which date 
printed materials fail us except for the parallel information supplied 
by the departmental Calendars of the Treasury and Home Office. 
It is however very questionable whether the continuation of Calendars 
of Domestic State Papers alone during the remainder of this period 
would be worth attempting, from the student's point of view, owing to 
the notorious fact that the State Archives have been depleted of a 
third of their contents through the deliberate appropriations of the 
ministers of Hanoverian kings 3 . The distribution of the existing 
State Papers in respective reigns can only serve as a rough indication 
of their relative bulk, since the volumes and bundles are not absolutely 
uniform in size. The following calculation from the published List 
does not include the State Papers Foreign or Colonial, nor those for 
Scotland or Ireland, the Borders, Channel Islands, or Hanover ; nor 
yet the Addenda and the Supplementary or Miscellaneous State Papers. 
Again the Warrant Books, Domestic Entry Books, Docquets, Passes, 
Petitions, Proclamations, Precedents and a number of similar Letter 
Books or Entry Books would have to be reckoned with. It will, 
however, probably be found that all these additional sources have 
been preserved in a corresponding ratio to the existing collection of 
State Papers Domestic, but the important point to remember is that 
these scattered sources exist for each reign. A table of this dis- 
tribution is given in an Appendix. 

1 These of course were not at any time official State Papers, having been in the possession 
of the old East India Company till 1857. The State Papers proper for the East Indies 
in the Colonial series are comparatively unimportant before the year 1757. 

3 See Sir L. Playfair's Bibliography of Morocco, and cf. the History of the ind (Queen's) Regi- 
ment, Vol. I. by Col. John Davis, the monograph on Tangier by Miss E. Routh, in R. Hist. 
Soc. Transactions, Vol. xix., and the valuable references to Dunkirk by Prof. Firth, ibid. 
Vol. XVII. There are also many references to Tangier in the Fanshawe Papers (Historical 
MSS. Comm. Report (1899)). 

8 Manuscript Calendars of the Domestic State Papers exist from the beginning of the 
reign of George I to the year 1746 (Scotland, 1760), those for the years 1745 1746 being 
exceptionally full and valuable. The Domestic Papers for this period do not however appear 
to have been preserved on any definite system, and they contained many documents which 
clearly belong to the Colonial series and to distinct departments. 



88 The Analysis of Archives 

The Letters and Papers of Henry VIII (in spite of the bulk of the 
famous Calendar) only number some 200 volumes, the Domestic Papers 
of Edward VI 19 volumes, and those of Mary only 14 volumes exclu- 
sive of Addenda. The Domestic State Papers of the reign of Queen 
Elizabeth, reduced as they are in bulk through the loss of the Hatfield 
and Lansdowne collections alone, yet number, without the Addenda, 
300 volumes and cases ; those of James I over 200 volumes ; and 
those of Charles I considerably more than 500 volumes, though many 
of these contain miscellaneous documents and parchment Records. 
During the last two reigns the losses of official documents from the 
usual causes are comparatively slight 1 , but with the period of the 
Civil Wars and Interregnum a wholesale concealment and even 
destruction of Political papers must be added to the existing system 
of "embezzlement 2 ." The regular series of Letters and Papers 
between the years 1642 and 1660 shrinks to insignificant dimensions, 
but on the other hand the Archives are reinforced by the Day Books 
and Correspondence of the Commonwealth Committees, one of which 
alone has contributed 26 numbers. 

The State Papers of the Restoration period are largely swelled by 
naval correspondence, but in spite of the increasing losses which 
Sir Joseph Williamson so feelingly deplores, they make a brave show 
as a historical source down to the last years of the reign 3 . Then we 
have a comparative blank for the reign of James II 4 , followed by 
a slight revival for that of William and Mary, thanks largely to the 
careful preservation of " King William's chest 8 ." But with the reign 
of Queen Anne the Domestic State Papers are again reduced in 
bulk and in political importance 6 , and with the accession of the 
House of Hanover they become of secondary interest compared 

1 The history of the Cecil, Coke Conway, and Winwood collections amongst others will 
show that in spite of unusual vigilance on the part of the government, this official mis- 
demeanor could no more be put down than the prevailing official dishonesty. 

a e.g. the papers of Thurloe and Nicholas. Many were apparently destroyed by Brad- 
shaw. Amongst the others which have survived in private custody may be mentioned the 
Clarendon, Ormonde, Fairfax and Clarke collections. 

3 There are 450 volumes and bundles for this reign. In 1706 the keeper of the Papers 
reported that there were very few Papers in the office of a later date than 1679 ; but some 
were afterwards recovered and deposited in the Transmitter's Office. Still the quantity of 
State Papers for the last six years of the reign is relatively insignificant. The missing Papers 
for this and the following reign cannot by any means be accounted for in private collections, 
and a large number were doubtless suppressed for political reasons. 

4 Only five volumes and bundles of State Papers are preserved for this reign. 

* The number of volumes, &c. is 35, including 18 for " King William's chest." 
6 There are 30 volumes and bundles for this reign. The existence in private custody 
of the Harley Papers alone will explain the shortcomings of this collection. 



The Analysis of Archives 89 

with the vast and systematic collections preserved in private custody 1 
and the ever expanding scope and volume of the Departmental 
Records 2 . 



(c) Departmental Records, 

We have already seen that considerable difficulties stand in the 
way of a close study of the history of the several departments of 
the State by means of their existing Archives. Indeed only the 
scantiest materials exist for that purpose, whilst no conscious traditions 
of an earlier official practice have been preserved by the modern 
departments themselves. 

At the outset, then, we are confronted with the fact that great 
changes have undoubtedly taken place in the administrative system 
of certain departments which have affected the whole character of 
their Records, without any satisfactory explanation of the matter 
being available 3 . In any case, however, a knowledge of the ancient 
departmental procedure would not enable us to ascertain all the uses 
to which the existing Records may be put, for the simple reason that 
a large number of these Records can have no connexion with the 
functions of the department to which they have been provisionally 
assigned. 

In short, an exhaustive analysis of the contents of these official 
collections cannot be attempted with any greater hope of success 
than attends their classification on a scientific plan until the history 
of the departments themselves, including the vicissitudes of their 
respective Archives, has been further elucidated by the modern 
antiquary. 

Such a complete survey of the Government Archives is, however, 
beyond the scope of the historical student's researches. A minute 
examination of the evidence of the more ancient departmental 
Records may be, and indeed has been required in connexion with 
official precedents, and the results of such investigations are occasion- 
ally published in the shape of Blue Books. There is, however, an 

1 It is unnecessary to mention more than the Townshend, Rutland, Newcastle, Chatham, 
Lansdowne and Egremont collections. 

2 These assume a new constitution and activity after the Revolution, though in turn sub- 
jected to many losses of Records from the usual causes. 

3 Thus, in the case of the Treasury, a change of practice is observed in the years 1660, 
1678, 1689 which is still involved in some obscurity. The changes consequent on the great 
departmental reforms of 1782 and 1832 have been referred to above. 



9O The Analysis of Archives 

obvious distinction between the use of these Records for official or 
for historical purposes and the latter method only will concern us 
here 1 . Therefore no departmental compilations, Indexes or other 
special aids to official or privileged researches can be taken into 
account for the purpose of indicating the usual methods of research 
in these historical sources. Again it would be obviously impracticable 
to attempt even the briefest description of the subject-matter of the 
principal classes of documents in the order of the several departments. 
A few general principles and a few hints for the investigation of the 
Departmental Records at large must take the place of a detailed 
analysis of their contents, but the illustrations offered in support of 
these theories will be found to cover a wide field of research. 

Perhaps the most practical method of procedure will be to follow 
the structural order of the diplomatic forms indicated in our classi- 
fication of these Records, referring by way of illustration to the 
various subjects of departmental interest. 

The great class of original papers or In-Letters 2 is naturally the 
first that engages our attention, and in this we may notice forms very 
similar to those which occur in the great collection of State Papers, 
including not merely those of a true epistolary type but others of a 
more purely diplomatic character, such as Petitions and Addresses, 
together with a number of anomalous forms. Naturally care must be 
taken to distinguish between the relative authority of a signed paper, 
a copy, and a draft respectively ; whilst it will be found that the first 
of these forms may be further differentiated according as a letter or 
paper is holograph or merely signed 3 . A characteristic feature of these 
departmental collections is seen in the numerous Entry Books, in 
which copies sometimes of whole series of original letters have been 
preserved. Finally we have once more to grapple with the problem 
of inclosures, missing or misplaced. These points are primarily of 
diplomatic interest, but they may also have an important bearing on 

1 Thus the Records of the old Board of Auditors of Public Accounts include series of 
Minutes, Reports, Orders, Instructions, Certificates, Memorials, &c., which possess a 
certain diplomatic interest though probably but little historical value. 

2 These are usually furnished with descriptive titles such as " Intelligence," " Intercepted 
Letters," " Governor's (Colonial) Despatches," " Captains' Letters," " Promiscuous Letters," 
" Miscellaneous Letters," &c. A parallel list of such titles will doubtless be compiled before 
long by some enterprising student. 

3 The importance of such distinctions is at least as great as the exact terminological 
description of mediaeval instruments, and yet they are rarely preserved in printed works. 
A model however exists in the method employed by Messrs B. F. Stevens and Brown for 
the description of MSS. relating to the American Revolutionary War (cf. Hist. MSS. Com. 
Report on Royal Institution MSS., 1904 1907). 



The Analysis of Archives 91 

the selection of these Records for the purpose of historical research as 
well as for that of their preservation 1 and classification 2 . It is well 
known that in several series of later State Papers which are technically 
classified as Departmental Records, the inclosures, especially those of 
a bulky nature, are frequently found separated from the covering 
letters and they are even preserved as separate series 3 . In such cases 
the identification of the sources from which these documents were 
derived is sometimes material to their historical value. In other 
cases the inclosures will have to be sought for in various directions, 
a circumstance which is largely due to the prevalent custom of com- 
municating such documents in their original form for the information 
of other departments or even for the Government press 4 . 

In one respect at least the In- Letters of the departmental period 
may be more easily consulted and accounted for than the earlier 
State Papers. The well-known official practice of numbering all 
despatches of a regular series in consecutive order, and of affording 
further indications of their sequence, if not of their significance, by 
the use of such advertisements as " Secret," " Private," " Separate," &c. 
will often prove of much assistance to the observant reader 5 . More- 
over in this later period few despatches have been left to be deciphered, 
and the ministerial clerks who performed this useful service have also 
not unfrequently been at the pains to docquet important despatches 
with a clear and helpful precis of their contents. 

Although the typical In-Letter, with its inclosures, has been 
regarded here as a communication received by the department, it 
must not be forgotten that a large number of similar documents has 
been preserved in official custody, most of which are of the nature of 
deposited Records, that is to say, not addressed to the department, 
but acquired by accident, by the fortune of war, or by the devices of 
diplomacy. These therefore will be referred to under their appro- 
priate classification. Possibly a considerable number of such letters 

1 In connexion with the custody of Departmental Records it will be observed from the 
published Reports that these distinctions have chiefly guided the selection of a large quantity 
of departmental documents for destruction. 

a See above, p. 70 sq. 

3 e.g. Colonial Office "Transmissions" and "Sessional Papers," Board of Trade 
" Maps" and " Acts," Foreign Office " Newsletters," &c. 

* In most cases, certainly, copies or extracts only were communicated ; but the practice 
was often to make use of the original. 

5 The loss of letters forming part of such a series can thus, as a rule, be easily detected 
and their identification in other collections is hereby facilitated. Letters of a semi-official 
or private nature are not usually numbered. The official practice was then, as now, to 
distinguish the letters, when referring to them, by means of these numbers or headings. 



92 The Analysis of Archives 

may have been originally inclosures belonging to the regular series 
of In- Letters, though others have clearly no connexion with that 
class. It will also be obvious that the official correspondence was 
actually represented in another aspect by a series of original Letters 
which were addressed by the departments to various persons. When 
these originals were received and retained by private individuals they 
no longer concern us here, their place being taken by the drafts or 
copies preserved in official custody. In other cases, however, these 
originals were received by an official person or body and thus two 
versions of the same document have become available 1 , through the 
concentration of the departmental Archives. Indeed it may happen, 
as in the case of the transmitted Archives of a foreign Legation, that 
both versions are now preserved in a single collection 2 ; but in the 
case of Colonial despatches the custom seems to have obtained, from 
an early date, of regarding the government Archives as a Colonial 
possession. The question naturally arises as to the course which the 
student should pursue with regard to this choice of texts. In the 
event of the.original despatch being preserved in duplicate or triplicate, 
no hesitation need be felt in discarding the secondary versions, but 
some preference might seem to be due to an original document over 
a formal copy. On the other hand the use of a bound volume which 
is frequently indexed is more convenient to the reader than that of 
loose papers, and, as the authentication of signatures is not here in 
question, the chief value of these resumed collections seems to lie in 
the occasional preservation of original inclosures, which of course were 
not usually copied in official Letter-Books. 

Closely connected with the subject of the use of these In-Letters, 
is that of the Registers in which their receipt was recorded and their 
ultimate destination indicated. The existence of a Register in some 
form or other might almost be presumed in the case of a modern 
department, but the preservation of this class of Records in official 
custody is somewhat erratic. It would seem indeed that no such 
expedient was employed in the departments of the Secretaries of 

1 The textual value of the restored original of an official despatch may be considerable, 
especially in the case of signed letters, for at the last moment, after the act of signing, a 
holograph postscript might be added which would not be found in the official draft or copy. 
This was sometimes done to ensure secrecy. 

2 The same circumstance is known to have occurred in the case of great administrative 
departments such as the Admiralty and War Office, the records of whose sub-departments, 
which were formerly distinct establishments, were brought together during the last century. 
A large mass of official correspondence belonging to the latter, in the shape both of In- 
Letters and Out- Letters, has been dispensed with in consequence of such duplication. 



The Analysis of Archives 93 

State in early times 1 , though official Registers probably exist for a 
later period. Several perfect series of Registers have however been 
preserved by the departments which have been administered by a 
Board of Commissioners from an early date. The Admiralty in 
particular is distinguished for the minute and methodical registration 
of its papers and the "Indexes" and "Digests" of its principal 
departments 2 form one of the greatest curiosities of the modern 
official Archives. Moreover these monumental compilations have a 
special importance from the fact that they preserve the date, author- 
ship, and subject of correspondence which in many cases has not been 
preserved 3 . 

The next stage in the official treatment of the In-Letter is marked 
by the departmental Minute which records the nature of its contents 
and the decision arrived at on the subject propounded. In this 
aspect the Minutes might be regarded as superseding the information 
contained in the Registers. But apart from the greater facility of 
access which the latter afford, it does not follow that every paper 
received was the subject of a Minute. Conversely the Minutes will be 
found to record many official acts which had not their origin in any 
previous communication, and on this account their importance would 
be considerable were it not for the fact that in most cases the brief 
indications given by the Minute are expressed at length in an appro- 
priate instrument. This aspect of the case is especially noticeable in 
a later period when the Minute assumes a cursive form as a hasty 
endorsement of an original paper from which the experienced clerk 
can nevertheless evolve a stately missive. Therefore provided that 

1 There were, it is true, spectel compilations for the purpose of indicating the nature of 
this original correspondence, such as Calendars (Colonial Office, Board of Trade), Precis 
Books (Foreign Office) and Journals or Indexes (Admiralty, War Office), but these were 
intended for convenience of official reference only. The Privy Council Registers were 
probably regarded as sufficient for this purpose, a large proportion of the " Miscellaneous 
Letters and Papers" preserved amongst the State Papers addressed to the Secretaries of 
State not being of a nature requiring any reply. 

2 e.g. the Admiralty Board, Navy Board and Greenwich Hospital. The Registers of 
the first named department being by far the most extensive series. The approximate measure- 
ment of one of these volumes near the end of the reign of George III is 14 inches in height by 
1 8 inches in depth and 12 inches in thickness, the weight being probably one cwt. According 
to the printed List, in a still later period, more than one volume of Registers exists for each year. 
For the use of the Treasury Registers, see Prof. Andrews's Report in the American Historical 
Review (1905). 

3 We may gather from official Reports that two of the largest series of these Registers, 
those for the War Office and Ordnance correspondence, afforded very little information as to 
the nature of the incoming correspondence. In the several departments the place of the 
modern series of Digests described above is taken in an earlier period by abstracts and 
indexes of In-Letters. 



94 The Analysis of Archives 

the latter record can be identified with ease and certainty in its several 
forms of an Out-Letter, Warrant, Order, Commission or the like, 
nothing will be gained by a reference to the actual Minute on which 
such action was taken. This identification however is not always an 
easy task, and in one instance at least 1 the Minutes serve as an in- 
valuable key both to the immediate action taken and also to former 
and further correspondence on the same subject. In the two instances 
referred to, the Privy Council Office and the Board of Trade and 
Plantations, the Minutes, which exist from the I5th and i/th centuries, 
are styled respectively Registers and Journals. From the latter of 
these, especially, the origin and destination of the various letters and 
inclosures addressed to the Commissioners by Colonial governors or 
by individuals can be clearly ascertained, and the use of this means 
of identification has proved a revelation to the modern school of 
American historical students. To some extent these board Minutes 
serve the purpose of reference books, that is to say they indicate the 
particular department, especially the Privy Council itself, to which 
certain cases were referred for report, thus affording a means of 
tracing many documents which for some reason or other were not 
returned to the department from which they were issued. 

We might perhaps have expected that these official references 
would have been preserved in a separate series of Entry Books, but 
the only series of such Records which now exist are the Reference 
Books of the Treasury and Ordnance Office, the former of which 
extending from the year 1680 to 1819 are of great value for the earlier 
period, as reciting the texts of documents which in many cases are no 
longer preserved. 

The Reports which ensued upon such References are somewhat 
better represented in the departmental Archives, an early and 
valuable series being preserved in the War Office Records and 
another in those of the Ordnance Office. In other cases, however, 
these Reports are not entered in Report Books proper, corresponding 
to the departmental Reference Books, but in special series of Entry 
Books. Sometimes too they are only preserved in their original form 
amongst the In-Letters. Amongst these may be noticed a valuable 
collection of Opinions of the Law Officers, of which the originals or 
entries will be found in the Treasury and Home Office papers, as 
well as in the Records of the Admiralty and other departments, 
although after a certain date they are prohibited as a source of 

1 The Ordnance Office Minutes. 



The Analysis of Archives 95 

information. At the same time it must be remembered that the 
Reports and Opinions of the Law Officers preserved in official 
custody do not by any means constitute the whole of the existing 
documents, a considerable number being preserved in public and 
private collections 1 . 

The In-Letter with its inclosures having been dealt with by way 
of Registration, Minute, Reference and Report it remains for us to 
consider the nature and capabilities of the several historical sources 
included under the head of the Out- Letter. 

Here we must be careful to distinguish in the first place between 
Entry Books and Letter Books, for the title of the former properly 
implies fair copies of original papers, although copies of Out-Letters 
are also to be found under the same title and even in the same 
volume. 

In the next place we have to distinguish between the several 
species of Out-Letters which the departmental Minute has brought 
into existence. Of these by far the most usual form is that of the 
official letter, traversing the In-Letter under the direction of the 
Minute, and giving original information or instructions so far as 
possible according to a common form. It has been previously intimated 
that the chief difficulty that is likely to be experienced in consulting 
this class of official Records lies in ascertaining the particular series 
of Letter Books to which a letter upon a given subject may have 
been relegated. In the earliest and simplest practice of the depart- 
ments a General or Common Letter Book was kept for all purposes 2 , 
but before long the number of the Letter Books is found to corre- 
spond with the principal branches of public business 3 . The recognized 
headings under which this business was conducted can be ascer- 
tained from the official Guide, but the contemporary definitions of the 
several subjects are some'what vague, and the system by means of 
which the correspondence was assigned to the respective series of 
Letter Books was wholly arbitrary 4 . A knowledge of the appropriate 
series can therefore only be obtained by experience, which is also 
needed, together with considerable self-restraint, for the successful use 
of the erratic indexes with which most of these early Letter Books are 

1 e.g. the British Museum (Stowe, Hardwicke collections) and Inns of Court. 

2 In later times this General Letter Book was often styled a " Domestic Book." 

3 The titles given to the several series are not always of a local or departmental character, 
such as North Britain Book, Lords' Letter Books, Secretary's Letter Books, Commander- 
in-Chief's Letter Books, Treasury Letter Book, &c., &c. They are frequently more or less 
descriptive, such as Military, Secret, &c. 

4 These were probably explained by means of a departmental key. 



96 The Analysis of Archives 

furnished 1 . In fact it may be accepted as a useful maxim that the 
index of an average departmental Letter Book is not to be relied on, 
though its assistance is by no means to be despised. 

Bearing in mind that these epistolary forms are also to be found 
in so-called Entry Books of Orders, Instructions, Warrants, Com- 
missions and the like, mingled with those formal instruments, we may 
proceed to describe the characteristics of the latter sources in their 
turn. Curiously enough, in spite of their evident importance, a com- 
plete series of any one of these types is comparatively rare. Perhaps 
the most striking void is noticed in the case of the Warrant, although 
many of these instruments will be found in general Entry Books and 
under still more unlikely titles as in the well-known case of the 
War Office " Miscellany Books 2 ." Again a large number of Warrants 
have been preserved in their original form, but after a careful search 
we must come to the conclusion that heavy losses have been sustained 
in this quarter 3 , particularly on the military side. Apart from the 
Secretary of State's Warrants preserved in the Home Office Records 4 , 
the most complete of the remaining series are those contained in the 
archives of the Treasury 5 , Ordnance Office 6 , Admiralty 7 and Lord 
Chamberlain's Office 8 . 

The exact distinction between the Warrant and the Order, or 
between the latter in turn and the official Out-Letter, is a diplomatic 
question which will be discussed elsewhere 9 . It is sufficient to bear 
in mind that the Order is not found in an Order Book alone, and in 
fact some so-called Orders are merely extracts of Minutes 10 , whilst 
others appear as entries made in the Report Books which record the 

1 In addition to numerous omissions and unintelligent entries, subjects will frequently be 
found indexed under the title of the instrument, as "Warrant for," "Order for," &c., and 
usually all matters concerning a regiment under the name of its colonel. Naval subjects, on 
the other hand, are usually indexed under the name of the ship or station. 

2 These, however, are only special Warrants from 1670 to 1817 preserved as precedents 
and do not represent the whole issue from this department since the reign of Charles II. 
Some Warrants relating to military matters are entered in the Home Office Warrant 
Books, since that department had the nominal control of military affairs down to the year 
1794.. 

3 For the dispersal of the secretarial Warrant Books in the 1 7th century, cf. State Paper 
Office Documents (D. K. yzth Report, Appx. passim). 

4 See below, Appendix V. 5 From 1620 to modern times. 
8 From 1642 to 1855. 7 From 1695 to 1815. 

8 From the i6th century to modern times, perhaps the most extensive of the departmental 
collections. 

9 See Part II. What are generally known as Domestic Entry Books include Letters, 
Commissions, Orders, Instructions, Licences, Passes, &c., as well as Warrants, and the same 
applies to departmental Records. 

10 As in the case of the Ordnance Office. 



The Analysis of Archives 97 

results of departmental references 1 . The further departmental in- 
struments mentioned above are chiefly applicable to naval, military 
and diplomatic business, but here again the greatest difficulty will 
frequently be experienced in identifying particular Instructions 2 ; 
whilst in later times the entry of a naval or military Commission 3 is 
usually confined to a list of names and dates, being thus practically 
indistinguishable in form from an official Precedent Book 4 . The best 
examples of both these departmental instruments may probably be 
found in the Orders and Instructions of the Admiralty 5 , and the 
Commission Books of the War Office 6 , whilst the Orders of the 
Ordnance and Navy Board are amongst the earliest of Departmental 
Records. 

Pursuing the order of our structural classification we come 
next to the largest class of the Departmental Records, the official 
compilations in the nature of Precedent Books, which include such 
forms as Statements of Accounts, Establishments, Estimates and 
Returns 7 . 

In these miscellaneous Records we can recognize the results of 
the departmental process which has already been described. The 
Accounts which have been submitted, or which are required to be 
kept in the ordinary course, are entered here in the Bill Books, 
Debentures, Imprests, Pay Books, Cash Books, Journals, and Ledgers 
dealing with every branch or stage of official business 8 . Many of 
these serve also as nominal rolls of soldiers 9 , sailors 10 or civilians 11 
of every rank, but special sources of information for this subject exist 
in the shape of numerous Muster Rolls 12 and Muster Books 13 , Victualling 

1 Some Orders occasionally designated by the title of "Select Orders" are really Pre- 
cedents and these are also described in still later times as " Records." 

2 Particularly "sealed orders" to naval commanders. In connexion with this subject 
reference should also be made to the War Office, Home Office, and Colonial Office Records, 
and even to those of the Foreign Office, so far as the last three classes are open to the public. 

3 e.g. the Commission Books of the War Office and Home Office and the Commission 
and Warrant Books of the Admiralty. 

4 e.g. the War Office Notification Books. 

6 From 1665 to 1815. 6 From 1660 to 1873. 

7 These are for convenience of classification and reference generally grouped together as 
"Registers" in the latest official arrangement. "Precedent Books," so-called, frequently 
contain valuable entries which are in some cases unique. 

8 These are especially characteristic of the Archives of the Admiralty, War Office, 
Ordnance Office, Commissariat, Pay-master General's Office, and the Revenue departments. 

' e.g. War Office regimental Pay Lists and Officers' Half- pay and Pension Lists. 

10 e.g. Admiralty ships' Pay-books and Officers' Full-pay Registers and Half pay Lists. 

11 e.g. Pay-master General's and Accountant General's (Naval) Pay Ledgers. 

12 From 1 746 to modern times. 

18 From 1670 to modern times, including Sick Lists. 

H. 7 



98 The Analysis of Archives 

and Subsistence Lists 1 , Census 2 and Service Returns 3 , Description 
Books 4 , Registers 5 , Entry Books 6 , Vouchers 7 , Commission Books, 
Succession and Notification Books 8 , Records of Certificates 9 , Appoint- 
ments 10 , Promotions, &c., together with a more formal series of Establish- 
ment Books 11 and some assistance from Exchequer Records which are 
no longer of a Departmental nature 12 . More nearly related to the 
Accounts are the Estimates, Prices, Surveys of Stores and other 
statistical Records 13 the value of which diminishes from the middle 
of the 1 8th century. Following these are the Returns made or at 
least used for other purposes than the above, such as the Ships' 
Logs 14 , Regimental Inspection Reports 15 , Court Martial Reports 16 , 
&c. As for the common-place books, such as Precis Books, official 
Diaries, Address Books and Posting Books together with issue books 
of Records for official reference, these too will have their uses on 
occasions 17 , though their chief interest is connected with topographical 
and purely Departmental history. 

The Deposited Records, which come last of all in this structural 
classification, may be distinguished from the preceding class not so 
much in respect of form or use as by the accident of their official 
custody. Some of these, it is true, are rather of the nature of legal 
Records than of State Papers, and their classification under the head 
of Departmental Records is doubtless due to the exigencies of a dual 
control 18 . In course of time many of these will doubtless be transferred 
to their natural position amongst the Public Records, and therefore 
we need not concern ourselves here with such departmental sources 

1 From 1 793 to modern times, including prisoners of war and convicts. 

2 From 1819 to 1836, including Colonial slaves and convicts. 

3 From 1800 onwards for both services chiefly by Order of Parliament. 

4 Of soldiers and sailors from 1800 onwards. 

6 Greenwich Pensioners. 6 Ditto. 

7 e.g. of Army Agents and Contractors. 

8 From 1684 onwards (War Office). 

8 e.g. of naval officers (Navy Board). 

10 e.g. Appointment Books of the Lord Chamberlain's Department. 

11 e.g. Royal Household, Army, Custom-House, &c. 

12 The Auditors' Patent Books and Pells " Appointment Books " which serve as a key to 
the same. 

13 e.g. for the Ordnance Office (1570 to 1855) and Navy Board (1651 to 1832). 

14 From 1670 to modern times. 18 From 1750 to modern times. 

18 Of the Admiralty, 1680 to 1839. Those for the War Office are not accounted for. 

17 e.g. for the purpose of dating the despatch or receipt of an important letter. Some of 
these contain exact itineraries of the King's Messengers over the whole of Europe ; others 
show on what occasions certain Papers were consulted by the Ministers of George III. 

18 i.e. by the respective departments under the charge and superintendence of the Master 
of the Rolls. Some of these collections are already deposited in official custody. 



The Analysis of Archives 99 

as Ancient Deeds, Ministers' Accounts, Court Rolls, Rentals, surveys 
and the like 1 or even with i7th century newsletters which more 
properly belong to the State Papers 2 . There are other documents of 
a purely personal and private nature preserved in these Departmental 
collections 3 and others again which have a legal value or interest, 
whilst a few so-called Records are not of a documentary nature at all. 
Those that will be found of chief value for historical purposes are 
the muniments of the several expired Commissions and dissolved 
Corporations together with the evidence considered in respect of 
various international Claims and Demands 4 , whilst Intercepted Letters 6 
and Prize Papers 6 , when detached from the In-Letters to which they 
were presumably annexed, are frequently of great historical interest 7 . 
In spite of the obvious advantage of an analytical method of research 
based upon the structural classification of the Departmental Records 
it will be necessary in many cases to ascertain in the first place the 
technical bearings of the subject before it can be assigned to its 
appropriate sources. Some knowledge therefore of the official 
environment of the departmental Archives will be necessary, and 
this can to a certain extent be obtained from a study of printed 
works of reference such as a Biographical Dictionary, an official 
Calendar, and a book of Dignities, to supplement the information 
contained in Naval and Military Histories, particularly for individual 
regiments, Histories of Treaties, of Trade, of the Colonies and the 
general political and constitutional History of the period between 
the Restoration and the Reform Bill. 

It will in fact be found that, in spite of the scarcity of special 
historical texts for this later period, the printed literature available 
is far more extensive and serviceable than is generally supposed. 
In many cases indeed it may be suspected that the student who is at 
the pains of consulting the departmental Archives to ascertain a 
particular fact, has not troubled to ascertain in the first place whether 

1 Amongst the Records of Greenwich Hospital, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and 
the Land Revenue Record Office. 

- Amongst the Records of Greenwich Hospital (Miscellanea) dating from 1681 to 1695. 

3 e.g. Wills, Certificates, and Effects of Soldiers and Sailors. 

4 e.g. During the Seven Years' War, the American War of Independence, the Napoleonic 
Wars and the suppression of slavery, amongst the Records of the Treasury, Audit Office and 
Foreign Office. " For details see the printed Guide. 

8 For most departments but especially the Foreign Office and Admiralty. 

8 e.g. Admiralty Records, some of the most interesting of these are also found in the 
Foreign Office Records. 

7 e.g. the series of "Confidential Miscellaneous" in the Foreign Office and the "Secret 
Letters" of the Admiralty collection. 

72 



ioo The Analysis of Archives 

the information required exists in a well-known work of reference 
such as the Navy or Army Lists, the Sessional Papers or Biographies 1 
and Memoirs compiled by writers who have already placed all the 
original Records under requisition. At the same time after making 
full use of these printed sources there remains ample scope for 
intelligent researches to elucidate numerous historical subjects in 
regard of which our present information is erroneous or defective. 
But, as previously stated, until an adequate History of the Public 
Departments has been written it will not be possible for the historical 
student to make a satisfactory use of their Archives 2 . 

1 These, it is well known, are very complete on the naval, military, artistic and scientific 
sides, but singularly incomplete for the Diplomatic and Civil Services. 

2 The student should not fail to make full use of the special information on this subject 
in the official Guide, from which the facts contained in the preceding pages have been largely 
derived. 



THE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ENGLISH OFFICIAL 
HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS. 



THE Bibliography of legal Records, State Papers, and Depart- 
mental Records in official custody is a subject which presents 
considerable difficulties to the modern investigator. It has been 
frequently stated that the " Science of Archives " as cultivated on the 
Continent is practically unknown in this country 1 , and whatever quali- 
fications this statement may require it is certain that the history of the 
national Archives has not been exhaustively treated in any printed 
work of reference. In fact our knowledge of the subject is to a great 
extent based upon official tradition which is only fitfully preserved 
in a multitude of casual inventories and disconnected precedents. 
The study of official documents has not yet reached a literary 
method of expression, and it is far behind the scientific development 
of the Continental "Archivwesen 2 ," whilst such publications as exist 
deal almost exclusively with the Public Records of the mediaeval 
period 3 . 

But apart from this science of Archives, the Bibliography of 
official documents includes a large number of Indexes, Calendars 
and Texts of various forms and varying merit, whilst certain works 

1 Gross, Sources and Literature, pp. 56, 57, and section 12; Giry, A., Manuel de 
Diplomatique, p. 39; cf. H. R. Tedder, " Proposal for a Bibliography of National History" 
in Libr. Chron. ill. 185; F. Harrison, "A proposal for a new Historical Bibliography" 
in Transactions of Royal Historical Society, N. S. XI. and Athenaeum, 10 Sept. 1904, 

P- 349- 

* For the Bibliography of this subject see G. Holtzinger, Catechismus der Registratur und 
Archivkunde, p. 117; F. von Loher, Archivlehre, p. 179; von Helfert, Staatliches Archiv- 
wesen, p. 32 ; G. Richou, Traite" Pratique des Archives Publiques (1883) ; H. Bresslau, 
op. cit. I. 120; E. Lelong, in Repertoire general du droit franfais, s.v. "Archives de 
1'histoire de France "; C. A. Burkhardt, Hand- und Address- Buch (1887); Revue Inter- 
nationale des Archives, p. 12, 1895 6 Archivalische Zeitschrift, &c. 

8 e.g. those examined by the Old Record Commission (1800 1837). Since this was 
written several scholarly notices have appeared in the prefaces to the mediaeval Calendars 
(Rolls Series), e.g. Feudal Aids (Vol. I.), Patent Rolls (1327), and Charter Rolls (Vol. I.). 



IO2 Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 

of research, based upon original Records and embodying their 
contents to an appreciable extent, are deserving of at least as much 
attention as the historical memoir which can rank as a text 

In the first place, therefore, it will be desirable to classify the 
printed literature relating to our national Archives, and such a 
classification may be suggested on the following plan: 

I. Introductory or Auxiliary to the Sources. 

(a) Guides, Handbooks (of MSS.). 

(b) Bibliographies. 

(c) Auxiliary Studies and General Works of Reference. 

II. " Versions " of the Sources. 

(a) Inventories or descriptive Catalogues (of MSS.). 

(b) Calendars and Abstracts of Texts. 
(c} Translations of Texts. 

(d) Facsimiles and Transcripts of Texts. 

(e) Texts (Collections and Single Texts). 
(/) Excerpts from Texts (Source Books). 

III. Modern Works. 

(a) Original Compositions (Individual, Co-operative, or Periodi- 
cal), actually based on printed or inedited Archives. 
(b} Special Compilations based upon these Sources. 

If we apply the above scheme of classification to the three great 
Judicial, Secretarial and Departmental collections of the Public 
Records it would be found that, although no special Bibliography 
is available for the mediaeval or later periods, a fairly complete 
knowledge of the existing printed sources for the former can be 
acquired from a single work 1 . The publication of the work referred 
to, which practically supersedes all previous compilations, renders any 
individual and partial attempt to indicate the chief characteristics 
of the literature of English official sources alike needless and 
unprofitable. Side by side with this indispensable work of reference 
we have the well-known and excellent official Guide to the Public 
Records 2 in the form of a descriptive inventory which contains many 
references to official Lists, besides printed Calendars and texts. To 
bring our knowledge of the literature dealing with the early Records 

1 Gross, op. cit. For the official sources of the Continental states, so far as they concern 
the student of English History, the well-known work of MM. Langlois and Stein already 
cited will be found invaluable, with special bibliographies such as M. Gabr. Monod's 
Bibliographie de rhistoire de France. 

3 A Guide to the Public Records, by S. R. Scargill-Bird (1908). 



Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 103 

up-to-date, we should need to consult further the periodical Catalogues 
of H.M. Stationery Office and the announcements of recent publica- 
tions by learned Societies 1 or by the University Presses 2 together 
with the information contained in certain Periodicals 3 and other 
familiar sources of bibliographical information. 

For the subject-matter of the later legal Records and for that 
of the State Papers and Departmental Records we must rely solely 
upon these scattered bibliographical sources in default of any satis- 
factory compendium*. Even so a large proportion of our information 
must be derived from foreign publications, since the modern Archives 
are rarely consulted by English students except for professional or 
genealogical purposes 5 . 

Several valuable lists of documents preserved in English Archives 
which especially concern the history of Continental countries have 
been published in France, Belgium, Holland, &c. in addition to the 
American Guide above referred to. To these must be added col- 
lections like those of Delpit, Langlois and B6mont based on special 

1 Some of these are Metropolitan Societies, like the Royal Historical, Selden, and Pipe 
Roll Societies, and the Society of Antiquaries, whilst others are local and for the most part 
county organizations. A list (incomplete) of these with their publications will be found in 
the annual " Year Book " and in the Catalogues of the British Museum (Academies} and 
Society of Antiquaries. For Articles only, see Gomme, Index of Archaeological Papers 
(1891, &c.). 

2 e.g. of Oxford and Cambridge, London (School of Economics), Manchester, Liverpool, 
&c. , and of the American and Continental Universities in connexion especially with Academic 
theses. 

3 e.g. the English and American Historical Reviews, the Athenaeum, the Revue ffistorique, 
the Deutsche Zeitschrift fitr Geschichtswissenschaft, the Jahresberichte der Geschichtswissen- 
schaft, &c. 

4 The older works of bibliographical reference for this subject such as Hardy's Catalogue 
and Edwards' Libraries are now out of date, whilst random lists of works containing texts of 
Records or State Papers like that printed in the ipth Report of the Deputy Keeper of 
the Public Records are of little value. Far more important contributions to the Bibliography 
of Archives will be found in Dr J. F. Jameson's article on the printed sources of American 
History, A. H. R. (1906), and the Presidential Address of Dr G. W. Prothero in the Transactions 
of the Royal Historical Society, N. S., Vol. xvil. The well-known work by Gardiner and 
Mullinger will be found useful for the later period, and there is a valuable sketch by 
Mrs L. C. Lomas of the materials for the period between 1603 and 1660 in the Transactions 
of the above Society, N. S. Vol. xvi. 

A scientific Guide to the American sources has been already planned and is in prepara- 
tion under the direction of Prof. Chas. Andrews, who has published an important Article on 
the subject in the American Historical Review (1905). 

6 To the periodical publications usually consulted for the earlier period should now be 
added the Revue d" 1 Histoire Diplomatique, the Archives des Missions Scientifiques et Littf- 
raires, the Transactions of the Russian Imperial Historical Society and some other foreign 
historical societies, and in England the publications of the Navy Records Society. The 
admirably conceived Revue Internationale des Archives, &c. unfortunately did not survive 
the first year of publication (1895 6). 



IO4 Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 

researches in the English Archives for such subjects as diplomatic 
relations, social conditions, commercial intercourse, &c. For the 
modern period of European History these extraneous researches 
naturally become more numerous, and in fact there are few historical 
subjects of European importance or interest that would not be repre- 
sented by researches of foreign scholars in the London Archives. 
These have been published abroad and must often be sought for 
in foreign Bibliographies. On the other hand a limited number of 
works compiled by foreign scholars will be found to exist which deal 
with subjects of purely English interest. These, especially if they 
should attain to the dignity of a translation, will take their place 
eventually side by side with the native authorities for the subject, and 
will appear accordingly in English Bibliographies. It may even be 
desirable to indicate the existence of similar conditions in the case 
of publications due to the national enterprise of students of the sister 
kingdoms and imperial Colonies, and thus we should be prepared to 
look for record publications concerning Wales to the national Society 
of that Principality and to the governments of Canada and Australia 
for the titles of extensive series of English State Papers published 
at Ottawa or Sydney. 

The first object of a bibliographer must necessarily be the 
collection and arrangement of his sources. To describe, to criticize 
and even to reject individual works might be found a somewhat 
thankless task; nor is it altogether prudent to discover historical 
merit in obscure and ephemeral publications. The Bibliography 
itself may be intended as a guide to students, but its chief use will 
be to serve as a book-index for book-makers 1 . A purely conven- 
tional view of the object and scope of historical study is thus, in a 
manner, forced upon the attention of the Bibliographer, for he is 
scarcely justified in condemning or ignoring works which 'conform 
to the general acceptance of History as a branch of literature rather 
than as a science 2 . 

The only escape from the dilemma of unprofitable controversy 
on the one hand and of unscientific procedure on the other, would 
seem to lie in the direction of a rigid classification which will relegate 
works of a certain character to their proper rank in the scale of 
historical research. This is a method to which no exception can 

1 This observation is intended as the enunciation of a simple though profound truth, 
and not as a reflexion on an industrious class of students. 

2 Some modern scholars are inclined to solve the difficulty by an arbitrary selection, 
whilst others prefer to include unscientific works for the purpose of denouncing them. 



Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 105 

possibly be taken on technical grounds, whilst it is one that will not 
preclude the general reader or professional book-maker from reference 
to congenial authorities. In the case of a Bibliography of official 
historical documents the position is much simplified by the obvious 
fact that such a compilation cannot include any work which does not 
either deal directly with the subject-matter of these documents or 
reproduce their evidence to a material extent. The only real difficulty 
which arises here is due rather to defects or anomalies of earlier official 
custody than to any inconsistency in respect of the composition of 
official documents. That is to say, we may meet with official forms, 
possibly unique or of superior merit, in private custody which must 
be ignored for the purpose of the present enquiry. To relax this 
rule in individual cases would produce graver inconsistencies than 
those which it is sought to avoid, and therefore a consideration of 
these several missing units must be deferred for another occasion. 
Here then it only remains for us to distinguish accurately between 
the several denominations of printed works legitimately connected 
with the subject in hand. With this object in view we may perhaps 
have recourse to the provisional classification given above. This of 
course is a mere enumeration of the several types which may exist 
and can without difficulty be stated in the usual form of a Biblio- 
graphy. If we follow the main outlines of that which is now in 
general use amongst historical scholars for the mediaeval period, 
namely the invaluable work of Professor Gross, we should find no 
difficulty in identifying the mediaeval Bibliographies, Lists, Indexes, 
Calendars, Texts and Original Compositions under their appropriate 
headings. Bibliography must stand as an essential title. Periodical 
Publications which are usually associated with works of reference 
must clearly be relegated to another position. It will be evident, 
however, that the methodology of the subject is represented only by 
certain treatises on the Public Records, for we are concerned here 
with the Science of Archives rather than with the study of History. 
On the other hand the auxiliary studies represented by Palaeography, 
Diplomatic and the rest are of great importance for our present 
purpose, but these have been dealt with elsewhere. Although it is 
sufficiently difficult to find any work of real utility dealing with the 
resources of the national Archives during the mediaeval period of 
documentary history, the difficulty is increased tenfold in the case 
of later times, and even if a comprehensive survey of the historical 
sources of this later period were at our disposal, it would not be 
found to include references to any works affording reliable information 



io6 Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 

respecting the origin and use of the State Papers and Departmental 
Records. 

With the Printed Lists, Indexes and Calendars the case is 
somewhat different, the distribution of these works for the several 
periods being fairly uniform and the standard of quality in respect 
of modern works remarkably high. Although a clear distinction 
cannot always be made between a " List " and a " Calendar," even 
in the latest official series, the conventional distinction may be 
usefully preserved for the purpose of classification. A Calendar 
obviously differs from an Index in giving the epitome of a text 
or texts. In one sense therefore a Calendar is a text, or substituted 
text, and its use as an Index or List is merely due to the exigencies 
of research. In an ideal condition of Archive-economy, the Index 
or Inventory would answer every practical purpose and the Calendar 
might well be dispensed with, for as a substitute for a text (provided 
always that it is accessible) the latter is quite unsatisfactory. The 
contrast between our own practice herein and that of foreign countries 
is very noticeable and is scarcely to our advantage. 

Calendars of Archives may be conveniently grouped in three 
series for legal Records, State Papers, and Departmental Records 
respectively, the several examples of which are familiar to every 
student. Of these some, as has been observed before, are properly 
Indexes, whilst, conversely, many Indexes and descriptive Catalogues 
are really Calendars. In certain cases, moreover, the so-called Calen- 
dar is actually a text. 

Differing somewhat from the official Calendars, there are the 
private publications of learned societies and individual scholars. Here 
also we notice an increasing tendency to substitute for an actual text 
a version of the original MS. which is considered more suitable to 
the taste and requirements of a large number of unlearned subscribers. 
The conventional titles given above might well be utilized for this 
type of publication, but it would be found that many partial Lists 
or Abstracts are contained in private works and even in periodicals. 
The published Lists, Indexes or Calendars to be thus included under 
the head of Archives might therefore be distinguished as official 1 and 

1 For a list of ancient Indexes, &c., see D. K. i^th and ^st Reports, but we know 
that the old race of officials was chary of making, or at least of publishing, Indexes from 
interested motives. Some of the early printed Indexes are still useful, e.g. Carte (French 
Rolls), Jones (Memoranda Rolls), whilst the Indices Rerum of the Record Commissioners, 
"Calendars" of Patent Rolls, &c., are often helpful. The early Reports of the Deputy 
Keeper are also a mine of information, though a general Index to the 40 51 Reports is 
badly needed. It is unnecessary either to describe or to praise the modern series of 



Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 107 

private publications with further reference to date and form of pub- 
lication, distinctions which may be conveniently indicated in the case 
of the remaining divisions of Record publications. 

The above mentioned subjects are of a somewhat special character 
and admit of subdivision for the most part only in respect of 
their chronological order. The large class of texts, however, must 
be arranged according to the usual method employed in the case 
of general sources. One such classification will be chronological. 
Another will follow the recognized subjects of historical study, and 
these publications may again be conveniently divided according to 
their published form. But in the first place, the producing agency, 
as we have already seen, may be distinguished with some advantage. 
Thus we may recognize the agency of the State, of societies and 
other corporate bodies and of private scholars respectively. Abroad, 
however, the royal academies may really be regarded as State 
departments for this purpose, and the same remark applies to the 
national " Schools " of Archive-study at Rome. 

The distinction is to our own national disadvantage, since in 
keeping with the non-recognition by the State of the British Academy 
and the British School at Rome, we have no departmental agencies 
such as the Ecoles des Ckarfes, the section Historique or Archives 
Diplomatiques of the French War and Foreign Offices or the Royal 
Commissions of Italy and other countries. In the case of our own 
meagre State publications it is possible to distinguish further the 
several departmental agencies, whilst in the case of learned societies 
we notice, besides the usual distinction of central and local publica- 
tions, the topographical scope of enterprises that are either regional, 
county or parochial in their local interest. These distinctions 
apply chiefly to the mediaeval period. In later times institutional 
subjects are more in evidence. A classification of these archival 
texts in point of date is concerned chiefly with a distinction between 
the ancient and modern series in respect of publication, and also 
between the mediaeval and modern periods of historical events. 

Here we may easily notice distinctions, on the one hand between 

"Indexes and Lists" devised by Sir Henry Maxwell Lyte. Besides these official publi- 
cations and numerous MS. Indexes of both ancient and modern date, there are Indexes 
printed by private enterprise (Rye, Selby, Phillimore, &c.). The inventories prepared as 
the result of the "missions" of foreign scholars previously referred to, though didactic in 
their general purpose, form admirable Indexes to several collections of Records. Of a 
purely bibliographical character are the general Indexes to the contents of several important 
collections of printed texts, whilst from another point of view the Index must be carefully 
distinguished from the List of Records. 



1 08 Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 

the style and quality of the earlier and later editions, and on the 
other hand between the attention given to the mediaeval and modern 
periods respectively. Perhaps we should come to the conclusion 
that, whilst the merit of the older Record editions cannot for 
a moment be compared with that of the modern editions of Chronicles 
and other unofficial MSS., their value is greatly enhanced by the 
paucity of modern texts, which, as we have seen, have been dis- 
continued since the days of the old Record Commission in favour 
of Calendars. Moreover such texts as exist are largely excerpts due 
to local interest and are disfigured by the use of Record-type. This 
remark applies to the mediaeval period only, for the later legal 
Records are as yet an unexplored field. For modern times there 
is a considerable bulk of texts, but these in most cases are of 
secondary value. In fact whilst we have to be content with 
somewhat inadequate Calendars of the main series of State Papers, 
we have been favoured with an abundant supply of texts of memoirs, 
journals, and newsletters, selected chiefly for their sensational interest. 
It is true that Rymer is still available through the i/th century, but 
for the later period the selections are as unintelligent as for the earlier 
period the texts themselves are untrustworthy, whilst the old 
collections of printed State Papers, whether of official or semi-official 
origin, can scarcely be regarded as working texts. When we come to 
the 1 8th century we find a diminishing supply of texts with a rapidly 
increasing bulk of State Documents. It is true that we have various 
extensive editions of Despatches, notably those of Marlborough, 
Nelson and Wellington, but the originals are not all in official 
custody 1 . Moreover more than one of these editions are composed 
of arbitrary selections from a great mass of papers and do not 
in any way represent the nature or value of the collections with 
which they deal. It is impossible to review here the several series 
of existing texts of official documents, but if we could do so, 
we should be reluctantly forced to conclude that in the case of the 
legal Records, the State Papers and Departmental Records alike, 
the existing texts are not only generally inadequate but also in- 
complete; neither is there any prospect of an immediate improvement 
in the existing conditions. 

In our classification of these texts it will be useful to indi- 
cate the chief historical subjects that may be materially illustrated 
by this class of evidence. For the mediaeval period these headings 

1 In the case of the editions of the Chatham and Cornwallis correspondence a similar 
objection can now only partially apply. 



Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 109 

are already made, but for the official documents of a later period 
some new headings must be introduced. Specimens have been given 
in an Appendix. Again it may be noted that, although every text 
which has not been practically superseded should find a place in this 
bibliographical section, care must be taken to distinguish between 
texts of merit in respect of scholarship and those of a serviceable 
character. It is even more necessary to make a distinction between 
completed texts and editions which present a garbled version of the 
original text or merely selected passages. Finally it will be found 
that numerous texts, often of considerable value, are published in 
various collections or periodicals, and here too the form of pub- 
lication should be carefully indicated, with a note of any reissue of 
the document in a permanent form. 

The class of original compositions based directly or indirectly, 
ostensibly or actually, upon documentary texts, manuscript or printed, 
might appear to be an even more extensive one than the preceding. 
Its extent, however, must for the present really depend upon the 
process of selection which may be employed. It is perfectly clear 
that in very many instances a general claim to the merit of original 
research has become almost a meaningless formula. But whatever 
its justification may be in respect of historical sources at large, the 
mere fact of the use or reproduction of specific historical documents 
can be easily decided. There are in fact original works which 
traverse the evidence of documents almost as closely as an official 
calendar, and there are others which either skilfully assimilate this 
evidence or grossly pervert its meaning. The omission of such 
reference can at least be positively demonstrated, and for the present 
this must perhaps serve as the only conclusive test of the scope 
of such original historical compositions. For this reason alone it 
would certainly be desirable that every work which claims to be 
based upon official documents should be furnished with a table of 
such documents in addition to the usual list of authorities, for 
hitherto this practice has not been generally adopted. 

In the case of these original works, a useful distinction may per- 
haps be made between those of early and recent date respectively. 
The former class is characterized by the large number of docu- 
ments printed in the body of the work or in the footnotes, and the 
latter by a more critical and judicious use of this official evidence, 
the actual texts being given, when desirable, in an appendix. It 
is moreover an interesting fact that in certain cases the texts of 
documents, which cannot now be identified, have been preserved 



1 1 o Bibliography of English Official Historical Documents 

in original publications of an early date. It will be obvious that 
originality of thought or design may be recognized not only in 
conventional historical narratives, instructive treatises, or occasional 
essays, but also in the preparation of the Texts themselves, in the 
selection or presentment thereof, and in their translation. This 
view of the subject will certainly extend to works dealing with the 
auxiliary studies of history and historical methodology, although 
in accordance with the conventional system of bibliographical classi- 
fication we have placed these several forms of historical publications 
under other heads. 

In this section of our classification it is also possible to enumerate 
certain subjects that appear to have attracted the special attention 
of historical writers in connexion with the mediaeval and modern 
periods respectively. The list could doubtless be extended without 
much difficulty, but it will serve to remind us of an instructive 
phenomenon of our historical literature. The unequal distribution 
of historical research is very apparent from such a classification of 
its results and it is still more obvious to those who have the charge 
of archives. Why so much has been written on certain favourite 
subjects, and so little on others that are obscure or uninviting, can 
easily be explained. These oft chosen subjects, it would be found, 
appeal to our political or religious temperament or to our imagination. 
Certain constitutional theories must be maintained, and so Magna 
Carta, the Reformation, the Great Rebellion and the Revolution have 
their votaries. Commercial and agrarian systems must be expounded, 
and so we dwell lovingly on Domesday Book, the Villeins' insur- 
rections, the Gild Ordinances, and the Navigation Laws. Great 
disasters like the Black Death, the Plague and the Fire of London, 
and conflicts like the Spanish Armada, the battles of Trafalgar and 
Waterloo, and the Napoleonic invasion appeal to our sense of national 
pride or security. Doubtless many readable books and a few valuable 
contributions to learning have resulted from this trivial round of 
historical enquiry, but the sum of our real knowledge of the national 
history is not largely increased by this restriction of our investi- 
gations. 









*5\ " 


11 


til 

3 


u 










IT-I ^ 


^ "- 


</, 


V 








^Ti "H 


^ 


'S <- 


c 








of 0^ ^ 






^ '^ *B 








7 s -~ ~2 


*~. 


.S w 


^ ^ 2 








S "3 


^ 


i5 ^ 


o a- 








S S ^ 


b^ 


4,^2 


^ *> 








O "o 


S .j> 


. *5 jj 


2 ^3 "c 








p^ 'O <3 1. 




^3 c -5 








i_H -i -^ 


o ~ 


f |^ CJ ^ 








a'g 


rt 1> 


P 12 jz 








*~*~ rS*^ ^ "^ 


n 


rt ^- g 








*Q ^ * s k M ^ 


rt _O 


^ > 








'r* xl3."^ ^ ^ 


tj ^ 


C t^-C 








tj ^ i ^ ^> 




D O *-* ^ 




W 
U 


? 


8.1-1 


*? 


S cj;s cs 




E 

b 


. 




ll"o 


'! '* 5 


|$? u^ 






Q 

3 
o 

| 


^ 
~t 

s s 

II 

6% 


?1 b = I fe 

W a o a 

1> ^ p^ r^ "^ 

"fr'S' *-*\> 

^L Bu 


ill 

^ ^ 


1 S- ' * 
2 b ^"5u 




u 


OS -? 


L n ^^? 
. * j* 5 s 

gjs ^3|^5 


ll! 


a 2 il 1 ^ d. 




3 


^o 7-\ 




'o '"^ *5 


*3 ^ 3 rt . x 




M 


-_^K) 


|M ^ $ g * 


1> "rt ^ 


> 3 pC o ^ 




P 

PH 


<* 


$L *$ " |f ^ 


c $ <r> 


|t s 


. 




S S 


^ ^^* ^^ ^ Q 


aj D ^ 


*5 ^ *5 *-' * 







^ 










B 


is 


** ^ i 
%i ^-v. _^ 


o """* H H ^ 


^ Qj ^ *" f/5 


ENDIX 


H 

h 
O 

z 
o 

H 

S 


Chamber (i 
( Wardrobe A 




S3i 
-5fi1 

w s -L 
o o 5f 

Jo^ 
2 w 


3 

u ^ 

31 i 

_u -S ^S - 


w "O bfl 

'5 u c 
-2 E 'C 


PH 


M) 
O 






2 

tn"^" 


l| ^ ? 


* i 


^"J 


M 






8'c 


^ "" .2 * 


^ j "1 


^ 








S.-a 


M Jj 


** I 


e S 




s 






-^ 


p^ c 


O a) CH 




H 






v 1 


^ I P 


0) 











S^^ 



1 H 


B. H . 




2 






CJ 


"o "<5 


<y <U y 




^ 








w o 


o S 1 ^ 




o 






^. 


60 ( 


^s ^ s^- 




c 






' '"? 


'S <*-. 


" CX 




9 




c< 


Jl 


1 2 

s 

55 J 
v u 
^ > 


^ 

! !> M 

o I Jj* 

^ j> . rt *- 


CD ^ 
^ 






il 


Ul t-i 


.S - " 


- td 


o o .S 




< 


i> 

1? 


II 


w 


o 

"o 4> 




Ctf tr; 






g fe 


B *"* 


^T- 










* >5 


1 


' ' C 


c * 


^ O ^ 






5$ 


1 


I.I 


.5 >, 


1 "313 s| 









S" 


g 3 


^"* G 2 






JZ-S 


J3 -ft, 


J3 Jj 


aj i- " u ^ 










V 








|| 


3 




.i'lin 






~3 .% 


1 ?!" 


1 s i 


I'sll 1 i i 






* 


sf ll 


c w 


-g 8 5 S a. 






ISI ^> 


L>- S . Br5J 1 j-i H 


o J3 <S 



M pl (Tl 



1 2 Appendix I 



B. METROPOLITAN RECORD REPOSITORIES 1 

(showing the distribution of the Records before the Public 

Record Office Act of 1838). 
Westminster, 
i. Treasuries 2 ." 

(a) The Abbey Treasury (Wardrobe, Exchequer, King's Court). 

(b] The Palace Treasury (Exchequer and King's Court), 
ii. General Repository 3 . The Chapter House (Abbey). 
Hi. Repositories of the Court of Exchequer 4 . 

(a) Exchequer of Account, including : 

Pipe office [Lincoln's Inn]. 

Lease office [Gray's Inn]. 

King's Remembrancer [Temple]. 

Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer [Temple]. 

Foreign Apposer [Somerset House]. 

Surveyor of Greenwax [Somerset House]. 

Auditors of the Land Revenue. 

Surveyor-General of Crown Lands. 

Auditors of the Imprest. 

Augmentation office. 

First Fruits and Tenths office [Temple]. 

(b) Exchequer of Receipt 5 , including : 

Auditors. 
Tellers. 
Pells. 
Tally Court. 

1 This list is compiled from the Reports of the Parliamentary Committees and Record 
Commissioners in 1800, but although it may sufficiently indicate the devolution of the 
ancient Treasuries of Records, it is by no means complete. For further particulars see the 
2nd and following Reports of the Deputy Keeper (e.g. loth Report, Appx. p. 191). It is 
scarcely necessary to notice the intermediate Repositories between the Act of 1838 and the 
final transfer of the Records to the Repository in Fetter Lane. 

2 Including the ancient treasuries within the Abbey, that of the Exchequer adjoining the 
Palace and the treasuries of-the Common Law Courts within the Palace itself. 

3 This was the virtual successor of the Abbey and Exchequer Treasuries. 

4 The address in brackets indicates the position of the working Department where 
usually the bulk of its Records were also preserved. In the case of the Departments to 
which no such indication is appended, the Records appear to have been preserved at 
Westminster. From 1800 there was a tendency towards centralization in temporary reposi- 
tories such as Somerset House, Carlton House, &c. instead of the Inns of Court, &c. 

5 The Records of this Court formed the bulk of those deposited in the Exchequer 
Treasury in later times. For details of their distribution, cf. D. K. ith Report, Appx. ii. p. 3. 



Appendix I 113 

(c) Exchequer of Pleas 1 , including: 
Plea Office [Lincoln's Inn]. 
Clerk of the Errors, &c. [Sergeants' Inn, &c.]. 

iv. Repositories of the Court of King's Bench 2 : 
King's Bench "Treasury." 
Gustos Brevium [Temple]. 
King's Bench Office [Temple]. 
Crown Office [Temple]. 

v. Repositories of the Court of Common Pleas 8 : 
Common Pleas Treasury. 
Clerk of the Warrants, &c. [Temple]. 
Gustos Brevium [Temple]. 
Chirographer's Office [Temple]. 

vi. Repositories of Special Courts (derived from the King's Council) 4 : 
Court of Requests. 
Star Chamber. 
Court of Wards and Liveries. 

vii. Repositories of Household Courts 5 : 

Marshalsea [Southwark]. 
viii. Repositories of Honour Courts 6 : 

1 The Records were chiefly deposited in Westminster Hall. 

2 Several other departments of the King's Bench were not situated at Westminster and 
their Records were neither deposited nor transmitted there (see D. K. loth Report, Appx. 
191 sqq.). The Welsh Records were preserved locally till 1854 (see below, Appendix I. c). 

3 The following departments of the Common Pleas were not situated at Westminster 
though their Records were chiefly deposited or transmitted there : 

Clerk of the Essoins [Temple]. 

Reversals of Outlawry Office [Temple]. 

Filacer [Temple]. 

King's Silver Office [Temple]. 

Alienation Office [Temple]. 

Return Office [Temple]. 

4 These were akin to the Chancery in point of procedure and of much later date than 
the other Courts of Law at Westminster. Their position here is probably connected with 
the vicinity of the palace of Whitehall. It is well known that the Decrees of the Star 
Chamber were last heard of in Smithfield where records are occasionally found in the earlier 
period. The Records of the Court of the Lord President of Wales and the Marches and 
those of the Council of the North and of the Court of High Commission were probably 
destroyed during the Commonwealth. 

5 The Placita Aulae dating from the i3th century are the best known Records of this 
court (cf. Fleta, II. 14). The following departments of the Household were not situated 
normally at Westminster nor were their Records deposited there : 

Lord Chamberlain's Office [St James's Palace]. 

Lord Steward's Office [St James's Palace] . 

8 The Records of the Duchy of Lancaster were at one time deposited at Westminster. 
The Records of Chester were preserved locally like other Welsh Records and those of the 
Duchy of Cornwall. The Palatinate of Durham was not vested in the Crown till 1832. 

H. 8 



1 1 4 Appendix I 

Temple. See above Nos. iii., iv., v., and below under Rolls Chapel. 

Tower of London. 

i. Treasury (Wardrobe and Chancery) 1 . 

ii. General Repository (Early Chancery Rolls, &c.). 

Rolls Chapel 2 . 

i. General Repository 3 . 

ii. Subsidiary Repositories 4 , including : 

Petty Bag Office [Rolls Yard]. 

Six Clerks Office [Rolls Yard]. 

Inrolment Office [Chancery Lane], 
iii. Independent Repositories 5 , including : 

Masters in Chancery [Symonds' Inn, &c.]. 

Prothonotary's Office [Temple]. 

Hanaper Office [Chancery Lane]. 

Cursitor's Office [Chancery Lane]. 

Clerk of the Crown [Rolls Yard]. 

Subpoena Office [Rolls Yard]. 

Clerk of the Custodies [Temple]. 
Dispensations [Temple]. 
Letters Patent [Adelphi]. 

Bankrupts' Patentee Office [Lincoln's Inn]. 

Inrolment Office in Bankruptcy [Chancery Lane]. 

Examiner's Office [Rolls Yard]. 

Register of Affidavits [Symonds' Inn]. 

Report Office [Chancery Lane]. 

Accountant General's Office [Chancery Lane]. 

Crown Office [Clifford's Inn]. 

1 Apparently in Caesar's Tower before 1360 and after that date in the Wakefield Tower. 
The Ordnance Records were preserved here with those of the Great Wardrobe, but the 
Records of the Privy Seal Office were preserved elsewhere. The Records relating to the 
garrison and prisoners are still preserved in the Constable's custody, but those relating to 
the Liberty have been apparently dispersed. Cf. J. Bayley, History of the Tower of 
London, II. Appx., War Office, Ordnance, Miscellanea, 1073, and D. K. yoth Report, 
Appx., 3i3- 

2 The Records were preserved partly in the body of the Chapel and partly in a room 
under the roof. Some were found in the Rolls House itself in 1717. 

3 This was the real nucleus of the Public Record Office subsequent to the Act of 1838, 
the General Repositories at the Tower and Westminster being regarded as branch offices. 

4 The departmental Records of the Chancery were chiefly preserved in private or official 
buildings in the neighbourhood of Chancery Lane, and in the case of the offices mentioned 
below the Records were regularly transmitted to the Rolls Chapel or direct to the Tower by 
warrant of the Master of the Rolls. 

8 In the case of other departments, mentioned below, the Records were not transmitted 
and an independent custody thereof was claimed by the clerks. 



Appendix I i i $ 



C. REPOSITORIES OF WELSH RECORDS 1 . 

i. Chester Circuit. Chester Castle. 
*Montgomery. 

Welshpool. 
* Den high. 
*Wrexham. 

Ruthin. 

ii. North Wales Circuit. Caernarvon. 

Dolgelly. 

iii. Brecknock Circuit. Brecknock. 
Presteign. 
Cardiff. 

iv. Caermarthen Circuit. Caermarthen. 

Cardigan. 
Haverfordwest. 

D. EXISTING REPOSITORIES OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 

Many ancient and valuable Records continued to be preserved in depart 
mental repositories after the passing of the Public Record Office Act of i838 2 . 
Of these, however, the greater part have now been deposited in the Public 
Record office, including the residue of the outstanding judicial Records 3 and 

1 These repositories have been practically disused except for the custody of the normal 
" Local Records " (see above, p. 22) since the removal of the Welsh Records to London in 
1854. The repositories marked with an asterisk had been virtually abandoned before the 
date of that removal {Deputy Keeper's 8tA Report, Appx. I. p. 36). It should be noted that 
the Records were not entirely preserved in these castles, or shirehalls, or churches (as the 
case might be), but were apparently preserved in part in the private dwellings of their 
official custodians. As in the case of Scotland or of Ireland (above, p. 22) certain native 
Records were doubtless conveyed to London during the English occupation. The Records 
of the "Council of Wales" formerly preserved at Ludlow have now disappeared (C. A. J. 
Skeel, The Council in the Marches of Wales, p. viisqq.); but even in the reign of Queen 
Elizabeth they seem to have been carelessly preserved (S. P. Dom. Eliz. Appx. xxvii. 95). 
The names of the patentees holding the office of clerk of the Council of Wales and the 
Marches after the Restoration will be found in the Signet Office Docquet Book, April 1662, 
a clue which might be followed up with advantage. The English Records relating to Wales 
form part of the general series of Public Records, and others may be found in the Land 
Revenue collection recently transferred to the Public Record Office. There are also originals 
or transcripts in private collections and diplomatic correspondence in foreign Archives ; cf. 
E. Owen, Catalogue of MSS. relating to Wales in the British Museum. 

2 Cf. D. K. i$th Report, p. xxi. 

3 The outstanding Records of the Chancery, the Courts of King's Bench, Common 
Pleas and Exchequer, and the Admiralty and Probate Registries, together with some frag- 
mentary proceedings of the old Palace Courts and the valuable Records of the Palatinate of 
Durham. 

82 



1 1 6 Appendix I 

the ancient muniments acquired by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners 1 , the 
former Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital 1 , and the Commissioners of 
Woods and Forests as the successors of the Auditors of Land Revenues 
(Land Revenue Records) 2 . However some actual Records, connected with 
or continued from the series in official custody, are still preserved in certain 
repositories situated both in London and in the provinces. The most 
important of these are contained in the following list, which does not, of 
course, include collections of State Papers or Departmental Records (which 
will be treated in the present volume under separate headings), neither 
does it include such Records as have been palpably abandoned by the Crown 
itself, and which, therefore, no longer fall within the category of official 
Records 3 . 

The same exception must be held to apply to the large class of so-called 
" Local Records," which a strict interpretation of the Public Record Office 
Act of 1838 and of the complementary Order in Council of March 5, 1852, 
supplemented by the specific directions of certain recent enactments, might 
logically affect 4 . As stated above (p. 22), however, the inclusion of these 
so-called " Records 5 " in any existing scheme of Record classification cannot 
be justified on historical or scientific grounds, however desirable this con- 
summation might appear on those of public policy or national sentiment. 
For the purpose of the present survey these "Local Records" will be 
considered as private or unofficial Records, and as such they must be 
reserved for treatment on another occasion. 

1 These Records consist of the manorial evidences which came into the possession of the 
Commissioners when they took over the administration of certain ancient estates. It must 
be observed, however, that these Records have been merely "deposited" in the custody of 
the Master of the Rolls, although they form part of a series of manorial evidences of which 
a large proportion was already preserved amongst the Public Records. 

2 These include apparently Exchequer Records which had probably been used for 
reference when the Auditors' department was situated in Westminster Palace. For Exchequer 
Records left behind at Westminster, cf. D. K. $6th Report, p. 5. 

3 e.g. the Proceedings of the President and Council in the Marches of Wales fcf. i^th 
Rep. Hist. MSS. Commn. Appx. iv. pp. 247 282), and the Records of dissolved corporations 
assigned to public institutions or local repositories by the Treasury, the Local Government 
Board and the Charity Commissioners (e.g. Records of the South Sea Company, presented 
by the Treasury to the British Museum). For the Records of similar bodies in official custody, 
cf. p. 126. 

4 e.g. the Births, Marriages and Deaths Registration Act (1874), the Municipal Corpora- 
tions Act (1883) and the Local Government Act (1894). Under these and preceding Acts, the 
official nature of such documents as Registers of Births, &c., Inclosure Awards and Tithe Maps 
and Legislative exhibits seems to have been pretty clearly established. In another aspect, 
moreover, the supervision of such Local Records is vested by these recent Acts in a delegated 
authority (Local Government Board, Charity Commissioners, Board of Agriculture, County 
Council), thus dispensing with the powers given under the Act of 1838 and the Order in 
Council of 1852. 

6 Most of these are briefly described in the Report of the Treasury Committee on Local 
Records (1902). As to Parish Registers, cf. also D. K. i8M loth Reports. 



Appendix I 117 

E. LIST OF EXISTING REPOSITORIES OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, 
ADDITIONAL TO THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE 1 , 

(a) Central, 

Royal Courts of Justice 2 . 
Houses of Parliament 3 . 
Somerset House (General Registry) 1 . 
Board of Trade (Patent Office) 9 . 
Board of Agriculture 8 . 
Land Registry Office 7 . 
Ecclesiastical Commission 8 . 
Queen Anne's Bounty Office. 
Privy Council Office 9 . 

(b) Local. 

Clerks of Assizes 10 . 
Clerks of the Peace 11 . 

1 This list, which is probably by no means exhaustive, only includes such typical Records 
as may be closely compared with the legal Records in the custody of the Master of the Rolls. 
Departmental Records are excluded, and will be referred to elsewhere. This list is compiled 
from the Deputy Keeper's Reports and the official Guide. 

2 Including the current Records of the Admiralty Registry and the King's Remembrancer's 
Office. Important Crown Office Records were transferred as recently as 1906. For the 
present distribution of the judicial Records, see the official Guide, p. 296. 

3 It is not suggested that the Records preserved in the Houses of Parliament are the 
property of the Crown in the sense of the Act of 1838 or the Order in Council of 1852. 
From a historical point of view, however, these are legal Records in the truest sense. 

4 Wills and Registers. 

8 I/egal Records periodically transmitted to the Public Record Office. 
8 Tithe Maps, &c. 

7 Enrolments of Titles, &c. to land in Middlesex. 

8 Some early Records still retained. 

9 Registers and State Papers. Those prior to the year 1600 have been recently trans- 
mitted to the Public Record Office. 

10 From the analogy of the delivery of the Records of the Justices of Assize into the 
Treasury and from the directions contained in 9 Edw. Ill, (i) c. 5, and n Hen. IV, c. 3 we 
might certainly conclude that these are Records under the Act of 1838 (cf. D. K. i$t 'h Report, 
p. xxvi). The Records in their custody seem to have shared the fate of those preserved in 
Wales. We may notice too that the Records of the special commissions for carrying out the 
provisions of the Statute of Labourers were ordered to be delivered up in the same way as 
other Plea Rolls, and some of these are still in fact preserved amongst the Assize Rolls. 
Yet these pleadings must be regarded as closely analogous to the ordinary business of the 
later Quarter Sessions. The Passes issued to Labourers under the Statute of 1388 have 
disappeared, but some seals are still preserved in the British Museum. 

11 Although Justices of the Peace might be regarded as amenable to the above rule their 
acts were chiefly administrative. Moreover, a special custodian was ultimately appointed in 
this case (Gustos Rotulorum), and possibly such local appointments were made as early as the 
reign of Henry III. For these local judicial records, cf. Report of the Committee on Local 
Records, p. 7, and Athenaeum, 5 Oct. 1902. Their historical value has been amply proved 
by the contemporary researches of Mr and Mrs Sidney Webb. 



1 1 8 Appendix I 

Duchy of Lancaster 1 . 
Duchy of Cornwall 1 . 
Palatinate of Ely 2 . 

F. CHRONOLOGY OF THE CUSTODY OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 

[1086 1189]. Royal Treasury at Winchester containing Records 3 . 
[1154] 1854. Royal Treasury at Westminster containing Records 4 . 
[1177] 1230. Notices of Records in official custody 5 . 
1185 1291. Treasury in the Temple Church containing Treasure and 

Records 6 . 

1200 1305. Tower of London used as a Treasury and Wardrobe 7 . 
1305 1318. Tower of London used as a Treasury of Records 8 . 
1232. Foundation of the Rolls House and Chapel 9 . 
1286 1377. Offices of Master of the Rolls and Keeper of the House of 

Converts usually held together 10 . 
1377. The above offices united, including the Keepership of the Tower 

Records 11 . 
1483 1603. The offices of Master of the Rolls and Keeper of the Tower 

Records distinguished 12 . 
1320. Royal precept for the arrangement of the Records in the Treasuries 

of Westminster and the Tower of London 13 . 
1322. Commission to arrange the Records at Pontefract, Tutbury, and in 

the Tower of London and House of the Friars Preachers 14 . 
1322. Commission to Walter de Stapeldon to arrange the Records in the 

Treasury and elsewhere 18 . 

1323 1325. Ordinances of the Exchequer referring to the Records 18 . 
[1360 1362]. Transfer of the Chancery Records from the White Tower 

to the Wakefield Tower 17 . 

I Some Records not yet transferred. For an early notice of Records at Clitheroe 
Castle, see Chanc. Inq. P. M. 4 Ed. II. No. 51. Records of the honour of "Knarsboro" 
were transferred in 1900. Nothing is known as to the fate of the Stannary Court Records 
at Bodmin after the transfer of its jurisdiction to the County Court at Truro. 

* A large collection of Records, included under the Act of 1838, not transferred to the 
Public Record Office. 

3 J. H. Round in Antiquary, June July, 1887. 

4 Hall, Antiquities of the Exchequer, p. n sqq. 

6 Dialogus de Scaccario, I. xiv. Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls), p. xxi sqq. 

6 Hall, Receipt Roll of the Exchequer (31 Henry II), p. vi. Close Roll 20 Ed. I, m. 13 d. 

7 Above, p. 1 8 sq. 8 Ibid. 

9 W. J. Hardy in Midds. N. and Q. n. 47 sq. D. K. tfth Report. 

10 Ibid. pp. 55, 56. D. K. tftA Report. 

II Pat. 51 Ed. Ill, m. 20. 

18 Edwards' Hist, of Libraries, p. 229. Camden Miscellany, X. vii. 

13 Record Commission, Papers and Documents, p. 413. 14 Ibid. 

15 Palgrave, /Calendars and Inventories, Vol. I. p. r. 

18 Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls), pp. 848969. 

17 Close Roll 34 Ed. Ill, Pt. I, m. 15 and 33 ; cf. 36 Ed. Ill, m. 25. 



Appendix I 119 

1372. Petition of the Commons for access to the Records 1 . 

[15651571]. [Petition of the Judges to the Crown for the better preservation 

of the Records at Westminster] 2 . 
1603. Office of Keeper of the Rolls of Chancery in the Tower subordinated 

to that of the Master of the Rolls 3 . 
1610. Agarde's Compendium completed 4 . 
1617. Scheme for a " General Record Office 5 ." 
1662. Prynne's Report on the Tower Records 6 . 
1693 1717. Publication of Rymer's Foedera. 
1703 1728. House of Lords' Reports on the Public Records 7 . 

1731. Act for Records to be written in English only 8 . 

1732. Report of the House of Commons on the Public Records 9 . 
1764 1800. Commission for " methodizing" the Public Records 10 . 
1783. Publication of Domesday Book. 

1772. Report of the House of Commons on the Public Records 11 . 

1772 1832. Occasional removals of Records for greater safety 12 . 

1788 1793. Reports of House of Commons on Approaches to Westminster 

Hall 13 . 
1800 1837. Reports and Publications of the Commissioners of Public 

Records 14 . 

1836. Report of House of Commons on the above Commission 15 . 
1838. Public Record Office Act 16 . 
1838 1854. Provisional accommodation for and supervision of Public 

Records under above Act 17 . 
1840. House of Lords' Committee to enquire into the sale and destruction 

of Exchequer Records. 
1852. Order in Council (5 Mar.) for the supervision of Public Records by 

the Master of the Rolls. 
1852. Amalgamation of the State Paper and Public Record Offices. 

1 Rot. Part. ii. 314. 

2 For this traditional representation, cf. Ayloffe's Calendars, xxviii. 

3 Camden Miscellany, x. vii. * Ed. Powell, Repertorie of Records (1631). 
6 S. P. Dom. Chas. I, cxlviii. 57. 

6 S. P. Dom. Chas. II, Ixvi. 154 and Brevia Parliamentaria (epist. dedicat.). 

7 The State of the Public Records of the Kingdom (Lond. 1723), Lords' Journals ; 1703 
1728. 

3 far!. Hist. vill. 861. 9 H. C. Reports, Vol. I. p. 508. 

10 Above, p. 41. 

11 Commons Journals, xxxm. 775. 

12 H. C. Reports, passim ; Commons Journals, XXXIII. 791. 

13 Commons Journals, XLVIII. 848. 

14 Commissions were issued in the years 1800, 1806, 1817, 1821, 1825 and 1831. In 
addition to the Annual Reports, detailed Reports were issued in 1800, 1803, 1812, 1819 
and 1837. 

15 Par/. Papers, 1836, Vol. XVI. 16 I & 3 Vic. c. 94. 
17 D. K. Reports, s. a. 



I2O Appendix I 

1854. Completion of the Public Record Office Repository. 

1854 1862. Transmissions of Records and State Papers from other Re- 
positories 1 . 

1862 1908. Transmissions of Departmental Records 2 . 

1840 1857. Calendars of State Papers instituted by Mr Hobhouse. 

1857. Rolls Series of "Chronicles and Memorials" instituted by Lord 
Romilly. 

1873 1 %79- Judicature Acts remodelling the procedure and Records of 
the Courts of Justice. 

1877 1898. Public Record Office Acts for the disposal of valueless docu- 
ments 8 . 

1892. New Series of Record Calendars instituted by Sir H. Maxwell Lyte. 

1895 1900. The Rolls House and Chapel pulled down and the new 
frontage of the Public Record Office erected on their site 4 . 

1902. Report of Treasury Committee on Local Records 5 . 

1 D. K. Reports, s. a. 2 Ibid. 

3 40 & 41 Vic. c. 55, amended by 61 & 62 Vic. c. 12. 

4 D. K. tfth Report. 8 Sess. Papers C. d. 1335. 



APPENDIX II. 

CHRONOLOGY OF THE CUSTODY OF THE STATE PAPERS. 

1536. Act defining the precincts of the Palace of Westminster (28 Hen. 

VIII, c. 12). 
1544. Entries of the receipt of State Papers cease to be made in the records 

of the Treasury of the Receipt of the Exchequer. 
[1545]. Inventory [by William Honnyng] of State Papers in the "Study" 

at Westminster. 
1578 1603. Traditional establishment of a State Paper Office at Whitehall, 

and appointment of Dr Thomas Wilson and Dr James successively as 

Keepers of the Papers of State. 
1603. Grant of an Annuity of ^50 to Sir Thomas Lake in consideration 

of his custody of the Papers of State. 
1 6 10. Grant of the Office of Keeper of the Papers of State to Levinus 

Munck and Thomas Wilson. 
1614. Further grant of the same office to Thomas Wilson and Ambrose 

Randolph. 

1614 1618. Construction of a repository for the State Papers at Whitehall. 
1619. Destruction of certain Papers by a fire at Whitehall. 
1619. Removal of the State Papers to the Whitehall Gateway. 
1629. Grant of the Office of Keeper to Ambrose Randolph, on the death 

of Sir Thomas Wilson. 

1 66 1. Grant of the Office of Keeper to Sir Joseph Williamson. 
1702. Grant of the Office of Keeper to John Tucker. 
1706. John Tucker's Report on the condition of the Papers in the custody 

of Sir Joseph Williamson. 

1706. Removal of the earlier State Papers to the "Cock-pit " in Whitehall. 
1725 1800. Appointment of Collectors and Transmitters of the Papers. 
1756 1764. Removal of the Whitehall Gateway and discovery of old 

Papers there. 

1764 1800. Appointment of Methodizers of the Papers and Records. 
1786. The Collector and Transmitter's office removed to Scotland Yard. 



122 Appendix II 

1792. Appointment of John Bruce as Keeper. 

1 800. First Report of the Record Commissioners and re-organization of the 

State Paper Office. 
1819. Removal of the Transmitter's Papers from Scotland Yard to Great 

George Street. 

1825 1852. State Paper Commission (Publications of the). 
1833. A new Paper Office built in St James's Park. 
18481852. The Paper Office constituted a "Branch State Paper Office" 

under the superintendence of the Master of the Rolls. 
1862. Removal of the State Papers to the Public Record Office. 
1894 1908. Re-arrangement of the State Papers (Domestic, Foreign and 

Colonial) and publication of revised Lists under the supervision of 

Sir Henry Maxwell Lyte. 



APPENDIX III. 

A. LIST OF PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS WHOSE HISTORICAL RECORDS (INCLUD- 
ING THOSE OF ABOLISHED OFFICES UNDER THEIR JURISDICTION) HAVE 
BEEN MAINLY TRANSFERRED TO THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE 1 . 

Admiralty. 

1. Secretary's Department 2 . 

2. Accountant General's Department 3 : 

Navy Board, Treasurer's Office, Bill Office, Imprest Office, 
Comptroller's Office, Ticket Office, Allotment Branch. 

3. Surveyor's Department 4 . 

4. Victualling Department 5 . 

5. Storekeeper-General's Office 4 . 

6. Transport Department 5 . 

7. Medical Department 5 . 

8. Greenwich Hospital (and Chatham Chest). 

9. Royal Marine Office 6 . 

1 The information contained in this list is derived chiefly from the early Reports of the 
Deputy Keeper of the Public Records with some additional information gleaned from 
official Handbooks, Parliamentary Papers, Archaeological works and other printed sources. 
It should however be supplemented by the Official Lists which may be consulted by students 
within certain limits at the Archives. Legal records such as those of the Privy Seal and 
Signet Offices are not included in this list, which also omits several departmental collections 
of small historical interest (cf. above, p. 70). 

8 Including the Hydrographer's Office which was also concerned with Logs. 

3 Established in 1833 to supersede the old departments of the Comptroller and Treasurer 
known respectively as the Navy Office and Navy Pay Office, including the several branches 
concerned with Tickets, Wages, Imprests, Bills, Allotments, Wills, &c. 

4 Associated with the Navy Office as an administrative department in distinction to the 
Navy Pay Office. 

5 These offices were administered by distinct Boards. The Medical Department, formerly 
the Sick and Hurt Board, was administered later by the Transport Board, and then by a 
Physician General. The first Transport Board was constituted in 1690 under an Order in 
Council. The Commissioners acted under a Patent from 1710 to 1724, when the Board was 
dissolved and its business conducted by the Navy Board, Victualling Board and Ordnance. 
It was re-established in 1795 and took over the management of Prisoners of War and of 
the Sick and Hurt during the Napoleonic wars. With the exception of one or two volumes 
none of the Records of the old Board (1690 1724) appear to have survived. 

6 Including the Records of the central office in distinction to the divisional headquarters. 



1 24 Appendix III 

Agriculture, Board of 1 . 

Ordnance, Survey Records. 

Audit Office (Exchequer and Audit Office). 
Exchequer of Receipt (1834 1867). 
Commissioners for Auditing Public Accounts. 
Colonial Audit Office. 
Comptrollers of Arrny Accounts (1711 1834). 

Chamberlain (Lord), see Household (Royal). 

Charity Commission 2 . 

Old Charity Commission. 

Colonial Office, see Secretaries of State. 
Customs, Board of 3 . 

Foreign Office, see Secretaries of State. 
Home Office, see Secretaries of State. 

National Debt Office. 

Life Annuity Records. 

Tontine Records. 

Slave Compensation Claims. 

Paymaster-General's Office. 

Paymaster-general of the Forces. 

Paymasters of the Civil List. 

Treasurers of the Navy, Ordnance and Chelsea, &c. (after 1836). 

Hospital. 

1 The Ordnance Survey Returns, and Correspondence form an integral part of the old 
Board of Ordnance Records, but for departmental purposes they appear to belong to the 
modern Board of Agriculture. This department has also the official custody of the Tithe 
Maps, formerly belonging to the old Tithe Office, but it has none of the ancient and im- 
portant Records of the old Board of Agriculture, some of which have been printed. 

2 The Records of the old Charity Commission were removed in 1841 to the Rolls Chapel 
by order of the Treasury and Home Office, but documents of a legal nature will be found 
among the Chancery Records. The Records of the existing Commission are of comparatively 
modern date. Some of these appear to have been transmitted with the Records of the 
Treasury Solicitor. 

3 It appears from the early Reports of the Deputy Keeper (-](h Rep. p. 4 and if>th Rep. 
p. xix) that several interdepartmental transfers of Records took place between the Treasury 
and the Customs previous to the final removal of these Records to the Rolls House. It is 
related that a large number of the Records perished in the fire of 1814. It is at least certain 
that the existing series is very incomplete so far as it has been transmitted to the Public 
Record Office. 



Appendix III 125 

Royal Household. 

1. Lord Chamberlain's Department 1 : 

Wardrobe 2 . 
Jewel Office 3 . 

2. Lord Steward's Department 4 : 

Board of Green Cloth 5 . 
Privy Purse 6 . 

Secretaries of State. 

1. Home Department 7 : 

[Post Office]. 
Alien Office. 
Expired Commissions 8 . 
Irish Department. 

2. Foreign Office : 

Slave Trade Commission. 
American Claims (i794) 9 . 
Levant Company. 
King's Messengers 10 . 

3. Colonial Department : 

Board of Trade". 
Board of Control 12 . 
Expired Commissions 13 . 

1 Records transferred from St James's Palace and the office of the Examiner of Plays. 
Most of the early Records were probably destroyed by the fire in Whitehall in 1691. 

2 Abolished 1782. 8 Now a department of the Tower of London. 

4 Records transferred from Buckingham Palace. 

5 Records for the most part missing. Some purchased by the Bodleian Library. 

6 Modern Addresses to the Crown. An earlier series was preserved in the State Paper 
Office. 

7 In addition to the State Papers Domestic and Privy Signet Office described elsewhere, 
this department has, by virtue of its constitutional position, acquired important Records in 
connexion with military and naval affairs, Justice, Police, the Church, &c. Some of which 
supply gaps in other departmental Records. 

8 Most of these are of modern date. For particulars, see the official Guide (2nd ed. 
p. 94, and 3rd ed. p. 392). 

9 This series was deposited in the State Paper Office. The main series are amongst the 
Treasury and Audit Office Records. 

10 A series of valuable records presented to the Public Record Office by the executors of 
the late Sir E. Hertslet. 

11 i.e. the Records of the Old Board abolished in 1782. These have been officially 
regarded as dependent on the Colonial Office owing to the preponderance of Papers con- 
cerning the Plantations. An early series of Entry Books from 1696 were, however, retained 
amongst the Records of the Board of Trade as forming part of a continuous series of 
documents relating to trade generally in distinction to the trade with the Plantations. 
These have recently been transferred to the Colonial Office Records. 

12 i.e. East India correspondence from the State Paper Office. The main series is in 
the India Office. There are many original papers or copies amongst the Treasury Records. 

13 e.g. Land and Emigration Board (1835 *894). 



126 Appendix III 

Board of Trade 1 . 

Treasury 2 . 

Expired Commissions. 

The Commissary General's Office 8 . 

Treasury Solicitor's Department 4 . 

War Office 5 . 

Secretary at War's Department. 
Board of Ordnance 6 . 
Board of General Officers 7 . 
Army Medical Board 8 . 
Inspector-General of Fortifications 9 . 
Adjutant General's Department 10 . 
Quarter-Master General's Department. 
Royal Military Academy. 
Royal Military College. 
Foreign Department 11 . 

Office of Works 12 . 

1 i.e. The modern department established in 1/84. Certain ancient Exchequer docu- 
ments from the Standards Department of the Board and the enrolled Specifications of 
Patents from the Patent Office are preserved amongst the legal Records. 

2 Records belonging to the jurisdiction of nearly every department are found amongst 
the Treasury Records, together with the Records of a large number of expired Commissions, 
for a list and description of which reference may again be made to the official Guide (see 
above, p. 99, n. 4). The departments chiefly concerned will probably be found to be the 
Foreign Office, Colonial Office, Exchequer and Audit Office, Inland Revenue, Customs, and 
India Office (Board of Control). The history of the early custody of these Records will be 
found in the Reports of the Deputy Keeper. The historical value of this class of Records 
is very considerable. 

3 i.e. the earlier Records of this department which was administered by the Treasury 
after 1816. The Irish Commissariat Office Records were transferred to Dublin in 1854. 
Presumably the modern departmental interest in these Records lies with the War Office. 

4 Many of these were transferred from an Office in the Temple. 

6 This department has not been counted amongst those of the Secretaries of State as 
the jurisdiction of the Secretaries of State herein, previous to 1854, was purely formal. 
After various vicissitudes the bulk of the War Office Records in the several departments 
were brought together in the depot at 6, Whitehall Yard, whence they were transferred to 
the Rolls Yard in 1855. Some Records apparently are still preserved at Chelsea Hospital 
and notices of Records preserved elsewhere have been occasionally published. 

6 Merged in the War Office after 1855. 

7 Better known as the Clothing Board at Whitehall. A large part of its invaluable 
records was probably destroyed by fire in 1816. 

8 For the almost incredible narrative of the wanton destruction of its Records, see Deputy 
Keepers 8tA Report, Appx. I. p. 2 sqq. 

' Succeeded to the custody of the Records of the old Ordnance Drawing Office. 

10 Better known as the Commander-in-Chiefs Office. 

11 Concerned with the Foreign Corps between 1793 and 1815. 

12 Recently transferred. Some earlier Records are amongst the Exchequer and Treasury 
Records. 



Appendix III 127 

Office of Woods and Forests and Crown Revenues 1 . 



B. LIST OF PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS WHOSE EARLY HISTORICAL RECORDS 

HAVE NOT YET BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE 
OR ONLY PARTIALLY TRANSFERRED 2 . 

i. Records not yet transferred : 

India Office 3 . 
House of Lords 4 . 
House of Commons. 
The Mint 5 . 
The Post Office 6 . 
Board of Agriculture 7 . 
Stationery Office. 

ii. Records partially transferred: 

Board of Trade 8 . 
Colonial Office 9 . 
War Office 10 . 



1 Exclusive of the Records of the Court of Surveyor General, the Treasury and the 
I^and Revenue Record Office. The extent of the transfers is not indicated in the printed 
Reports. 

2 The information given in this list is derived from the Deputy Keeper's Reports, 
official handbooks, Calendars and Blue Books and other printed information. It cannot 
therefore be regarded as either authoritative or exhaustive ; but some such compilation was 
necessary in order to explain obvious omissions in the preceding list and to save historical 
students the pains of fruitless search or enquiry. It is a striking fact that less than ten years 
ago the number of outstanding departments and the bulk of Records still untransferred 
would have doubled the dimensions of the present list. 

3 How far the imperative conditions of the Act of 1838 and the Order in Council of 1852 
apply to the Indian Government is a constitutional question which need not be discussed 
here. Records relating to Indian affairs have been transferred to the national Archives 
from other departments (Colonial Office and Treasury). 

4 Certain Records have been inevitably transferred to the Public Record Office, but the 
characteristic Records of the legislature are still retained. 

R Exclusive of the ancient legal Records of the Exchequer. 

6 Supplementary to the Home Office series. 

7 Tithe Maps, &c. 

8 Records of the General Registry of Merchant Seamen retransferred from the Public 
Record Office. 

9 Some Out-Letters retained. 

10 The Records of the Judge Advocate General's department have not been transferred. 
The office was situated at 35 Great George Street from 1838 to 1893. The Records of the 
Medical Department are also with one or two exceptions not preserved in the Public Record 
Office. In 1831 these were at Nos. 4 and 5 Berkely St. It is well known amongst military 
historians that many regimental records are preserved in local depots. 



128 Appendix III 

Admiralty 1 . 
Foreign Office 2 . 
Privy Council Office 3 . 

1 Presumably any Records that are still preserved at the out-ports or retained for 
official reference. 

2 Certain Legation Archives. Those already transferred are noted in the later Reports 
of the Deputy Keeper. 

3 The Registers down to the end of the i6th century have been transferred to the Public 
Record Office. The later Registers and many original papers remain at Whitehall. 



APPENDIX IV. 

A. OUTLINE OF THE EXISTING OR PROPRIETARY CLASSIFICATION OF THE 
RECORDS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS x . 

I. Records of the Superior Courts of Law : 
i. Chancery. 

ii. King's Bench 2 (Crown Side and Plea Side). 
iii. Common Pleas, 
iv. Exchequer 3 . 

(a) Exchequer of Pleas. 

(b) King's Remembrancer's Office. 

(c) Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer's Office 4 . 

(d) Augmentations Office 5 . 

(e) Land Revenue Department 8 . 

1 For the proprietary classification of Records previous to the Public Record Office Act 
of 1838 see Appendix I. Since the Judicature Acts (1873 and 1879) the arrangement of 
accruing Records is naturally simplified, and the Records of the Supreme Court of Judicature 
now follow those of the Common Pleas in the official Guide. 

2 The Records of Justices Itinerant are now regarded as a distinct class, a fact which 
may be due to their abandonment to private custody and inevitable destruction (in most 
cases) since Edward IV. 

3 The subdivisions of the Exchequer may perhaps be more intelligibly grouped as : 
(a) Exchequer of Pleas. 

(6) Exchequer of Account (K. R. and L. T. R.). 

(c) Exchequer of Receipt (Auditors, Pells and T. of R.). 

(d) Later Departments (Augmentations Office, General Surveyor's Office (Land 

Revenues), First Fruits and Tenths Office). 

In a scheme of structural classification however these later departments must be regarded 
as abolished Courts, their procedure and Records being exactly analogous to those of the 
jurisdictions relegated to class II. infra. There is a tendency to place the Exchequer im- 
mediately after the Chancery in the latest official arrangement. 

4 Including the Pipe Office. 

5 Including the Court of the General Surveyors of the King's Lands annexed to the 
Court of Augmentations when dissolved under Queen Mary. 

8 See Appendix i. The Records under the departmental control of the Office of Woods 
were derived from the old Auditors of Land Revenues abolished in 1832. These have now 
been finally transferred to the Public Record Office. 

H. Q 



130 Appendix IV 

(/) First Fruits and Tenths 1 . 
(g) Exchequer of Receipt 2 . 
(K) Treasury of Receipt 2 . 

II. Records of Special or Abolished Jurisdictions 3 : 

i. Court of Requests. 

ii. Court of Star Chamber. 

iii. Court of Wards and Liveries. 

iv. Marshalsea and Palace Courts (including the Marshalsea, etc. 
Prisons). 

v. High Court of Admiralty. 

vi. High Court of Delegates (and Court of Arches). 

III. Records of the Palatinate of Durham 4 . 

IV. Records of the Palatinate of Lancaster 4 . 

V. Records of the Principality of Wales 5 , and Duchy of Chester. 

VI. Records of the Duchy of Lancaster. 
VII. Records of the Honour of Peveril. 

B. A STRUCTURAL CLASSIFICATION OF RECORDS". 

Class I. Judicial Proceedings. 

Division i. Records of Pleadings 7 . 
Division ii. Subsidiary Records 8 . 
Sub-division i. The Chancery. 

Section i. Common Law Side. 
Section 2. Equity Side. 

1 This Court was also erected under Henry VIII and was abolished by Mary, becoming 
under Elizabeth a department of the Exchequer. A dual control of its Records was the 
result of the institution of Queen Anne's Bounty Office (2 & 3 Anne c. 20). The Office of 
First Fruits and Tenths was abolished by i Vic. c. 20. 

2 These two departments may be regarded as practically identical. 

3 The Records of these tribunals are very imperfect. No mention is made here of the 
Council for Wales and Marches or of the Court of High Commission as no Records exist 
in either case. 

4 The Records of the remaining ecclesiastical palatinate (Ely) have not been transferred 
into the custody of the Master of the Rolls as required by the Act of 1838. See Ap- 
pendix i. E. 

6 Including those of the Duchy of Chester. The Records of the Duchy of Cornwall 
have curiously enough come into the custody of the Exchequer and are described under that 
Court. 

6 For a more detailed Diplomatic classification of Records, see below, Part II, Appendix. 

7 i.e. the Plea Rolls, &c., Decrees and Orders, Pipe Rolls and Memoranda Rolls. 

8 i.e. Affidavits, Appearances, Bails, Certificates, Essoins, Indictments, Depositions, 
Minutes, Writs, Warrants, &c. 



Appendix IV 131 

Sub-division 2. The Exchequer. 

Section i. Exchequer of Pleas. 

Section 2. Exchequer of Account. 

Section 3. Exchequer of Receipt. 

Section 4. Later Departments 1 . 
Sub-division 3. Court of King's Bench. 

Section i. Crown Side. 

Section 2. Plea Side. 

Sub-division 4. Court of Common Pleas. 
Sub-division 5. Pleas before the Justices Itinerant. 
Sub-division 6. Proceedings of the Supreme Court of Judicature. 
Sub-division 7. Special Jurisdictions. 

Section i. Special Jurisdictions abolished or extinct 2 . 

Section 2. Special Jurisdictions surviving 3 . 

Class II. Ministerial Proceedings. 

Division i. Diplomatic Documents 4 . 
Division ii. Inquisitions and Returns 8 . 
Division iii. Accounts. 

Class III. Precedents 6 . 

(Divided according to their respective Courts and sub-divided according 
to the subject-matter 7 .) 

Class IV. Miscellaneous 8 . 

(Documents exhibited or deposited; arranged according to their diplo- 
matic construction and subject-matter.) 

1 i.e. the Augmentations, General Surveyors and First Fruits and Tenths. 

2 Including the Records of the Pleas, &c. of the Forests and the "Judaism," the Courts of 
Palatinates of Lancaster and Chester, the Marshalsea, c., Star Chamber, Requests, Wards 
and Liveries, First Fruits and Tenths, Honour of Peveril, and the High Court of Delegates. 

3 Including the High Court of Admiralty, the Palatinate of Durham and the Duchies 
of Lancaster and Cornwall. The ancient jurisdiction of the Royal Household is now only 
represented by the control of Play-houses. The ancient Records of the Legislature and 
Council are preserved with the judicial Records, and their modern Records are not (with 
a few exceptions) in the official custody defined by the Act of 1838. 

4 Enrolments or entries of Royal Charters or Confirmations, Writs, Warrants, Letters, 
Petitions, notarial instruments, &c. ; for details, see Part II. 

6 i.e. Inquests, Surveys, Extents, Commissions, &c. ; for details, see Part II. 

6 i.e. the so-called " Books of Remembrance," containing Precedents, Memoranda and 
common-place books connected with the procedure of the Courts or official interests. 
Some of this class are in the form of Rolls. 

7 /.<. Judicial Proceedings, Ministerial Proceedings ( Diplomatic Documents, Feodaries,&c.). 

8 See above, p. 59. These would include the originals of diplomatic instruments 
whenever they have been deposited in official custody, and this class would therefore 
absorb a large proportion of the ancient Records of the Courts of Augmentations, &c. 

92 



APPENDIX V. 

A. OUTLINE OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE STATE PAPERS, c. I54S 1 . 

This is merely an inventory, but the following titles can be recognized : 

1. Letters and writings, or letters and matters touching France, the 
Emperor (or Germany), Italy and Rome (or the Papacy), German States, 
Flanders, Denmark, Venice, Calais and Marches, Scotland and North Parts, 
Wales and Marches. 

2. Instructions to ambassadors, Treaty Papers, Passports, Ambassadors' 
privileges. 

3. Warrants, Commissions, Signed Bills, Signet Books, Drafts of Letters 
Patent, Licences, Pardons, Oaths, Letters of denization, Admiralty documents, 
Loans, State trials (? Baga de Secretis), Certificates of Musters, Lists of 
Justices of the Peace, Memorials, Household officers, Ecclesiastical matters, 
Indentures, Accounts. 

4. Early Records, Precedents, Treatises. 

B. OUTLINE OF SIR T. WILSON'S CLASSIFICATION OF THE 
STATE PAPERS, 1619 1629 2 . 

I. England {Britannia Australis) sub-divided into: i. Regalia*; 
2. Legalia* ; 3. Ecdesiastica 5 ; 4. Mi lit aria 6 ; 5. Politica ~ ; 
6. Criminalia* '; 7. Mechanica*. 

1 Bags of books, letters and other writings in the Study at Westminster and in several 
tills within the same, severally described as "great bags," "little bags" or "bags"; "in 
the cupboards and tills" ; " special things in a till " ; " Books and Letters remaining in the 
chest" (S. P. Documents, I. i 4). 

2 S. P. Documents, I. 91 (cf. ibid. II. 230). 

3 Subdivided again into two groups (a) Documents relating to the title or prerogative of 
the Crown (Warrants, Petitions, &c.), (b) Papers relating to the revenue of the Crown 
(customs, loans, subsidies, lands, &c.). 

4 Acts of Parliament, Proclamations, lay corporations, &c. 
6 Bishoprics and Crown livings, &c. 

6 Subdivided as (a) Terrestris (Musters, &c.), (b) Thalassiarchia (Admiralty, sovereignty 
of the Seas, &c.). 

7 Acts of the Council and instructions to Governors, &c. 

8 Treasons and felonies, Star-Chamber, Recusants, &c. 
" Trade, Merchants, Exchange, &c. 



Appendix V 133 

II. North Britain (Scotland and the Borders). 

III. Wales and Ireland 1 . 

IV. France. 
V. Italy. 

VI. Spain and Flanders. 

VII. Germany and Denmark and Hanse Towns. 

VIII. Poland, Muscovy, Sweden. 

IX. Low Countries 2 (Holland). 

X. Turkey, Barbary States, the Indies 3 . 

XI. Treaties. 

XII. Miscellaneous (Mixta)*. 

NOTE. It will be seen that this arrangement justifies Sir Thomas Wilson's 
general division of the Papers of State into the two series still known as 
" Domestic " and " Foreign " with a third series of " Miscellaneous " which 
may still be recognized. Colonial Papers were included under Domestic (7), 
but most of these were probably preserved with the Council Records, whence 
some found their way into the Manchester and Bridgewater Collections. 

C. OUTLINE OF SIR J. WILLIAMSON'S CLASSIFICATION OF THE 
STATE PAPERS, i682 5 . 

England (arranged in year bundles. Papers previous to 1559 in a division 
called Anglia vetera); Scotland and the North 6 ; Ireland 6 ; Wales; Jersey 
and Guernsey ; Tangier ; London ; France ; the Low Countries ; Italy 
(Switzerland included under France and Germany); Germany; Denmark, 
Sweden, Poland; Spain and Portugal. 

Treaties and Treaty Papers ; King's Letters ; Church ; Parliament (in 
three groups: (i) Orders, &c. (a) before 1560, (b) 1560 1640, (c) 1640 
onwards, (ii) Debates, (iii) Drafts of Bills) ; Household ; " Offices " ; 
" Usurpation " ; Signet Books ; Criminalia ; Militia (including Ordnance). 

1 In one part of the MS. France precedes Ireland, and Wales is omitted ; but in the 
explanatory part the order is as given here. 

2 Styled the United Provinces. 8 Including Persia. 

4 Wilson explains that whereas the above eleven classes represent the true Secretarial 
Papers, recovered by himself, the older collection (largely mingled with early records) 
which had been kept together from 1522 to 1590 is included under this last heading. 

5 S. P. Documents, li. 49, but the MS. seems to be imperfect and should be supplemented 
by the plan which accompanies it. It is difficult to decide whether this constitutes 
Williamson's final arrangement or whether this was revised by his successor between 1702 
and 1706 (cf. 5". P. Documents, 11. 82 86). At the latter date a few new headings seem 
to have been added, though these are chiefly of a temporary character, e.g. the Rebellion 
(? Rye House Plot). On the other hand we have Plantations, Mint, Post Office, Warrants, 
Passes, Certificates, Intelligence, &c. The actual order in which the papers were placed 
in the presses was quite fortuitous and has been disregarded in the present "outline." 

8 Some early papers also in Anglia vetera. 



1 34 Appendix V 

D. OUTLINE OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE STATE PAPERS BY 
THE METHODIZERS, 1764 iSoo 1 . 

A double classification was, apparently, necessitated by the preservation 
of the State Papers in two different repositories, the older series being kept 
in the Paper Office in the Cock-pit and the papers accruing since 1706 in 
the Transmitter's Office. 

(a) Old Series (Alphabetical). 

Admiralty, Ambassadors, Army, Correspondence, Foreign (by countries 
in alphabetical order) 2 , Coronations, Court Offices 3 , Courts 4 , Commissioners 5 , 
Denmark, Domestica Miscellanea, Eastern princes 5 , Ecclesiastical Affairs, 
England 5 , Fisheries, Flanders, Foreign Trade, France, Genealogies, Genoa, 
Germany, Guernsey and Jersey, Hanse Towns, Heralds and Heraldry, 
Interregnum 5 , Ireland (with sub-divisions in imitation of Wilson's system) 2 , 
Italy, Knights 5 and Knighthood, Law, Letters, Merchants and merchant ships, 
Militaria, Mint, &c., Negotiations, Netherlands, Papists and Popish Recusants, 
Parliamentary Affairs, Petitions, Plague, Plantations, Politica, Portugal, 
Proclamations 5 , Records, Rome 5 , Royal Letters, Royal Prerogative, Royal 
Revenue, Russia and Sweden 5 , Saxony 5 , Scotland, Spain, Styles and Titles 6 , 
Strangers 7 , Sweden, Tangier, Trade, Treaties (with the States, grouped 
alphabetically and geographically), Turkey, Venice, Voyages and Discoveries, 
Wales. 

(b) Modern Series 8 , consisting of: 

1. Later Papers, supplementary to the above, chiefly in respect of 
Foreign Correspondence and Treaties, with such new headings as Hanover 
and Whitehall ("Regencies") and America. The Foreign "Ministers" of 
the several countries are distinguished, as also are the German and Italian 
States. 

2. Domestic, Colonial and Trade Papers and Entry Books, and the class 
now known as " Foreign ' Domestic '." These give us the same headings as 
occur for similar subjects in List (a), with the following additions : Warrant 
Books 9 , Domestic Correspondence 9 , Law Papers 9 , Petitions 9 and Memorials 10 , 

1 This classification is quite unintelligent and abounds with inconsistencies and repetitions. 
For Edwards's criticism of it, see Libraries, p. 204. 

2 This sub-arrangement is not mentioned in the 1800 Report. 

3 Council matters, &c. 

4 Star-Chamber, Wards, &c. 
6 Omitted in 1800 Report. 

6 Precedents, probably for Royal Letters and King's Letters. 

7 Aliens. 

8 Some of the series, however (e.g. Scotland and Ireland) begin in the reign of Charles II. 

9 These titles are still preserved. 

10 Including Inventions. 



Appendix V 135 

Corporation Papers, Domestic Letters, Rebellion, &c., Customs, Excise, 
Post Office 1 , America and West Indies 1 , Projects and Counter- Projects, 
Gibraltar, Minorca, Board of Trade 1 , East India Company, South Sea 
Company, Foreign Ministers. 



E. OUTLINE OF THE STATE PAPER OFFICE CLASSIFICATION, 1848 1862 2 . 

i. Foreign. 

(a) Letters and Papers 3 , in alphabetical order under countries [1509]* 
to 1688, with the Entry Books and Letter Books relating to the same 5 . 
(ff) Royal Letters 6 . 
(<:) King's Letter Books 7 . 

(d) Ciphers 8 . 

(e) Foreign Various 9 , 
ii. Domestic. 

(a) Letters and Papers relating to England and Wales, Scotland and 
the Borders, the Channel Islands and Calais [1509] 1688 4 , in chronological 
order 10 . 

(b) Domestic Various 11 . 

(c) Ireland (Letters and Papers, Entry Books and Miscellaneous 
Documents). 

(d) Miscellaneous, including : 

1. Original documents (Papers and Records 12 ). 

2. Transcripts and compilations 13 . 

1 These titles are still preserved. 

2 Probably devised by Mr Charles Lechmere. 

3 Including Treaty Papers (under "T.") and with many miscellaneous documents and 
printed treatises, &c., interspersed. 

4 Some much earlier now included in " Ancient Correspondence," &c. 

5 i.e. the Foreign Entry Books, Secretary's Letter Books, &c. 

6 In-Letters from Royalties. 

7 Entry Books of Diplomatic Instruments and Precedents and Out-Letters to Royalties, 
also termed " King's Letters." The Letter Books were subdivided as relating to Northern 
and Southern Departments respectively. 

8 With keys. 

9 This division corresponded roughly with the Domestic Miscellaneous (below) and 
contained rough letter books, precedents and deposits. 

10 Including a large number of subsidiary documents and deposits, such as original 
instruments or drafts (Letters Patent, Privy Seals, Warrants, &c.), Docquets, Proclamations, 
Passes, Certificates, Petitions, Precedents, Treatises, Musters, Exchequer Papers and Depart- 
mental Papers (Navy, &c.). 

11 Including a continuous series of Warrants, Docquets, Law-Papers, Caveats, Letter 
Books, &c. 

12 A few only. l3 Chiefly of or from early Records. 



136 Appendix V 

3. Printed Treatises, &c. 

4. Supplementary Instruments (Petitions, Warrant Books 1 , &c.). 

5. Supplementary Papers (Tangier 2 , Navy Papers). 

6. Chapter House Papers 3 . 

iii. Colonial 4 . 

(a) Correspondence and Entry Books in alphabetical order of the 
Colonies and in chronological order (1605 1688). 

(b) Plantations General 5 . 

(c) Journals 6 . 

(d) East Indies (original correspondence and Entry Books) 7 . 

F. OUTLINE OF THE DEPARTMENTAL CLASSIFICATION OF THE 
STATE PAPERS, 1873 1889". 

i. Home Office Records 9 . 

1. Letters and Papers (Domestic) from i689 10 [to 1830], 

2. Entry Books and Letter Books (Domestic) 11 . 

3. Miscellaneous Papers and Books 12 , &c. 

4. Departmental Papers and Entry Books. Arranged in alphabetical 
order of Countries, Departments, Subjects and Instruments indiscriminately 13 . 

I Scottish. 2 Afterwards transferred to Colonial Papers. 

3 Lisle and other collections. 

4 This arrangement was only provisional as these Papers were not yet arranged. 

5 A heading still retained. 6 i.e. Minutes of the Board of Trade and Plantations. 

7 Exclusive of the East India Company's Records. 

8 This classification obtained from about the year 1870 till the publication of the Lists 
of State Papers Domestic (1894), Foreign (1904), and Colonial (1908), and was the result 
of an artificial arrangement of the State Papers subsequent to their transfer to the Public 
Record Office. As previously stated (p. 67) the Lists of Home Office, Foreign Office 
and Colonial Office " Records," containing the results of this rearrangement, have been 
printed for the use of the Public and for private circulation only. Although details of 
these Lists have been frequently published both in this country and abroad, it has not 
seemed desirable or necessary to reproduce them here. The outline given here is based 
on the classification employed in the admirable List published under the supervision of 
the present Deputy Keeper in 1894. An outline will be found also in the official Guide 
(and ed.). 

9 These include many documents of later date than 1782, and therefore of a departmental 
character only. 

10 This list was evidently intended as a continuation of the old State Paper Office List as 
far as the actual State Papers Domestic were concerned. The old regional divisions are 
continued with the addition of the Channel Islands, Regencies, &c. In the case of Scotland 
and Ireland, however, the whole series was included. Throughout many irrelevant docu- 
ments are mixed with the Papers. 

II Including, besides correspondence, formal instruments such as, Warrants, Passes, 
Licences, Petitions, Caveats, Commissions, Docquets, &c. 

12 e.g. Circulars, Precedents, Records, Acts, Treatises, Newspapers, &c. 

13 These early departmental papers are properly State Papers. On the other hand Navy 
Board Papers, mixed with the State Papers before 1673 are really departmental. 



Appendix V 137 

ii. Foreign Office Records (1883 1894). 

1. Correspondence with English ambassadors, consuls and agents and 
with foreign ministers, including In-Letters, Out-Letters and miscellaneous 
documents, arranged in alphabetical order of countries mixed with special 
subject-headings 1 . 

2. Ciphers 2 . 

3. Intercepted Letters 3 (" Confidential Miscellaneous "). 

4. Foreign Various 4 . 

5. Royal Letters 5 . 

6. Treaty Papers 6 . 

7. Treaties 7 . 

iii. Colonial Office Records (1876 I9O7) 8 . 

1. Colonial Papers and Entry Books 9 . 

2. "America and West Indies" (Papers and Entry Books) 10 . 

3. Board of Trade (Papers and Entry Books) 11 . 

4. Colonial Correspondence 12 . 

5. Colonial Transmissions 13 . 

6. Acts, Minutes of Council, Journals of Assembly 14 . 

7. Miscellaneous 15 . 

The above arranged in alphabetical and chronological order 16 . 

1 e.g. Great Britain, General, King's Letters, Foreign Entry Books, Letters to Public 
Offices, Military Expeditions, Levant Company, &c. 

2 With deciphers. 

3 In foreign languages chiefly (1726 1765). Many others are at the British Museum. 

4 Drafts, duplicates, inclosures, Treatises, Precis and Compilations. A few Archives 
are included here as well as amongst the Correspondence. 

5 Letters of ceremony from foreign princes. 
* 1668 1848 (a convenient subdivision). 

7 Protocols and Ratifications, i.e. original documents. 

8 See the description of the American Series by Prof. C. M. Andrews, in A. H. R. 



9 Previous to 1688. 

10 Matters concerning the Secretary of State's department as opposed to the regulation 
of Trade and Colonial administration by the Board of Trade and Plantations, with some 
miscellaneous papers. 

11 Matters concerning the latter department, with an admixture of such subject-headings 
as Navy, &c., between 1689 and 1782. 

12 Governors' despatches. 

13 Bulky inclosures, chiefly. 

14 Inclosed in official despatches for approval. 

15 Chiefly departmental papers after 1782. 

18 These headings are those for the period 1574 1782 only. The later titles include 
departmental Records not yet open to the public, and therefore cannot be referred to here. 



138 Appendix V 

G. A STRUCTURAL CLASSIFICATION OF THE STATE PAPERS 1 . 

I. Letters and Papers, distinguished as In-Letters (Received), and Out- 
Letters (Issued) 2 . 

i. In-Letters, distinguished by : 

(a) Form (Apographs, Holographs, Signed Letters, Entries, &c.). 
(6} Environment 3 (Inclosures, Intercepted, Duplicate, Secret, Private, 

Confidential, Separate, Official, &c.). 
(c) Subject (Royal Letters, Intelligence, Newsletters, References, 

Reports, Petitions, Memorials, Addresses, Domestic, Foreign, 

Council, Admiralty, &c.). 

ii. Out-Letters, distinguished by : 

(a) Form (Drafts, Entry Books 4 , Letter Books, &c.). 

(b) Environment (King's, Secretaries', Regencies, Domestic, Foreign, 

North, South, Whitehall). 

(c) Subject (Criminal, Military, Church, &c.). 

II. Instruments (Secretarial). 

i. Originals or Drafts of Warrants, &c. 
ii. Entries 4 of Warrants, Commissions, Instructions, Caveats, &c. 

III. Miscellaneous, including many documents, now mixed with I. above, 
as: Instruments, Maps, Ciphers, Records, Accounts, Archives, Precedents, 
Printed Matter, &c. 

H. HEADS OF A PROPRIETARY CLASSIFICATION OF THE STATE PAPERS". 

Series I. State Papers Domestic*. 
i. Letters and Papers, arranged according to : 
(a) Regions 7 , in chronological order. 
() Departmental business, in alphabetical and chronological order 8 . 

1 Regarded as "Records and Papers of State"; including State Papers Domestic and 
Foreign 1509 to 1782, and Colonial 1574 to 1782. 

2 Most of these are existing or recent sub-headings. 

* i.e. by the circumstances of their authorship, custody, transmission, &c. 

4 Entry Books are of the three following types (a) Copies of In-Letters for preservation 
or reference, (b) Copies of Out-Letters (Letter Books), (c) Enrolments of formal instruments, 
such as Warrants, Signet Letters, Passes, Caveats, &c. 

8 Based on the preceding classification but distinguishing the proprietary interest of the 
modern departments of State. 

6 Including Scotland, Borders, Ireland, Channel Islands and Regencies with England 
and Wales. 

7 As in the preceding note. 

8 Giving such subject-headings as Military, Naval, Law Papers, Grants, &c. 



Appendix V 139 

ii. Entry Books and Letter Books for : 

(a) Entries of In-Letters 1 . 

(b) Instruments 2 . 

(c) Out-Letters 3 . 

iii. Miscellaneous 4 . 

Series II. State Papers Foreign. 

i. Letters and Papers, arranged in alphabetical order of countries 
under " Northern " and "Southern " Departments 5 , and distinguished as : 

(a) Diplomatic Correspondence (" Foreign " and " Domestic ") 6 . 
(b} Special Subjects 7 (Treaties, Treaty Papers, Royal Letters, 
Newsletters, " General "). 

ii. Entry Books and Letter Books 8 , for : 

(a) Entries of In-Letters 9 . 

(b) Instruments 10 . 

(c) Out-Letters 11 . 

iii. Miscellaneous 12 (Archives, Intercepted Papers, Duplicates, Registers 
and compilations, &c.). 

Series III. State Papers Colonial. 

i. Letters and Papers (Secretary of State's). 
(a) Colonial Correspondence. 
(b} Special Subjects. 

In alphabetical and chronological order of the Colonies, distinguishing 

I e.g. Governors' despatches. 
2 e.g. Warrant Books, &c. 

3 e.g. King's and Secretaries' Letter Books. 

4 Heterogeneous documents thrown out from, (i) with precedents, common-place books, 
ciphers, circulars, &c. 

s This division which goes back to the 1 7th century is very helpful. 

8 That is the despatches received from English Ministers abroad and the notes received 
from Foreign Ministers in England respectively. 

7 These are all recognized headings. 

8 In the later period Out-Letters (to the Ministers abroad) are only preserved in the form 
of Drafts, usually bound up with the In-Letters. 

9 e.g. Treaty Papers. 

10 e.g. Instructions, Passes, Commissions, Credentials, &c. 

II King's and Secretaries'. 

12 i.e. deposited or departmental documents, such as Precis, &c. 

13 In this theoretical classification the Records of the old Board of Trade are regarded 
as departmental and not as State Papers. 



1 40 Appendix V 

between America and the West Indies, Africa, India 1 , &c., and with the 
necessary subject-headings 2 . 

ii. Entry Books and Letter Books, for : 
(a) Entries of In-Letters 3 . 
(l>) Instruments 4 . 
(c) Out-Letters 5 . 

iii. Miscellaneous (Archives of ceded Colonies, Colonial Acts and 
Sessional Papers, Printed Treatises, Journals, Reports, &c.). 

1 Thus Tangier would come under Africa (North) and Sierra Leone under Africa (West), 
with a group of Mediterranean " Colonies." The distinction between " settled " and "ceded " 
colonies would scarcely be serviceable. 

2 Such as Military, Naval, General, &c. 

3 These are very numerous in the present series. 

4 Such as Orders in Council, Grants of Land, Instructions, Acts of Assembly, &c. 

5 To Governors and Commanders. 



APPENDIX VI. 

THE CLASSIFICATION OF DEPARTMENTAL RECORDS. 

A. Theory of the Classification of the Records of a Department 
in Commission^. 

I. Records of the modern department (Board) 2 : 

1. In-Letters 3 . 

2. Registers 4 . 

3. Minutes. 

4. References 4 . 

5. Reports 4 . 

6. Out-Letters (classed as Letters, Warrants, Commissions, Orders, 

Instructions) 6 . 

7. Books of Reference (under subject-headings) 6 . 

8. Miscellaneous 7 . 

[The above classes to be sub-divided under the various sub-departments, 
or by earlier and later series, or by subjects, in alphabetical and chronological 
order.] 

II. Records of an ancient department (Board) now absorbed by a 
modern department (Board) 8 . 

[The same method of classification will obtain. If more than one such 
ancient department is included under the same jurisdiction, each will follow 
a similar arrangement under a distinct proprietary title. 

The ancient sub-departments (if any) 9 will be distinguished as contem- 
porary divisions in the above scheme of classification.] 

1 e.g. the Admiralty (Secretary) and Treasury. Some other Boards, such as the Customs 
and Inland Revenue, are possessed of very imperfect collections of ancient Records. Others 
again, such as the Board of Ordnance (which was not a Commission in the usual sense) and 
the old Board of Trade have been merged in modern Secretarial departments (War Office 
and Colonial Office). Certain smaller modern Commissions are omitted here since they 
possess few Records of historical interest. 

2 Assuming that this is properly entitled to the Records now within its jurisdiction. 
8 Of various forms and descriptions. 

4 These classes of Records do not always occur in existing departments. 

6 These types are often distinguished by special titles. 
8 Such as Accounts, Establishments, Returns, &c. 

7 Either mere office-books or documents deposited, &c. The Records of the ancient 
departments referred to below (B) are not included here. 

8 e.g. the Navy Board, Victualling Office, Transport Board, Medical Board, Greenwich 
Hospital, &c., under the modern Board of Admiralty. 

8 e.g. the Navy Office (Comptroller and Surveyor) and Navy Pay Office (Treasurer) 
representing the Navy Board, together with the Bill Office, Ticket Office, Imprest Office 



142 Appendix VI 

III. Records of an ancient department (not in Commission) now 
absorbed by a modern department (in Commission) 1 . 

i. In-Letters. 

ii. Out-Letters. 

iii. Books of reference. 

iv. Miscellaneous. 

B. Theory of the Classification of the Records of a Department 
not in Commission 1 . 

I. Records of the modern department. 

i. In-Letters 3 . \ 

ii. Out-Letters 4 . [ With sub-divisions for the subordinate 

iii. Books of reference 5 . j departments. 

iv. Miscellaneous 6 . ; 

subordinate to the above. Numerous Commissions of Enquiry have transferred their Records 
to certain of the larger departments, notably the Treasury and Home Office. These Records 
differ widely in character from those of the ancient Boards. Generally speaking they will 
be found to include the following subjects : (i) Departmental correspondence, (2) Registration 
and statement of claims or counter-claims, (3) Proceedings of the Commissioners, (4) Awards, 
(5) Official Accounts of Liquidators of claims. For details, see the official Guide, 

1 The existence of such departments is quite exceptional, for unless an independent 
department represented the agency either of the Secretarial or Household officers of the 
Crown, it would inevitably derive its authority from a Royal Commission. Instances of 
such exceptional jurisdictions might perhaps be found in the case of the Royal Marine 
Office (Admiralty) and the Exchequer and Audit Office, but of these the connexion of the 
latter with the Treasury is anomalous whilst the Records of the former are evidently 
incomplete. 

2 This again is a purely artificial classification, necessitated by the existence of exclusive 
departmental jurisdictions. The chief departments included here are the Home, Foreign, 
Colonial and War Offices and the Royal Household. Certain small modern Commissions 
whose records are of an irregular type should probably be included here instead of under 
Boards. The characteristic distinction of the present group is the absence of Registers, 
Minutes, References and Reports 1 as separate series. 

8 In the form either of miscellaneous Letters and Papers (Home Office) or of Despatches 
(Foreign, Colonial and War Offices) resembling the correspondence of earlier date classified 
as State Papers. 

4 Copies of official letters despatched, and Entry Books of In-Letters are rarely found 
with these. In some cases only Drafts are preserved bound with the In-Letters (Foreign 
Office). Instruments are found which represent the administration of the royal prerogative 
by these departments (Commissions, Orders, Instructions, Warrants). 

5 Of the same nature as those mentioned above p. 94, especially in the case of War 
Office Records. 

6 Including a still larger collection of Common-place Books and semi-official correspon- 
dence, with deposits such as Soldiers' and Sailors' Wills, Colonial and Legation Archives, 
and printed papers, &c. 

1 With the exception of some collections of Law Officers' Opinions and Judges' Reports. Registers of 
War Office correspondence were prepared for official use from 1793 onwards and probably the same remark 
applies to the other departments under consideration. These Registers however were connected with the 
machinery for answering the In- Letter rather than with its consideration upon being read pro forma. 



Appendix VI 143 

II. Records of an ancient department (not in Commission) now 
absorbed by a modern department 1 . 

[To follow the same arrangement as above (A. III. and B. I.) with a 
separate heading for each ancient department, if more than one is included 
in the same jurisdiction.] 

III. Records of an ancient department (in Commission) now absorbed 
by a modern department (not in Commission) 2 . 

[To follow the same arrangement as above (A. I.).] 

1 There are few such departments possessed of historical Records. Those of the 
Surveyors General of Woods and Works and of the Judge Advocate General (War Office) 
might perhaps be included under this head, if they have been preserved intact ; and the 
same remark applies to the old Commissariat department subsequently administered by the 
Treasury and War Office successively. 

2 Important instances occur in the case of the Ordnance Board, absorbed by the War 
Office since 1855, and the old Board of Trade (ending 1782), the Records of which are 
claimed by the Colonial Office. In the case of the latter department the Journals appear 
to serve the general purpose of Minutes, Reference and Report Books, whilst a curious 
system of registration prevailed by means oT an alphabetical and numerical notation 
resembling somewhat the ideographic system of the mediaeval repositories. 



APPENDIX 

SPECIMEN RESEARCH FORM FOR A HISTORICAL 



Historical Subject 



Printed References 



Parallel MSS. 



The Inquest of Judges 
(Edwardian State Trials, 
1289 1293 illustrating 
Political History, Consti- 
tutional History, Social 
History, History of English 
Law, Biography, &c.). 



The State Trials of the reign 
of Ed-ward I. (ed. T. F. 
Tout and Hilda johnstone) 
(1906) 

Red Book of the Exchequer 
(Rolls), cccxv. sq. 

Stubbs, C. H. n. 125 

Ramsay, Dawn of the Con- 
stitution, p. 360 sq. 

Pauli, Geschichte, IV. 50 sq. 

Political History of England 

Seeley, Edward 7. p. 75 sq. 

Foss, Judges, s.t. 

Diet. Nat. Biogr. s.t. 

Calendars of Patent Rolls 
(1272 1292) 

Calendars of Close Rolls 
(1279 1296) 

Calendars of Ancient Deeds 

Calendar of Inquisitions P.M. 

Abbrev. Placitorum (passim) 

Stowe, Survey, I. 86 

Foedera, I. (2) 711, 715 

Ann. Land. 97 sq. 

- Duns table, 355 sq. 

Wav. 408 
Berm. 467 
Wigorn. 499 

Wykes, 319 

Bart. Cott. 171 sq. 

Peckham, in. 968 

Heminburgh, II. 16 

Chron. Ed. I. and II. I. 97 

Flor. Hist. III. 70 sq. 

Rishanger, 420 

J. Oxnead, 275 

Cont. Flor. Wigorn. II. 241 

Chron. Melsa, II. 251 

etc. 



MS. Cotton Nero, A. 6 fo. 

32 
MS. All Souls' Coll. 39, fo. 

109 b. 
MS. Add. 31826, fo. 54 

etc. 



VII. 



SUBJECT FROM VARIOUS OFFICIAL SOURCES. 



Classified Source 



Judicial Proceedings 
i. Records of Pleas 
(Chancery) 

(Exchequer) 



(King's Bench) 



(Common Pleas) 



ii. Subsidiary Records 
(Chancery) 

(Exchequer) 



Ministerial Proceedings 
i. Diplomatic Documents 
(a) Originals 



(Chancery) 



(b) Enrolments 
(Chancery) 



(Exchequer) 



H. 



Official Reference 



Parliament Rolls 

Plea Rolls 
Memoranda Rolls 



Coram Rege Rolls 
Assize Rolls, &c. 

Gaol Delivery Rolls 
De Banco Rolls 

Feet of Fines 

Miscellaneous Inquisitions 
Parliamentary Proceedings 

Exchequer (K. R.) Pro- 
ceedings 

Miscellanea of the Ex- 
chequer 

L. T. R. Miscellaneous 
Rolls 

Ancient Petitions 
Warrants for Issue 

Ancient Correspondence 
Patent Rolls 

Close Rolls 
Fine Rolls 

Redisseisin Rolls 
Originalia Rolls 



Description 



Enrolment of Proceedings in 
Parliament 

Special pleadings on Accounts 

Enrolments of precepts, ap- 
pearances, recognizances, 
&c. 

Pleas of the Crown and Civil 
Pleas 

Proceedings of the Justices 
in eyre and Commissioners 

Proceedings against prisoners 

Common Pleas held by the 
Justices 

Conveyances of lands 



Information or Proceedings 
subsidiary to the Com- 
missioners' inquiry 



Addressed to the King in 
Council or to the Parlia- 
ment or Chancellor 

Directions for preparing let- 
ters under the Great Seal, 
&c. 

Addressed to the King or 
Chancellor 

Grants, Mandates, Commis- 
sions, &c. 

Precepts of several kinds 

Notes of Fines or Oblations 
offered in return for Par- 
don, &c. 

Memorandum of the King's 
transfretation 

Memoranda of Grants for 
which Fines, &c. are due 

10 



146 Appendix VII 

APPENDIX VII. (continued). SPECIMEN RESEARCH FORM FOR A 
HISTORICAL SUBJECT FROM VARIOUS OFFICIAL SOURCES. 



Historical Subject 



Printed References 



Parallel MSS. 



Classified Source 



Official Reference 



Description 



ii. Inquisitions and Re- 
turns 
(Chancery) 



iii. Accounts 
(Exchequer) 



Precedents 



Miscellaneous 
(Exhibits or Deposits) 



Inquisitions P.M. 

Hundred Rolls I 

Miscellaneous Inquisitions) 

Pipe Rolls 

Liberate Rolls 
Issue Rolls 
Receipt Rolls 
Exchequer Accounts 

Exch. K. R. Misc. Bks. No. t. 
(Red Book of Exchequer) 
Liber Metnarandoritm 

Kirkby's Quest (Exch. K. R. 
Misc. Bks No. 17) 

Ancient Deeds 



Ministers' Accounts 
etc. 



On the deaths of Crown ten- 
ants 

Inquisitions concerning local 
misgovernment and en- 
croachments 

Declarations of Sheriff's Ac- 
counts 

Payments of Salaries, &c. 

Payments Out of Revenue 

Receipts of Revenue 

Of Amerciaments, &c. 

The case of Adam de Strat- 

ton 
Memoranda and Inventories 

of Exchequer Records 
Feudal tenures, 1285 



Charters, bonds and other 
title-deeds relating to the 
accused judges 

Relating to the estates of 
the accused 



APPENDIX VIII. 

THE SEVERAL REFERENCES TO THE STATE PAPERS OF A SINGLE 
YEAR (1697) REMAINING IN OFFICIAL CUSTODY*. 

i. State Papers Domestic. 

(a) S. P. Dom. William and Mary. 

S. P. Dom. King William's Chest. 

(b) S. P. Dom. Entry Books 2 . 

(Caveats). 

(Council Office). 

(Ecclesiastical). 

(Military). 

(Passes). 

(Petitions). 

(Precedents). 

(Warrants). 

(c) S. P. Dom. Letter Books. 

(King's). 
(Secretary's). 
(Signet Office) 3 . 

(d) [H. O.] Admiralty 4 . 
[H. O.] Law Papers. 

[S. P. Dom.] Proclamations. 

1 This year has been selected without any particular reason. The selection excludes 
a few well-known series of earlier or later date, such as "Borders" and "Post Office," 
and does not include semi-official collections or foreign transcripts. Where this year is not 
indicated in the published Lists, the covering dates are presumed to include it, in accordance 
with the usual method of research. 

2 These occasionally refer to Foreign and Colonial matters and more than one subject 
is often entered in the same volume. 

5 These are really Irish Letter Books. The Signet Office Records are not included in 
this list. 

4 Outlying State Papers such as the Greenwich Hospital (Admiralty) Newsletters and 
others included in the official Calendars have not been included here. It will be found 
moreover that there is considerable difficulty in distinguishing between " State Papers" and 
the "Departmental Papers" of the Admiralty, Treasury, War Office and Ordnance, &c., 
some of the latter being included in the official Calendars or Lists of State Papers though 
they have been omitted here. 

IO 2 



148 Appendix VIII 

(<?) State Paper Office Documents 1 . 
(/) State Papers Supplementary 2 
(g) State Papers Miscellaneous 3 . 

(h) State Papers, Scotland (Letters and Papers). 

(Warrant Book). 

(*') State Papers, Ireland (Letters and Papers). 
(King's Letter Book). 

(/) State Papers, Channel Islands. 
(k) [H. O.] Regencies 4 . 

2. State Papers Foreign. 

(a) Letters and Papers from various European and African States 5 . 
(b} Royal Letters from and. .to the same. 

(f) Foreign Entry Books for the same. 

(d) Newsletters from the same. 

(e) Foreign Ministers for the same. 
(/) Treaty Papers for the same. 

(g) Treaties with the same. 

(K) Archives of English Missions to the same. 
(/) State Papers Foreign, " Various." 

3. State Papers Colonial. 

(a) Colonial Papers. 

(b) Colonial Entry Books. 

(c) America and West Indies. 

(d) Sessional Papers. 

(e) Papers of the Board of Trade (Plantations). 
(/) Entry Books of the same (Plantations). 

(g) Entry Books of the same (Trade). 

1 A semi-official collection relating to the State Papers at large. 

2 To the Domestic Letters and Papers, a collection of greater value for an earlier period. 

3 The residue of Sir J. Williamson's collection not distributed amongst the other series. 

4 i.e. correspondence with the Lords Justices during the King's absence. 

5 This series also includes "Military Auxiliary Expeditions" which are detached from 
the War Office correspondence for reasons explained elsewhere. 



APPENDIX IX. 

OUTLINE OF THE PRINCIPAL SOURCES FROM WHICH THE DEPARTMENTAL 
RECORDS IN OFFICIAL CUSTODY* MIGHT BE SUPPLEMENTED 2 . 

1. Departmental Records in official custody not yet arranged or described 
(if any) 8 . 

2. Departmental Archives not yet transferred to the above official custody 
(if any) 4 . 

3. Papers removed from State Departments, viz. 

(a) Presented to or acquired by the Public Record Office*. 

(b} Acquired by public Libraries or Institutions 8 . 

(c) Acquired by private corporations. 

(d) Acquired by individual collectors. 

(e) Still in the custody of official families or their legal representa- 

tives 7 . 

(/) Acquired by foreign institutions or collectors. 
(g) Transcripts or texts of any of the above available for reference. 

1 i.e. the Public Record Office as indicated by the Order in Council of 1852. 

2 This list is intended to serve as a mere suggestion of the several external sources which 
should be borne in mind by the student. It does not cover cases of the transfer of Records 
from one Department to another. It will apply equally to State Papers. 

8 See Official Guide, p. 366 sq. 

4 See notices in the daily press of recent discoveries of departmental Records. 

5 See Official Guide, p. 403. 

6 e.g. the British Museum, University Libraries, Royal Institution, &c. 

7 See Historical Manuscripts Commission, i jtA Report, Index. 



APPENDIX 

OUTLINE OF THE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF 

I. MEDIAEVAL 



Title 



Form and Extent of 
Publication 



Production and Distribution 



1 . General Works of Refer- 
ence: 

(a) Bibliographies 

() Guides (to Archives and 

Collections) 
(c) Handbooks of Auxiliary 

Studies 

2. Lists: 

Indexes 
Inventories 
Repertories 
Catalogues 

3. Calendars 

4. Transcripts and Fac- 
similes 

5. Texts of Documents 

6. Excerpts from Texts 
("Source- Books") 

7. Original Compositions 



Collections 
Single Works 
Periodicals 

Complete Editions 
Partial 



Official Enterprise 
Corporate ,, 
Individual ,, 

National Interest 
Regional 
County 

Parochial 
Manorial 
Institutional ,, 



X. 

OFFICIAL HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS. 
RECORDS. 



Date of Publication 



General Historical Subject 



Special Historical Subject 



Early 
Modern 



Works 



Political 

Constitutional 

Social 

Economic 

Ecclesiastical 

Local 

History 



Laws and Ordinances 
Judicial Proceedings 
Parliamentary Proceedings 
Ministerial Proceedings 
Local Government 
Municipal Government 
Private Franchises 
Ecclesiastical Relations 
Diplomatic Relations 
Foreign Possessions 
Aliens and Jews 
Forests and Fens 
Works and Mines 
Revenue and Taxation 
Feudal and Customary 

Tenures 
State of Society 
Industry and Commerce 
History of Prices 
Manorial and Agrarian 

Economy 
Army and Navy 
Mint and Exchange 
Royal Household 
Natural History 
Archaeology 
Genealogy 
Topography 
Archive Economy 

etc. 



152 



Appendix X 
APPENDIX X. (continued). II. 



LATER RECORDS, STATE 



Title 



Form and Extent of 
Publication 



Production and Distribution 



1. General works of Refer- 
ence 

2. Lists, &c. 

3. Calendars 



4. Transcripts and Fac- 
similes 



5. Texts of Documents 



6. Excerpts from Texts 
(" Source-Books ") 



7. Original Compositions 



Collections 
Single Works 
Periodicals 

Complete Editions 
Partial 



Official Enterprise 
Corporate 
Individual 

National Interest 
Regional ,, 
County ,, 
Parochial , , 
Institutional ,, 



Appendix X 
PAPERS AND DEPARTMENTAL RECORDS. 



153 



Date of Publication 



General Historical Subject 



Special Historical Subject 



Early 
Modern 



Works 



Political 

Constitutional 

Social 

Economic 

Ecclesiastical 

Local 

Naval 

Military 

History 



Judicial Proceedings (State 

Trials, &c.) 
Royal Commissions 
Commutation of Tenures and 

Franchises 
Agrarian Changes 
Local Government 
Ecclesiastical Government 
Ministerial Government 
Diplomatic Relations 
Royal Prerogative 
Justice and Police 
Poor Laws 
Civil List 

Revenue and Taxation 
Army and Navy 
Internal Defence 
Trade and Plantations 
Exploration and Emigration 
Chartered Companies 
Universities, Schools, and 

Charities 

Currency and Banking 
Crown Lands and Royal 

Household 
Works and Buildings 
Court Ceremonies 
Inventions 
Aliens 

History of Prices and Wages 
Biography 
Topography 
Maps and Plans 
Archive Economy 

etc. 



PART II 



THE DIPLOMATIC 

OF 

OFFICIAL HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS 




INTRODUCTION TO THE DIPLOMATIC STUDY 
OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS. 

IT has often been remarked that the Public Records of this 
country are unequalled throughout Europe in number and historical 
interest. To this observation we might add that amongst our Records 
those of the Chancery itself would be found to be in the most perfect 
state of preservation. This being so it is at first sight a matter of 
some surprise that such scanty information is available respecting the 
characteristic formulas of the national diplomata, especially as many 
causes were at work during the mediaeval period of our history to 
stimulate professional and individual interest in diplomatic criticism 1 . 
But although the prerogative of the Crown and the welfare of the 
community were equally concerned in the purity and legality of the 
instruments which purported to issue from the early Chancery, it may 
at least be suggested that in too many cases no adequate scrutiny 
was applied to them. 

The fiscal exigencies and the unabashed official corruption of the 
age will sufficiently account for many of these concessions. Moreover 
so far from being a presumptive object of distrust, a royal charter was 
something sacro-sanct in the eyes of mediaeval lawyers and officials. 
It is true that the hardy chronicler, in spite of a credulous acceptance 
(in the interests of his own house) of many impossible evidences of 
the royal favour, was capable of very shrewd reflections upon the 
character of the treasured muniments of a rival community 2 . At the 
same time there were no traditions of an old English Chancery to 
direct and stimulate these fitful essays. Thus it came to pass that 
the flood of diplomatic criticism which had its source in the New 
Learning of the Renaissance period and which was swelled by the 
religious controversies of the i6th and i/th centuries, found its 
natural course through continental channels. From that time onward 
English scholarship has toiled painfully in the wake of foreign science. 

1 Below, p. 185 sq. 2 Below, p. 186 and Appendix. 



158 Introduce to the Diplomatic Study 

Now and again a few specialists have dealt with diplomatic subjects, 

but even the antiquarian giants of the I7th and i8th centuries, 

Prynne, Dugdale, Hickes, Madox and their fellows, were but im- 

v perfectly versed in the canons of diplomatic criticism, first enunciated 

^by the Papal curia at the end of the I2th century, and finally adopted 
by learned Europe six centuries later through the labours of the 
Benedictines. Then with the great revival of historical learning 
throughout Europe in the second quarter of the I9th century this 
country lost another opportunity of placing the systematic study of 
diplomatic documents upon a sure foundation. For in the place of the 
National Archives, first organized by the genius of Republican France 
and their fitting annexe in the shape of an Ecole des Charles, a govern- 
ment absorbed by party politics and complacently tolerant of the 
productions of its Record Commission was content with a wholly 
inadequate Repository under the charge of an ordinary establishment 
of the Civil Service. It is not surprising therefore that, with the 
distinguished exception of the sound but rather elementary official 
disquisitions of Sir T. D. Hardy, the subject of our insular Diplo- 
matic continued to be wholly neglected down to our own time. 

Of the revival of this study at Oxford under the scholarly influence 
of Mr R. L. Poole or of the brilliant contributions to the new learning 
made by Mr \Y. II. Stevenson and Mr J. II. Round it is unnecessary 
to speak here. Indeed there can be little doubt that the importance 
of the subject is fully recognized by the present generation of English 
historical scholars. There is indeed a growing feeling that our his- 
torians have been scarcely fairly treated in the matter of the provision of 
certain essential aids to diplomatic calculation. Bond's Handy Book 
is with us still, but we know its limitations, and in other respects this 
work must be supplemented by some foreign Treasury of Chronology. 
In the province of Biography, where notable advances have been 
made in recent years, it is almost incredible that we should still need 
a working list of Chancery officials. We possess an expensive work 
on the Greatj?eals of England, but the evolution of the Smaller Seals 
remains in utter obscurity. Most of all we lack a Formula Book 

-, based on some comprehensive system of diplomatic classification. 

/ Certainly the slight but useful handlists of the royal style compiled 
by Sir T. D. Hardy 1 and greatly improved by Mr W. de G. Birch 2 
are not exhaustive. It is not more than two years ago since an 
interesting suggestion concerning an important change in the style of 

1 Rot. Chart. (Pref.). 2 Second Report of Index Soc. 1879 (Appx. i). 



of Official Documents 159 

Henry II was made by a great French scholar 1 . We have seen from 
a recent communication concerning an eventful change in the first 
Mary's style 2 that a defective list may be a serious hindrance to the 
historian, and there can be little doubt that other discoveries could be 
made by patient investigation. 

It is now generally accepted that some knowledge of this subject 
must be acquired by students of palaeography who are concerned 
with other than purely literary MSS. It might even be insisted that 
it is impossible to acquire an intelligent perception of the system of 
mediaeval official writing without a sufficient knowledge of the 
formulas and professional routine of the national chanceries. Again, 
it can scarcely be doubted that a knowledge of the appropriate 
formulas, technical terms and nomenclature found in official docu- 
ments must prove of great assistance to the modern searcher or the 
transcriber. For one so armed the struggle with these palaeo- 
graphical difficulties has been already half-won. Unfortunately few 
English scholars care to pursue the practice of historical method 
beyond the bare requirements of textual criticism ; but when a 
student of historical Acts, though limited perforce to printed texts, 
is yet well versed in their diplomatic composition, the gain to him in 
point of interest and perception is quite remarkable. In both cases, 
however, native enterprise in respect of these original studies is 
discouraged by the lack of information and instruction above referred 
to. It is true that with an ample choice of foreign text-books the 
actual construction and innermost significance of the imperial or 
royal Acts, Papal Bulls, and notarial instruments, received and 
miraculously preserved in our own Archives, can be understood. In 
addition to these, many diplomatic forms of legal, ecclesiastical and 
mercantile documents can be sufficiently comprehended from the 
same bountiful source of information. But the continental expert 
has hitherto let the royal Acts of the English Chancery and their 
developments in the shape of curial and ministerial instruments 
severely alone 3 . 

The student of native Diplomatic will find in the Anglo-Saxon 
and Anglo-Norman Charters, in the special forms of instruments 
under the Greater and Smaller Seals of the later Plantagenets and in 
the departmental procedure of the i6th and i/th centuries, types 

1 See below, p. 219. 2 Cf. . H. R, xv. 120. 

3 This was written before an opportunity had occurred of perusing the interesting essay of 
Monsieur E. Deprez. The value of the work done in this direction by Brunner, Delisle, 
Liebermann, Bemont and Aronius is already well known. 



160 Introduction to the Diplomatic Study 

which he will seek in vain to define by recourse to the continental 
handbooks. It is as though a naturalist should attempt to identify 
the British Fauna with the species figured in some foreign 
catalogue. Thanks to the knowledge acquired through a scientific 
training many forms would be familiar, whilst others would merely 
present variations due to climate or environment. At the same time 
many more on either side would be unrecognizable. Yet in this case 
recourse to alien literature need not be had since scores of native 
handbooks are available. But with all our wealth of literature 
dealing with other subjects how few are the works devoted to 
the scientific aspect of English Diplomatic ! In view of this obvious 
deficiency any serious attempt to fill the void by means of written 
descriptions or academic teaching may be acceptable. Possibly the 
latter method would seem for the moment more practicable than the 
former, but its beneficial effects cannot be regarded as -being very 
widely distributed. At most half a dozen students yearly enjoy the 
great advantage of attending the admirable lectures given at Oxford 
in the best style of the foreign Universities, and perhaps another 
fifty derive more or less benefit from the very modest course of 
instruction provided in the Universities of London, Edinburgh, 
Manchester and Liverpool. But the gain from these valuable studies 
is for the teachers and students alone. The information acquired 
through their researches is not directly available to English students 
at large and is quite unknown to the still larger body of continental 
students who have long desired to possess a more adequate descrip- 
tion of the insular diplomata. For example, in a recent number of 
a French review 1 the doyen of European scholars in these "auxiliary 
sciences" describes and discusses two languettes which he has 
observed to have been cut from the bottom margin of our I2th century 
writs ; and yet in the following pages there will be found a description 
of these languettes with their diplomatic uses, which was written more 
than 12 years ago from notes and drawings of original specimens and 
which has served as the basis of successive lectures and for the ex- 
hibition of models to many generations of London University students. 
Instances of this sort, however trivial in themselves, may serve 
as an excuse for an unwonted egotism in assuming that the desultory 
researches and unconventional teaching of 1 2 years may benefit a wider 
circle of post-graduate students. Perhaps the scope of the present 
essay will be sufficiently indicated by the classified Table of Diplomatic 
instruments printed in an Appendix. This presentment of the normal 

1 Bibliothtque de fcole des Charles (T. LXVIII, p. 309). 



of Official Documents 161 

diplomatic types which are usually recognized as variants of the 
Charter, the Writ and even of the Letter will be familiar to students 
of the continental manuals of the orthodox Diplomatic. This com- 
pilation is the product of much labour and consideration and it has 
natually formed the basis both of the following sections of the present 
work and of the Formula Book 1 which may be permitted to serve 
as an Appendix of illustrative types. 

The inclusion in this work of a section dealing with Record 
types which will be familiar to those who use the publications 
of the Record Commission and Rolls Series may perhaps require 
a better justification than the plea of utility. Whether the writer has 
made out a case for the serious treatment of these abnormal types 
must be decided by those who do not shrink from the perusal of the 
pages in which this obscure and doubtful aspect of the subject is 
discussed. Idle and unconvincing as such special pleading must 
always seem to the judicious reader, it may at least have the desired 
effect of drawing the attention of more competent investigators to an 
interesting and neglected subject. 

At the same time it must be made clear that even in the legitimate 
sphere of diplomatic study the scope of the present attempt is strictly 
limited. It is needless to dwell, however briefly, upon the conven- 
tional aspects of the ~s~ubject which have been stated at large in 
many foreign text-books and summarised for the benefit of English 
students in a singularly lucid sketch which is accessible to all 2 . 
For a like reason it has seemed unnecessary to introduce any 
detailed comparisons between the formulas of English diplomatic 
instruments and those of continental states. It will also be evident 
that the scope of the present work admits of no reference to the 
Scottish or Irish archives under the charge of separate government 
establishments and within the sphere of interest of national academies 
and native students. Finally the importance of several cognate 
studies such as Chronology, Sigillography, Numismatic, Linguistic, 
Biography, Topography and Archaeology, which in turn subserve the 
study of this auxiliary historical science, can only be recognized in 
a brief bibliographical note. 

For the rest, the establishment and apparatus of the English 
Chancery cannot be adequately treated for a further reason which 
will be presently referred to. There remains therefore only the 
classification, definition and description of the several diplomatic 

1 See Preface. 

2 The essay by Mr R. L. Poole in Cambridge Historical Teaching. . Y/ 

H. II 



1 62 Introduction to the Diplomatic Study of Official Documents 

instruments which issued from the royal Chancery or secretariat of 
this country or which are preserved amongst its diplomatic archives. 
Even these can only be treated in a desultory way, though a fuller 
treatment is invited by their historical interest. Indeed the only 
claim to a comprehensive method that these Essays can possess is 
based upon their exceptional range in point of date, embracing as 
they do types of the whole series of official instruments from the 
Anglo-Saxon Charter to the Sign Manual Warrant of our own 
times. 



THE ANGLO-SAXON CHARTERS. 



(a) Tfie Old English Chancery. 

WE shall seek in vain amongst the Tabulae Curiales of this country 
for an authentic list of Anglo-Saxon chancellors such as has been 
compiled for the contemporary history of the Continental chanceries 1 . 
The earliest description of such a native establishment dates only 
from the close of the reign of Henry I 2 , and even this reference has 
been taken to apply more especially to the court of the Norman 
duchy. Some twenty-five years later, the English chancery, as it then 
existed, appears as the clerical department of the all-powerful Ex- 
chequer 3 . Indeed beyond a natural grouping of the chancellor with 
the King's chaplains and with the clerks of the Scriptorium we have 
little direct evidence of his professional activity until the reign of 
Richard I, when royal charters are first authenticated in his name. 

Far less, then, can we expect to find any positive mention of a 
chancery establishment under the Anglo-Saxon monarchy. And 
yet, not only does a royal chancellor, with appropriate notarial 
appurtenances, figure in certain charters of this period, but the office 
has been readily accepted and described by English antiquarians from 
Coke and Spelman down to our own times. 

We should be, perhaps, prepared for such a view by the prevalent 
opinion respecting the transformation of the Old English hand- 
writing through foreign notarial influences before the Conquest 4 . It 
is not surprising therefore that this opinion should include the esta- 
blishment of an Anglo-French or Anglo-Norman chancery in which 
the new writing could be officially employed. It is possible, however, 
that modern historians have been misled herein by the assumptions 
of early chroniclers unversed in the rudiments of diplomatic criticism 8 . 
And yet the supposition was a very natural one. The foreign 
chanceries with all their pomp of chancellors, notaries, formulas and 

1 Cf. H. Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, I. 268. 

2 Constitutio Domus Regis (Red Book, p. 807). 

3 Dialogtis de Scaccario^ I. v. * See below, Part III. 
5 See below, Appendix. 

II 2 



164 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

seals had, before the close of the I2th century, been brought into 
close and fruitful connexion with this country, and the system that 
men see in their own day they commonly assume to be applicable to 
an earlier age. It becomes necessary, therefore, to test the correctness 
of this prevailing theory of an Old English chancery and notarial 
system before we can consider the probable nature of the apparatus 
that actually existed. 

Although the most discerning of our modern scholars would 
probably look askance on many of the Anglo-Saxon chancellors 
enumerated by Dugdale 1 , the existence of the office under the Con- 
fessor at least has not been seriously doubted, whilst the claims of 
other notarial officers who figure in the Codex have not apparently 
been investigated. 

Three chancellors of the Confessor have been generally accepted," 
Leofric, Wulfwig and Regenbald, with his vice-chancellors Alfgeat 
and Swithgar. The first two of these appointments, however, are 
scarcely well authenticated. Bishop Leofric was, indeed, qualified to 
hold such a position both from his learning and his foreign education 2 , 
but the best authority for his specific title is found in the dictum of 
Florence of Worcester. Wulfwig, on the other hand, is precisely 
described as the King's chancellor in a contemporary charter 3 but 
this proves to be one of the worst forgeries of the Church of West- 
minster. 

The position of Regenbald, however, rests on much stronger 
evidence. He is circumstantially described as chancellor and as 
performing notarial acts in several charters of the reign and as the 
king's priest in others. In addition, he is incidentally mentioned as 
chancellor in Domesday Book. It may be found, however, that these 
notices will not bear every test of diplomatic scrutiny. Of the charters 
in which Regenbald appears as chancellor the greater number are 
gross forgeries of the Westminster type 4 and with these are swept 
away the notarial positions of Alfgeat and Swithgar. In one of the 

1 Orig. Jurid. p. 32 sq. The existence of the earliest of these reputed chancellors has 
not even the support of a spurious charter but depends on the assertions of Matthew Paris 
(Hist. Abbat. \. 32 sq.) and Ingulf. The tradition respecting the statutory chancellors of 
Ely, Glastonbury and Canterbury is derived from a similar source (Gale, Scriptores, in. 501 ; 
Spelman, Gloss. 109). 

2 W. Malm. Gest. Pont. 201. 

3 C. D. DCCLXXIX. 

4 C. D. DCCCIX, DCCCX, DCCCXXIV, Dcccxxv, Dcccxxvi. Of these the first is a typical 
Ramsey production and the second is obviously of continental origin. The original of the 
Ramsey charter is still preserved at Holkham and appears on inspection to be a later 
fabrication. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 165 

two remaining charters', Rcgcnbaldus Regis Cancellarhis appears 
amongst the witnesses. This is the famous foundation charter of 
Waltham Abbey, a production which may remind us of the monastic 
forgeries of Ramsey. The real objection to this charter, however, 
lies in the fact that it is executed in the style of the Prankish 
chancery 2 . The other charter referred to gives Regenbald the title 
of 'cancheler,' but as this charter is contained in the I2th century 
Codex Wintoniensis, a work which abounds in affected archaisms and 
palpable anachronisms, we may perhaps consider that he is here 
designated by a post-Conquest titled In the case of other charters 
in which Regenbald is styled presbyter only, it should be noticed that 
no notarial functions are ascribed to him. Most of these charters 
being admittedly genuine the distinction appears to be highly signifi- 
cant 4 . There remains the Domesday evidence. In the Great Survey, 
amongst several other notices Regenbald is once styled Reinbaldus 
canceled, but it may be remarked that the title is a gloss, possibly 
contemporary, but interlineated in the MS. Doubtless Regenbald 
would have been styled chancellor by French official scribes after the 
Conquest 6 , just as he is so styled in the rubric of an Old English 
charter in a Cirencester collection 7 . 

Besides these reputed chancellors, who may or may not have 
acted in that capacity under the Confessor, notices occur in the Codex 
of royal clerks exercising undefined notarial functions at an earlier 
date. An examination of their official status would, however, involve 
the question of the authenticity of a class of charters which are not 
worthy of serious discussion 8 . 

1 C. D. DCCCXIII, but this charter has been accepted by very high authorities, including 
Bishop Stubbs. 

2 It contains, amongst other witnesses various consangiiinei Regis, two capellani Regis, 
a pincerna Regis and a. pincema RegiiKt, two dapiferi Regis and a dapifer Regina, an aulicus 
Regis, a palatimts Regis, a procurator Aula; together with the quasi-notarial subscription 
Hifc ego subscripsi Swithar sttb nomine Christi. Finally in the text itself we meet with such 
terms as shirce, hundreda, placita and gelda with the notorious exemption from all secular 
service declaimed with a statuo ttf. This charter appears to have been composed on the 
model of C. D. DCCCX which is obviously a foreign forgery. 

3 C. D. DCCCXCI. But this is a vernacular writ to which the statement that Regenbald 
was present is appended as a memorandum. 

4 Cf. C. D. DCCXCI DCCXCIII, DCCXCVI, DCCC. 

9 D. B. i. i8ob. 

6 For a learned discussion of Regenbald's nationality and status, see Mr W. H. Stevenson 
in /:. H. R. xi. 732 and Mr Round in Feudal England, p. 331. 

7 ArchiEologia, xxvi. 256. 

8 Cf. C. S. 4, 5, 6, 107, 268, 325, 365, 409, C. D. DCCXCV, DCCCXV and Bouquet, 
Scriptores, IX. 397. These notarial offices range in point of date from Ethelbert of Kent 
to Edward the Confessor and include such titles as refcrendaritts , graphio, cartigraphus, 



1 66 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

On the other hand it might not unreasonably be inferred that 
during the Anglo-Saxon period several great Churchmen held a 
position not very different from the modern conception of the office 
of chancellor, or at least that of chief of the chaplains who were 
also the King's clerks. A great historian has suggested that "the 
office held by Dunstan under Edred must have been very much like 
that of the later chancellors 1 " ; but we are elsewhere reminded that 
the masterful bishop " has left, beyond a few lines of writing, the 
endorsement of a charter and the prayer put into the mouth of a 
kneeling figure in an illumination, no writings whatever 2 ." All that 
we know of the lives of churchmen like Dunstan and Athelwold is 
perfectly consistent with this supposition, and yet they had neither 
the title of chancellor nor are they found to exercise the functions 
of that office in any credible diploma*. Again, Gisa, bishop of Wells, 
held a position not unlike that of Dunstan, Athelwold and Leofric 
for the purpose of the monastic forger 4 , and indeed his claim to the 
title of chancellor might seem to be as strong as that of Bishop 
Wulfwig. It will be observed, however, that notarial functions have 
not been definitely ascribed to a succession of office-holders, but in 
casual instances to a limited number of episcopal celebrities. In 
these and in other cases, referred to below, it is quite possible that 
the acts ascribed to notable churchmen have no special significance. 
None the less these incidents contrast unpleasantly with the usual 
simplicity of genuine diplomata. We cannot dismiss the suspicion 
that the presence of these official witnesses may have been regarded 
as an additional proof of the authenticity of certain charters. The 
instruments under consideration are, it is true, of varying merit. 

scholasticus, notaries, subdiacomts and plain presbyter. Of these, the credibility of the earlier 
titles is not enhanced by meeting with such an expansion of " Hocca graphic " as " Hocca 
comes," "Graphic conies." The title presbyter is of course unobjectionable unless it is 
connected with a notarial subscription such as may be chiefly found in Crowland forgeries. 

1 Stubbs, C. H. (1891), I. 380 n. 

2 Memor. of Si Dunstan (Rolls), p. cix. Even these exceptions might have to be 
abandoned. 

3 Athelwold is credited with the education of a courtier (W. Malm. Gest. Pont. p. 165). 
A definite assertion with regard to his official position is made by the Rolls editor of an early 
Cotton MS. (Anglo-Saxon Leechdoms, III. 417), who, on the strength of an Old English 
expression regarded as the equivalent to a secret enrolment, suggests that the Bishop held 
the office of Keeper of the Rolls to King Eadgar. Unfortunately the word in question does 
not appear to bear this meaning ("Newminster" in Hants Record Soc. p. xii). It is true that 
Athelwold is termed a secretis noster in an Ely charter of 970, but this (in its Latin form at 
least) is a grotesque forgery (C. D. DLXIH). The phrase is more familiar to us in i2th century 
works although it is of greater antiquity. 

4 Cf. C. D. pcccxj and pcccxvi. He is usually regarded as a " chancery clerk." 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters [67 

Some are obvious forgeries, whilst others have many claims to be 
regarded as authentic. 

In most cases the quasi-notarial formula in question amounts to 
the statement Ego, A. ., hanc cartulam dictavi 1 , and the verb in 
itself is doubtless unobjectionable, equally with such variants known 
to the Scriptorium as depinxi, titulavi, notavi, composui, &c. Apart 
from other suspicious circumstances, none of these phrases would 
be likely to arrest our attention, as for instance would be the case 
with the formal notarial subscription of continental origin which may 
occasionally be found in the pages of the Codex" 1 . It has also been 
fairly argued that even the most florid of these distinguished sub- 
scriptions are merely intended to denote a privileged style or an 
appropriate sentiment, whilst in most cases perhaps we may find no 
deeper motive than a scribe's conceit 3 . 

A like explanation might be given of those graphic indications 
of sealing which have also been a source of difficulty. It is indeed 
by no means inconceivable that many high ecclesiastics actually 
impressed their signet rings, and we know that such rings might bear 
as a device a cross exactly resembling that drawn by the scribe's pen 4 . 
Again we have to reckon with the fact that within a few years of the 
Norman Conquest it was assumed that particular subscriptions might 
be distinguished by an autograph cross indicating the actual presence 
of the witness 5 . 

Finally there are cases in which the initiative is taken by the 
King himself, who commands a charter to be composed or innovated, 
and there are other cases in which the notables present join in the 
command 6 . 

Lastly there are certain circumstances of time and place and 
execution of charters that may be looked upon as notarial artifices. 



1 Cf. C. D. DCLXXXIV, MCCXCVI and Bouquet, Scripfores, xi. 655. 

2 Cf. C. S. 66 1 with the formula Ego quoque Reinardus peccator interfni et notavi atque 
siibscripsi. 

3 For the well-known practice of "ringing the changes" on the conventional phrases by 
way of producing a jangle of " cons " and " avis" cf. C. D. DCCLXin, DCCLXXI, DCCLXXIV 
DCCLXXVI, DCCLXXX, DCCLXXXI, DCCLXXXVII, MCLV, MCXCV, MCCXI, MCCLXXXIX, 
MCCXCII, MCCCIX, MCCCX, MCCCXXXII. 

4 There is also a formula which may refer to the actual use of the pen by individual 
witnesses viz. SigntiHi sancta Cruets propria maun scribendo firmavi, cf. Archaologia, 
xvin. 18. 

s Cf. Somerset Arch, and N. H. Soc. vol. XXII. p. 114. In this case the bishop (Gisa) 
was certainly cognizant of the Old English practice. 

8 Cf. C. S. 592, Bouquet, xi. 655 and C. D. ccciv, DCLXXXVI, DCCXXXVI, MCXCI, 

MCXCVI, MCXCVII, MCCCIV, MCCCV, MCCCVI1I, MCCCXVI. 



1 68 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

The motive is doubtless to be found in a desire to obtain some official 
or public testimony in favour of a particular charter. Actum publice* 
may be taken as the key-note of these expressions. The phrases In 
palatio regiu"- or astantibus,%ic. may be attributed to the same motive; 
but these purely foreign ceremonial adjuncts are extremely rare 
amongst Old English diplomata. Far more frequent are notes of 
time and place assigned to public assemblies which, though frequently 
betraying the workmanship of an over-anxious fabricator, are in 
themselves consistent with the received traditions of the primitive age 
of diplomatic criticism in this country. 

The usual form of these excrescences is that of a supplementary 
narrative of the formalities which accompanied or symbolized the 
delivery of seisin in a primitive age. When a record of this ceremony 
was regarded as desirable, a convenient position for a pious inter- 
polation could be found in the usual comminatory clause or "Sanction." 
The charter having been executed (with many circumstances of time 
and place) those present take part in the further ceremony which is 
performed in the church benefited by the grant. Here the charter, 
or the grantor's helmet, or his hand are laid upon the altar, the pre- 
siding churchman speaks the words of the "Sanction," and the 
audience murmur Fiat, Fiat, or Amen 3 , a formula which perilously 
resembles the Apprecatio of the continental chanceries. In one re- 
markable case the ceremony is associated with a feast 4 . 

As with the foyal chancellor or notary, so with the kingly seal. 
The existence of neither can be proved from the evidence of authentic 
diplomata, and yet all our authorities are agreed that the regular 
sequence of the Great Seals of England dates at least from the reign 
of the Confessor. At the same time it would be found that an earlier 
doctrine has been already discredited. Few learned dissertations 
have been more trustfully accepted than the famous description by 
a great English antiquary of the royal Seals affixed to certain Old 
English charters preserved by the church of St Denis 5 . Even to the 
present day these portentous survivals of an insular notarial system 
figure in official catalogues and are reproduced in diplomatic texts 
without the slightest reservation 6 , although the searching tests of 

1 C. s. 109. 2 c. D. DCCLXXIX. 

3 C. S. 22, 27, 39, 125, 131, 154, Matt. Paris (Rolls), vi. 30, Hist. Abingdon (Rolls), I. 70, 
and cf. the observations by M. L. Delisle on a similar observance in Blbl. de rcole des 
Charles, LXVIII. 313. 

4 C. S. 235. s Arch. Jo. xin. 356. 

6 Since this was written the most suspicious of the St Denis charters have been with- 
drawn from the regular series in the Archives niitionctles and are exhibited and described 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 169 

diplomatic criticism have proved their utter falsity 1 . After this it is 
needless to discuss seriously the once burning question of the authen- 
ticity of the leaden Seal of St Augustine 2 or that of King Coenwulf 3 ; 
but these things should be remembered when we approach the ques- 
tion of the Great Seal of the Confessor. Let us therefore approach 
that question cautiously. 

It has been previously suggested that the instances of the exercise 
of notarial functions by reputed chancellors and vice-chancellors 
during this period are of somewhat doubtful authenticity, and this 
criticism would necessarily include the use of a seal. On the other 
hand, the use of a signet by Anglo-Saxon notables 4 and the well- 
known foreign proclivities of the Confessor should make us slow to 
deny the possibility of the use of a " seal of majesty " for certain 
purposes during his reign. It is perfectly possible that at any moment 
a genuine seal of this king, duly attested in an unimpeachable charter, 
may come to light; but at present we can only deal with the evidence 
of the existing specimens. These have been arranged and described 
with great care and precision by official experts who, very properly, 
have not discussed the question of their authenticity at all. Alto- 
gether there may be nearly a score of these seals which are evenly 
divided between the collection in the British Museum 5 and the muni- 
ments of Westminster Abbey 6 . One specimen is in the possession 
of the Earl of Winchelsea 7 . 

Of the above specimens none of those in the British Museum 
collection are attached to true diplomata. Three are attached to writs, 
of which one is admittedly, and another obviously, spurious. Those 
that are detached must remain an unknown quantity. In the case of 
the Westminster collection the only charter, bearing a pendent seal, is 

quantum valeant. As recently as 1906, however, the famous seal of Offa appeared on a 
printed circular announcing the publication of a learned work. 

1 Mr W. H. Stevenson in E. H. R. VI. 736. 

2 Hist. Man. St dug. (Rolls), p. 122, cf. below, Appendix. 

3 Archizologia, xxxil. 449. 

4 Archaologia, X. 232, xvm. 12, 40, xx. 479. The well-known instance of King 
/Ethelred's writ under seal has suggested the employment of a signet or privy seal rather than 
a pendent "seal of majesty " which no one has yet ventured to refer to such an early date. The 
suggestion is an ingenious one, and the point is deserving of further attention in view of the 
continental analogy of the cumulus. On the other hand the Charter referred to comes from 
a source (Textus Roffemis) which, however respectable, is not above suspicion; whilst we 
have in the case of the Westminster Charter (C. D. MCCXXIII) bearing the cumulus of 
Dunstan an undoubted forgery. 

For another possible analogy with the continental practice cf. below, p. 170, n. 5. 

5 Brit. Mus. Cat. of Seals, Ibid. Facs. of Anglo-Saxon Charters, Vol. IV. 

8 Ordnance Facs. Part II. 7 Ordnance Facs. III. ; Monasticon, I. 293. 



170 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

a notorious forgery 1 , whilst the rest are merely writs to which the 
seal is attached by what French experts neatly term a simple quetie*. 
The Winchelsea charter is another admitted forgery. 

The well-known allusions in Domesday Book 3 to " charters " under 
the seal of the Confessor are found when carefully examined to 
amount to very little. Read in a general connexion, these notices 
may be classified as follows : 

1. Cases in which testimony is made of the King's writ under 
seal, whether issued by the Confessor or by the Conqueror. 

2. Cases in which testimony is made of the seals of both these 
kings or of either of them. 

It will be noticed, however, that the production of these writs and 
seals is usually directly connected with questions of disputed investi- 
ture, and that they are regarded as evidences of an identical value. 
One formula in fact may be expanded as follows : Homines dicunt 
nunquam se vidisse brevem Regis, vel sigillum, vel hominem (liberatorem, 
nnncium, legatunt) qni, ex parte Regis, N, de hoc manerio saisisset. 

It is not altogether clear whether vel is used here disjunctively, 
but apparently the mention of any one of the above agencies for 
livery of seisin will include the others 4 . We may suppose that the 
King's writ, with the "seal of majesty" attached, was usually produced 
in the County Court by a royal messenger 5 . 

The real value of these references does not lie wholly in the 
evidence of the existence of Edwardian sealed writs at the date of 
the Domesday inquest. The jurors themselves could scarcely have 
distinguished between a genuine example of these instruments and 
an arrant forgery 6 , or at least an irrelevant instrument in the shape of 

1 Ordnance Facs. Part II. No. 18. C. D. DCCCXXV. * Cf. below, p. 218. 

3 Cf. D. B. I. 36, 39, 47 b, 50, 59, 60 b, 62, 78 b, 141 b, 154 b, 169, 197, 208, 218, 238, 
241 b, 298, 373 b, 374, 375; n. 176, 195, 208, 270 b, 310 b, 409, 413. 

4 It would seem that the references in Domesday Book to a charter (concessitm) in dis- 
tinction to a writ are too indefinite to convey the sense of a grant preceding livery of seisin. 

5 On the other hand in certain cases livery may have been given by a symbolic ceremony 
which made the writ unnecessary. So too we read in D. B. I. 154 b of Pax Regis manti vel 
sigillo data, where vel is apparently used disjunctively. Attention may be drawn, in this 
connexion, to the interesting notice in a Prankish capitulary of the 8th century of a 
consuetude which reminds us of the ancient system of issuing writs under seal by the hands of 
the Usher of the Exchequer. Here the customary service Sigillum et epistulam prendere is 
associated with vias et portas cnstodire (Capit. geii. (783), c. 17, ed. Pertz, III. 47). 

6 Thus although we read in the Survey (l. 78 b) that King William caused the church of 
Sliaftesbury to be re-seised of certain lands " i/uia in ipsa eecclesia inventus est brevis cum 
sigillo Regis Edwardi, predpiens ut acclesia restituerentur" we cannot accept this statement 
as conclusive. Even as late as the reign of Henry VIII the local jurors in a royal inquest 
accepted as evidence of a monastic title a Charter of Henry I which is an obvious forgery of 
the reign of Henry III (Hist. S. Petr. Glotic. (Rolls), II. 187). 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 171 

a conventional vernacular writ without the pendent seal 1 . But can we 
suppose that men who must have lived under the Confessor's rule 
were uninformed on this point : that they would have accepted the 
evidence of a sealed writ of the Confessor, even though no such 
system of authentication was in use during this reign ? This would 
seem at first hard to believe: yet before we are justified in basing 
any conclusions upon this Domesday evidence it would be necessary 
to investigate every case in which the Confessor's seal, apart from his 
mere writ, is alleged. These cases moreover are not only few in 
number, but usually associated with churches of indifferent repute ; 
whilst it is after all conceivable that local jurors, even if they possessed 
this diplomatic knowledge, would have hesitated to denounce these 
pious presentments of the saintly king as impudent forgeries. Again, 
accustomed already to the use of royal seals they would naturally 
assume that the practice was one of immemorial antiquity. At the 
same time it may be readily admitted that in the existing writs under 
the Confessor's seal and the texts of others that have not survived, as 
well as in the allusions of the Domesday inquest, we have evidence 
of a very different kind from that furnished by the isolated notices of 
Old English pre-historic seals above referred to. Indeed the general 
conclusion as to the existence of a Great Seal of the Confessor might 
seem to be amply warranted by this evidence. The statement of the 
case, however, requires certain qualifications and amendments. 

In the first place the size and colour and attachment of the seal 
itself are matters of great consequence, and many of the existing 
specimens scarcely fulfil the conditions which might be required 
herein 2 . In one respect indeed they are admittedly deficient, that is 
to say in the precautions taken for due attestation. The Signum 
manus of the Old English diplomata was not verified by a notarial 
certificate or by a royal seal 3 . It should be remembered, however, 
that the subscriptions used in the Anglo-Saxon system are far more 

1 Cf. the case of the Abbot of Abingdon before the County Court in D. B. I. 59, Chron. 
Abbendon, I. 477, and the naive admissions made by the chronicler (Chron. Abb. II. 2, 
cf. II. 126). 

2 A noticeable feature of the existing sealed writs of the Confessor preserved by the 
Church of Westminster consists in the fact that the seal in several cases is affixed transversely 
to the parchment label or "tag," and the same peculiarity is observed in the case of later 
instruments in favour of this church which are of more than doubtful validity (cf. Add. 
ch. 11205 an d '9581; Cott. ch. VI. 3). It has of course frequently been pointed out that 
mediaeval forgers were able to affix a genuine seal to a spurious charter with slight risk of 
detection (cf. D'Anisy, Charles de la Basse Normandie, Intro, p. 9, and Formula Book 
No. 18). 

3 The Signum maims is in itself a seal and has outlasted all other forms of verification. 



172 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

elaborate than those that are found in continental charters. Moreover, 
the spirit of the Old English system is favourable to publicity such as 
would be secured through the ratification of these instruments in the 
national council. Thus an official attestation by palace officers, a 
royal monogram and seal, and a notarial subscription were neither 
necessary nor appropriate. 

It is true that the act of sealing is mentioned incidentally in the 
subscriptions of both the earlier and later Anglo-Saxon periods 1 ; but 
we have already been prepared to make considerable allowance for 
mere flourishes on the part of learned scribes. Moreover we are 
perhaps justified in suspecting that this formula has been interpolated 
by a later forger with the intention of strengthening the authenticity 
of the grant 2 . 

It is well known that historians, in the I7th and i8th centuries, at 
least, have regarded such expressions as seriously intended to indicate 
the attachment of an actual seal. Mediaeval writers, however, were 
in most cases better informed on this point than has been generally 
supposed. Even the pseud- Ingulf thinks it politic to insist that 
seals are not found attached to Old English charters. The author of 
the history of St Augustine, Canterbury, is still more explicit The 
absence of seals, he tells us, need not surprise us, since a rude and 
barbarous nation 'recently converted to Christianity would prefer the 
use of the Holy Cross. Therefore (he continues) except in the case 
of Cnut, himself a foreign conqueror, we find no royal seals in use 
before the coming of the Normans 3 . 

Again, the Ramsey chronicler, who delighted in reproducing 
fanciful subscriptions, explains that the simplicity of an earlier age 
had no use for the modern device of the seal 4 . 

Enough has been said to make it clear that it is not our purpose 
to deny the possibility of the use of a royal seal under the Confessor. 
In the first place, however, it is necessary to distinguish between 
charters and writs, between instruments containing a sealing clause 
and those which do not indicate that the seal was affixed, and then 
between suspicious and apparently authentic documents. The mere 
fact of the existence of seals during the Anglo-Saxon period does not 
immediately affect the question at issue. The discovery of many 
fresh examples would not throw any new light upon the subject, unless 

1 Cf. C. S. 581, C. D. DCCCXI, "and above p. 167. 

2 Cf. Cart. Hames. (Rolls), II. 58. 

3 Hist. Mon. St Aug. (Rolls), p. 118 ; cp. Hardy, Rot. Chart, p. xxviii. 

4 Chron. Kames. (Rolls), Annals of Burton (Ann. Mon. \. 183), p. 65, and below Appendix. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 173 

these were "seals of majesty" correctly attached to unimpeachable 
charters. For although, as we have seen, a few original writs bearing 
the Great Seal of the Confessor are known to exist, together with 
other writs from which the seals have apparently become detached, 
no genuine charter composed in the Old English diplomatic formulas 
and authenticated by such a seal can be produced. 

The importance of the above distinction between sealed charters 
and writs will be presently apparent 1 , but it may be stated at once 
that this distinction presents a new view of the origin and use of the 
Old English and Anglo-Norman "seals of majesty." 

It is perhaps unnecessary to make any difficulties with regard to 
the use of 'a pendent "seal of majesty" in this country. That such 
an ingenious device should have apparently originated in the English 
court which was destitute of any notarial establishment or traditions 
and which is supposed to have derived its diplomatic formulas from 
continental models would certainly seem to be a remarkable fact. 
For although the Frankish chancery had reached a high state of 
development, including the habitual use of a seal, long before the 
days of the Confessor, it did not adopt the pendent seal for at least 
another generation-. 

But apart from the tardy adoption of this device by the French 
chancery, it should not be forgotten that specimens of each of the 
three methods of sealings henceforth practised can be found in several 
provinces of north-western and southern Europe from the beginning 
of the nth century or even earlier. Here we can see the pendent 
seal in the shape of the Papal and Carolingian Bulla and the Seal of 
majesty in wax affixed to French and German diplomata " en placard." 
The third form of sealing, and that which alone is found in the case of 
Anglo-Saxon diplomata, namely a seal pendent by a strip cut from 
the bottom of the document, may be seen in many instruments com- 
posed in the courts of the north French princes from the I ith century 
onwards 3 . 

Here then we have ample precedents for the practice of sealing 

1 Below p. 201. 

- Giry, Hist, de Diplomatique, p. 639 sq. It will be noticed that French writers regard 
this question of priority of invention with a sober equanimity. On the other hand the 
evidence of early diplomatic relations between the Anglo-Saxon kingdom and the Norman 
Duchy is accumulating, whilst the analogy of the diplomatic procedure in respect of the 
Frankish and Anglo-Norman inquest is worthy of much closer attention. At the same time 
we must remember that the execution of the Anglo-Norman coinage "has no sharp line of 
demarcation" from the Anglo-Saxon models, whilst the latter coinage "owes nothing what- 
ever" to the continental duchy (Catalogue of A. S. coins in the British Mttseum, n. xciii). 

3 Giry, Hist, de Diplomatique, p. 637. 



174 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

which most people believe to have been employed in the well-equipped 
court of the Confessor which presents us with so many imitations of 
continental officialism. 

The actual existence of this practice may still remain with the 
few a matter of opinion, but for the present it is enough to have 
taken exception to the sealed "charter" of this period. The credibility 
of a sealed writ, even if (like the older Merovingian forgeries) it 
possessed no clause announcing sealing, may remain an open question, 
for there is a diplomatic gulf fixed between the Anglo-Saxon "Fare- 
well " and the Anglo-Norman Attestation. 

The Old English royal seal therefore presents a real difficulty to 
the student of English diplomatics. The difficulty, however, is one 
which should be frankly faced. Whether the Anglo-Saxon diplomata 
needed to be sealed at all; again, why no announcement of sealing 
is found in the texts of genuine examples ; why writs only are 
sealed and not charters ; why some writs are sealed and not others ; 
finally, why these sealed writs are so closely associated with the 
. Church of Westminster 1 ; are questions which invite a full and partial 
examination. Meanwhile a simple solution of the problem may be 
suggested. 

If the derivation of the form of the post-Conquest writ from an 
Old English model 2 can be demonstrated, does it not seem probable 
that in the latter we have only an intelligent anticipation of the 
Anglo-Norman practice ? At least we must dismiss the Old English 
charter from the case and concentrate our attention on the future 
writ, in connexion with which we have new diplomatic requirements 
which invite, even if they do not demand, the use of a new emblem 
of attestation. On this showing the sealed "charter" is at most a writ 
which was sealed or not at pleasure, and its later development appears 
to accord with this theory, for within a century of the Conquest it is 
still difficult to distinguish a charter from a writ, and before another 
century has elapsed the writ has finally ousted the charter from its 
diplomatic pre-eminence 3 . 

Next to the existence of some apparatus for the composition and 
execution of a charter secundum artem notariam, we should look for 
some evidence of the registration of such instruments, or, at least, for 

1 Examples, however, occur in connexion with other churches, e.g. Bury and Exeter. 
Matthew Paris assures us that the statement that seals were not used by Anglo-Saxon kings 
is proved to be false by the discovery of King Edward's seal (? matrix] at Westminster 
(Gesta Abbat. I. 151). For an exposure of the Westminster methods, cf. Crawford Charters, 
pp. 88-102. 

2 Cf. below, p. 208 sq. 3 Cf. below, p. 214. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters [75 

their preservation in a suitable repository. This requirement seems to 
have suggested itself to the I2th century forgers of Old English 
"land-bocs," but, as we have already seen, there is no precise mention 
of any such provision in authentic diplomata of the pre-Conquest 
period 1 , although it is well known that the practice of preserving 
vernacular conventions in triplicate is referred to in Old English MSS. 
dating from the loth century-. 

It may perhaps be asked, "What then is left of the outward signs 
of an Old English chancery?" The answer must be that, in spite of 
the rejection of foreign formulas and later symbols, there is abundant 
evidence of the existence of a highly developed style of diplomatic 
composition. Just as the Old English scribes were unquestionably 
the equals if not the superiors of their continental brethren in mere 
penmanship, so they appear to equal advantage in respect of the 
regularity and precision of the formulas which they have made their 
own. None the less it is only reasonable to suppose that some system 
was adopted to facilitate the proper composition and the due execution 
of an Old English charter, but of such a system we possess only 
a few slight indications. It is true that certain writers have made no 
difficulty at all about the matter. "During the Anglo-Saxon era 
charters were prepared by professed scriveners or notaries and read 
aloud in some place of common resort 3 ." Possibly a class of professed 
scribes existed in Anglo-Saxon times, but there is no evidence what- 
ever that their services were requisitioned for composing royal charters 4 . 
The truth is that we have scarcely any information at all concerning 
the Schriftwesen of the Anglo-Saxon period. What little we know 
points to the conclusion that the art of writing, like every other branch 
of learning, was directed by the Church, and was practised almost 
exclusively in houses of religion 5 . The wandering scholar had not 
yet made his appearance in England, and speculations as to the 
extent of the culture disseminated by the great northern schools are 
futile in the face of the confessed ignorantia literarum prevalent in 

1 Cf. C. >. DCCCLV, uccccxxxn, Chron. Raines, p. 172, and above p. 14. On the 
other hand we have a few such general notices as that seen in C. S. 421, which appears to be 
genuine. For the myth of the registration of Anglo-Saxon Records, cf. Ayloffe, Calendars, 
p. xiii. 

2 This custom is connected with the muniments of certain churches, e.g. Canterbury and 
Worcester. 

3 Hardy, Rot. Chart. I. xxviii. 

4 Hickes, Dissert. Epist. p. 46. Cf. Matt. Paris (Chron. Major.), III. 438. 

5 Cf. Heming, Cartulary, I. 265, citing a grant of land made to a monk on the condition 
that he should write all the books of the church. The same writer's reference to notariorum 
carta may be regarded as a general expression. 



i 76 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

court circles from the time of Beda. It was not till the end of the 
nth century that sovereignty was graced by anything approaching 
a clerical establishment, and another century had elapsed before every 
lordling had his chaplain or clerk, his camera or gardaroba 1 . In 
the meantime the nation's writing was undertaken by its spiritual 
directors. It is needless to dwell upon the all-reaching influence of 
the Anglo-Saxon Church which pervades the public acts and councils 
of the nation. The fact remains that whilst for the laity "the common 
memory was a sufficient archive," the religious found their account in 
the formal registration of their privileges. So it had been from the 
time of Beda, and a new impulse was given to the practice by later 
reasons of state. Perhaps we do not always sufficiently realize that 
practically the whole existing bulk of Old English charters has been 
both made and preserved through the agency of the Church. The 
lay grantee was either a " man of straw " who obtained a collusive 
grant, or a worthy "minister" of the Crown (whose corpse and 
lands were sure to come the Church's way at last 2 ), and the Church 
was there to make charters for them both 3 . 

This is a view which at least simplifies matters considerably. The 
motion for a grant or confirmation or innovation of charters must 
proceed from the Church itself, and every church possessed the 
requisite knowledge for the preparation of the necessary instrument. 
This would be dictated by the respective bishop or abbot or some 
learned subordinate, and written on the spot, which was often enough 
the church itself, on the occasion of a royal visit. Then it was pre- 
sented for formal ratification by the king and his optimates. Thus the 
services of a royal chancellor, chaplain, or notaries could be well 
dispensed with. 

This is not a purely conjectural procedure. We find indications, 
slight it is true and unvouched, but very suggestive, of the actual 
process in question. It is a "notarial " subscription of Abbot Brightric 
of Malmesbury which deposes that, after diligently reading and 
scrutinizing the charters of his church, he has dictated a certain 
charter, written the same with his own hand, and subscribed it as 
witness among his peers 4 . Even so did Bishop Heaberht of Worcester, 
when he saw his church being unjustly despoiled of certain lands at 
the instigation of King Bertwulf of Mercia, proceed to the great 

1 The spurious references to household chaplains acting in this capacity to be found in the 
Welsh "Triads" really belong to a much later period. 

3 Cf. C. S. 144. 3 Cf. Chron. Rames. p. 13. 

4 Cf. C. D. ucccxvn, and Hickes, Dissert. Epist. p. 47. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 



177 



council at Tarn worth, taking with him the elders of erp , - church and 
its ancient charters, and then and there obtained a favourable judg- 
ment, dictated by him in the terms of a charter for which he fined to 
the king and queen in horses and rings and vessels of gold and silver 1 . 
Instances in point might be multiplied, and although the charters 
may be fabrications, the writers have at least unconsciously described 
the way in which the churchmen would have gone about their 
business 2 . 

Is not this the key to the method of composing the Old English 
diplomata, which appear so unconventional to the student of the 
regular Continental forms? In this primitive age the grantee drew 
his own grant and obtained its ratification by his personal supervision 
and supplication, supplemented on occasion by a judicious offering. 
In a more sophisticated age he feed a royal notary, bribed a royal 
chancellor, and fined to the royal Exchequer, to a like end. The Old 
English royal charter is a religious and a local product. The hand- 
writing is local, the language is local, the formulas are adapted by 
local scribes from academic models ; the attestation only is official, 
inasmuch as the court by which it is ratified followed the king into 
the locality. 

But this local aspect of a large number of charters which find 
places in monastic cartularies must not entirely supersede the wider 
view of the professional rather than official part played by the Church 
in the production of the Old English diplomata. These local efforts 
are reinforced or even supplanted on occasion by the professional 
intervention of an independent churchman ; but all the same the 
general effect is in harmony with that constitutional scheme in which 
the Anglo-Saxon laws also have their place and which received its 
lasting form in a charter of liberties composed by a clerical leader 
from a local model on the altar of a London church. 



(b) Old English Diplomata. 

For thirteen hundred years, since the landing of the Roman 
missionaries, we have possessed a stock of public diplomata unequalled 
in any other country, and during the last fifty years we have attempted 

1 Cf. C. S. 430, 731, 737. 

2 The charter of 799 802 which describes the production and emendation of an earlier 
charter is apparently genuine (Aug. II. 26. 27). 

H. 12 



I 7 8 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 



to bring thevfreliest of them together in a printed Codex. At no 
time, apparently, has the question of the sources of these diplomata 
been seriously considered. They are still, to the great majority 
of students, merely typographed abstractions of constitutional, eco- 
nomic or philological interest, to be taken as they are found, with 
such casual reservations as it has pleased a few inquiring minds to 
propound. 

And yet, if the Old English diplomata form an important item in 
our scanty historical evidence for the pre-Conquest period, it might be 
thought that their authenticity was a matter of some moment. To 
base our historical arguments upon supposed facts or imaginary 
relations is, possibly, to argue from false premisses. We can repeat 
the statement for what it may be worth, we can estimate its value 
according to the probability of its form and the credibility of its 
source ; but to accept it as Gospel without any scrutiny whatever, and 
to build upon this flimsy basis of fact a lofty superstructure of theory, 
is surely not a historical method that will commend itself to the 
inquiring student of the future. 

The Old English diplomata which are thus presented to us in the 
pages of our printed Codices may be said to have been derived from 
two apparent sources. In one quarter, they are preserved in some 
ancient writing, ar.d this written form, which may be either the original 
or a version thereof, is usually contained in a single sheet. Failing 
this original, there may be a later copy or abstract, which commonly 
bears an outward resemblance to its exemplar. If, however, as most 
frequently occurs, neither original nor apograph has been preserved, 
our text will be derived from a monastic entry-book, register, or 
cartulary, which may have been compiled at any time within eight 
hundred years of the date of the original instrument. Again, there 
are some cases in which none of the above sources are available, and 
we are dependent upon a modern transcript. Lastly, owing to the 
well known practice of presenting ancient charters for confirmation 
or for official inspection, numerous texts have been preserved in the 
rolls and registers of the Courts of Chancery, Exchequer, and King's 
Bench, and it has been suggested that, not infrequently, these 
enrolments furnish a unique or at least a preferable version of the 
original instrument 1 . 

The second class of diplomatic texts comprises such as no longer 
exist in any ancient writing, but in a printed form which sometimes 

1 Mr W. H. Stevenson in Engl. Hist. Rev. xi. 737. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 179 

causes our gratitude to the bygone editors to be tempered by mingled 
curiosity and regret 1 . 

To the misfortune of this unequal descent of our existing texts 
must be added that of their uneven distribution. It is perfectly 
obvious that we no longer possess the whole or even the bulk of the 
diplomata that were executed between the 7th and the nth centuries. 
It is also to be inferred that what we do possess were scattered in 
irregular groups amongst the local repositories from which they have 
been rescued. In one period Winchester comes to the front, and in 
another Worcester. Wessex and Kent and East Anglia are fairly 
well represented; Mercia not so well, and Northumbria not at all 2 ; 
but no volume of diplomatic evidence issues continuous and complete 
from any one source. We may be justly proud of the learned zeal of 
the cartographers of Rochester and Worcester ; but one really perfect 
local collection would have been worth many times the joint result of 
their labours from the point of view of the student of English Diplo- 
matic. 

At the same time, we must be on our guard against pressing the 
conclusions based upon these statistics to their logical conclusion. 
It is premature to bewail the loss of a vast mass of Old English 
charters estimated solely by the residuum that has survived, without 
some further assurance of the necessity for their existence. Indeed, 
our limited knowledge of the occasions which governed these grants 
of "boc-land," or of privileges and immunities connected with its 
possession, points to a somewhat different conclusion. We are no 
longer compelled to suppose that book-land was the holding of 
all who claimed a several estate in the Ager ptiblicus 3 . On the 
contrary, we are now well assured by a great legal historian that 
book-land was "a clerkly and exotic institution, and that grants of it 
owe their existence, directly or indirectly, to royal favour, and can 
throw no light, save incidentally, on the old customary rules of land- 
holding 4 ." 

This Old English customary procedure is perhaps the key to the 
puzzle of the missing charter. In the bracing atmosphere of this 

1 For instances of this class, and for the whole subject, see Kemble, Codex Diplomatics, 
VI. Preface; Birch, Cartularium Saxonicttm, I. Preface; and British Museum Facsimiles, IV. 
Preface. 

2 For Professor Liebermann's scholarly notice of some later Northumbrian diplomata, 
see below p. 225. For notices of early Celtic diplomata, see Liber Lamiavensis (ed. 
J. G. Evans). 

3 Cf. Prof. VinogradofT's famous essay in E. H. R. Vlll. i. 

4 Pollock and Maitland, Hist, of English Law, I. 37. 

12 2 



180 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

native custom the " book " imported from the imperial or pontifical 
chancery may well have languished as an " exotic." That it should 
have gained such repute as led to its further propagation is really due 
to entirely extraneous circumstances, the exact force of which has not 
perhaps been as yet sufficiently ascertained. It might, however, be 
urged that it is not the business of the editor of a Codex to attempt 
an estimate of the value of the manuscripts which have been used for 
the purposes of his edition. Be that as it may, this very reticence may 
encourage a mere essayist to offer a few humble suggestions to future 
editors, a few useful hints to intending students and foremost this : 

The Codex (or by whatever other name the printed text of the 
Old English diplomata may be called) is not to be regarded as a 
finality. That is to say, we must be prepared to go behind the printed 
text in order to estimate the historical value of the materials which 
we propose to use. The Codex, in fact, is only a chronological register 
of diplomata brought together for convenience of reference. It does 
not (whether rightly or wrongly) make any serious attempt at diplo- 
matic criticism. This is a matter that is designedly we might almost 
say wilfully left to the ability or taste of individual students, as 
though it were a matter which concerned the palaeographer and the 
philologist alone. 

Here, then, we have a view of the Codex which is instructive to the 
whole body of its students, the classification of its contents. This is 
a subject which we are apt to overlook in using the paged and 
numbered volumes of the printed text. We forget that, in order to 
effect our convenient chronological arrangement, the original codices 
have been, so to speak, cut up and pasted down. Thus we have lost 
sight of the antecedents of the collected charters, their local colouring, 
and their distinctive individuality. We may hastily scan page after 
page of the Codex, without being reminded of Heming or the Textus 
Roffensis, and even the blatant pseud-Ingulf almost passes muster in 
the crowd of minor forgers. 

It is true that our Codex may be tardily furnished, like that of 
Kemble, with a partial key for the identification of the sources, but 
how many will use it, or would realize the meaning of its synonyms ? 
How many students are accustomed to carry in their heads the 
equation, "Ad. 15350 = Codex Wintoniensis," the chief source for 
Winchester charters ; or to distinguish from memory between the 
MSS. "Tib. A. 13," which, being Heming's cartulary, must be treated 
with respect, and " Faust. A. 3," "Claud. B. 6," "Bodl. Wood, i.," and 
" Vesp. B. 24," which, as they contain the respective collections of 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 181 

Westminster, Abingdon, Malmesbury, and Evesham, should be used 
with considerable caution ? 

This question of classification therefore may be earnestly recom- 
mended to the attention of the student who has not the requisite skill 
to tell at a glance whether this or that charter bears a genuine aspect 1 . 
Thus equipped, he will "know his warranty" for the statements in the 
printed text, and he can take such further precautions as are needed 
by recourse to diplomatic criticism. It will be seen that this recom- 
mendation amounts to "starring" the several codices, just as individual 
charters have, to a limited extent and to a certain date only, been 
" starred " by the editor of our first Codex. The principle is perhaps 
more sound, as it is also far less arbitrary, than Kemble's method, 
since it applies to the whole period, and includes charters which were 
formerly unknown or at least omitted. Again, instead of condemning 
certain instruments at random upon evidence which is not stated, 
a thorough scrutiny is invited of every specimen which is intended to 
be used. Neither is the labour of identifying the several collections 
so great as might be thought. A full half of the contents of Kemble's 
Codex is derived from only a dozen famous cartularies, the residue 
being made up from original parchments, lesser registers, or printed 
versions. 

It has been usually supposed that the authenticity of any par- 
ticular charter is capable of proof by means of diplomatic tests. It 
cannot, however, be said that our experiments in this direction have 
been uniformly successful. A charter which conforms with all the 
laws of philology and all the rules of palaeography may still be 
proved a forgery by external evidence, if we have reason to suspect 
a forgery from its manuscript relations. For the purpose of a true 
diplomatic test, therefore, an appreciation of those manuscript re- 
lations is essential, and yet it is employed in very few instances. 

It might indeed be objected that to proceed thus upon suspicion 
of forgery would be to prejudice the case. The truth is, however, 
that we have not yet arrived at an understanding even as to the 
diplomatic definitionofajoigery. Time was when, during the sharp 
reaction Trom long centuries of childish credulity, charters were 
denounced as forgeries for the slightest inconsistency. Since then 
we have been- passing through a fresh period of reaction, in the 
direction of the limitation and refinement of the term " forgery," until 
it has become an extremely hazardous matter to reject a charter at 

1 An attempt to refer the printed charters to their several codices without recourse to a 
key will be found a most instructive exercise. 



1 82 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

all. Between the downright dogmatism of Hickes and the cautious 
methods of Kemble and Professor Earle there is perhaps room for 
a middle course, and that course will be safest steered by the light of 
diplomatic criticism. 

But first there is a limit to our patience and our gravity, which 
hitherto each one has set for himself. Whether there is any profit in 
a discussion of a certain class of charters is a question which most 
people have answered in the negative, and yet the Croyland and 
Beverley forgeries are with us always 1 in the Codex and with them 
stand score upon score of kindred falsities which are accepted and 
used every day as historical evidence. Even the most valued 
sources are not always immaculate. The originals which have been 
perpetuated in facsimile include nth and I2th century imitations 
of Old English characters and composition. The Worcester and 
Rochester books have preserved here and there a forgery as palpable 
as any of Crowland, whilst in comparatively respectable collections, 
such as those of Canterbury and Winchester, we are presented with 
whole batches of suspicious charters. As for houses like Abingdon, 
Malmesbury, Evesham, Glastonbury, St Edmunds, Bath, St Augus- 
tine's, Shaftesbury, Wilton, Sherborne, Peterborough, Chichester, and 
Chertsey, it is enough to say that wherever there is a motive to forge 
we may suspect a forgery. 

This motive theory is indeed the vexed question which can never 
be answered to the satisfaction of all. By keeping it carefully out of 
sight, Mabillon and his followers were able to formulate a series of 
tests which, as Hickes truly observed 2 , would save almost every 
suspected charter from condemnation. And this cry has been raised 
once more in our own times : " Let us save something ! No matter if 
the king is a wrong one, or the indiction, or if the witnesses are 
impossible ; these are clerical errors which may be set down to the 
carelessness of a later scribe." 

It has been strangely assumed by nine writers out of every ten 
that a forged charter is an original composition of a much later date 
than the period to which it refers. Therefore these critics have chiefly 
concerned themselves with a laborious search for trivial anachronisms; 
but in many cases in which there is a reasonable suspicion of forgery, 
the scribe has merely tampered with an original grant by way of 



1 The researches of Prof. Liebermann and Mr Stevenson have proved that some at least 
of the Croyland forgeries are of a much earlier date than the i4th or ijth centuries. 

2 Antiq. Lit. Septentrionalis Praefatio, p. xl. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 183 

interpolating a word or sentence in order to settle some disputed 
point which the grantor had unfortunately omitted to foresee 1 . In 
such cases when erasure or insertion were impracticable, a perfect 
model was at least available for the fabrication of an improved 
original 2 . 

To detect these nearly contemporary forgeries by the test of 
handwriting alone is indeed a difficult task, and as a rule the official 
expert is wisely reticent concerning the precise period of an undated 
manuscript 3 . 

With the existence of a considerable diversity of opinion as to the 
extent of the admissibility of a certain class of Old English charters 
as historical evidence, it is clear that no general standard of authen- 
ticity can be propounded. A number of more or less valuable rules 
of diplomatic criticism have been elaborated by English scholars 
from the tfme of Hickes 4 , but these have been employed in a very 
desultory manner. Such tests as the verification of the chronology, 
of the royal style and of the persons and places mentioned in Old 
English charters have been more frequently resorted to than the 
examination of the language which does not always accord with the 
assumed date or place of origin. The diplomatic tests connected with 
the phraseology and formulas of these charters have rarely been used 
in this country 8 . It is true that discrepancies in style such as the 
anachronistic flourishes in the subscriptions of the Crowland charters 
have been readily pointed out, and that brevity and simplicity are 
regarded as characteristic of authentic diplomata of early date ; but 
the diplomatic method of scrutiny might be carried much further 
than this if the formulas in use at different periods had been even 
partially worked out. As it is, the editor who wishes to test the 
authenticity of particular charters is compelled to provide his own 
diplomatic apparatus. He cannot, in fact, ascertain the exact position 
of a few specimens belonging to a given period without a tedious 

1 Bolder attempts occur in the interpolation of whole charters in some text of repute, 
e.g. the grant to Medeshamstede, a i2th century insertion in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle 
(Rolls ed. p. 52; cf. C. D. n. 46 and v. i). 

3 Mabillon (Pref. I. vi.) gets over the objections that might be made to many apographs 
by the ingenious contention that many things are to be passed over in an apograph which 
would vitiate an original charter. 

3 This discretion has not been always observed, for a great official antiquary of the early 
Victorian period has described one of the most glaring forgeries in the whole Codex as 
"a magnificent and perfect specimen of ancient calligraphy." 

4 For these see the Prefaces of Kemble and Earle and the excellent summary by 
Dr R. L. Poole, op. cit., and below, p. 184. 

6 A notable exception is to be found in the Crawford Charters (Napier and Stevenson). 



184 The Anglo-Saxon CJiarters 

examination of diplomata dated long anterior and subsequent to that 
period. 

To summarize the principal rules that have been recognized in 
the modern study of the subject, we shall find that the occurrence of 
one or other of the following peculiarities may justify us in regarding 
an Old English charter with more or less suspicion : a later and, 
especially an imitated hand-writing ; anachronisms and other dis- 
crepancies in the names or styles of kings and witnesses, dates, events 
and national usages ; narrative Preambles, Expositions, Grants, 
Sanctions and Attestations ; florid Preambles and Sanctions ; rhymes 
and flourishes of every kind ; notes of time and place and of his- 
torical events that are irrelevant to the business in hand ; the dragging 
in of the names of celebrities as witnesses to a charter ; barbarisms 
and archaisms that are out of date or over-done and an affected 
emphasis placed on vernacular idioms or synonyms ; a penal clause, 
unknown in this country, and grants that deliberately omit to reserve 
the three-fold obligation 1 . 

To this list, which might be enlarged 2 or emended without much 
difficulty, a few additions may be suggested from another aspect of 
diplomatic criticism ; such as grants of liberties, privileges or im- 
munities which may suggest a motive for the discovery of early 
documentary evidence in support of a disputed claim ; the use of 
later constitutional terms in connexion with the above grants ; the 
appearance of interpolations in the body of a genuine charter; 
marked irregularities of style and the use of the distinctive formulas 
of a much earlier or later period ; the use of foreign phrases or 
formulas, especially in the Dating or Attestation clauses ; a sequence 
of suspicious charters from a particular source. If we add to the 
above that all rhyming 3 and foundation charters, and most innova- 
tions of lost charters and confirmations may be regarded with 
suspicion, a by no means exhaustive or conclusive list of dubious 
diplomatic forms will have been suggested. 

Again, it may be useful to suggest that, for the purpose of his- 
torical evidence, the Old English diplomata may be conveniently 
grouped in three divisions. Of these the first will comprise genuine 
charters whether originals, apographs, or entries. The second will 

1 For the suspicious character of exemptions from episcopal jurisdiction, cf. Somerset 
Record Society, Vol. 14, in the case of Muchelney. 

1 e.g. on the use of the future tense in dispositive formulas (Napier and Stevenson, 
Crawford Charters, p. 38). 

* For rhyming charters, cf. Linkeisen, Die Anfdnge der Lehngerichtsbarkeit in England, 
P- 43 sqq- 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 185 

consist of palpable forgeries or documents that are too suspicious to 
be used without full warning of their doubtful character. The third 
division will contain apographs or versions which, though disfigured 
by certain anachronisms or discrepancies, may still be partially 
utilized for historical purposes. 

With regard to the first of the above divisions it should be 
noted that comparatively few of the texts included therein have as 
yet been submitted to a close diplomatic scrutiny. Kemble himself 
did not mark the charters of the nth century with any confidence 
or consistency, whilst we have no means of ascertaining the method 
adopted by him in sifting a mass of earlier charters which do not 
moreover represent the whole number that is now known to us 1 . 
A more accurate definition of this class would therefore be, " Charters 
the authenticity of which has not been seriously impugned." 

It must not, however, be supposed that the elements of diplomatic 
criticism were propounded for the first time by I7th or i8th century 
scholars. Even in the I2th and I3th centuries monastic chroniclers 
could undertake to account for the miraculous preservation and 
opportune production of the ancient evidences of their churches' 
possessions, or to explain the absence of seals from an Old English 
charter by recourse to diplomatic arguments which have scarcely 
been sufficiently appreciated by modern scholars. The fact that the 
existence of this early knowledge of the subject has been hitherto 
ignored is perhaps a proof of the general indifference to the subject. 
The pseud-Ingulfs notions about the Old English handwriting and 
seals have indeed been frequently quoted to his disadvantage, whilst 
too much credence has been given to the romance of Battle Abbey 3 . 
These sources, however, might have been supplemented by the 
interesting disquisitions of Heming, Gervase of Canterbury, the 
monks of Evesham and Ramsey, Matthew Paris, and Thomas of 
Elmham. Even the allusions contained in early treatises such as the 
Dialogus de Scaccario and the Constitutio Domus Regis seem to have 
been generally neglected, and many others might be found 
amongst the Chancery and Exchequer compilations of the I3th 
century*. 

1 It will be found that Kemble starred about 300 out of 1000 charters, but the proportion 
of doubtful forms in the completed Codex would be considerably higher. The method 
employed by Professor Earle in his valuable and suggestive Land Charters must be regarded 
as a purely arbitrary system of classification. 

8 Chron. de Bella (1846), pp. 84 sq., 107 sq., 164 sq. 

3 See Appendix. This was written before the publication of the Oxford edition of the 
Dialogus. 



1 86 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

At the same time it may be admitted that these early diplomatic 
essays do not take us very far. The sententious brevity of writers 
like Fitz Nigel and Gervase of Canterbury might indeed lead us to 
suppose that they knew more than they chose to impart, but in the 
case of less learned writers these obiter dicta may degenerate into 
idle gossip. We gather moreover from an anecdote of Matthew Paris 
that the prophets of the new science were not honoured in their own 
houses. The historian relates that in the reign of King John there 
appeared among the brethren at St Albans an enquiring mind in the 
body of one Alexander de Langley who had mastered the whole art 
of diplomatic composition. Unhappily this rare accomplishment 
turned the good monk's head. Intoxicated with the importance of 
the new learning, he became insupportable to his fellow- writers of the 
"scriptorium." In vain he was banished to the cloisters and flogged 
usque ad effusionem sanguinis. The diplomatic spirit could not be 
cast out. Then there was a verdict Propter multas litteras insanire, 
and Alexander died miserably, in chains, in the Abbey's cell of 
Binham, and was buried in his chains, a warning to all conceited and 
intolerant pedants 1 . 

A motive for the preservation of Old English charters, as the 
earliest and most precious title-deeds of the churches' possessions, 
has been frequently and variously suggested. One such motive has 
been found in the necessity imposed upon churchmen after the Con- 
quest to produce actual documentary evidence of title, and it has 
been added that such documents would have been furnished with 
seals in conformity with the new diplomatic practice. This theory 
which figures conspicuously in the narrative of the pseud-Ingulf is 
not justified by the actual facts. The supposed compulsion has 
possibly proceeded from a confusion of ideas induced by the famous 
inquisitions upon writs of Quo Warranto under Edward I, which 
apparently gave rise to a large, and hitherto unsuspected crop of 
later forgeries 2 . A more intelligible explanation of the anxiety of 
religious houses to be provided with copies of their ancient charters 
is to be found in the exigencies of the Exchequer routine which 
required the production of all charters of liberties under which 
exemption was claimed from imperial or local taxation. To this 
motive we may perhaps attribute the preservation of a considerable 
number of charters or confirmations of a later date which have 
survived amongst the "Ancient Deeds" in official custody, whilst 

1 Gesta Abbat. I. 266. 

2 Public Record Office, Transcripts of Deeds Various (Exchequer K. R.). 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 187 

others again have been enrolled in such classes of Records as the 
Pipe Rolls and Cartae Antiquae. It is possible that the still more 
numerous enrolments in the Chancery by way of Inspeximus were 
chiefly due to the same official exigency. As the "oblations" and 
"fines" paid for the concession or renewal of certain privileges came 
to be recognized from the close of the I2th century as a valuable 
source of revenue, these instruments began to possess the importance 
of official receipts for the redemption of land-tax and other common 
assessments. But there remains a still more obvious and urgent 
motive for the preservation, discovery or renewal of these ancient 
diplomata in the litigious spirit of the post-Conquest period. 

We have only to glance at the ex parte statements of these cases 
entered in monastic registers, like those of Worcester, Rochester or 
Peterborough, and still more explicitly described in monastic histories, 
like those of Evesham or Crowland, to realize the true position of 
affairs. Here we shall find, almost side by side, the text of an Old 
English charter and the narrative of the law-suit in which it made 
a conspicuous appearance 1 . 

Following this motive theory still further backward, we are con- 
fronted with another problem. 

We have learnt to regard the Anglo-Saxon " land-bocs " as having 
been granted equally to churchmen and to thegns ; but if this is so, it 
is clear that a very large deficiency in respect of existing grants in 
favour of the latter class has to be accounted for. To suggest that, in 
the natural course of events, only the charters of the religious would 
have been preserved, is merely to beg the question. But even the 
premisses of this argument would need to be rectified. We are 
scarcely justified in assigning even the comparatively few lay-grants 
which survive to a distinct species. This is a matter which requires a 
good deal of discrimination. In the first case it must be obvious that 
these grants to the laity were preserved as the title-deeds of the 
church which claimed to be the grantee's heir. They were in fact 
needed to complete the chain of documentary evidence which was 
relied upon to secure the church's possessions from the rapacity of 
turbulent neighbours and the oppression or injustice of princely 
tyrants and their hirelings which form the constant theme of monastic 
narratives and diplomatic " Sanctions " alike. 

A clue to the real nature of the earliest of these lay-grants is 
perhaps found in a remarkable passage of Beda's well-known letter 

1 Cf. Honing s Cartulary (ed. Hearne), I. 248. 



1 88 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

to archbishop Ecgberht of York, in which the writer denounces the 
practice of obtaining grants of land by means of charters confirmed 
by the Witan for the purpose of founding religious houses which were 
only too frequently ill-regulated 1 . 

We have indeed only to refer to the diplomata of the /th and 
8th centuries to see that the expressed motive of such charters was 
usually to benefit some church 2 . In these cases a grant of land is 
made to some lay notable, ad construendum in ea monasteritwn, a 
phrase that may almost be dignified by the term of a formula 3 . In 
these " land-bocs" a reversion to the church is not always specified, 
though the pious motive is usually implied by the wording of the 
Preamble, Exposition and Sanction. Besides these actual grants to 
laymen, there are cases in which they are mentioned as having con- 
tributed to procure like concessions for churchmen 4 , who in most 
cases were the direct recipients of the royal bounty. 

In the course of the 9th century, however, we find grants made 
to laymen (and now to thegns rather than to princes or earls) with 
growing frequency, till at length these may amount to a third of the 
whole number. This increase certainly adds to the difficulties of the 
subject. Hitherto these lay grants have constituted but a small per- 
centage of the Codex, and, as we have seen, in many cases an ulterior 
motive is perceptible. But in these later grants no such motive can 
be perceived, whilst in many cases a very different motive is alleged. 
Moreover, we are not here concerned with wholesale forgeries, since 
the proportion of originals in this class of charters is quite remark- 
able. Again, instances occur in which lands thus bestowed on a 
layman do not seem to have been ultimately disposed of by the latter 
in favour of the church by which the charter was preserved, whilst in 
other cases such grants seem to have been resumed by the Crown 6 . 
It might also happen that a private deed or devise in favour of a 
church was disputed by the heir-at-law 6 . We must assume, therefore, 
that in this later period many grants to laymen were preserved by 
the churches as mere title-deeds 7 , without any immediate connexion 
with the pious dispositions of the original grantees. 

1 Ed. Smith, p. 309. 

a Cf. C. S. 32, 58, 59, 60, 74, 77, 78, 85, 122, 146, 153, 154, 182, 197, 198, 202, 206, 

209, 211, 2l8, 232, 244, &C. 

3 Cf. above p. 176 and C. S. 225, 230, 232, 274, 277, &c. 

4 Cf. C. S. 22 A, 58, 59, 142. 

B Cf. C. S. 303 where the condition of faithful service and allegiance of the thegn is 
specified. Cf. also C. S. 247 and 248. 8 Cf. C. S. 256. 

7 Thus we read in the History of Ramsey (Rolls p. 13) that Quaedam in archivis ecclesiae 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 189 

As a result of the above observations we have found that the 
distribution of the surviving Anglo-Saxon charters nearly coincides 
with the periods of paramount influence exercised by the Church and 
thegn-hood respectively, and that a due proportion of the grants 
made to each class in turn would naturally be found amongst the 
existing ecclesiastical collections. It is clear, however, that there is 
a missing link between the original "land-boc" and the later entry in 
some monastic register which records a private benefaction. Whether 
this link would have been supplied by a lost series of Anglo-Saxon 
wills and conventions is a question that could only be partially 
answered by an exhaustive enquiry into the origin and relations of 
the private diplomata of the loth and nth centuries. 



(c) Old English Formulas. 

The existence of distinct formulas in the composition of the Old 
English diplomata has been frequently noticed and a definite classifi- 
cation of these formulas has been more than once propounded. But 
how loose does this classification appear by comparison with the 
modern arrangement of the Continental types ! In the first place the 
distinction between the Protocols, or official formulas which occur at 
the beginning and end of the charter, and the Text, or body of the 
instrument, is not indicated at all. Again, the omission of certain 
formulas which are found in Continental examples is accepted without 
comment, whilst the existence of others, though in a rudimentary or 
irregular form, has apparently been unnoticed. 

Nevertheless it might be possible, by a slight modification of the 
existing arrangement, to bring the composition of the Old English 
formulas into close agreement with those of the Continental chanceries, 
though to prove their derivation from this source would be no easy 
matter. We may have very little doubt that the Anglo-Saxon scribes, 
who received the art of writing from the Roman missionaries, derived 
the outlines of their diplomatic compositions from the Gallo-Roman 
chancery which in turn was modelled upon the "course" of the Papal 
Curia. There seems to be no other possible explanation of the exist- 

noslrae repertae vetustissimae, scedulae eorundem regutn nomina et quibusdam personis factas ab 
eisdem terrarum donat tones continentes ; quae donationes etiam ab ipsis personis post modum 
ecclesiae nostrae in perpetuum eleemosynam, cum eorundem scedularum munimento, sunt 
collatae. For an instance in point, cf. Cart, /fames. I. 257, and Public Record Office, Ancient 
Deeds, No. 7873. 



190 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

ence of a considerable body of Old English diplomata from the 
7th century onwards. And yet we cannot identify any number of 
the insular formulas with the specimens preserved in the Papal or 
Imperial, Lorn bardic or Prankish collections and precedent books. 
At one time we have a snatch of a Roman and at another of a 
Prankish formular. Here we recognize Marculf and there the Liber 
Diurnus. 

This failure to identify the common sources of the Old English 
formulas is at first sight somewhat disquieting. We must remember, 
however, that the text-books of the Merovingian and Carolingian 
chanceries were not contemporary with the most active period of 
English diplomatic writing. Perhaps also our confused impression of 
the insular forms is only the natural result of a cursory inspection of 
the strange medley of historical documents that fill the earlier pages 
of our Codex. We have first of all to put aside vernacular " versions," 
rhymes, wills, conventions, letters, Papal Bulls, laws, councils and 
other historical documents which (however interesting in themselves) 
do not furnish us with examples of diplomatic construction. Even 
then it will be found a matter of no small difficulty to classify the 
formulas of the residue of credible examples in a comprehensive 
system ; for no Anglo-Saxon king used the distinctive style of the 
Continental chanceries and a constant overlapping of style and inter- 
change of formulas is met with from first to last. 

We have seen that the diplomatic instruments which were dictated 
in the Continental chanceries were composed according to certain 
recognized formulas, and that these were arranged so as to divide the 
diploma into three parts, consisting of an initial and a final Protocol, 
with the Text or body of the charter lying between them, as in the 
following Table. 

(a) Initial Protocol. 

Invocation. 
Superscription. 
Address. 
Salutation. 

(b) Text. 

Preamble. 
Notification. 
Exposition. 
Dispositive clause. 
Final clauses. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 191 

(c ) Final Protocol. 
Date. 

Apprecatio. 
Attestation. 

It must be further understood that several of these conventional 
formulas are capable of considerable elaboration according to the 
purport of the instrument itself, whilst the order and wording of the 
whole series vary during different periods. As the Continental 
diplomata are known to have been composed by a notarial college 
or at least by an official body of scribes, and, as we have seen, in 
accordance with official precedents, the regularity of the above 
formulas is easily explained. This uniformity was further enhanced 
by the special devices employed for their execution. 

It has been previously insisted that no notarial apparatus existed 
in this country during the Anglo-Saxon period, and this unpro- 
fessional character of the native instruments is reflected in the 
arrangement of the formulas as well as in the handwriting itself. 

The following classification of the Old English formulas will show 
the distinctive features of this national type : 

(a) Initial Protocol. 

Invocation. 
Superscription. 

(b) Text. 

Preamble (or Proem). 

Exposition (rudimentary). 

Disposition (or " Grant "; with description of Boundaries). 

Final clause (or " Sanction "). 

(c) Final Protocol. 

Date. 

Attestation (Subscriptions). 

It will be noticed that, for the purpose of this table, it has been 
necessary to make certain modifications in the recognized arrangement 
of the successive formulas. Thus an Initial Protocol can be distin- 
guished only by recognizing the importance of the Superscription which, 
although frequently involved with the first two clauses of the Text, 
usually sets forth the royal style in a formula which is constantly 
repeated in the terms of the Subscription in the Final Protocol. 
Again, the Preamble might be regarded as a substitute for the Invo- 
cation (which it so often replaces) rather than as a mere prelude to 



192 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

the Exposition in the Continental style. In any case its place is 
sometimes taken by a rudimentary Exposition, which, when present, 
is little more than a primitive Movent clause 1 . Lastly, it should be 
clearly recognized that the description of the boundaries, which is 
such a distinctive feature of the Old English diplomata, is merely 
an appendix to the " Grant " itself, usually inserted between the 
Text and the Final Protocol, but also appended as a schedule to 
the completed charter. 

Apart from this arrangement of the existing formulas, the Old 
English diplomata may be distinguished by the omission, of others 
which are specially characteristic of the Continental chanceries as 
well as of the conventional charter of later times. These omitted 
clauses are the Address (invariably), the Salutation (usually), and the 
Notification, whilst the numerous variants of the Final clause which 
occur in Continental types are also wanting. 

The characteristic features of these native charters can also be 
recognized in the composition of the formulas themselves. It is 
certainly possible, however, to notice a gradual development in the 
case of the Latin diplomata of the 7th and 8th centuries from the 
Roman type of donation to that of the Anglo-Saxon " land-boc." It 
is in the Disposing and Attesting clauses that this foreign influence is 
most conspicuous. The use of such words as trido, cedo and dono is 
most suggestive, together with the use of the perfect or future tenses 
and the first and second persons, whilst the announcement of the 
boundaries is in Latin. Again, in the Dating and Attestation clauses 
we meet with such formalities as are implied by the expressions testes 
competenti numero rogavi; rogatus consensi, &c. Again, the Indiction 
is rarely wanting and the Signum mantis is employed, at least for 
minor witnesses. At the same time, even in this early period, con- 
siderable variety and certain national characteristics may be seen in 
the expression of the kingly style, especially in the Superscriptions of 
the Mercian rulers, and the purport of the grant may be neatly 
epitomized in the royal Subscription. In the 9th century the most 
pronounced of the old classical formulas are modified by the increas- 
ing luxuriance of the native diction. This is especially noticeable in 
the case of the Dispositive clause in which the conditions of the grant 
are formulated in deference to the national policy. Moreover, Scripta 
occurs more frequently than Acta in the Dating clause, and the sub- 

1 Cf. Rot. Chart. (Record Com.), p. xxiii, n. 2, where (as in Kemble) the Preamble 
is regarded as a Movent clause. In this case, however, a true Exposition must equally be 
regarded as a Preamble. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 193 

scriptions of the witnesses assume the conventional form which was 
subject at a still later date to such extravagant embellishments. 

Again, in spite of the general resemblance of the Old English 
formulas during the whole period of their composition to those used 
in the Italian and Prankish chanceries, many divergencies may 
also be noted. The Invocation, though reproducing Continental 
formulas 1 , is never embellished with the elongated cursive characters 
of the Roman and Prankish calligraphy. Moreover, in a great number 
of cases, no Invocation whatever is found. The Superscription, as 
we have seen, is distinguished in Old English charters by an in- 
formality of style which contrasts with the system of the foreign 
chanceries. It is true that in the majority of the later charters the 
style Dei gratia rex A nglorum resembles the parallel Prankish formula, 
but this leaves a large number of irregular forms in the earlier pages 
of the Codex. 

In the composition of the Final Protocol, we have still stronger 
evidence of the informalities resulting from the absence of a notarial 
system. The words announcing the execution of the instrument 
are usually wanting or imperfect and there is no notice of the 
act of sealing. The phrase Acta instead of Scripta does indeed 
frequently occur till the middle of the loth century, but its disuse 
from that date is noticeable. Of the distinctly foreign Apprecatio 
it is only necessary to observe that such a phrase as In Dei nomine, 
feliciter, Amen occurs only in the worst type of forgery. 

In the case of the Attestation clause we have to distinguish care- 
fully between genuine and apocryphal instruments, but here too a 
progressive development of style is apparent. The early Signum 
manus is replaced by the equally stereotyped consensi et subscripsi, 
and this in turn by the characteristic flourishes of the loth and iith 
centuries. All these are perfectly regular, each in its own period, but 
the absence of a royal monogram and seal and of a notarial subscrip- 
tion gives an appearance of irregularity to the Subscriptions of the 
Old English diplomata which does not actually exist. 

The Protocols of a royal charter will naturally form that portion 
of the instrument which would be chiefly affected by notarial devices 
or by variations in the style of composition. The Text, on the 
other hand, will to some extent reflect certain constitutional and 
local peculiarities. In the case of the Old English charters the 
national characteristics are clearly displayed in the Dispositive 

1 Perhaps the characteristic English form is Regnante Christo in distinction to the 
Continental In nomine sanctae et individual Trinitatis. 

H. 13 



194 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

clause 1 . The Preamble and Sanction, however, bear a general 
resemblance to the corresponding clauses of Continental diplomata. 
Here the usual themes are introduced, the transitory nature of human 
possessions and the advantage of exchanging these for more lasting 
treasures ; the duty of worthy monarchs towards the Church or the 
importance of recording temporal grants by reason of the uncertainty 
of life and the deceitfulness of human nature. At the same time we 
can recognize considerable variety, and even elegance, in the diction 
employed which reminds us not infrequently of the style of the 
pontifical chancery, especially when the Preamble opens with a sen- 
tentious expression 2 which seems to dispense with the necessity for an 
Invocation. 

It is a well-known feature of the style of the Continental 
chanceries that the consecutive formulas begin with recognized catch- 
words. In the case of the Old English charters these distinctions are 
far less obvious and usually occur only in the Exposition of the Grant 
and the Sanction. The absence of one of these familiar introits is due 
to the omission in Old English diplomata of the Notification, which, 
like the Address, only occurs in irregular forms. In the place of a 
Notification, therefore, the Preamble is followed immediately by the 
Exposition with which it is connected, as usual, by such words as 
Quapropter, Quamobrem, &c. 

This clause may briefly refer to the circumstances or motive of 
the grant, as in the familiar Old English formulas pro rentedio et salute 
animce mece; pro ejus placabili pecunia. It has been previously observed 
that the long and circumstantial narrations which occur in Old 
English and Continental diplomata alike are suspicious in the case of 
the former, at least. These interpolations, however, are not confined 
to the Exposition but are sometimes introduced into the Grant and 
Sanction, and even into the Dating and Attesting clauses 3 . 

The essential words of the Grant itself do not differ materially 
from foreign formulas. Nevertheless it is this disposing clause which 
furnishes the most marked characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon " land- 
boc." It is usually announced by the personal statement of the 
grantor, followed by the words of concession to the grantee 4 , with a 
brief description of the estate conveyed, and a note of the conditions 

1 We have seen that the Narrative clause usually amounts to no more than a parenthesis. 

2 This frequently takes the form of a Scriptural text. 

3 These are particularly suspicious when they occur as part of a new paragraph introduced 
by the word Insttper. 

4 In the second or the third person. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 195 

or limitations of the Grant, or of the consideration for the same, if 
introduced here instead of in the Exposition. 

In each of these clauses there is ample scope for an expression of 
the national polity, and the rich harvest of constitutional and philo- 
logical terms thus preserved has been already reaped and garnered by 
industrious and skilful hands. It will be sufficient, therefore, to repeat 
that there are several features of the Old English formulas which may 
be regarded as national distinctions, such as the careful identification 
of the locality of the Grant and the description of its boundaries 
expressed in the vernacular calligraphy and diction. Indeed, we are 
almost tempted to conjecture that in some cases space may have been 
left by the scribe for the insertion of these particulars by a special 
" telligraphist," just as space was left for the rubric in copying 
MSS. 

Again, there is the well-known reservation of the Trinoda Neces- 
sitas, in connexion with the exemption from public burdens or royal 
exactions, together with the enumeration of particular liberties. 

The Sanction peculiar to these Anglo-Saxon charters is usually of 
a combined comminatory and promissory character. The introit Si 
quis will be very familiar to all students of the Codex, but a variant 
occurs with the words Atigentibus and Minuentibus. 

It has often been remarked that the Old English diplomata differ 
from the Continental by the omission of all mention of the compensa- 
tion to be exacted for transgression. It might be added that the 
absence of the numerous provisos found in the Final clauses of the 
foreign types constitutes a further distinction, though some traces 
of an Injunctive or Prohibitive clause might possibly be found in 
genuine charters and can be clearly distinguished in the later verna- 
cular writs. 

The Old English diplomata which may be most profitably 
examined for the purpose of diplomatic study are perhaps those 
which range in point of date from the end of the 7th century to the 
middle of the loth. Amongst these, the charters of the 7th and 8th 
centuries, being comparatively few in number, of a very miscellaneous 
character, and for the most part of doubtful authenticity, may be 
conveniently grouped together with the general characteristics of 
irregularity of form and traces of foreign influence. In the next 
group might be comprised the royal charters of the pth century and 
beyond, to the reign of ^Ethelstan. This is a period fertile in 
originals and forgeries, but the sequence of formulas is, on the 
whole, well-preserved and the kingly style is becoming fixed. Finally, 

132 



196 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

with the reign of Eadward the Elder, certain formulas are more or 
less recurrent ; but of the diplomata of this king so many are con- 
firmations, innovations, narrations, so many indeed are later apo- 
graphs, that the inception of the new style must be deferred to the 
reign of ^Ethelstan. 

The third period begins with this reign and lasts till that of Cnut. 
For the first time we recognize the consistent use of appropriate 
formulas which recur, with the greatest precision, in the several dip- 
lomatic types to which they respectively belong. Thus a charter 
which begins with a Preamble in a certain form of words will 
usually contain a Superscription, Exposition, Grant, Sanction, Dating 
and Attesting clauses in an equally distinctive form ; that is to say, 
each of the charters which contains any one of these formulas will be 
found to agree with the other charters of the group in respect of 
this and the remaining formulas. 

There are of course variants and irregular forms, but these can 
scarcely affect the general proposition. And this is not all. We may 
even be able to ascertain that one or other of these distinctive forms is 
preferred during a certain period of the reign and that a particular 
form is employed for the composition of a batch of charters executed 
on the same occasion, or that it is especially affected by certain 
religious houses. 

This statement, however, is only true to a limited extent. It is 
certainly possible to point to well-marked formulas which appear to 
obtain during certain reigns and even during definite periods of those 
reigns 1 ; and it is also possible to show that a large proportion of a 
certain issue was appropriated by a particular house 2 . At the same 
time it would be found that there are numerous revivals or survivals 
of other equally important formulas extending over a considerable 
period, whilst we have to reckon here once more with the question of 
the authenticity of our existing texts 3 . 

In the reign of yEthelstan the Old English "land-boc" approaches 
the highest point of its development, as will appear from an analysis 
of formulas printed in the Appendix. An Invocation is prefixed to 
some thirty charters of this reign in the shape of a chrismon, but as 
comparatively few of these instruments have been preserved in a 

1 e.g. in the case of the forms Flebilia fortiter used between the years 931 and 933, 
Fortunafallentis saeculi between 934 and 937 and Egregius agonista in 938 and 939. Cf. 
Crawford Charters, IV. 1. 21 note, and 1. 40 note. 

2 Thus five out of the ten forms Flebilia fortiter may be assigned to the church of 
Winchester. 

3 Cf. CrauforJ Charters, p. 1 1 1 . 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 197 

contemporary form, some allowance should be made for possible 
embellishments. The favourite openings of this formula would seem 
to~ be Regnante Theo and In nomine Dei with several variants. 
As the choice of an English scribe in the case of Invocations was 
comparatively limited, the recurrence of these variants is not sur- 
prising. On the other hand the Preamble which offers a greater 
scope for individuality of design affords a far surer test of systematic 
composition. 

A Preamble is found in not fewer than 55 of king ^Ethelstan's 
charters, and of these several are found in combination with the 
appropriate formulas before referred to 1 . Thus in the case of the ten 
charters in which the Preamble begins with the words Flebilia fortiter 
detestanda* , there is no Invocation, the Superscription contains the 
periphrasis per omnipatrantis dexteram> for Dei gratia , the Exposition 
begins with Qua de- re, the essential word of the Grant is tribuo, the 
Sanction begins with Si autem and the Dating clause with Hnjus 
namque. Finally, the royal Subscription usually contains the words 
ierarchia praeditus rex 3 . 

It will be noticed that in the great majority of charters which 
contain three typical Preambles of this reign an Invocation clause 
is not present 4 . In the remaining examples, with a few isolated 
exceptions 5 , the Preamble is preceded by an Invocation with which it 
is either skilfully blended" or else distinguished by such words as 
Quoniam 1 or Quamvis*. 

As for the themes of the several Preambles of this reign, it is 
perhaps enough to say that they are of the conventional types which 
are familiar to us in the diplomatic writings of other periods and other 
countries. That they contain any indications of the authenticity 
or otherwise of the several charters, or any allusions of historical or 
even of diplomatic interest might be a somewhat rash assertion, but 
as to the beauty and general purity of their style there can be no 
doubt. 

It has been already stated that the notice of an Exposition 
is an innovation in the recognized classification of the Old English 
diplomata. During this period, apart from the well-marked presence 
of the clause and its position with regard to the Preamble and Grant, 

1 Above p. 196. 2 C. S. 635, 674, 675, 677, 689, 691, 692, 694, 695, 696. 

3 In several cases with variants (see Appendix). 

4 See Appendix. 

5 e.g. C. S. 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 680, 681, 701, 713. 

6 As in the majority of Charters beginning Regnante. 

" Cf. C. S. 690. 8 Cf. C. S. 683. 



198 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

it usually contains nothing beyond the expression of a motive, 
material or spiritual, as the case may be. In a very few cases, 
however, the Exposition shows some approach to a narration or 
recital, or even a discursive tendency 1 . 

Besides the appropriate catch-words found in the Expositions 
of the special diplomatic forms given in an Appendix, certain inter- 
esting variants are found in the remaining charters of this reign. 
Quapropter is, of course, the favourite introit, and, next to this, Qua 
de re and Quamobrem. Unde and Proinde are obvious alternatives, 
but a pleasing variant is seen in Cujus amore*. At the same time 
it will be found that in a number of cases the Grant is simply 
announced with the words Ego jEthelstanus. This is especially 
noticeable in those charters which have an Invocation clause but 
no Preamble 3 . 

The Grant being, with the exception of the Date, that part of the 
Old English charter which has received most attention from modern 
scholars, it is only necessary to refer briefly to its scope and com- 
position. Moreover, as the usual subject of these charters is a Grant 
of land, it will be evident that the clause in question must naturally 
be of a uniform nature. This, at least, is the case in the reign of 
^thelstan, the announcement, description and conditions of the 
Grant being all well preserved. It will be seen by reference to the 
forms printed in an Appendix that of the disposing words the most 
characteristic is tribuo with variants such as condono, concede, &c. 

As the vernacular description of the boundaries had formed an 
essential part of the Anglo-Saxon charter from the early part of the 
previous century it need scarcely be said that it appears in all the 
regular diplomata of this reign. 

The Sanction, like the Preamble, is, as we have seen, capable of 
considerable variation, and, unlike the latter clause, a characteristic 
formula cannot be distinguished in the linked charters above referred 
to. But most of these variations are merely verbal flourishes, and the 
Sanction might be called the Si quis clause with as much truth in 
yEthelstan's reign as in any other. One remarkable exception, how- 
ever, occurs in the substitution of a " glacial " curse for the usual 
threats of eternal fire. It has been suggested by an eminent scholar 4 
that the charters containing this formula were the compositions of 

1 C. S. 667, 670- 2 Cf. C. S. 663, 664, 667, 669, 745 for other variants. 

3 For a confusion of this formula, see C. S. 660 and 746. 

4 Sir F. Pollock who kindly called the writer's attention to this interesting variation in 
the year 1896. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 199 

a scribe who had crossed the Alps and whose impressions of the 
journey have given an unusually realistic touch to this conventional 
clause. Curiously enough the use of this formula is confined to a 
period of ten years between 937 and 947 1 , and would appear to have 
been affected by a small group of religious houses 2 which may have 
had a special interest in a legend of the Alps 3 . 

Returning to the Protocols of the charters of this reign, the style 
of the royal Superscription and Subscription will be found con- 
sistently preserved in the linked charter-formulas analysed in an 
Appendix, and, speaking generally, the Superscription of this king 
should contain, in addition to the .title rex Anglorum, a reference to 
the royal sway over these islands. This style is commonly repeated 
in the Subscription with the addition of the conventional words which 
denote the apposition of the Signum Cruets. 

At the same time it will be seen from the analysis given in the 
Appendix that a large margin must be left for the individual taste of 
the casual composer, the royal title being often given in such an 
archaic form as ALthelstanus rex, or rex Anglorum, or even Angul- 
Saxonum. 

The Subscriptions of the witnesses at large show a distinct 
advance in respect of uniformity, the usual formula being Ego A. 
consensi et snbscripsi. There are a few slight flourishes in the signa- 
tures of the bishops. The signature of the primate is frequently 
distinguished by the formula Cum trophaeo agyae crucis consignavi, 
whilst the characteristic signature of the bishop of Winchester is still 
more striking. 

The Dating clause affords one more evidence of the precision of 
these linked formulas. Thus a charter of yEthelstan which begins with 
the Preamble FlebiliafortiterdetestandaovFortunafallentis saeculi will 
have a Dating clause beginning Hujus namque ; whilst a charter be- 
ginning with N eminent quippe or Egregius agonista will commence the 
Dating clause with Acta est. In other cases we find the usual order 



1 C. S. 714, 728, 734, 741, 753, 756, 757, 759, 767, 781, 783, 813, 821, the majority of 
which belong to the reign of Edmund. 

2 Christchurch (Canterbury), Winchester, Bath, Wilton, and later copyists (probably) at 
Shaftesbury, Wells, Malmesbury and Abingdon. 

3 That the dangers of this mediaeval journey were impressive may be gathered from the 
weird legend preserved by William of Malmesbury (Gesta Pontificum, 25) which relates how 
the curse of Archbishop Odo overtook /Elfsige, Bishop of Winchester, in the frozen passes of 
the Alps. Still more significant is the passage in which John of Salisbury writing from the 
Great St Bernard prays to be released from " this place of torment " (cf. Stubbs, Oxford 
Lectures, p. 128). 



2OO The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

of the formulas reversed and the charter begins Anno Dominicae 
incarnationis 1 , &c. 

It was not to be expected that a series of elegant formulas should 
begin and end with the reign of ^Ethelstan. Some of these, especially 
the forms of the Invocation, can be traced back to the reign of Alfred 
or even earlier, whilst others again recur in the charters of this king's 
immediate successors 2 . In some respects, indeed, it might be held that 
in the reigns of Eadmund, Eadred and Eadwy the Old English 
diplomata reach their highest state of natural development. That is 
to say, there is, all things considered, evidence of greater originality 
and resourcefulness than we can find in the more artificial and 
irregular forms of the later Anglo-Saxon monarchy. In proof of this 
it would be found that the scribes of the later period have constant 
recourse to the conventional formulas of earlier dictators, unless these 
manifest revivals are to be attributed to the deliberate imitations of 
unscrupulous fabricators. 

The formulas of Eadmund are particularly interesting. The style 
of the Superscriptions and Subscriptions of this king resemble those 
of .^Lthelstan, and there is, of course, little change to be noticed in the 
phraseology of the Invocation, Grant, Sanction 3 and Date. On the 
whole there is a larger proportion of Invocations, and many distinc- 
tive Preambles are preceded by Regnante, In nomine, or some such 
formula 4 . With these we have a recurrence of older formulas, which 
indeed reappear at intervals down to the reign of the Confessor 5 . 

The charters of Eadred are also characterized by mingled grace 
and simplicity and a characteristic formula of Subscription appears 
as indeclinabiliter snbscripsi. In one case, at least, we meet with 
a charter modelled on the Continental system, and this must neces- 
sarily be regarded with suspicion 6 . 

Under Eadwy the conventional Preambles, which have already 
undergone several modifications 7 , are conspicuously florid. The 
Superscription of this king also affects the imperial style which is 
such a noticeable feature of the diplomata of this later period 8 . 

The reign of Eadgar furnishes nearly 300 diplomata of one sort 
or another, and these present us with a considerable variety of 

1 See Appendix. 2 Cf. Crawford Charters, p. 1 1 1 . 

3 It is noticeable that Ananias and Sapphira are frequently introduced in the place of Judas. 

4 Cf. C. S. 749, 791, 796, 808. For exceptions to this practice, cf. C. S. 763, 768, 770, 
776, 786. 

5 Cf. C. S. 752, 798, 814, 817. 6 C. S. 860. 

7 Cf. C. S. 867, 868, 901, 955, 964, 982, 986, 1031. 

8 He is also described as indnstritts Rex (or Basiletis). 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 201 

formulas, though the general character of the period is still a con- 
servative one 1 . The Preambles, however, are of a didactic and 
Scriptural type. In the royal style Dei gratia occurs, usually, in 
forgeries of Westminster and Croyland. A typical Attesting clause 
has been noted in conjunction with appropriate formulas 2 . 

With few exceptions the same remarks might apply to the 
examples 'of the fourth period of Old English diplomatic writings, 
which extends from the invasion of Cnut to the Norman Conquest. 
So far as the regular diplomata of this period are concerned, beyond 
the final evolution of the royal style 3 , there is very little variation in 
the now stereotyped formulas, the old familiar Invocations and Pre- 
ambles recurring with monotonous regularity 4 as though the scribes of 
this later age suffered from poverty of invention. 

At the same time we must date from the beginning of this period 
the rapid development of a novel method of diplomatic composition 
which was destined to supersede entirely the typical forms of the Old 
English charter in the course of the following century. At least as 
early as the reign of Eadgar we begin to notice the presence of a new 
class of diplomatic instruments in the pages of our Codex. These 
diplomata are written entirely in the Old English character and 
language. Not only so, but they include during the nth century 
a class of instruments composed in a style that is totally distinct from 
that of the Latin charters of the period, a style so precise and so well 
adapted to the growing requirements of the kingly state, that it 
survived the Conquest itself and forms the basis of the royal writ 
which has been continuously employed down to our own time. 

The importance of the above innovation will be easily recognized; 
but the fact is one that may seem to stand in need of something more 
than mere assertion. Stated in the briefest possible way the case is 
this, that the Old English writ is found to contain the elements, at 
least, of a Superscription, Address, Salutation, Notification, Exposi- 
tion, Disposition, Date and Attestation. Thus it is seen to approach 
more closely to the Continental type than the insular Latin charter. 
In fact we have here an epistolary style represented by certain 
formulas 4 which have not hitherto been observed in the native diplo- 



1 Cf. C. S. 1074, 1259, I2 77 

2 By the editors of the Crawford Charters (p. 117). The formula is as follows: Serif ta 
tst hitjus donationis singrapha, hits testibus eonsentientibits, quorum inferius nomina 
caraxantur. 

a Cf. C. D. DCCLXXIV, DCCLXXXIII, DCCXCII, DCCXCVI, &C. 
4 i.e. the Address, Salutation, Notification and Valediction. 



2O2 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

mata, whilst other formulas 1 , which are especially characteristic of 
the latter instruments, are suppressed or greatly modified. 

That is to say, whilst the Invocation and Preamble are omitted, 
the Exposition and Disposition develop new and distinct formulas 
with a tendency, in the case of the latter, towards the insertion of 
final clauses after the Continental fashion. Finally, it may be 
observed that the scope and purpose of the writ itself are conducive 
to that brevity and precision which are associated with the native 
post-Conquest formulas. 

In the vernacular instruments to which we have referred it will be 
found that the Superscription hitherto remarkable for its diflfuseness 
is the simplest and the most consistent of all these formulas. It 
comprises the royal style in the words Ic A. cynige, or, merely, 
A. cynige, and no more. As no Subscriptions are appended to the 
Old English writ, this formula may be regarded as an anticipation of 
the brevity of the later official style employed on like occasions. 
Whether we should go a step further and assume that this informality 
of style and neglect of an official Subscription may be explained, in 
this case, by the use of a royal seal, is one of those vexed questions 
which we have already learnt to expect in the study of Old English 
diplomata 2 . 

The Superscription of this writ is followed by an Address, a 
clause which is now found for the first time. Its usual form is that of 
a particular or local and not a general address 3 . The persons usually 
addressed are the Bishop or Earl, or both, together with all the King's 
thegns within a certain shire; in fact all the officials of .the County 
Court. In some well-known cases the Address includes the officers 
in every shire in which the beneficiary has lands. This Address, 
therefore, unlike the Superscription, is not merely conventional. On 
the other hand, the Salutation and Notification, which follow it, 
consist of stereotyped phrases, interesting only on account of their 
exact correspondence with the parallel formulas of the later Anglo- 
Norman writ 4 . 

The Exposition which should introduce the Text of the instru- 
ment is seldom clearly marked. Even in the regular Latin diploma 
of the period, as we have seen, its presence is obscure, and in a writ 

1 i.e. the Invocation, Preamble, Disposition and Sanction. 

2 See above, p. 168 sq. 

3 A general or universal Address is sometimes found but this, especially when directed 
to the arch-bishops, bishops, abbots, earls, sheriffs, port reeves and household officers, may 
be regarded with suspicion. 

4 See below, p. 219. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 203 

there is obviously less need or scope for a recitation or narrative. At 
the same time we may regard this rudimentary clause as the precursor 
of the well-known Movent clause of the post-Conquest writ. Here 
it is usually an expression of the royal will, revealing a benevolent or 
pious motive 1 . More rarely an actual recital or narrative is given of 
the circumstances which immediately led to the issue of the present 
instrument, or a former donative or conveyance is recited by way 
of certification. 

The Dispositive clause which represents the Grant of the regular 
diploma is at once the most characteristic and the least regular of 
any other portion of the Old English writ. In a majority of cases it 
must be regarded as a precept confirming or completing the privi- 
leges or possessions already conveyed by a former grant. In other 
cases, however, these are actually granted or conveyed by the writ 
itself, though whether such instruments (like those of a later period) 
should be designated as writs or as charters, or whether they are 
in all cases genuine, are questions which are deserving of some 
consideration. 

The Dispositive clause, then, in the typical Old English writ takes 
the form of a declaration or precept which is usually expressed in one 
or other of two very similar forms. The first of these follows a brief 
Notification, closely resembling that of later times, stating that the 
King, from certain motives, has granted or confirmed the following 
parcels or privileges ; to which is usually added, by way of a Final 
clause, a Prohibition, intimating that nothing will be permitted to 
prejudice the benefit of the said grant. The second form is that of a 
mere precept for securing peaceful possession of a privilege or property 
without any statement of a grant. Each of these variations furnishes 
distinct formulas. In the one case the usual expression is ic habbe 
geunnen, with certain variants. In the other the injunction may take 
a greater variety of forms 2 . 

The description of the premises granted or confirmed is usually 
expressed in the same terms as those found in Latin charters of the 

1 e.g. For mynre sawle & for ealre mynra maga and for aelre there Kynga sawle the 
aefter me, &*c. 

2 A number of examples will be found in the Codex Diplomaticus between Nos. 
DCCCXXVII and DCCCXCVI. Here the O.E. letters have been modernized. Such forms as 
Ic wille tkaet A. habben, or friglice habben ; or thaet that land at X. lige into A. / that 
allc (hinge lige into A. ; thaet the Sokne lige into A. ; thaet A. werie now hiss land ; 
thaet A. beo his landes wrthe ; or his saca wrthe and his socna are commonly found. The 
Injunctive or Prohibitive clauses referred to will be easily recognized by the respective 
introits And ic wille ; And ic bidde, or And ic nella; And ic wille nan, &c. 



204 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

period. In some cases this description is contained in the recital of 
a former grant or convention and, as in the case of the post-Conquest 
writ-charter, we constantly find that the conditions of the Grant are 
specified or its provisions amplified in a final clause which furnishes 
several persistent and instructive formulas. One of these, which 
might be called the Mid saca and mid socna clause, sets forth the 
special liberties or jurisdiction appertaining to the premises in an 
alliterative jingle 1 . This clause is frequently rounded off, like the 
general Dispositive clause, by a compendious phrase which has its 
equivalent in the post-Conquest diplomata 2 . The other clause, which 
might be called the Swa ful and swa forth clause, contains a specifi- 
cation of title which again exactly corresponds to the familiar Ita 
sicut clause of I2th century Grants and Confirmations 3 . The second 
swa (answering to sicut) is followed by the example, which may be 
either personal or impersonal 4 . In several cases a secondary clause 
follows in which swa swa is repeated with a further example. 

In addition to the above regular formulas there are several isolated 
phrases that are characteristic of these Old English writs. For 
instance, we can recognize, in several cases, the equivalent of the 
Latin Sanction 5 . Again, the place of this modified Sanction may be 
taken by a pious ejaculation (reminding us of the Continental Appre- 
catio) or even by a simple valediction 6 . 

More rarely some traces of Dating and Attesting clauses are 
found 7 ; but these are usually associated with Old English versions of 
regular diplomata. 

The question will naturally be asked, " Whence is this Old English 
royal writ derived?" It appears suddenly in the Codex side by side 
with the formal charters to which it bears no resemblance either in 
structure or in phraseology. Clearly then it is not evolved from the 
native Latin diplomata. Again, in spite of its general diplomatic 
affinities with the Continental diploma, the original of the Old English 

1 Mid saca & mid socna, mid toll & mid team and mid infangene thof, o-v. ; On wade 
& on falde ; hi strande & bi lande, &c. This clause is reproduced in post-Conquest 
charters. 

2 One form is found as mid alle thare thingan thaet tharto harth (or belempneth) and the 
other as And on alle (othere) thingan. 

3 Ita plene, &c. sicut A. plenius, &c. In some cases the formula runs swa fill d^ swa 
forth Cr 3 swa fre, swa, &c. 

4 e.g. swa hit mesilfen formest on hande stod ; swa lange swa heo libbe, swa ani man 
firmest hauede. 

5 And gif anig man, &c. 

8 Cf. Be godes bletstmge Be Codes leve and be mine God eow alle gehealde, and gife eoio 
ece salthe, Amen ! 

7 Cf. This... woes gemaced aet Windlesoren on feorthe Easter daeg on gewitnysse. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 205 

writ cannot be traced in any foreign chancery. It is true that several 
of its most characteristic formulas exactly correspond with those of 
the later Anglo-Norman writ, to which a foreign origin is usually 
assigned ; but this is a coincidence that gives rise to a further 
problem. 

The Old English royal writ which has been described above is 
almost exclusively confined to the reign of the Confessor. A few 
isolated examples of earlier date may, however, be found extending 
back to the reign of ^Ethelred, but these are either mere narratives or 
apographs of a somewhat later date 1 . In addition to these belated 
writs, we meet with certain vernacular versions of regular Latin 
diplomata 2 , but these cannot be regarded as independent forms, 
being merely literal and often unintelligent translations. In other 
cases 3 we have apparently original compositions, reproducing in Old 
English idioms the phraseology and formulas of regular Latin diplo- 
mata. Here we may find an Invocation, followed by a Superscrip- 
tion, Address, Notification, Grant with Boundaries, Sanction, Date 
and Attestation 4 . 

Again, there is still another class of vernacular diplomata in the 
form of later English versions of Old English texts 5 . In precisely 
the same degree of relationship stand the avowed or obvious Latin 
versions of Anglo-Saxon charters such as those that were deliberately 
undertaken by the monk of Ramsey 6 . 

It may be possible to identify the source of these vernacular 
versions if not of the Old English writ in a class of instruments of 
which numerous examples will be found in the Codex. These are 
the Old English conventions, wills, and other private deeds consti- 
tuting a series of somewhat uncouth diplomata, but nevertheless 
containing, embedded, as it were, in their diffuse narrations, most of 
the essential formulas of the Old English writ. A large proportion 
of these irregular feoffments is included under the general appellation 
of " Anglo-Saxon Wills." Indeed the earliest specimens that have 

1 Cf. the interesting form contained in a Christ-Church "land-hoc" of the time of Harold 
Haranfot (C. D. DCCLVIII). Here the King's writ is recited in the body of the docu- 
ment. 

3 Cf. C. D, DCCCLIII, MCCCXLI. But we even find an old English version of a Papal 
Bull of the /th century (C. S. 48), besides merely farcical versions of nth century charters 
and 1 3th century Letters Missive. 

3 C. D. DCCCXI.IV, DCCCXCVI. 

4 The inclusion of an Address and Notification may indicate a Continental dictator. 

5 Haec est translatio cartae Regis Edwardi in lingua Saxonica, translata in linguam 
Anglicanam (C. D. DCCCLXVii). 

8 Chron. de Rameseia (Rolls), p. 161, and Excheq. K. R. Transcripts of Deeds Various. 



206 The Anglo-Saxon Charters 

survived, extending back far into the 9th century 1 , are undoubtedly 
of this nature, although the distinction in point of diplomatic con- 
struction between these so-called " wills " and other vernacular con- 
veyances or conventions, including manumissions, is hardly noticeable 2 . 
The further circumstance that practically all these are private and 
not royal instruments is of small moment, since in many cases they 
are stated to be executed with the sanction of the King or Witan, and 
in any case the diplomatic method which, they disclose would have 
been available for the composition of royal instruments in the verna- 
cular style 3 . 

A careful examination of these primitive deeds will present us 
with the following rudimentary formulas. There is a conventional 
Invocation 4 , which, however, is frequently dispensed with, and a very 
concise Superscription 5 , which may be used in direct or oblique 6 
oration. A Notification 7 is chiefly found in narrative forms and is 
frequently used, as in post-Conquest deeds, for an opening sentence 8 . 
The Address is not clearly marked, with the like analogy 9 . There is 
a conventional Exposition 10 which is often repeated in the later clauses. 
The essential portion of these instruments is the Dispositive clause, 
to which Injunctive or Prohibitive clauses are frequently added 11 . 
There is also the well-known clause of Reservation, which is a 
characteristic condition of the post-obit feoffment, namely a specified 
term of enjoyment with reversion to the donor's residuary estate 12 . 
The Sanction is more or less curtailed, but is practically a version 
of the conventional Latin form 13 . Finally, there is in some cases a 
formal Dating clause and the Subscriptions of the witnesses are care- 
fully indicated 14 , whilst there is sometimes a personal attestation 15 . 

1 Cf. C. D. cccxvn, cccxxvn, cccxxvm, cccxxxix, ccccxxix, CCCCLXXVII, ccccxcn, 

DCLXXV, DCLXXVI, DCLXXX, DCLXXXI. Cf. C. D. DCLXXXV, DCXCIII, DCXCIV, DCXCIX, 
DCCIV, DCCVIII, DCCXVII, DCCXXII, DCCLXXXVIII, MCLXXIII, MCCLXXXVIII, MCCCII. 

2 Cf. C. S. 330, 405, 412, &c. 

3 Cf. above, p. 175 sq. 

4 In usses Drihtnes naman haelendfs Cristes. 

6 Ic A. mid Codes gaefe, &*c. 6 Her Swutelath, &c. thaet A. &c. 

7 Ic cythe. 8 Her cyth on tkisum gewrite thaet, 6-v. 

9 Cf. Notum sit universis per presentes, &c. 

10 God to lofe and ntinre sanle to alysednysse, &-Y. 

11 Ic wille thaet, &=<:. ne thafige thaet, 6rv. 

2 This is prominent in the deeds preserved by the churches of Christ Church and 
Worcester. 

13 Gief hwa...hit abrecan...butan he gecyre ; God aelmihtig hire awende...the this awende. 

14 Thes is to gewitnesse, &c.: This is seo hondsieten, &>c. 

15 A. mid minre agenre hande, &=c . . . gefastnie. Mention of the presence or consent of the 
King and Witan is also occasionally found. 



The Anglo-Saxon Charters 207 

At the same time it will be observed that the above Old English 
formulas are practically versions of those found in conventional Latin 
charters, and as such they differ materially from the royal writ which 
has discarded certain familiar formulas and evolved others from some 
unknown source. We certainly do not find amongst the existing 
diplomata of the 9th and loth centuries any close or persistent 
resemblance to the characteristic formulas of the Edwardian verna- 
cular writ, nevertheless we should perhaps attribute considerable 
importance to the early prominence of the Notification and to the 
injunctive tendency of the Dispositive clause in the Old English con- 
ventions referred to above. There is also the alternative solution that 
this Old English royal writ is derived from epistolary and not from 
diplomatic models, whilst, as we have seen, the authenticity of the 
whole class is a subject for serious consideration. 



ANGLO-NORMAN CHARTERS AND WRITS. 



(a) Anglo-Saxon Survivals. 

i 

IT will be evident from an examination of the formulas of the later 
Old English diplomata that the turning point in the evolution of the 
charter may be assigned to a date previous to the Conquest itself. 
We have seen that from the close of the loth century the Latin 
" land-boc " had begun to give place to the vernacular " writ." This 
Old English writ served as a model for the post-Conquest writ, from 
which in turn the true post-Conquest charter was evolved. In that 
transitional instrument more ample diplomatic formulas were grafted 
on to the vigorous stem of the native writ 1 . Long before the close of 
the 1 2th century this hybrid growth had superseded the older stock 
of native charters, and in the substituted style of " Letters Patent " it 
has survived to our own times. 

Assuming that the diplomatic construction of the post-Conquest 
writ is practically identical with that of the pre-Conquest " gewritte," 
we are naturally tempted to surmize that the former is practically 
a version of the latter from a diplomatic point of view. In the 
first place it has been suggested that this Anglo-Norman writ, 
which obviously reproduces the essential features of its Old English 
precursor, has no exact parallel in the Continental chanceries before 
the beginning of the 12th century 2 . Therefore, unless earlier Conti- 
nental forms once existed, or unless practically the whole of these 
Old English types are fictitious versions of a later date, the above 
conclusion would seem to be inevitable. And yet it can scarcely be 
denied that the Old English formulas might be ultimately traced to 
an external source 8 , and it would perhaps be more correct to assert 
that the originality of the Old English writ chiefly depends on the 
view that the existing formulas were easily adapted to a new type of 
diplomatic composition 4 . 

1 Cf. W. H. Stevenson in E. H. R. xi. 733. 2 Above, p. 204. 

3 Cf. Brunner, Schwurgericht, 76 84, as to the analogy of the Prankish Indiculuin. 

4 It will be seen later that no less dexterity was displayed by later mediaeval and even by 
post- mediaeval clerks in evolving idiomatic formulas in the vernacular from instruments under 
the Smaller Seals. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 209 

It might indeed be possible, at the expense of some ingenuity, to 
advance a fairly plausible argument in favour of another theory of 
diplomatic construction, whereby the Old English writ would seem 
to be the vernacular version of a post-Conquest Latin form. For the 
mere possibility of this suggestion we have to thank the industrious 
forgers of the church of Westminster and their followers at St Paul's 
and St Edmund's ; but apart from the suspicions that might attach 
to the specimens preserved in these collections, the originating in- 
fluence of the Old English writ could be maintained by other 
arguments. 

It is significant that the earliest surviving specimens of the Anglo- 
Norman writ are couched in the vernacular and reproduce the con- 
ventional forms of the Old English Scriptorium. It is true that 
bilingual instruments exist at an early date, which have been regarded 
either as English or Latin versions according to individual opinion 1 . 
It is also true that Latin writs of the earlier years of the Conqueror's 
reign have been preserved in various cartularies 2 ; but the existence 
of such forms merely affects the question of the date at which the 
typical post-Conquest writ in its new official Latin garb superseded 
the vernacular form, which unquestionably prevailed before and at the 
Conquest. Even the authenticity of these early Latin forms (which 
for the most part should be accepted with the utmost caution) does 
not affect the issue ; for, whether they are genuine or not, the proba- 
bility of the change of style having been effected within a measurable 
period is sufficiently obvious. 

The difficulty which exists in identifying the exact process of this 
official conversion has been perhaps increased by the reckless produc- 
tion of " versions " by interested parties 8 . Herein, doubtless the 
motive of the monkish scribe was identical with that of the royal 
clerk, but whereas the versions of Old English writs made to order by 
the former are usually quite unintelligent, those which are derived 
from the royal chancery present us with what was practically a new 
type of diplomatic composition. It would seem indeed that an 
idiomatic Latin version of an Old English writ was beyond the 

1 Cf. F. Liebermann as to a bilingual ordinance of this period in Athfn&um, i Sept. 1893. 

2 Few if any of these have survived in their original form. The monastic collections 
which include the charters of Gloucester, Ely, Ramsey, Abingdon, Rochester, Worcester, 
St Albans, St Augustine's, &c. are well known. The official enrolments are partially 
described in the iqth Report of the Deputy Keeper. 

8 Quae etiam nostra usitata sermonatione describi mandavimus...quo possint in auribus 
vulgi sonare, ne aliqua scrupulositale, &c. writes the Ely fabricator of an Old English 
charter in Latin with a i3th century version appended. 

H. 14 



2io Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

powers of an untrained scribe 1 , though less difficulty was experienced 
in the production of a tolerable English version of a Latin original. 
When we meet with such phrases as Salutat amicabiliter for gret 
freondlice, Ego demonstro vobis for Ic cythe eow, and Dominus vos 
conservet for God eow gehealde, we know without further inspection 
that we have to do with a I2th or ijth century version, home-made, 
of an " Old English " writ. But when the same instrument was 
used as a model by the royal chaplains, the ancient practice of the 
Continental chanceries supplied technical equivalents for the familiar 
phrases of the vernacular. Salutem and sciatis remained in fashion 
when Lancastrian clerks were ringing the changes on the Old English 
formulas with "we greet you heartily" 2 or "we let you wit." In some 
cases, however, the official scribe avoided linguistic difficulties by the 
simple device of omission ; whilst in the case of the writ itself he 
imported the Dating clause of the regular diploma to take the place 
of the Old English epistolary valediction 3 . 

A further difficulty which besets the study of the origin of the 
post-Conquest diplomata is due t'o the prevailing and long standing 
confusion between the charter and the writ. It is well-known that 
the Old English charter survived the Conquest, like the Old English 
writ, and may equally be regarded as an approved official instrument 
during a certain period, which is also not very clearly defined. 
Certainly there is nothing improbable in this survival, which was 
assisted by political expediency. It is, however, unfortunate that 
nearly all the existing examples of this archaic type are suspicious 
in themselves, many being forgeries of a grotesque kind. Especially 
must we be on our guard when even, in otherwise irreproachable 
forms, a clause announcing sealing is introduced, though no seal is 
affixed. 

However, these misgivings as to the credibility of individual 

1 The Ramsey historian, however, explains that the vernacular charters to his church 
have been "idiomatically" rendered by him from English into Latin. This is probably a 
deliberate misstatement. 

2 It is noticeable that the French versions which were especially in favour during this 
later period show a decided tendency to follow the vernacular rather than the Latin idioms. 
Thus we have nous vous salttons souvent as the equivalent of "we greet you heartily." 

8 It would seem that continental clerks, even in Normandy itself, were quite incapable of 
an intelligent version of Old English forms. A typical effort of this description dated at 
Rouen in u 19 is preserved in the Colchester cartulary. Here we have a Preamble followed 
by a Superscription and Exposition introduced by the O. E. tag Horum namque exemplo. 
The Dispositive clause is succeeded by elaborate Final clauses, including penal and promissory 
clauses, with an O.E. Sanction added. A formal Appreciation, Deo gratias soleinniter et 
feliciter, follows the date (which is glossed as the year of the Prince's marriage) and the 
Charter is subscribed with crosses by the distinguished witnesses. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 2 1 1 

specimens need not deter us from accepting this type of instrument 
as one of the earliest (if not the very first) in use after the Conquest. 
Its devolution far into the I2th century may be (perhaps charitably) 
explained by the same political motive ; neither need we gaze in 
dismay at the gilded crosses, wondrous seals and still more singular 
subscriptions with which certain of these charters are embellished, for 
the Norman chancery itself appears to have admitted a dual form of 
execution 1 . 

The real importance of the survival of the Old English "land-boc" 
in the post-Conquest period lies in another circumstance. This instru- 
ment, composed in the " grand style " of the continental chanceries, 
though without their diplomatic excrescences and notarial accessaries, 
provided, as we have seen, the ceremonial formulas which, when added 
to the diplomatic outline of the Anglo-Norman writ, furnished the 
1 2th century chancery with a "new-model" charter. It might of 
course be argued that these later formulas could have been imported 
direct from the continent. On the other hand, the absence of 
notarial indications and the analogy of the evolution of the writ make 
this supposition unnecessary. The general construction of the 
formulas in question, the details of the royal style, the appropriate 
Address, the circumstances and conditions of the Movent and Dis- 
positive clauses and the profuse Attestation bespeak an insular 
origin. 

(b) The Anglo-Norman charter and writ. 

So then the Anglo-Norman charter was made, but no sooner 
made than confounded with the writ by antiquaries from the I2th 
century to our own time 2 . The habit would appear to be incorrigible, 
and it has to answer for many grave misstatements and misunder- 
standings. Unfortunately the lack of a Cartnlarium Anglo-Normanni- 
cum, and the further difficulty of accepting certain doubtful examples, 
must leave the approximate date at which this new form was 
introduced in considerable obscurity : at least it does not seem to 
have been in common use before the last years of the nth century. 
In the reign of Henry I it is in full vigour, although it does not 
assume its final form until the middle of the I2th century. It is 
clearly a matter of much consequence to ascertain, on the one hand, 

1 A typical form of these antiquarian forgeries of the nth century is that of the charter 
of Henry I to Shrewsbury Abbey (W. Farrer, Early Lancashire Charters, p. 271). 

2 Breve est, non Carta is an early gloss which may be found in the inventory prefixed to 
the Ramsey Cartulary. 

14 2 



212 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

the uses to which the two new types of diplomata were put during 
the century following the Conquest and, on the other hand, the 
distinctions that exist between each and in turn between these and 
the diplomatic instruments of an earlier and later period. 

To take the latter distinction first. It may be suggested that it 
would appear from a reference to a considerable number of existing 
types 1 that the chief distinction between the post-Conquest and pre- 
Conquest royal diplomata, irrespective of their diplomatic construction, 
lies in the application of the former to many other uses than were 
apparent in an earlier age. In addition to grants and demises, the 
enjoyment of various liberties was an important consideration to the 
later baron or knight and the newly recognized corporate bodies ; 
whilst for the serjeant or clerk the royal benevolence opened up a 
boundless vista of lucrative offices. These and other subjects of 
diplomatic activity gave rise inevitably to distinctive diplomatic 
forms. For example the newly developed jurisdiction over the royal 
forests produced a long sequence of grants of exclusive right of 
warren, grants of assarted lands and writs of exemption from assart 
fines or forestal jurisdiction in which distinctive and consistent forms 
are observable from the reign of Henry I to much later times. 
Similarly a recognized form for the grant of a market or fair was 
differentiated at a very early date, while the special features presented 
by charters of liberties will be sufficiently familiar. 

Again, it is unnecessary to instance the multiplication during this 
period of appropriate instruments concerned with the administration 
of justice and finance 2 . Finally, apart from fresh grants or special 
processes, a new field of diplomatic activity and fiscal profit was 
being developed in the confirmation of previous concessions 3 . At the 
same time the diplomatic practice of the I2th century was essentially 
conservative. Herein perhaps it differs from that of the I3th in 
which the epistolary type of composition was exploited in order that 
fees might be taken in the Wardrobe or Privy Chamber as well as for 
the Hanaper 4 . Nevertheless we shall find that a species of Letters 

1 The incalculable losses that we have sustained for this period alone have been well 
described by M. Delisle in Bibl. def&coledes Chartes, LXVII. 361 sq. More than one hundred 
charters and writs dated between 1066 and 1200 were cursorily examined for the purpose 
of the present essay including all the originals (then unpublished) in the British Museum 
and Record Office, and the whole series of enrolments known as Carhe Antiques and 
"Transcripts of Exchequer Charters," in preference to the texts preserved in numerous 
printed cartularies. 

2 Cf. Delisle, op. cit. and Eyton, Court and Household of Henry II passim. 

3 e.g. under Richard I. * Cf. below, p. 260. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 213 

Patent was employed as early as the reign of Henry II 1 , and we must 
remember that it is perhaps only owing to the misfortune of their 
non-survival from an earlier period that we first meet with so many 
novel record types in the opening years of the I3th century. 

The royal charters and writs of the post-Conquest period will, 
however, scarcely bear a minute sub-division. A clear distinction 
between the two types is after all the chief consideration, and this will 
form the subject of some subsequent remarks. Again, it is clearly of 
importance to distinguish further between the charter containing a 
gift or grant 2 and the confirmation of an earlier charter or donation. 
This distinction is a very simple one and remarkably consistent. None 
the less it has been commonly overlooked by modern antiquaries. It 
will be seen from the examples given in the Formula Book above re- 
ferred to that the essential distinction between the two forms is contained 
in the Dispositive clause. Here the words concessisse et dedisse or one of 
them should be found in the case of a grant, with a general reference 
to the nature of an earlier holding. In the case of a confirmation the 
word dedisse is usually omitted and there is a specific reference to the 
former grant in such words as sicut dedit et carta sua confirmavit. 

In the case of the writ during this early period it would scarcely 
be profitable to attempt a close identification of those conventional 
forms that are so familiar to us in the I3th century. It is enough for 
us in the first place to realise the fact that the Breve Regis may be 
distinguished from the Carta Regis as an initiating or completing 
instrument, which is effectively employed, usually through the 
machinery of the County Court, for every conceivable executive, 
administrative or judicial purpose. It matters little in the earliest 
stage of its development whether it is Patent or Close, Original or 
Judicial ; whether it is despatched broadcast to procure exact 
returns to a general inquisition, or directed to local officers or 
ministers of the crown to give effect to a gift in the forms adapted 
to ensure legal process or the redress of a private wrong. Possibly 
before the Anarchy we might already distinguish amongst others 
such prevalent forms as the writs for enquiry, for despatch of 
justice and livery of seisin and especially as "writs of aid" and 
execution or respite of fiscal processes, though the effort is scarcely 
worth the pains that it involves. We may easily conclude that the 
purpose of the Anglo-Norman diplomata was the same as that of 

1 Cf. below, p. 228 sq. 

3 No attempt has here been made to distinguish between these two forms and none at 
all between the several conditions expressed in charters of feofirnent. 



2 r 4 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

their Old English precursors, namely the concession or confirmation 
of lands or liberties and the due discharge of the respective obligations 
of the crown and the subjects which had not as yet assumed a very 
complex character. But with the accession of the first Angevin king 
we enter upon a new phase in the diplomatic writings of this country. 
Already the executive writ has been largely used to supplement the 
ordinary processes of justice in the national Courts 1 . Then as the 
King's Court draws to itself special cases, the possessory assizes of the 
1 2th century begin to influence the whole course of justice. For 
new actions and a reformed fiscal procedure appropriate writs are 
required. The King's Court and the Exchequer have their depart- 
mental seals, but only the Chancery can issue original writs. And so 
they are issued, in an ever-increasing volume, the Brevia de cursu 
which are soon beyond the control of the successors of Glanvill and 
Fitz Nigel. 

Somewhat strangely, the position of the true diplomata, the royal 
grants and confirmations, is found to be but little affected by the 
clerical activity of this later period. The charters of Henry II and 
Richard P differ in no essential particular from the charter issued by 
Henry I, though the common form is rapidly becoming as purely 
conventional as that of the next century 3 . Perhaps the chief inno- 
vation during the above reigns is seen in the growing recognition of the 
usefulness of the Old English covenant for political, commercial and 
judicial purposes. Herein the treaty obligations of the crown were 
expressed side by side with an acknowledgement of its private obliga- 
tions, whilst, shaped upon the model of the foreign Tractatio, the "final 
concord" ratified by the King's Court achieved a permanent success 4 . 

In the reign of Richard I the germs of the later Letters Patent 
and Inspeximus may be occasionally distinguished in genuine charters, 
though perfect examples of either style occur at a still earlier date 
which may be regarded as suspicious. More noticeable, however, 
than any such innovation is the occurrence of so many sequences of 
the typical instruments of the period, illustrating the diplomatic 
procedure in individual cases ; the charter of concession, the writ of 
execution and the later Confirmation. 

1 Cf. W. H. Stevenson in E. H. R. xxi. 505. 

2 It is true that the charters of Richard I show a tendency towards the plural style and 
the charters are executed per manum cancellarii nostri as in the next reign. 

8 See below, p. 235. 

4 Cf. the Treaties with Flanders (Foedera, I. 6, 7, 22) which have, however, been incorrectly 
printed and described. Cf. also the Lincoln Charter of noi edited by Mr W. H. Stevenson 
jn E. H. R. xxi. 505. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and W 7 riis 215 



Anglo-Norman Diplomatic Apparatus. 

The administrative aspect of the diplomatic procedure of the 
Anglo-Norman period would seem to imply the permanent establish- 
ment of a royal Chancery with its usual accessaries, and by general 
consent the existence of some such institution, since the Norman 
Conquest, has been assumed 1 . The use of a seal and the office of 
Chancellor are at any rate beyond reasonable doubt. We can even 
trace the outline of a clerical establishment of the king's household or 
chapel from the early years of the I2th century 3 , whilst the official 
routine in connexion with the execution of diplomatic instruments 
was well established after the accession of Henry IP. With due 
deference to many learned opinions it may, however, be observed 
that neither the external notices above referred to, nor such docu- 
mentary evidence as can be relied upon, support the view of the 
existence of a great secretarial department dating from the Conquest. 
To say the least, the importance of the office of Chancellor and of the 
clerical establishment of the Chancery was dwarfed by comparison 
with the preeminence of the justiciary and the scientific organization 
of the Exchequer, whilst the Camera or other secretarial department 
of the king's house has to be reckoned with 4 . In any case it can be 
clearly seen that an Anglo-Norman chancery made use of none of 
the notarial devices which are associated with the recognized procedure 
of the Continental courts, or rather that we should submit that these 
devices are not found in the case of genuine examples. But until an 
adequate Codex Diplomaticus of the Anglo-Norman period has been 
published, enabling us to distinguish between credible and fraudulent 
specimens it is scarcely profitable to attempt the definition of an or- 
ganization, the personnel of which chiefly depends on the admissibility 
of a certain class of evidence. 

It is true that the subject matter of the several diplomatic forms 
which obtain during this early period, has been differentiated by 
Madox in his Formnlare Anglicanum. It must nevertheless be 
insisted that no such classification can be undertaken on any scientfic 
principle until the existing diplomata of the Anglo-Norman period 
have been sifted and arranged. The great work of Madox is in fact 
a mere medley of charters and writs, royal and private, without 

1 E. H. E. xi. 732. 2 Constitutio Dom. Reg. (Red Book, p. 807). 

3 Accornt of Ric. de Anesti (ed. Palgrave, Commonwealth}, cf. Dialogus, I. v, vi, xiii. 

4 Red Book, p. xxii ; Dialogus (Gar. Press), p. 18. 



216 A 'rlo-Norman Charters and Writs 

w 

distinction of fortu and regardless of the authenticity of the selected 
texts. In the place of such an arbitrary and artificial arrangement 
it is surely more desirable that the elementary distinctions between 
public and private, pre-Conquest and post- Conquest, English and 
Continental diplomata should first be established 1 . Even when this 
has been accomplished, it will still be necessary to determine which 
specimens shall be admitted as genuine examples. To constitute an 
important genus from a few undescribed species is scarcely in keeping 
with scientific methods of research. 

It is from the study of original instruments alone that we can 
hope to obtain any real knowledge of the composition of the post- 
Conquest diplomata. A copy or entry in a cartulary or register 
presents in most cases an abbreviated form of the Initial and Final 
Protocols. An official enrolment, even of a considerably later date, 
will frequently preserve a fuller version of the original ; but in any 
case it is unsealed. Again, though this copy or enrolment may have 
preserved the names of the witnesses who subscribe an Anglo-Norman 
charter on a pre-Conquest model, they would possibly fail to re- 
produce the accompanying "signatures" ; for "^ Willelmus Rex" is 

one thing, but pT- * s qu^ 6 another 2 . Moreover, we require to 



know the size of the parchment and its shape ; how it is " cut " or 
" folded " for the attachment of the seal and the character of the 
writing itself together with the spacing of the words. In any one of 
these details there may be affectations or omissions that will invite 
a further scrutiny, for it is everything to determine whether the scribe 
of a doubtful charter was fraudulent or merely careless. 

With regard to the external form of the documents in question 
the Anglo-Norman diploma is usually written on an oblong or square 
piece of parchment varying in size from 3 or 4 inches to a foot. 
Exaggeration in size or shape is nearly always a suspicious indication 3 . 

The Great Seal 4 is usually attached during this period by a double 

1 Bracton's well-known classification of diplomatic instruments (Book II. c. 16) not only 
belongs to a later period but is more valuable for its definitions of private than of royal 
charters. 

2 Cotton Charter, vin. 15. 3 e.g. Westminster (Cotton Charter, VI. 3). 

4 For the purpose of comparison with foreign types the colour of the Great Seal during 
this period is a matter of some interest. It is well-known that the seals of the nth century 
are of a whitish hue whilst those of Henry I and Henry II are coated with a rich reddish- 
brown varnish. Towards the end of the I2th century green is chiefly affected and this 
colour continued in vogue during the mediaeval period. Under Henry III a walnut coloured 
varnish was employed with good effect compared with the brown and yellow or virgin wax 
used in a later period. For the dimensions and legends of the seals, see Messrs Wyons' 
well-known work and Mr Birch's list in Keport of Index Soc. 1879, Appx. II. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 217 

strip or thong of parchment from the centre of the lower margin 
which is folded in order to furnish a better support. In some cases, 
however, no fold has been made, whilst in others it has apparently 
been made as an afterthought and actually conceals part of the 
writing 1 . The attachment of the thong to the fold is effected by various 
ingenious devices. Usually it was passed through two transverse slits 
made in the centre of the fold in such a way as to ride upon the 
upper edge of the incision, the ends hanging down on either side of 
the fold. These loose ends were inclosed in the body of the seal 
which could not be removed without cutting either the thong or the 
fold o the charter. Although there seems to have been no absolute 
rule in this matter, it will be found that in the greater number of 
charters of this period that are unquestionably genuine the two 
transverse incisions above referred to are both present ; whilst in 
certain doubtful charters a single incision only will be found 2 . 
Exceptions certainly occur in each case, but the practice in point 
is deserving of attention, though after the end of the I2th century 
it has very slight importance. 

The dimensions and texture of the thong itself should also be 
noted, since this was frequently obtained by cutting a strip from the 
top margin of the charter itself, and this is sometimes found to con- 
tain a trial line of writing which may also have been intended to 
assist identification 3 . The occurrence of a thong cut from a different 
parchment will be frequently noticed in charters of a very question- 
able character. 

It is well known that seals were attached to early charters by 
some other substance than a parchment thong, silk, hemp, and even 
leather being used for this purpose. The cords made of these sub- 
stances were usually braided on the fold in a rectangular or lozenge- 
shaped pattern, after passing through eye-lets, the loose ends being 
enveloped by the seal as before. It would perhaps be found that 
many of the charters in which the seals are attached by cords during 
this period were executed abroad or prepared by a foreign expert. 

The writ in most cases is easily distinguished from the charter by 
its long and narrow form, the length being usually about three times 
the width of the parchment. This peculiar shape was doubtless due 
to the practice of attaching the seal to a strip cut from right to left 

1 Add. Ch. 20120. 

2 In some suspicious cases the thong has been passed through one of the incisions only, 
as though a new thong had been attached in the style prevailing at a later date. 

3 D'Anisy, Chartes de Calvados, p. 9 sq. 



218 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

along the lower margin of the document. But below this strip another 
and much narrower strip was first cut out, both remaining attached at 
the base to the left-hand margin of the writ for a space of about an 
inch. To the upper and broader of these two strips the seal was 
attached, the narrower one being evidently intended to serve as a 
ligament to secure the writ when folded round the seal. This was 
necessary to prevent the weight of the seal from tearing through the 
neck of the thong, and the device resembles that afterwards used for 
securing letters missive. In many cases, indeed, the seal has been 
already torn away from this cause, and has even been reattached by 
an incision being made in the centre of the lower margin, to imitate 
the attachment of the pendent seal of a true diploma. 

Perhaps the significance and interest of the system of attachment 
used in the case of the writ have been scarcely appreciated in con- 
nexion with diplomatic criticism. In the case of many existing writs 
of the i ith and I2th centuries which do not bear seals, it is sometimes 
possible to determine whether or not a seal was originally attached, 
from the indentation or scar (so to speak) which should be visible in the 
left-hand margin. Moreover, it will not infrequently be found that later 
forgeries of Old English and Anglo-Norman writs, whilst preserving 
at least the indications of the attachment of a seal, usually fail to 
reproduce the ligament. Again, the presence or absence of these 
"scars" will often enable us to distinguish between an original writ 
and an official rescript, a matter of some consequence since, in the 
earliest period at least, writs were rarely enrolled, " rescripts " being 
filed instead. 

Although this simple form of attachment was chiefly used for 
writs, as opposed to charters, the latter are sometimes found to be 
executed in this manner. Letters Patent and Close were also 
frequently "cut" in this way 1 , and the practice in point serves as 
a rough distinction between Patents that are writs and those that are 
virtual charters, the latter usually bearing the seal suspended from the 
centre of the lower margin by incisions made in a " fold." 

In certain cases the Anglo-Norman writ is found to be cut in an 
abnormal manner. One such variation appears in the form of a broad 
flange cut out from either the lower margin or from one of the 

1 In the 1 3th century this form of attachment was sometimes picturesquely described as 
in cedula and the liability to detachment was a convenient pretext for an " Innovation." 
This attachment of the pendent seal is also a device familiar to continental notaries. It is 
neatly described by French antiquaries as the "simple queue," but stress is not laid by 
these authorities on the presence of a ligament. It was also largely used for private 
diplomata, being often cut for numerous seals in the case of indentures or certificates. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 219 

extremities of the instrument 1 . Here the breadth and shortness of 
the " tail " must have prevented the seal from appearing pendent in 
the usual sense. No ligament is found in these forms, which are 
prima facie of a suspicious character. 

It will be observed that in the case of writs which are closely 
assimilated to the charter in respect of their diplomatic construction 
and use, the depth of the parchment is increased at the same time 
that its length is diminished. Moreover, the seal is frequently attached 
from the centre of the lower margin on a fold as in the true charter. 

(d) Anglo-Norman Diplomatic Formulas. 

It has been observed before that, until the urgent need of a critical 
Cartularium Anglo-Normannicnm has been supplied, it is impracticable 
to attempt an adequate diplomatic description of the post- Conquest 
diplomata. As, however, such a task is perhaps within the powers of 
but two or three scholars of our own time, we must for the present 
make shift with the results of a desultory study of the composition of 
the contemporary diplomata. 

To begin with the writ ; it will be noticed that the formal Super- 
scription in the post-Conquest forms exhibits a distinct advance upon 
the Old English style. To the formula A. rex Anglorum the qualifi- 
cation Dei gratia is not frequently added before the reign of Henry I, 
and it has recently been argued by M. Delisle in a notable essay" that 
this diplomatic formula comes into regular use from the year 1173. 

Other expansions in early native charters must be regarded with 
some suspicion. Under Henry II, however, when the writ has been 
diverted from its original purpose, the full style of the sovereign is 
used indiscriminately in both charters and writs. 

The Address of the post-Conquest writ varies in a rather per- 
plexing manner. At first the persons specifically charged with its 
execution are usually of the same type as in Old English charters. 
From a very early date, however, we meet with writs, the authenticity 
of which it would not be always easy to dispute, addressed at large in 
the style of the formal diploma, namely to the Archbishops and other 
magnates. It is true that in the writ as well as in the charter a 
general Address in such words as et omnibus ministris et fidelibns suis, 

1 Cotton Charter, vn. i ; Ibid. x. 8. 

2 Bibl. de rcole ties Charles, LXVII. p. 361 sq. and Lxvill. p. 272 sq. The acceptance of 
this learned theory depends chiefly on the reader's point of view with regard to certain 
charters of this reign ; but see Mr J. H. Round in Arch. Jo. LXiv. 63. 



22O Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

Francis et Anglis 1 is usually appended to the designation, but this 
expansion has not the same significance as the conventional Address 
which became a stereotyped feature of the " new model " charter. 
Whether the occurrence of this later Address in writs or even in 
original charters dated before the Anarchy is to be regarded as a 
suspicious indication is a very difficult question. Admitting, however, 
that the formula inevitably occurs in many forgeries, there would seem 
to be no constitutional objection to dating the origin of the practice 
from the reign of Henry I 2 . 

The sententious form of Salutation must be regarded as a normal 
feature of diplomatic as opposed to epistolary composition. In the 
case of the Notification which ushers in the text of the instrument 
much greater latitude usually prevails. In the post-Conquest writs, 
however, this clause is perhaps less frequently omitted than in a later 
period. 

An Exposition reciting the occasion or motive of the precept is 
not, of course, at any time a characteristic feature of the writ. A brief 
recitation of the purport of a former grant is, however, frequently found, 
and in I2th century specimens the usual declaration of a pious motive 
constantly occurs as in Old English writs. Similarly a true Disposi- 
tive clause cannot be looked for in a mere precept, although the effect 
of the writ may amount to an actual concession 3 . The usual form is 
that of an Injunction, or Prohibition, as the case may be, and this 
is expressed by such words as pracipio, mando. volo, or else prohibeo 
or nolo. The forcible expression of the sovereign's will seldom 
requires to be amplified by a recitative Final clause such as usually 
occurs in charters of feoffment ; but conditions or reservations are 
sometimes introduced. In this connexion several distinctive man- 
nerisms will be noticed in Anglo-Norman writs, amongst these being 
a tendency to ejaculation, and the somewhat irrelevant use of such 
words as amodo, ita and qnia. In fact the forgers of such instruments 
were not slow to grasp the distinctive value of these virile phrases, and 
their indiscriminate use may afford an additional cause for diplomatic 
criticism 4 . 

1 The extension of this form of Address to the Welsh or Irish may be regarded as having 
a local significance. 

2 In many cases, however, these seeming writs are really charters. 

3 In certain diplomata of Henry I's reign a grant of liberties takes the form of a string 
of exemptions beginning with Et ne . These instruments may probably be regarded as 
charters rather than writs. 

4 In the case of grants to churches the name of the titular saint appears as the grantee 
(e.g. S. Ethelreda = Ely), a graphic statement which is constantly reproduced in later 
charters. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 221 

Another characteristic addition is seen in the significant intimation 
of the penalties of non-observance which replaces the old ecclesiastical 
Sanction 1 ; but this, like the later order for speedy execution, may 
be introduced parenthetically in the injunction itself. Finally, as we 
have seen, a new feature is presented in the Attestation and Dating 
clauses which, however, like the clauses of the Initial Protocol, are 
merely abbreviated from the more ceremonious diploma. Like the 
latter, too, the writ is executed by means of a seal, the distinctive 
attachment of which has been already described. 

The distinctive formulas of the conventional charter, modelled 
upon the lines of the Anglo-Norman writ, cannot be described with 
any degree of precision before the middle of the I2th century. The 
constitutional intention and the legal effect of the post-Conquest 
charter may be derived directly from the existing model of the Old 
English " land-boc " and from the analogy of the contemporary conti- 
nental practice ; but the diplomatic construction of this instrument 
must be ascribed to the influence of the post-Conquest writ. Here 
was found ready-made the outline of the royal charter, procured with 
the old constitutional formalities but composed and executed accord- 
ing to the new official requirements, if for no other purpose than 
to supplement the royal revenues. 

The Protocols needed only to be amplified by an Address to the 
old optimates and an Attestation by the new curiales, with the 
embellishment of a pendent seal. A precedent was already found for 
dispensing with the turgid Preamble and the primitive Sanction, and 
for expressing the purport of the Dispositive and Final clauses in con- 
cise and conventional formulas. The tenor, however, even of these last 
may be traced back to pre-Conquest or Continental models. The 
words of donation are virtually the same, except that for graceful 
variants of " dono " or " tribuo " we have plain " do," " concedo " and 
" confirmo." So the famous Habendum et tenendum clause, which 
does not, however, become stereotyped until the next century, has its 
earlier counterpart in the Old English fruendum, and the hereditary 
notion and sense of perpetuity may occur in both versions. Again, 
the typical conditions of the post-Conquest gift, the bene et in pace, 
libere et quiete, integre et honorifice are already familiar to us, 
whilst we have in the inevitable cum saca et soca clause a mere 
version of the mid sac and mid socne of the vernacular writ. A new 

1 In rare and possibly suspicious cases a specific money fine is imposed for disturbance of 
the grantee, but this penalty clause was always permissible in the case of forest rights. 



222 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

note is perhaps struck in the appendix, cum omnibus libertatibus et 
liberis consuetiidinibus suts, for " liberties " and " customs " were held 
in greater honour by the I2th century forger than by the I ith century 
scribe, and the exact equivalent of the Old English formula mid ealla 
belymneth is rather found in the Latin version cum omnibus aliis 
rebus. On the whole, however, the rhythm of the conventional 
" parcels " flows smoothly from either pen. /;/ bosco et piano and the 
rest were in fact still interchangeable, in the I2th century, with the 
vernacular On wode andonfelde and other diplomatic sing-songs. 

At the same time the arrangement of these kindred formulas in 
the later period is far more precise and scientific, though possibly the 
Latin version lends a learned glamour to a vernacular writ. Yet 
a study of the technical distinctions between the Anglo-Norman 
grant and confirmation will show how skilfully the common formulas 
were utilized to produce new diplomatic types. Swa full may find 
its equation in Ita plene, and sicut unquam plenius may have its 
bilingual complement ; but the Old English diploma will not by 
a simple reference 1 or by the omission of an essential word 2 indicate 
a broad distinction between two common diplomatic forms. 

(e) Special Charter Forms 3 . 

The above analogy applies almost entirely to donations or con- 
firmations of land. In the new diplomatic types which appear in the 
post- Conquest period we shall have new Dispositive forms made to 
order, and sometimes these are even labelled by contemporary scribes. 
Thus a grant introducing the word reddidisse* is termed a " charter of 
Retrocession," though restitution was also effected by a simple con- 
firmation or by a new donation. 

Amongst these special forms of early royal charters the grant in 
Free Alms is perhaps the most familiar, and here besides the essential 
and distinctive words of donation 5 there are appropriate comple- 
mentary formulas". 

Grants of office will contain appropriate expressions in the Dis- 

1 Sicut carta testattir. 

3 Dedisse. 

8 See Formula Book, Nos. u 18. 

4 Sdatis me reddidisse et per hanc cartatn confirmasse (or retrocessisse), but this is a purely 
arbitrary title. Thus the word condonasse might be said to constitute a royal pardon. 

5 In pura, perpettia et libera eleinosyna. 

6 Sicut aliqua ecclesia quiet 'tus vel liberius tenet aliquant deinosynam, &c. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 223 

positive and Movent clauses, though for legal purposes the officium or 
ministeriuni is treated as a freehold. In consideration of service 
rendered 1 , the grantee is invested with a modest daily "livery" in 
respect of a certain "custody" or " ministry" which he is henceforth 
entitled to perform, ita bene, &c., and with the enjoyment of the con- 
suetudines thereto pertaining, sicut aliquis illud melius, &c., tempore, &c. 

If we may accept certain I2th century sources as authentic, the 
form of the grant of a market or fair may be traced back to the 
reign of Henry I, and the technical formulas with regard to the period 
and duration of the licence and other particulars would not seem to 
differ in any way from a similar charter executed in the next 
century 2 . 

The forest charters of the period are particularly interesting, and 
the genuine examples exhibit well-marked formulas. The greater 
number of these, however, may more properly be regarded as writs, 
addressed either to the Barons of the Exchequer 3 for exemption from 
common assessments, or more usually to the local foresters enjoining 
that certain holdings non numerentur inter essarta*. 

In the case of a formal charter of this nature the general Address 
may be supplemented by the insertion of the Forestarii, and the 
Dispositive clause usually specifies the concession of so many acres of 
assart in a certain forest. This is followed by the usual injunction 
for security of tenure and exemption from assart fines and other pleas 
of the forest. 

Grants of warren differ from the above in respect of a prohibition 
for other parties to chase within the warren except by licence of the 
grantee, under a specified penalty 5 . 

From the above examples it will be seen that the Dispositive 
formulas of post-Conquest charters are capable of a considerable 
amount of differentiation. 

The Final clauses of these diplomata, though possessing a distinct 
individuality, do not exhibit many variations. The characteristic 
Injunction which explains or supplements the terms of the donation 
or concession has been already referred to in its bilingual aspect 6 . 

1 Pro servitio suo with its well-known expansion in later Patents, nobis hactenus 
impenso, &c. 

2 Cart. Antiq. R. xxi. 8 Cf. Dialogus, I. xi. 

4 The beau ideal of such a concession may be seen in the case of the forged charter 
(Ancient Deeds, A. S. 308) of Henry I claimed by the monks of Gloucester and produced by 
them in evidence as late as the i6th century (Hist. Man. S. Petri Glouc. (Rolls), li. 187). 

5 See below, p. 224, n. 4. 8 Above, p. 220. 



224 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

The grant itself is frequently accompanied by a Reservation which 
may be of a general 1 or specific 2 nature. Similarly the Injunction 
may be strengthened by a Prohibition 3 against molestation which is 
not infrequently accompanied by the statement of a penalty which 
is sometimes in the form of a definite assessment, as in charters of 
the warren* and charters of liberties 5 , but in other cases, especially 
in ecclesiastical grants, it may be regarded as a reminiscence of the 
ancient Sanction 6 . Finally, as we have seen, this penal or com- 
minatory clause has become in the early years of the next century 
a mere official interjection 7 , although the statement of a precise 
penalty is still to be found in modern Proclamations. The interesting 
development in diplomatic composition which is completed in the 
13th century by the virtual division of charters of feoffment into 
two parts, the enacting and the recitative parts respectively, will be 
referred to in another place. At the same time a distinct tendency 
in this direction can be clearly recognized from the middle of the 
1 2th century, and the recitative or injunctive clause also begins 
usually with the words Quare volo. 

There are many miscellaneous points of interest connected with 
the diplomatic compositions of this period, but one remaining feature 
only can be noticed here. The facility with which a I2th century 
scribe could expand the body of a ceremonious or momentous charter, 
especially of confirmation, finds a precedent, as we have seen, even in 
the pre-Conquest period. Perhaps here also such amplifications may 
be regarded as being to some extent suspicious, except in the case of 
charters of liberties or conventions. It is in fact easy to understand 
how so many interpolations have been made without detection in 
charters of this period ; for one more after-thought would be of little 
moment in these laboured narratives. Here Prceterea and Insuper 
afford inexhaustible openings for the royal benevolence, whilst scilicet 
and nominatim play their part in ear-marking disputed parcels. 

1 Ita quod, &c. salvo, &c. z Excepto, &. Reddendo, &c. 

3 Et ita ne, &=c. Quia nolo, &>f. Et prohibeo, &c. and the significant hint Ne super hoc 
amplius inde damorem audiam pro penuria justitia:. 

4 This penalty due to the Crown came to be chiefly effective as deterring an offender 
from defending an action for trespass. 

8 The Et si clauses ending with an ernendatio. 

6 In some cases this is actually preserved in the Old English form. 

7 Sicut te ipsum &c. diligas. 



Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 225 



f. Private Charters and Deeds. 

It still remains for us to glance at the independent construction of 
the private charters of the period. In some respects it might appear 
that here the post-Conquest scribes were equally indebted to Old 
English models ; but the obligation is confined to the general style 
and does not extend to the special forms that were evolved from the 
primitive Convention. For the familiar types of these Ancient Deeds 
undoubtedly exceed, in variety as well as in number, the forms of the 
post-Conquest Chancery. The common forms of feoffment, however, 
are clearly constructed upon an official model, particularly in the case 
of charters executed by the churches or by the great barons 1 . These 
charters, both of feoffment and confirmation differ only from royal 
instruments in respect of the Initial Protocol, which is usually couched 
in an impersonal and narrative form 2 . There is no Salutation in 
normal cases, but the Exposition is very prominent. The Dispositive 
clause is precise and technical, but the characteristic Final clauses of 
the royal diplomata are naturally wanting. In their place, however, 
the legal warranty is very conspicuous and affords many interesting 
variants. The Final Protocol differs but little from official forms, but 
is frequently preceded by an annunciatory clause. The presence of 
witnesses who are undescribed by name is indicated by the words "et 
multis aliis." Finally, the seal is never, except in the case of very 
great men, attached to a single thong cut from the bottom of the 
document 3 but is pendent from the centre of the lower margin though 
cords are not used as in the case of the royal charter. 

In addition to the usual charters of donation or confirmation we 
find many charters of Foundation and Frankalmoigne, executed by 
private donors, which resemble in most respects the similar produc- 

1 Possibly were it not for the dearth of Northumberland diplomata we should be able to 
add to these typical formulas some interesting variants from the Scriptonum of the great 
north-country earldom or the chancery of the episcopal palatinate. This supposition is 
perhaps justified by the survival of a few vernacular writs dating from the close of the 
nth century in which we find an Address to thegns and drengs and in one instance the 
Notification "Wite ge" together with suitable dialectic equivalents for the conventional 
terms found in Old English writs of the period. Cf. J. Wilson in Scott. Hist. Rev. I. 62. 
Hickes, Thesaurus, I. 149. Two of these writs have been edited with a wealth of learning 
and excellent reproductions by Prof. F. Liebermann in Archiv. Neueren Sprachen, cxi. 3, 4. 

2 Omnibus hanc cartam visuris, &*c. ego, &c. Sdant prasentes etfuturi, <5rV. Notum sit 
omnibus, <2rV. Noverint universi, &"c. 

3 An instance occurs in the case of a writ of Richard, Earl of Cornwall, to his bailiffs of 
Exeter, as late as the year 1256. 

H. 15 



226 Anglo-Norman Charters and Writs 

tions of the Royal Chancery. Another diplomatic form based on the 
Old English cyrograph, although occasionally utilised in this period 
for official purposes, is not of frequent occurrence amongst the 
Chancery Records until the next century. Of this class the Concord 
or Convention and the Bond are the best known examples. The 
Quit-claim, Release or Surrender is properly a form of Feoffment, and 
charters of Attornment are also complementary thereto ; but we are 
not here concerned with the evolution of diplomatic forms, the occur- 
rence of which in official archives is purely accidental and in some 
cases at least irregular 1 . 

1 On the other hand the charters of the great palatine earls and princely bishops precede 
those of the crown in the sequence of mediaeval title deeds in certain countries (e.g. Lancaster, 
Chester). For the form of an alleged seignorial charter of manumission see The Ancestor, 
XII. 42. 



LATER CHARTERS AND DIPLOMATIC 
INSTRUMENTS. 

(a) The English Chancery from the i^th to the \6th century. 

WE have seen that in the case of the Anglo-Norman charters it is 
almost useless, for lack of a critical Codex Diplomaticus, to attempt 
the reconstruction of the establishment and apparatus of the royal 
Chancery which first appears as an administrative institution during 
the period immediately following the Norman Conquest. 

The same objection applies with almost equal force to the later 
mediaeval period, from the close of the I2th century down to the 
beginning of the i6th, when the Chancery is at last fully occupied 
with legal business and its secretarial duties are discharged by a new 
ministerial department. 

It is true that in this later period we are chiefly concerned with 
official enrolments in which the constitution and practice of the 
Chancery can be read at large, with the help of formula books for 
official writs, ordinances, accounts, correspondence, and mediaeval 
treatises 1 . But though we need have less concern as to the authen- 
ticity of contemporary instruments we are still confronted with a 
number of suspicious forms which have found a place in the later 
Confirmation Rolls through the simplicity or greed of royal officers. 

Again, although the Chancery Rolls for these three centuries are 
becoming rapidly accessible for historical study by means of an 
admirable series of calendars and texts, this form of publication does 
not take note of the departmental usages with which we are here 
concerned. The commonplace books of the learned editors engaged 
in these official calendars would doubtless supply most of the trivial 
information which is needed for a diplomatic study of the period 2 ; 

1 One of the most valuable of these sources, for the internal economy of the Chancery, 
is the series of Hanaper Accounts which have been hitherto comparatively neglected. 

2 Amongst the points of diplomatic interest which thus await solution, chiefly in connexion 
with the practice of sealing, may be mentioned the following: (r) the practice of issuing 
Letters under the Great Seal, e.g. during a minority, and by the state departments. 
(2) Substituted and abnormal or special forms. (3) Duplicate or triplicate charters or "pairs" 
of Letters. (4) Rescripts and contrabrevia. (5) The method and progress of enrolment. 
(6) The procedure of sealing with Great and Smaller Seals, the " half-seal '' and the " cold- 
seal," &c. (7) The fees and revenue of the seals. 

152 



228 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

but for the time being this source must remain unexplored except for 
the casual illustrations that may be gleaned from a cursory exami- 
nation of the existing texts 1 . This deferred knowledge must also 
include many details regarding the internal economy of the Chancery 
itself. Our complete ignorance of the nature of the alleged establish- 
ment during the earlier post-Conquest period is, indeed, eventually 
relieved by the interesting allusions contained in the I2th century 
tracts previously referred to 2 . But the interpretation even of these 
authorities is in doubt, and a wide gap remains to be filled before the 
records of the next century bring us new enlightenment. 

In the reign of King John the royal Chancery is evidently 
endowed with important functions. As a court of law it can hardly 
be said to exist, whilst as a secretariat it has not yet attained a 
complete organization ; but such as it is, it is supreme, we are told 3 , 
in the king's name. The ancient officers of state who, since the 
reign of Henry II, have withdrawn themselves from the Exchequer 
on the king's business, are at the disposal of this central establishment. 
The Marshall prepares his roll of musters or scutages, the Constable 
is responsible for the " liveries " of the household and the wages of 
the retinue. The Justiciar with the Chancellor, who is to succeed to 
his importance, or his deputy, are always near the King. They 
attest writs which serve, according to their form, as precepts, pro- 
hibitions, commissions and acquitances. With them are found the 
household Chamberlains, and a crowd of unplaced curiales, with a 
limited number of royal clerks. Such is the court whose activity is 
represented in the earliest Chancery Rolls ; but although the 
Chancellor and his staff compose its instruments, they do not dictate 
its policy. 

Meanwhile the older court, the Curia Regis of the last century, 
has settled down to its purely judicial business, though its justices 
may still be employed, on occasion, in a variety of administrative 
enquiries. The Exchequer, which provides the sinews of the new 
state-craft, is as vigilant and as powerful as ever. All promissory 
transactions are passed on to it by the Chancery, and it scrutinizes 

1 Since this was written much assistance has been given to the student by two admirable 
volumes of a Calendar of Charter Rolls to 1300, prepared by Mr C. G. Crump under the 
direction and supervision of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, who is himself 
profoundly learned in the technicalities of this subject. 

2 Cf. above, p. 215, as to the Dialogiis and Constitutio Domus Regis. A valuable descrip- 
tion of the 1 3th and 1 4th century apparatus from an archaeological point of view is contained 
in the histories of the Rolls Chapel by Sir H. Maxwell Lyte (D. K. $- t th Report) and Mr W. 
J. Hardy (Middlesex and Herts. Notes and Queries, Vol. II. p. 49). 

3 Cf. Hist, of English Law, I. 172 sq. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 229 

the proceedings of the Justices with a view to fiscal profit. The 
whole revenue passes through the day-books of the Receipt, and 
even the most secret diplomatic or financial operations of the crown, 
transacted in the Chapel or the Wardrobe, are entered in official 
precedent books. With all this activity and interest around us, 
we are still, in the I3th century, without exact information as to the 
clerical establishment and housing of the royal Chancery. Towards 
the end of that century we begin to realize that the Chancery has 
out-grown the Chapel and the Camera clericorum of the peripatetic 
Court. Its clerks now occupy houses of their own, the head-quarters 
of the later Chancery departments, in a new centre of clerical activity 1 . 
The division between the Chancery and the Secretariat has already 
begun. On the one side we see the growing occupation of the 
Chancellor in common law appeals, in equitable suits, and in 
references from the Council. On the other side we mark the results 
of the usurpations in turn, of the Camera, Exchequer, Wardrobe and 
Council, of the growing powers of Parliament and seal-bearing 
offices; of the successive devices of the Smaller Seals 2 and the Sign 
Manual ; of the disuse of enrolments, and the accumulation of 
epistolary instruments, the nucleus of the later secretarial collection. 

The means whereby these developments may be traced are now in 
sight, but not yet within our reach. For our present purpose it will 
suffice to have noted these and to confine our examination of the 
Chancery practice to a few brief observations which are needed for 
the purpose of assisting the student who has occasion to consult the 
Chancery enrolments and files. 

In the first place, leaving the formulas of the original instruments 
for subsequent description, it is important that those who prefer to 
study these instruments from the enrolments should note several 
peculiarities therein, in the shape of clerical devices, which may be 
attributed to the official practice of the Chancery. 

The origin and antiquity of enrolments provide us with difficulties 
enough, but when the custom of enrolments is once established, more 
difficulties still are prepared for us. It is true that most of these 
difficulties have received a perfunctory explanation 3 , but a further 
warning may not be superfluous. 

1 Cf. above, p. 19 sq. 

a No attempt has been made here to describe in detail the actual seals, which have been 
dealt with by experts, who have scarcely done justice, however, to the Smaller Seals used by 
mediaeval sovereigns. The practice of sealing and other diplomatic procedure claim priority 
of treatment. 

3 One of these difficulties is notoriously found in respect of the date; for although the 



230 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

The obvicus fact that in a very large number of cases the 
Chancery clerks entered these instruments in an impersonal form, or 
even as mere memoranda, need not occasion surprise when we 
remember that the later Docquet Books containing precisely similar 
entries served all official purposes. Thus we may regard the Estreats 
of the Exchequer in the shape of Originalia, Fine Rolls, Liberate 
Rolls, &c., and the bulk of the Chancery writs for other purposes as 
mediaeval " Docquets," charters and formal instruments being more 
carefully entered 1 . 

It need scarcely be suggested that the clerks could reconstruct 
the formulas of the original instruments with perfect facility since the 
task is not a difficult one to ourselves ; but the loss for the purpose 
of diplomatic study is considerable. One remarkable consequence of 
this official practice is the perpetuation of certain of these narrative 
forms as actual instruments under a Smaller Seal 2 . 

Amongst several technical formulas which await an authoritative 
explanation, attention may be called to the special use of the 
preposition per in departmental memoranda attached to diplomatic 
instruments or their enrolments. In the case of I3th century writs 
under the Great Seal it will be presently seen that the departmental 
minute per Regent or per ipsum Regem must be distinguished from 
the symbolic Attestation clause which is such a familiar innovation in 
this period. But when appended to warrants under the Smaller Seals 
the minute may have the force of an official superscription and this 
later use is seen in the case of Immediate Warrants and Procla- 
mations 3 . But the commonest sense of per in this connexion is to 
indicate the official agency 4 by which the instrument has been 
" procured," and this connotation will be familiar in later Docquets 5 . 
A more subtle use of per is seen in certain official embellishments of 



problem connected with the place of execution has been solved by accepting the theory of 
conventional practice ("at Westminster"), the actual time of execution may often remain in 
doubt. Thus we have the frank admission of Hengham, C. J. pleaded on his own behalf in 
the State Trials of 1289 92, that in Cancel/aria et alibi in uno et eodem die unus dericus 
ponatunam datam et alius aliam (R. Hist. Soc. C.S. (Third Series), Vol. IX. p. xlv). 

1 In the case of the Fine Rolls, these Chancery enrolments seem to have served as Fee- 
Books or Minute Books, the entries being mere memoranda of transactions connected with 
the actual enrolments. 

2 e.g. the "Debenture" (wardrobe) under a semi-official seal and the Fiat under the Privy 
Seal. The former begins with the statement Debentur. 

3 See Formula Book, pp. 102, 149. 

* Including fines in the Hanaper, as well as official persons or departments. 
5 It is well known that this indication is of the greatest value for tracing the sequence 
of instruments by which the Great Seal has been procured. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 231 

diplomatic attestations. Thus per Barones et per Librum Rubrum de 
Scaccario may be regarded as a compendious method of vouching an 
appropriate record which is by no means uncommon 1 . So, to save 
space or trouble, formal clauses may be rendered by another form of 
expression, as Testibus domino P. Wintoniensi et aliis scriptis in carta 
comitis Hollandiae, anno xiiij 2 . It is only one step backwards in point 
of practice from these official refinements of I3th century Chancery 
clerks to the age when men called the Apostles or the Deity to 
witness in their need. 

This is not the place in which the existing classification of the 
Rolls of Chancery can be properly discussed. The facts which 
chiefly concern the student of Diplomatic are these. Although the 
only distinctive forms of diplomatic composition that were enrolled 
during the I3th and I4th centuries are those connected with charters 
and writs, it is well known that there are several important series 
of enrolments in addition to the Charter Rolls, Patent Rolls and 
Close Rolls 8 . 

Indeed, just as at the beginning of the I3th century the great 
Exchequer Pipe Roll began to throw off separate membranes as a new 
and extensive series of " Foreign Accounts 4 ," so for a like convenience 
of official reference new series of Chancery Rolls were formed for the 
entry of instruments connected with special affairs of State such as 
Foreign Policy 8 , Trade 6 , Revenue 7 , Parliament 8 and the conventional 
exercise of the royal prerogative in several directions 9 . Apart from 
these recognized subjects we may meet with others of casual 

1 Chancery Files, 9 Ric. II. The reference to the Red Book is to the writ De Prerogativa 
Regis in the levying of debts, which was here vouched in a case recorded in K. R. Memor. 
Trin. 9 Ric. II rot. 12. Cf. also the form of pleading in which a party se mette sur les 
liveres del Eschekere, whilst in the common departmental minute per memoranda of a certain 
term, we have a mere reference to the official enrolment. 

3 Pat. 14 John m. i d , an enrolment of a bond of service. 

3 Some of the enrolments are apparently interchangeable, as in the case of the Close and 
Liberate Rolls, and are even duplicated by an Exchequer series as in the case of the latter 
enrolments and to some extent by the various " Extract Rolls." 

4 See P. R. O. Indexes and Lists, No. xi. 

B The Norman, French, Gascon, Almain, Roman, Scottish, Irish, Welsh Rolls. 
8 Staple Rolls, Exchange Rolls, the latter being supplemented by the Passage Rolls 
which record the practice of an early period. 

7 Liberate Rolls, Fine Rolls, the former, however, being again supplemented by other 
forms of enrolment. 

8 Parliament Rolls, Statute Rolls. As to the omission of enrolling the earliest statutes 
cf. G. J. Turner in R. Hist. Sot. Trans. (3) I. 209, cf. Red Book of the Exchequer, 
p. ccclxviii. 

9 Pardon, Protection, Passage, Fine and Oblate, Surrender, Dispensation Rolls. 
Special forms of Protection were also entered in the Plea Rolls of the King's Court. 



232 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

importance amongst the Miscellaneous Rolls of the Chancery above 
referred to 1 . 

The extent and scope of the several series of Chancery enrol- 
ments have been most conveniently, and lucidly set forth in the 
official " Guide." It may be of further interest, however, to the student 
to ascertain the diplomatic character of the several instruments 
entered in these Rolls and the general departmental system of 
enrolment. The vicissitudes experienced by the Royal Charter in 
this connexion will be presently referred to in an account of the 
evolution of the " substituted charter " in the shape of Letters Patent, 
but the subject is capable of considerable development. Again, it 
will be found that many writs and other instruments under the Great 
Seal are not entered at all, and no satisfactory explanation of the 
procedure in point seems to be forthcoming 2 . 

But, however great the convenience of these separate series at the 
date of enrolment, the advantage is not so obvious at the present 
day. In fact we can easily notice a reaction in the direction of 
greater concentration before the close of the mediaeval period of 
enrolment. Of the " Treaty Rolls " which are represented in the 
reign of Edward I by eight different series, only two were in official 
use at the date of the second coronation of Henry VI. Within two 
years of the battle of Flodden, the Scotch Rolls came to an end, 
leaving the French Rolls to represent a specialized department of the 
Chancery, which produced enrolments fitfully till 1668 and entry 
books down to an uncertain date in the i8th century 3 . Of the rest 
the Exchange and Liberate Rolls together with the Redisseisin 
Rolls end in the reign of Henry VI, whilst the Rolls of Statutes 
were superseded by a new Parliamentary Record in the reign of 
Henry VII. 

On the other hand the Fine and Pardon Rolls are continued to 
the Stuart period, whilst from the i6th century the regular series of 

1 It is scarcely necessary to include such temporary and irregular series as the Praestita 
and Misae Rolls of King John's reign, whilst the Coronation Rolls like the Parliament Rolls 
themselves are really records of a curial nature. 

2 Many "returnable" writs were evidently intended for preservation on the Chancery 
files and possibly for enrolment in the parvi rotuli now known as the Chancery Miscellaneous 
Rolls, both of which series are evidently only the wreckage of a large collection. A similar 
deficiency in later times, in the case of the Treaty Rolls, can be explained by the neglect of 
the prothonotary of the Chancery (whose office had become a mere sinecure in the i8th 
century) to enter instruments that were formerly preserved by enrolment in this series. 
Some of these "Commissions," &c. are entered in the Secretaries' Entry Books (cf. 
below, p. 279.) 

1 Cf. Reports on Chancery Offices 1740 and 1816 under "Prothonotary." Also Reports 
on Public Records, 1800 and 1837 under "Chancery." 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 233 

Patent and Close Rolls are supplemented by other special collections. 
In this later period, however, as in the earlier, enrolments are 
sometimes found to have been made specialiori modo in an un- 
expected quarter. Thus the enrolment of the Proclamations of 
Henry VIII announcing the changes in the royal style consequent 
on the successive adoption of the formulas Fidei Defensor, Ecclesiae 
Anglicanae Supremum Caput, and Hiberniae Rex is found in the 
Judgment Rolls 1 of the King's Bench. 

It may be stated as a general proposition, that whilst the various 
instruments enrolled elsewhere than in the series of Charter Rolls, 
Patent Rolls and Close Rolls are to be regarded equally with the 
latter as charters, writs or letters under the Great Seal, their 
diplomatic composition is often of a wholly abnormal character 2 . 
This is especially noticeable in the case of the so-called "Treaty 
Rolls," above referred to. In this large group of enrolments, in 
addition to the usual Letters Patent of Protection and Safe-conduct, 
Licences and various species of Letters Close, including even some 
relating to Exchequer business, we shall find many unconventional 
forms and a large proportion of instruments connected with diplomacy 
which are frequently of a notarial character. 

In other cases, a special form of enrolment may be indicative of a 
distinct diplomatic construction, as in the case of the Parliament 
Rolls, Statute Rolls, Coronation Rolls, Dispensation Rolls, and 
Redisseisin Rolls or may merely denote, in the form of Letters 
Patent or Close, a special subject of ministerial interest, as in the case 
of the Exchange Rolls, Fine Rolls, Scutage Rolls, Pardon Rolls and 
Protection Rolls 3 . 

In the case of some other enrolments, although it may be possible 
to trace the forms of many diplomatic instruments amongst the 

1 Hil. 13 Hen. VIII, rot. 14. Hil. 26 Hen. VIII, rot. i. Hil. 33 Hen. VIII, 
rot. i. 

2 Since this was written the greater number of these temporary series have been arranged 
as supplementary to the great series of Patent and Close Rolls. In addition to these a 
number of Extract Rolls have been described, being only secondary compilations like the 
duplicate Patent and Close Rolls which have also been properly placed. 

3 This is especially noticeable in the case of the group of fiscal instruments defined as 
early as the i2th century (Dialogus, I. vi) and entered in turn on the Close Liberate and even 
on the Gascon, Norman and Exchequer Rolls of the I3th century. The Parliament and 
Coronation Rolls may be regarded as the Records of Processus tangentes Regnutn. The 
Redisseisin, Exchange and Dispensation Rolls appear to be the official products of certain 
Statutes. In the case of the last-named we have what is ostensibly an ecclesiastical diploma 
(i.e. a licence or faculty), but this was incomplete without confirmatory Letters Patent which 
are also enrolled. The writs of Redisseisin and the Licences and Passes as they are entered 
on the Exchange Rolls are for the most part in the form of departmental memoranda. 



234 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

entries 1 which have been previously referred to as departmental 
minutes or docquets 2 , we shall gain but little diplomatic knowledge 
from a study of their extended forms. In this connexion it may be 
remarked that there have been few greater hindrances to the scientific 
study of historical sources than the practice which prevails so largely 
in the present day of describing particular diplomatic documents by 
technical titles. Such terms, for example, as a " Foundation Charter," 
an " Inspeximus? a " Creation " or a " Conge d'elire are doubtless 
thoroughly descriptive, whilst it is equally convenient to distinguish 
common and recurring forms by such titles as "Commissions," 
" Precepts," " Mandates," and the like. It is not, of course, intended 
that these conventional titles should stand alone in the vocabulary 
of Diplomatic, neither do we desire that they should be regarded 
as anything more than varieties of recognized diplomatic species. 
Nevertheless few students who have not made a special study of the 
Chancery Records can at once appreciate the fact that documents 
described as " Commissions," " Precepts " or " Mandates " may be 
more or less interchangeable forms of Letters Patent, Letters Close or 
departmental writs ; that an Inspeximus may be issued in the form 
of Letters Patents, or again in the very different form of a royal 
charter of confirmation. 

A simple remedy for this confusion of terminology would be 
found in the consistent use, by experts, of the specific titles of diplo- 
matic documents, the descriptive title being added in parenthesis. 
Thus we should speak of " Letters Patent (Commission)," " Letters 
Patent (Mandate)," " Letters Close (Mandate)," " Letters Patent (In- 
speximus)" " Charter of Confirmation (Inspeximus}" and so forth 3 . 

The special descriptions referred to are not indeed confined to 
instruments issued under the Great Seal, but are applied equally to 
writs under the Smaller Seals and even the Sign Manual. Here the 
occurrence of alternative forms makes the use of a precise terminology 
especially important, otherwise the student will be in danger of 
regarding " Benevolences " and " Passes " as specific forms equally 
with " Privy Seals " and Sign Manual Warrants. Again, the in- 
evitable changes in constitutional and legal procedure effected by 
statute or ordinance produced a new crop of diplomatic terms before 

1 The Fine and Oblate Rolls (mediaeval) and the Praestita, Misae and Extract Rolls. 

2 Cf. above, p. 230. 

3 For the various forms of Letters Patent in the reign of King John see Rot. Litt. Pat. I. 
iv. sq. The facility with which technical titles may be supplied for common instruments can 
be seen in a formula book of the i8th century (Hail. 6702) as well as in the old handbooks 
of legal practice known as the "Complete Clerk," &c- 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 235 

the middle of the i6th century, whilst the presence of bi-lingual or 
even tri-lingual versions of a common form has increased the general 
confusion 1 . 

The term " Licence," for example, is applied to several species 
of instruments, each of which exhibits noticeable variations. The 
later Chancery Enrolments from the i6th century onwards have 
indeed owing to this altered terminology a somewhat unfamiliar 
aspect, though the forms of many typical instruments, such as Offices, 
Creations and Commissions can be traced back to a very early 
date 2 . As for the files and entry books of the Smaller Seals and the 
Sign Manual during the same modern period it must be said that 
they are greatly disfigured by an official terminology which can 
only be described as diplomatic slang. Here, again, it might seem 
desirable to employ the diplomatic descriptions, which are fortun- 
ately applicable from first to last, indicating the cant official title 
in a parenthesis. 

(b) Charters and Confirmations. 

Although the essential formulas of the royal charter can be clearly 
recognized from the reign of Henry II, a few final touches remained 
to be added before the typical mediaeval instrument reached its full 
development at the beginning of the I3th century. 

These additions will be most noticeable in respect of the Initial 
and Final Protocols which usually indicate any important changes in 
the political position of the sovereignty or in the official practice of 
the Chancery. To such natural transmutations must be further 
added the effects of the final development of the legal or feudal 
theories which had governed the conditions of royal grants from 
a much earlier date. 

On the whole, the changes both in style and theory do not amount 
to very much, partly, perhaps, because the necessity for their intro- 
duction is obvious. 

The changes in the royal style which took place at the beginning 

1 The fact of the interchange of titles in the case of Charters, Confirmations, Letters 
Patent, Letters Close and general writs under the Great Seal, &c. and even of Writs and Letters 
under the Smaller Seals and Sign Manual, is sufficiently known. It may be observed, how- 
ever, that although the same administrative effect is frequently produced by several distinct 
forms of instruments this is not always the case. A concordance of these parallel forms 
would be of interest and value. 

* The evolution of the conventional "Office" and "Commission" can be traced by a 
comparison of specimens dated in the reigns of Henry II, John, Edward II, Henry VIII, 
and George II. See Formula Book, No. 53. 



236 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

of the reign of John form the most familiar feature of the "con- 
ventional charter" of the I3th century. That is to say, the primitive 
designation of the " King of the English," &c., gives place to the 
feudal title of the " King of England." The secondary terms of the 
royal Superscriptions during the following century are regulated by 
purely political considerations which involve from time to time the 
omission of the titles Dux Normanniae and Comes Andegaviae and 
the acquisition of those of Dominus Hiberniae, Dux Aquitaniae, and 
even of Rex Franciae^. The Address now regularly includes the 
Priors in addition to the Abbots, and usually substitutes ballivis for 
minis tris. 

The Notification is invariably in the plural person, perpetuating 
an innovation begun in the last reign, and the Exposition takes 
the form of a definite " Movent clause 2 ." Here the consideration 
expressed reflects the condition or merits of the recipient of the grant, 
whilst a religious motive is also expressed under appropriate circum- 
stances. 

In the Dispositive clause the essential words remain the same, 
but their arrangement is now regulated according to a stereotyped 
formula in the typical feoffment of the period. That is to say, the 
words of concession, concessisse et hac carta nostra confinnasse, are 
indicative of the nature of the grant, whilst the Habendum et tenendum 
clause defines its conditions or determines its extent, the Disposition 
being thus divided into two more or less distinct portions. Following 
these we have an injunctive Final clause beginning with the conven- 
tional Quare volumus, but now systematically reciting the tenor of the 
Dispositive clause, concluding with the general reference sicut praedic- 
tum est. Besides this injunctive clause, there are often other Final 
clauses relating to the usual Reservations of accustomed service with 
traces of a Remainder clause and Warranty which are in keeping 
with the new litigious relations between the crown and its feudal 
tenants 3 . 

In the Final Protocol the formula Data per manum Cancellarii 
nostri introduced under Richard I is replaced, after the minority of 
Henry III, by the well-known innovation per manum nostram, whilst 
the regnal date is exclusively employed. No variations of any 



1 See Formula Book, sections I and II, and Hardy, Hot. Chart, Preface. 

8 Of purely constitutional interest is the frequent use of the clause intimating the consent 
of Parliament (cum consensu prelatorum, &c. in praesenti Parliament} inserted before 
concessisse. 

3 Cf. below, p. 244. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 237 

importance occur in respect of the attachment of the Great Seal 
which is always pendent (by cords) from the folded margin ; but now 
for the first time a purely official formula is found in the shape of 
a departmental memorandum describing the means by which the 
execution of the instrument was procured 1 . It must be remembered, 
however, that there is a well-marked, though somewhat obscure, period 
of diplomatic inactivity during the minority of Henry III. From 
November 1218 to January 1227 no charters were issued under the 
Great Seal, and there is a corresponding gap in the Charter Rolls 
for the first eleven years of the reign. Neither can we assume, 
as in the case of the earliest Chancery Rolls of the previous reign 2 , 
that the disuse of Royal Charters was accompanied by an increased 
activity in the issue of Letters Patent. It is true that the Great Seal 
of Henry III begins "to run" in 1218, and that, as far as Letters 
Patent or Close are concerned, there are no outward signs of an 
official stagnation. At the same time it may be fairly surmised that 
till 1223 the King was in a state of pupillage, and we are never certain, 
in default of original instruments, whether the current " Letters " were 
sealed with the Great Seal of the Chancery 2 or with some substituted 
seal which may have been a Smaller Seal or even the counter seal of 
a regent 3 . 

With the above exception the form of the conventional charter 
is well maintained during the whole of the I3th century. Before the 
reign of Edward II several slight expansions and variants can be 
recognized, and these show a tendency of Letters Patent and other 
instruments in the same direction. One of the most noticeable of 
these innovations is the well-known formula de gratia nostra speciali 
which, possessing a special constitutional significance from the reign of 
Henry IV, occurs as early as that of Edward II. This formula, how- 
ever, although it was much affected by the Continental chanceries, 
is not completed till the next century by the addition of the words 
ac ex certa sciencia et mero motu nostris. From the reign of 
Edward IV it is employed as a conventional Movent clause in typical 
grants, whilst a further variation is noticed under Henry VII 4 . 

1 Per breve de Privato Sigillo, &c. See above, p. 230. 

2 An interesting series of original writs in Exch. of Rect. warrants for Issues, Bdle i, 
confirms the evidence of the Chancery enrolments as to the vicarious attestation of royal 
instruments during this minority. 

3 See Formula Book, No. 126, and cf. the interesting remarks on this subject by Mr F. M. 
Powicke in E. H. K. xxm. p. 220. Amongst other substituted seals we find that of the City 
of London utilised in Pat. 5 Hen. Ill, m. i d . 

4 Et certis considerationibus nos specialiter moventibus. 



238 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

Another familiar formula which dates from the reign of Edward II is the 
motive expressed in Creations or Grants of Office 1 pro grata et Lauda- 
bili servicio quod dilectus et fidelis noster A. nobis hactenus impendit, an 
expectation of continued service being often added. Another ex- 
pansion (per praesentes) which became fashionable in the I5th century 
is apparently a mere variant of the old form praesenti carta which 
had been to some extent discontinued since the reign of Henry III. Of 
a purely legal character is the Reservation quantum in nobis est, 
frequently found in charters of pardon and licence, as well as in 
Letters Patent of the same nature, from an early date, and the develop- 
ment of legal procedure in the I3th century easily accounts for 
several modifications and innovations of this kind 2 . 

From the middle of the I5th century the florid variants in the 
Narrative and Dispositive clauses of certain charters, particularly of 
Creations 3 are very marked ; but by this date the royal charter has 
become a mere echo of the Letters Patent, in which, from the first, 
many eccentricities of style were allowed. The Address of the later 
charter was also subject to variation. Dukes are added to the usual 
list under Edward III, but still later the Address was frequently 
modified in several particulars, as the circumstances of the case 
might demand. Thus Constables are included in the case of charters 
to towns, just as Foresters were included in the Disafforestation 
charters of the I2th and I3th centuries. Again, the Universal 
Address at the close of the i$th century had become still more 
explicit, but on the other hand, an Address that is appropriate to 
a Charter is sometimes found at this date to be followed by execu- 
tion in the style of Letters Patent. Finally, we may notice that 
before the disuse of royal charters in 1516, the ancient injunctive Final 
clause (Quare volumus) is lost to sight in the presence of the new 
statutory clauses designed for the protection of royal interests against 
greedy and unscrupulous supplicants, which also afforded the deserving 
grantee some immunity from legal chicanery and official extortion 4 . 

1 This is sometimes preceded by a clause closely resembling a Preamble. 

2 It will be noticed that in the case of the numerous enlargements of the later grants by 
means of new paragraphs beginning Insuper, Praterea or Ulterius, the Movent and Dispositive 
clauses are usually repeated in each case, thus removing the objection to similar digressions 
taken in the case of Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman charters (cf. above, p. 224). 

3 e.g. Ordinavintus, constituimus, appunctavimus, erexitntts, &c. cf. Habendurn, tenendum, 
utendum et gaudendum, &fc. In some cases the variants are of a simpler nature, as, in tarn 
atnplis modo et forma, &c. which is concise by comparison with the Anglo-Norman Ita bene, &c. 

4 e.g. Eo quod expressa mentio, &t. by virtue of the Statutes i Henry IV and 18 
Henry VI (cf. Rot. Par!, in. 376 a). The other well-known clauses above referred to are 
Et de data pradicta (according with the date of expedition of the Privy Seal Warrant), Non 
obstante aliquo statute, orY. and Et hoc absquefine, &c. in Cancellaria, &c. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 239 

One of the most interesting, but at the same time one of the most 
obscure incidents in the evolution of the charter is connected with the 
gradual displacement of the conventional form by a substituted in- 
strument. This is the Patent, in its familiar sense, which has achieved 
a virtual supremacy over the ancient charter before the close of the 
1 3th century. At first this dual method of diplomatic composition 
was the cause of some confusion. Indeed, in certain cases a grant 
which should have been made in the form of a charter was executed 
in the style of Letters Patent. Entries of such grants may be found 
on the Chancery Patent Rolls, cancelled, with the note, Quia in 
rotulo Cartarum. At the same time it should be observed that these 
grants were not only sparingly made before the reign of Edward I, 
but also in most cases they are of an exceptional nature. Charters 
conveying grants of hereditaments or liberties to ecclesiastical or 
lay corporations are still made out in the ancient form, but gifts of 
forfeited estates 1 , provision made for the support of royal princes 
or household officers, custodies and estates not granted in perpetuity, 
were considered fair subjects for the issue of Letters Patent 2 . These 
instruments were also used for recording contracts or other financial 
transactions between the crown and the subjects, and in such cases it 
is not unusual to find Noveritis as a notification in place of Sciatis, 
according to an earlier precedent. 

On the whole, however, the form of these Letters Patent is far 
more regular and consistent than that of the royal missives to which 
the same title is applied. This perhaps is the reason why the former 
out-lived the latter in the possession of that title, ousting them from 
the stately membranes of the Patent Rolls to a humbler place 
amongst the bundles of State Papers for the Tudor and Stuart periods. 
Nevertheless, the most artificial form of Letters Patent of donation 
can only be regarded as a substitute for the conventional formulas of 
the charter, and even the florid expansions of these new instruments 
are merely refinements of an earlier diplomatic practice 8 . As early as 
the reign of Henry III we meet with specimens of Letters Patent 
eleganter scriptae* in the style of the Papal Curia and in the pedantic 
atmosphere of the Court of James I the Patent employed to confer a 
dignity or office had become a Euphuistic essay 5 . Indeed it might be 

1 These, however, might be made by Letters Close for livery of seisin. 

2 Cf. Formula Book, pp. 24, 54. 

3 Many of the grants to royal princes or favourites contain elaborate provisos and 
reservations, cf. Quod haec gratia nostra non cedat in prejudidum vel exhereditationem, vel 
trahatur in consequentiam, &c. Cf. Formula Book, No. 44. 

4 Pat. 45 Hen. Ill, m. 4 in cedula. 

5 Some of these embody discourses on various points of scholarship. 



240 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

fairly questioned whether the charter of the I5th century has derived 
its variations from the Patent or whether these have been simply 
copied from the charter itself by the latter instrument 1 . Perhaps the 
soundest view of the matter is that the : really characteristic formulas of 
the Patent writ are the Address and especially the Attestation. The 
gradual omission in both Charter and Patent of a distinctive In- 
junction 2 and the occasional use of a common Attestation indicate the 
approaching amalgamation of the two instruments as early as the last 
decade of the I5th century. 

It is well known that in its latest phase the Patent is concerned 
only with grants of dignities, offices and privileges, the reason for 
this being found in the constitutional limitations imposed upon the 
royal prerogative in respect of the crown lands 3 . But long before the 
advent of the Civil List the number of the royal grants of land had 
fallen in keeping with the exhausted resources of a personal monarchy. 

The suggestion has frequently been made that the custom of con- 
firming royal charters, especially in the case of municipal corporations, 
may be derived from the practice of the Roman Empire 4 . As, however, 
this supposed analogy is not confirmed by diplomatic evidence, it need 
scarcely be considered here. Some difficulty might even be found in 
discovering satisfactory precedents for such Confirmations under the 
Anglo-Saxon monarchy, since the reputed Confirmations of this period 
are not only of doubtful authenticity, but must be regarded, in some 
cases at least, rather as Innovations than as Confirmations 5 . It is, 
indeed, not unreasonable to conjecture that the very irregularity which 
has been noticed in the case of the earlier post-Conquest Confirma- 
tions 6 is indicative of a novel practice. As late as the reign of King 
John a conventional formula is not invariably used. The Confirma- 
tions of the latter part of the I2th and of the early years of the 
1 3th century are, however, equally characterised by simplicity of form. 

1 Above, p. 238. After the disuse of the conventional charter in 1516 these variations 
are continued with equal facility by the clerks of the Patents. As late as the reign of 
Charles II we have an elaborate Movent clause introduced by the word cum and the 
Dispositive clause is divided into successive paragraphs. 

2 Et idea vobis mandamus. Similarly the later charters drop the distinctive Injunction 
Quart volumusy &-'c. 

3 i Anne, c. I. 

4 Nouveau Traite, I. 176; Hardy, Rot. Chart. I. iii. 

5 Apart from the obviously suspicious character of these transactions, it will be noticed 
that the existing texts are almost invariably preserved in cartularies or chronicles. Examples 
will be found in the case of Winchester, Canterbury, Abingdon, Croyland, Peterborough, 
St Paul's, Chertsey, &c. Even the Worcester register ( Heming) is not to be relied on in this 
connexion. 

8 Formula Book, p. 41. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 241 

In these instruments two devices are usually employed. By the 
former a mere notification is made of a particular or general concession 
on the same terms as those contained in a previous charter or 
charters 1 . By the second the body of the former charter is re-issued 
in almost identical words with new protocols for the royal style and 
attestation 2 . Finally, it may be observed that the royal Confirmations 
of this period include a large proportion of private donations, and 
numerous individual charters may be included in a single Con- 
firmation 3 . 

Such was the practice of the English Chancery down to the nth 
year of Henry III, when, as is well known, a new expedient was 
resorted to. This change was perhaps unconsciously necessitated by 
the Proclamation of 6 Nov. 1218 forbidding any charter or grant in 
perpetuity to be issued under the Great Seal by reason of the king's 
minority 4 . This was followed, as we have seen, in January, 1227, by 
the further announcement 5 that all existing charters must be con- 
firmed under the new Great Seal, in compliance with which we must 
assume that the Confirmations entered on the Charter Rolls of this 
year were duly executed. 

The Inspeximus used for this purpose was perhaps not altogether 
a new device, although it is true that it must not be confused with the 
analogous system of Vidimus employed in the French Chancery 8 . 
Whilst we may safely reject the picturesque account of the origin of 
the new formula in the reign of Henry II, which is preserved in the 
Chronicle of Battle Abbey"*, it should be remembered that the formula 

1 The Sicul clause, cf. p. 213 and Formula Book, Nos. 36-43. Since this was written 
M. L. Delisle has made some interesting remarks on the subject of "innovated" charters in 
the 1 2th century (Bibl. de F&colt des Charles, loc. citi). 

3 In some cases this was intended to condone the effects of non-user, covered in later 
charters by the Licet clause. 

8 Formula Book, No. 42. 

4 Pat. 3 Hen. Ill, m. 6. 

5 Close ii Hen. Ill, pt. i m. 2i d . Possibly a large portion cf the existing collection of 
official transcripts known as the Cartae Antiquae was prepared at the Exchequer in this 
connexion. Similarly the Edwardian transcripts known as Deeds Various are perhaps 
connected with the proceedings by Quo Warranto in 1278. As for the official production of 
charters at a still earlier date cf. Dialogus, I. viii. 

6 It has been argued that the French instrument was primarily intended for the innova- 
tion of damaged charters, &c. a purpose served in this country by the Exemplification, 
Constal and Innotescimus. This, however, is scarcely a just distinction. Curiously enough 
the Vidimus has played a useful part in the English official system down to modern times, 
since certain instruments, notably Protections and Passes, were duplicated or registered by 
this authority and are still described as visis. 

7 Ed. 1846, p. 165, where we have an extravagant description of a scene in the Curia, 
about 1 175, to furnish a plausible occasion for one of the forged charters of this house. 

H. l6 



242 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

Inspexi was occasionally used during the reign of John. For the most 
part, however, the Inspeximus was a confirmation not of an earlier 
grant, but of a Confirmation of that grant, for comparatively few 
original charters remained unconfirmed at the beginning of the I3th 
century. As the chief interest of the Confirmation itself lies in the 
tenor of the original charter which it perpetuates, so the actual 
formulas of the Inspeximus contain little that is worth our attention. 
Indeed, it is necessary to insist that beyond the official formulas 
which enclose, as it were, the original instrument recited, the formal 
InspeximitSy like the Confirmation, supplies no independent variations 
of diplomatic construction with the exception of an occasional addi- 
tion to the grant. These official formulas will be found in the case of 
the conventional Inspeximus to consist of a Notification, which gives 
its title to the instrument, and a Dispositive clause, which is merely 
declaratory of the act of confirmation. This official pronouncement 
is certainly stronger than the casual allusion of the earlier Con- 
firmation, and the same effect was produced by the further expedient 
of an Inspeximus by Letters Patent. 

The substitution of this new form for the conventional Inspeximus 
is a fresh triumph of officialism. As early as the reign of Henry III 
we find a general confirmation of civic liberties granted as an 
additional clause to Letters Patent of Protection 1 . Possibly we have 
in such Letters of Protection one explanation of the transition from 
the form of the charter to that of the writ in the case of later 
Confirmations 2 . It is only natural to suppose also that the difficulty 
(which still apparently exists) in distinguishing between an original 
grant and a confirmation of an earlier period may have suggested to 
1 3th century clerks the use of a purely official instrument 3 . The 
mere innovation of an ancient charter with the necessary changes 
of style and date was liable to serious abuse, and although some 
confusion seems to have been caused by the substitution for the 
ancient Confirmation of an Inspeximus by charter and then of 
the ordinary Patent formula, the system worked smoothly under 
the skilful administration of the later Chancery. In a still later 

1 Pat. I Hen. Ill, m. i. Omnes barones Londonia habent litteras patentes domini Regis 
de Protectione addita hoc clausula. The usual formulas of a conventional charter of con- 
firmation follow. 

2 Similar Letters Patent of Protection reciting charter formulas are sometimes entered 
on the Charter Rolls of this reign. In the reign of Henry III these Protections are still 
found in the form of charters. 

3 The form of the Inspeximus by charter or by Letters Patent was prescribed by an 
Ordinance of 1285 printed in the Statutes from the Close Roll 13 Ed. I, m. 7 in cedula, where, 
however, it is no longer to be found. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 243 

period we notice a tendency to revert to the general allusion em- 
ployed in the earliest type of Confirmations. Here a succession 
of eleemosynary grants may be compendiously recited and admitted 
under a narrative Exposition 1 . It will be found that the special 
Dispositive clause of the charter type was retained in substance in 
the new Inspeximus by Letters Patent 2 and reappears with suitable 
modifications in the Exemplification, the Constat and the Innotescimus . 
Of these the first may possibly have been derived from the early 
custom of permitting the enrolment of private muniments on payment 
of a fee. We know that copies of such documents were carefully 
preserved in private registers, and the pleadings recorded in the 
Courts were also frequently noted. As early as the year 1372 the 
public right of search amongst the Records was successfully asserted 
by Parliament 3 , and this included facilities for Exemplifications. 
Again, original instruments were not only duplicated as a pre- 
cautionary measure from an early period, but Exemplifications were 
sometimes obtained from a like motive 4 . It was not till the end of 
the I4th century that this informal practice was legalised by Statute 5 , 
nor did it reach its fullest development until the middle of the i6th 
century*. From the first, however, it seems to have been understood 
that the Exemplification was properly concerned with private diplo- 
mata and legal records. The innovation of royal diplomata was 
effected by a special instrument, the Constat, though this was equally 
employed for certifying other records 8 . 

The Innotescimus was used in a less ceremonious fashion and may 
perhaps be regarded as a mere survival of the older Notitia used for 
a special purpose. This might be either the innovation of lost charters, 
or the allowance (or suspension) of a particular privilege (e.g. the 
clause Volumus in Letters Patent of Protection). The Innotescimus, 

1 Nos intelligentes qualiter dominus, &c. [Edwardus /] et alii progenitores nostri nuper 
Reges, &*f. temporibiis suis, separatim et successive, per litteras suas patentes, ex caritate et 
elemosynis suis, concesserint, videlicet, quilibet eorum pro tempore suo, &c. 

- The Forma Confirmations above referred to gives suitable formulas for different 
species of charters. The value of these, however, is purely legal, and the form of Inspeximns 
and execution is the same in all cases. The chief interest of this ordinance lies in the 
alternative formula of execution of a charter or Letters Patent. 

3 Rot. Par/. II. 3i4 h . 4 Owens Coll. Hist. Essays, p. 201. 

5 6 Ric. II, Stat. i, c. 4. 6 Stat. 3 and 4 Edw. VI, c. 4, and Stat. 13 Eliz. c. 6. 

7 The Constat was chiefly used in early times for certifying the tenor of a Record. In 
later times charters for markets^c. were brought into evidence by means of this certification 
(cf. D. of L. Drafts of Patents, &c. No. 53), but these facilities are specially applicable to 
Letters Patent. 

8 As to the meaning of sub peck sigilli in this connexion cf. L. O. Pike in N. and Q. 
8th Ser., xi. 303. 

1 6 2 



244 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

however, was also used for granting a testimonial or diploma. In 
these instruments the Movent and Executive clauses contain a recital 
of the peculiar circumstances of the case 1 , but the line drawn between 
innovated charters and those that \?ere often produced under suspi- 
cious circumstances and presented for inspection in the usual way can 
scarcely be distinguished in the present day. Even if we regard the 
ordinance of 1285 as a measure of reform, this implies an admission of 
existing abuses. It is at least certain that no adequate scrutiny was 
instituted by this or any other official provision for the confirmation 
or renovation of former grants, and it is doubtful whether a critical 
apparatus for such a scrutiny existed in this country before the 
i/th century 2 . Even in our own time such scrutiny is rarely applied 
to these diplomata, the continued use of which as an unexpurgated 
source of national history is to be regarded with sincere regret. 

The private charters and other diplomatic instruments which form 
the class of " Ancient Deeds " deposited amongst the official archives 
have been already referred to as extraneous documents only indirectly 
connected with the present subject 3 . Previous to the reign of King 
John these diplomata are almost wholly represented by specimens 
casually acquired by the crown or enrolled for a mercenary considera- 
tion. In a later period, however, many of these forms are either 
incorporated in royal instruments 4 or are used independently for semi- 
official purposes 5 . The sordid view of the later Plantagenet sovereign 
as a private adventurer and sharp practitioner, as a borrower, lender, 
fortune-hunter, trafficker in bonds and sureties, or even as a manipu- 
lator of title deeds and testaments 6 , has a new interest for us ; but the 
official character and position of these transactions have yet to be 
determined. It must therefore suffice for the present to call attention 
to the originals, transcripts and enrolments of private deeds which 
have been preserved in vast numbers amongst the Records of the 
Exchequer and other departments 7 . The semi-official forms above 

1 See Formula Book, Nos. 45, 62. 

2 Cf. the instances given in Hardy, Rot. Chart. I. vi, to prove that the Chancery had a 
large discretion for the issue of charters and that the subjects had come to regard the issue 
of certain instruments as a matter of course, and therefore as a matter of right, on payment of 
the usual fees, except in the case of unworthy persons or for illegal purposes. Very much 
the same position has arisen in the present clay with regard to the issue of passports. 

3 Above, p. 59. * Cf. Rot. Chart. (John), passim. 

5 Cf. Red Book, p. cccxi, and Formula Book, p. 129 sq. 

6 e.g. in the Libri Mnnimentorum of the Exchequer (ed..Palgrave, Kalendars), formerly 
connected with the Wardrobe, cf. T. F. Tout in Transactions R. Hist. Soc. (N. S.), VIII. 129. 

7 Deeds Enrolled (Chancery, King's Bench and Common Pleas). Also in Exch. Plea and 
Memo. Rolls and Augm. O. Books. Also (specialiuri modo) in the Exchequer Registers. 
Similarly in the Lesser Courts (Palatinates, &c.) and Registries of Deeds. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 245 

referred to may be found in the rolls of the Chancery and Exchequer 
and in the precedent books of those Courts. At the same time it 
will be possible to trace the influence of certain of these instruments, 
drawn with consummate skill by shrewd and learned men of business, 
upon the forms of the royal Chancery itself. The legal pedantry (as 
some would call it) of the age is reflected in the warranty clauses of 
royal grants and in the releases drawn on behalf of the crown in its 
dealings with the feudatories. Doctors learned in the civil and canon 
law drafted conventions with foreign princes or repartees to the papal 
curia, and royal merchants introduced refinements in the bond or 
recognizance which were turned to good account in official circles. 
These innovations are of interest if only because they serve to remind 
us that in spite of the decadence of the ancient diploma the art of 
diplomatic composition, reinforced by legal subtlety, attains its highest 
point of development at the close of the I3th century. It is well 
known that these private instruments furnish a multitude of diplomatic 
forms. But although the terminology of these is well established, 
a detailed description of their diplomatic construction cannot be 
attempted here. Reference will, however, be made to their official 
position elsewhere 1 . The study of their diplomatic composition can 
be facilitated by several well-known handbooks and by recourse 
to the collection printed by Madox 2 . 

In the first place, then, we may regard direct Feoffments in the 
shape usually of single charters or Deed-polls, as following the 
same plan of diplomatic construction. On the other hand, certain 
" indirect " Feoffments, though possessing the legal quality of convey- 
ances, assume a diplomatic form which is closely assimilated to that of 
the Convention. These " indirect " Feoffments are the " Release," 
" Quit-claim," or " Surrender," whereas the true Convention, as a 
covenant or contract, includes the various forms of "Concord," "Com- 
position," "Bond," "Oath" and "Letters of Attorney," many of 
which are duplicate charters, known as "Cyrographs" or "Indentures" 
forming a great class of " Ancient Deeds." 

Outside these two main groups there is the so-called " Certifi- 
cate," a convenient title for the classification of an irregular diplomatic 
variant of the " Feoffment " or of the " Convention s ." The "Petition," 
with the " Address " or " Memorial," is clearly distinguished by its 
epistolary character even when employed as a draft in the preparation 
of an instrument issued under the Great Seal. These documents, 

1 Appendix. * f'ormulare Anglicanum. 

8 A certificate might, however, resemble the modern document so called as a statement of 
facts within the knowledge or belief of the writer. 



246 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

however, for our present purpose must be regarded as of a semi- 
official nature. 

Although it is generally assumed that the royal diplomata served 
as models for all private charters' there are several familiar types 
of public instruments which are apparently derived from private 
forms 1 . These instruments it will be further noticed are connected 
with the official practice of the Courts rather than with the procedure 
of the royal Chancery itself. The common forms of the "Convention" 
and the "Oath" may indeed be found amongst the State Papers of the 
earlier period, and we have already noticed the official use of the 
forms of private deeds such as "Quit-claims," "Releases" and "Sur- 
renders." Again, the position of the whole body of diplomatic instru- 
ments in private law would seem to render this question of precedence 
immaterial. At the same time there are certain types, such as the 
" Fine" and the " Recognizance," which have attained a paramount 
official position by reason of their frequent employment for curial 
business, for, although the " Fine " is essentially a legal record, its 
diplomatic form may be traced back for several centuries as a " Final 
Concord," "Convention" or "Composition," which possesses well- 
defined diplomatic features of its own 2 . The "Recognizance 3 ," indeed, 

1 Many such conventions in connexion with diplomacy and politics will be found amongst 
the Patent Rolls and Treaty Rolls of the I3th century. A bond for faithful service was a 
formidable instrument (cf. Red Book, p. cccx), and some interesting political conventions 
may be seen in the Charter and Patent Rolls of the reign of King John. A familiar instance 
of the private Convention adopted for official purposes will be found in the case of the 
" Indenture of War," and the indentures for the receipt or transfer of jewels and records 
(Palgrave, Kakndars, passim, and Formula Book, Nos. 147, 148). 

2 The "Fine," as we have seen, is an official instrument which recalls the general style 
of the Old English convention though it derives its actual formulas from the Roman law. 
For its connexion with the diploma of the i2th century cf. L. Delisle, Bibl. de F Ecole des 
Chartes, loc cii. The reconstruction of this "inverted diploma" is, of course, an easy task. 
In its judicial aspect, however, the "Fine" must be regarded as a record of the King's Court 
from first to last. That is to say, the writ to commence the action and the licence to 
compound it are essential parts of the proceedings commemorated in the " principal record " 
or cyrograph, which is no mere home-made charter, but compiled on the same plan as other 
formal records. On the other hand, we have the analogy of the Archa Judaeorum, and the 
punctilious execution of a triplicate Concord, the original of which, formally handed in for 
registration, is now represented by the official " Foot " (cf. below, p. 313). 

3 The "Recognizance" which may be found in official enrolments or entry-books is 
frequently of a purely official nature. The Bonds entered into by nearly all office-holders furnish 
a large number of these entries, whilst contractors and even tenants of the crown-lands are 
represented here. In later times the simple Bond, or the Defeazance, may be replaced by a 
statutory Warrant of Attorney or Cognovit, namely a bond given by a debtor for the purpose 
of enabling a creditor to secure preferential treatment against other creditors, and many 
thousands of these Warrants were filed amongst the records of the King's Bench and 
Common Pleas. Far more interesting instruments of this nature, however, were those 
executed under the Statute of Merchants of 1283 and the Statute of the Staple of 1353, the 
certificates for which are referred to below. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 247 

differs but little in its diplomatic composition from the "Bond," though 
the conventional style is fixed at an early date, and this conventional 
form in turn serves as a model for later judicial and commercial 
instruments such as the " Affidavit," " Mainprise " and the " Statute 
Staple 1 ." Moreover, Recognizances are consistently enrolled, a circum- 
stance which lends an official character to other instruments, including 
"Letters of Attorney" and "Oaths 2 ." Another class of semi-official 
documents is of a still more miscellaneous character. These are the 
Certificates made out by various local officers in compliance with some 
statute or departmental routine. During the mediaeval period, how- 
ever, such instruments if not made as returns to Inquisitions 3 were 
usually in the form of Deeds, Letters Patent, or Signed Bills 4 . Some 
later types will be familiar in the case of " Certificates of Residence 5 ," 
"Blood-Money Certificates," Sheriffs' "Bills of Cravings 6 ," "Certificates 
of Musters 7 ," "Sacramental Certificates 8 ," " Passing Certificates 9 ," and 
many others. None of these Certificates were enrolled in the Chancery 
since the originals, made out by local officers, were intended for 
preservation 10 . In some cases, however, documents of this nature were 

1 Amongst the earliest and most important of these semi-official collections of Bonds or 
Recognizances and Acquittances are those connected with the Exchequer of the Jews. 
These Records consisting of Bonds by Christian debtors to Jewish creditors, and Acquittances 
of the latter to the former were carefully preserved in the "Archives" of the Exchequer. 
These Bonds are in the usual diplomatic form, but were executed with details which savour 
of the Civil Law, in the presence of the officials of the Archa. The " Starra," on the other 
hand, were variously composed in Latin, French, or Hebrew and were signed by the 
peregrine creditor in Hebrew characters and also sealed, but unless enrolled they were 
invalid (cf. Select Pleas of the Jewish Exchequer (Selden Soc.), Gross, Exchequer of the 
Jews, and Jacobs, Jews of Angevin England). In later times the registration of private 
mortgages has been confined to the counties of Midds. and Yorks., but modern abstracts 
of Deeds of Settlement, &c. have been preserved at Somerset House for purposes of 
Revenue. 

1 The official history of the Oath is still more extensive, cf. Red Book, p. cccix sq., 
Report on the Public Records ( 1 800) , p. 2 36 sq. , Palgrave, Scottish Documents (passim). For the 
oath of Councillors see J. F. Baldwin in E. H. R. XXI. i. For the later oaths of Justices 
of the Peace, &c. see S. P. Dom. Entry Book 72, fo. 313 and 333. In another aspect the 
oath of allegiance, or office, may take the form of a statutory certificate as in the case of 
"Acknowledgments of Supremacy " and other "Tests." 

3 e.g. " Proofs of Age" (cf. Palgrave, /Calendars, I. 162), Certificates of Homage (T. of R.) 
and Certificates of Knight Service (Red Book, Vol. l.). 

4 e.g. Household officers' Assignments, Customers' " Cokets," and Wardrobe " Deben- 
tures," for which see Formula Book, p. 122 sq. 

5 Amongst the Subsidies. 

6 Exchequer Records (see Scargill- Birds' Guide). 

7 Amongst the State Papers. * In the Petty Bag and elsewhere. 

9 Admiralty Records. 

10 The notarial Diploma, as seen in the well-known instance of Grants of Arms by the 
Officers of Arms, is in the nature of a Certificate issued by virtue of royal Letters Patent (cf. 
Formula Book, No. 140). 



248 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

entered in precedent books 1 . In most cases, however, they were 
simply filed, and a large collection of interesting evidences has been 
preserved in this form. Amongst these are the certificates of Mayors 
of towns and Staples reporting the failure of debtors to meet the 
recognizances entered into by them in accordance with the statutes of 
Acton Burnell (1283), Westminster (1285) and the Staple (1353) and 
invoking the assistance of the sheriff to compel payment by legal 
process 2 . The series of certificates known as Significavits represents 
the interests of another class of the community, being reports from 
the officials of the ecclesiastical courts as to the contumacy of lay 
offenders in despite of ecclesiastical censures, which were not removed 
till the beginning of the last century. These also conclude with a 
formal request for the aid of the " secular arm 3 ." Of a more formal 
nature are the Certificates of Institutions to ecclesiastical benefices. 
Other instances of the Certificate in its primitive official sense as 
a Notitia will be found amongst the documents collected by Madox 
in his Formulare Anglicanum. 

Amongst other well-known instruments of private origin which 
have been preserved in official archives we might include such quasi- 
diplomatic forms as Petitions 4 , and Specifications 5 , Parliamentary 
Proxies and Pawns 6 , Pensions and Corrodies 7 , and many others ; but 
the diplomatic value of these is of small consequence unless it were 
to illustrate the important and often unsuspected part played by the 
Petition in the issue of a Charter or Writ 8 . 

1 Cf. Red Book and Black Book of the Exchequer. Palgrave, Calendars, from which a 
very instructive list of diplomatic titles and variants might be compiled, S. P. Dom. Entry 
Book 72 and H. O. Precedents, 1-5. 

2 Cf. Formula Book, Nos. 135-137. 

8 A series of Petitions for the arrest of "Vagabond monks" is preserved amongst the 
Chancery Warrants (cf. Formula Book, No. 87 and No. 139). 

4 Filed during the mediaeval period and entered on the Parliament Rolls. 

5 i.e. of Inventions enrolled on the Surrender Rolls, &c. 

6 Enrolled in the Petty Bag (ed. Dugdale, Summons to Parliament, cf. Formula Book, 
p. 82). 

7 Cf. Cardinal Pole's Pension Book (K. R. Misc. Bk. 31), and Templars' Corrodies (ed. 
Cole, Documents). 

8 In addition to the conventional sequence of Petitions (cf. Formula Book, Nos. 88-93), 
connected with the issue of a Conge felire, " Royal Assent," or " Restitution of Tem- 
poralities" many others will be found amongst the " Ecclesiastical Petitions," e.g. for licenses 
to found chantries, &c. Indeed the certificates described above in connexion with statutory 
Recognizances might be regarded, like the ecclesiastical Significavit, as virtual Petitions for 
Letters Patent or Writs of Assistance under the Great Seal, 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 249 



(c) Writs under the Great Seal. 

Like the charter itself the ancient executive writ may be re- 
garded as surviving in a conventional form from the I3th century 
onwards 1 . At the same time we shall find that its construction and 
use have been completely revolutionized under the new order of things 
brought about by the organization of the Chancery department in the 
reign of John. Instead of a general type of writ, royal or depart- 
mental, to serve all purposes of administration, justice or finance, 
we can distinguish from this date an increasing multitude of types 
to which certain diplomatic titles have been applied. 

For a long time past the missive writ has been employed, some- 
times as a precept, and at other times as a certificate, whilst its 
affinity to the mediaeval letter is sufficiently obvious. A good 
instance of this interchange of character and terminology is seen 
in the Writs and Returns connected with the Inquest of Knights' 
Service in 1 166. Here the king's writ was apparently addressed 
to the sheriff of each county who notified the military tenants of its 
purport, either individually or in the County Court. The returns 
made to the writ were also apparently delivered to the Sheriff and 
transmitted by him to the King. No specimens of the above writ 
have survived, but it can be reconstructed with some probability from 
the existing returns 2 . It seems to have been regarded as a " precept" 
or " mandate," but it is also described as a writ (breve) or letter 
(litterae). The Return was in the form of Letters Patent (breve sigilla- 
tum et apertum) with the seal pendent (pendens extra sigilluni). It is 
variously described as a carta, scriptum, and breve, but is in fact a 
certificate in an epistolary rather than diplomatic form, for the execu- 
tion was not attested. 

There is no evidence to show whether the royal writ issued on this 
occasion was a departmental one, namely " tested " at the Exchequer 
where the returns were preserved and used ; but a long series of such 
writs were issued during the following century in an almost identical 
form 3 . To this type of administrative writ no special title has been 
applied, and we may perhaps regard it as a conventional survival of 

1 " Letters Patent" of Henry II are confirmed by John and it is at least certain that the 
term is used in the English Chancery from the first year of that reign, that is to say two years 
before the series of Patent Rolls begins. For the analogy of the contemporary practice of 
the French Chancery cf. Giry, Hist, de Diplomatique, p. 755 sq. 

2 See Red Book, p. 412. This has been cleverly demonstrated by Mr J. H. Round. 

8 Testa de Nevill, passim. In some cases (fo. 4i6 b ) the returns, made in precisely the 
same form as in 1 1 66, are described as Litterae Patentes. 



250 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

an older form 1 . It will be noticed at once that we have to do here 
with a writ the issue of which does not conclude the matter under the 
royal consideration. For this purpose a Return is required, and there- 
fore the writ in question belongs father to the class of " Original 
Writs," or Writs of Inquisition, than to the present class of declaratory 
instruments such as Charters, Letters Patent and Letters Close. The 
Writ of Inquisition itself, however, must be regarded as a type of the 
primitive form from which the Chancery " Letters " were gradually 
evolved. Moreover, it will receive a further separate description 2 in 
connexion with the Return, which in many cases constitutes an actual 
Record. Similarly, it is desirable to defer a notice of the Original 
and Judicial Writs which are usually associated with the class of 
Judicial Proceedings. 

The official title of the Letters Patent has been derived with 
much probability from the circumstance of their issue in an open 
state, in distinction to the closed missives under the Great Seal, which 
will be presently referred to. The same term has been applied to the 
elongated writing of the initial words of certain diplomata 3 , but this 
practice is of purely foreign origin. It may also be noticed that the 
term "patent" was frequently applied to private diplomata of an 
especially formal nature 4 . The title of these instruments is also 
descriptive of their general resemblance to letters or writs rather than 
to charters 5 , but their most distinctive feature is perhaps the famous 
Dating clause which introduces a foreign element in the shape of an 
announcement of due execution 6 and a new departure in the personal 
Attestation of the sovereign 7 . 

The origin and meaning of the latter formula have been the cause 
of considerable discussion 8 . It is obvious, however, that Teste me ipso 

1 We shall presently see that this administrative writ was frequently replaced, from the 
reign of Edward I, by writs of Privy Seal in the same form. 

2 Below, p. 293. 

3 Litteris Patentibus signified in "large letters." In distinction to this phrase we have 
the official formula Littera sunt patentes to indicate the execution of Letters Patent. 

* Cf. Pateat universis per prasentes. 

5 The ancient and important Writ of Right was always Patent in the sense of being 
open. A special reason for the use of Letters Patent in certain cases is indicated by the 
following explanation which announces the execution of a writ of the year 1199. Hoc vobis 
significamus per litteras nostras patentes, quia volumus quod idem utrique parti innotescat, 
It would certainly be only reasonable to suppose that in the case of writs the missive in the 
first place was folded and despatched secured by a ligament cut from the lower margin of 
the parchment, were it not for the positive distinction implied between writs open and 
closed. The supposed distinction in the use of a conspicuous pendent seal for the former, is 
open to question. 

6 In cujus rei testimonium has litteras nostras fieri fecimus patentes. 

7 Teste me ipso. * Hardy, Rot. Claus. I. xviii. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 251 

and Teste Rege are convertible formulas, the latter being employed as 
a narrative statement with a further abbreviation in the case of the 
letters T. R. which usually appear in Chancery enrolments. It is 
unnecessary to suppose that the use of this formula implies that 
the instrument was " procured " by the King, since such intervention 
is indicated by a distinct notice 1 . It must, however, be carefully 
distinguished from the Dating clause of charters 2 and the Attestation 
of other instruments such as departmental or judicial writs, which 
affect an older style. Whether this innovation was deliberate (to 
facilitate the operations of the Privy Seal) or whether it was only 
a casual practice acquired by observation of the persistent habit of 
Chancery clerks who used the royal style impersonally in preparing 
their official enrolments 3 , is a question that cannot be easily answered. 
It may be observed, however, that as this new formula constitutes an 
important landmark in the history of English Diplomatic, and as it 
affected something like a revolution in the method of executing 
official documents, it can scarcely be regarded as specially charac- 
teristic of Letters Patent. A far more distinctive formula is seen in 
the Address to all persons concerned, and this with the announcement 
of sealing above referred to, may be regarded as essential features of 
the conventional Patent. 

It must not be supposed, however, that the typical formulas of 
Letters Patent were suddenly evolved from the conventional charter 
or writ of the I2th century. In the first place, we have seen that the 
use of an open writ was no novelty in the reign of John and that 
even half a century earlier an equivalent phrase was employed to 
denote this characteristic. It would seem, then, that this essential 
condition having been thus early observed, the precise wording of the 
several clauses was for some time to come regulated by the circum- 
stances of each case. Even the universal Address invariably found 
in later Patents was comparatively rare during the early years of 
the 1 3th century in the case of missive writs. Like the executive 
writ or later Letters Close, these early precepts are usually addressed 
by name to the officials concerned in their execution. The Exposition 
or Movent clause, which in the Edwardian period is frequently 
elaborated in a marked degree, is scarcely noticeable in the earliest 



1 Per if sum Regent, <SrV. 

2 Data per mantim nostrum, or (from 1189 to 1225) per manum Caiuellarii. 

8 It might, therefore, be argued that just as Rex <SrV. represents A. Dei gratia Rex 
Anglia:, &c., so Teste Rege (i.e. meipso) may represent the official formula Data per manum 
nostram. 



252 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

Patents 1 , whilst the injunction is by no means confined to the formula 
Et ideo vobis mandamus. But the most striking variation is seen in 
the case of the clause announcing sealing. Here in place of the 
familiar formula In cujus rei testimonium has litteras nostras fieri 
fecimus patentes we find that the phrase Et in hujiis rei (evidently 
borrowed from private diplomata) was in use till the eighth year 
of Henry III, if not later. Not only this, but the more figurative 
expression vobis inde mittimus precedes the use of an actual announce- 
ment of sealing contained in the words fieri fecimns patentes' 2 ' by at 
least as long an interval, whilst a similar formula (ei fecimus patentes) 
is found in still later times. 

Again, the actual composition of the earliest Chancery enrolments 
of the reign of John confirms this view of the gradual evolution of the 
distinctive royal instruments of a slightly later period. It is well 
known that no Patent or Close Rolls exist previous to the third and 
sixth years, respectively, of this reign, the conventional writ in a 
slightly modified form doing duty for both Letters Patent and Letters 
Close, side by side with formal charters 3 . When the Patent Rolls 
suddenly begin to be made up in the third year of the reign, Letters 
Close are found mixed with them for the next two years. In the 
case of both classes of instruments the typical formulas are elaborated, 
as will be shown presently, by a very slow process of diplomatic 
construction. The earliest stereotyped form is naturally that in most 
frequent use, namely Letters of Protection, which, as early as the 
first year of the I3th century, are distinguished as Litterae Simplices 
as opposed to those furnished with the clauses Volumus (giving 
immunity from certain action at law), Nolumus, and other forms 4 . 
Mention has already been made of the use and possible abuse of 
the conventional titles which have been given to such familiar forms 
of Letters Patent as Commissions, Presentations, Protections, Safe- 
conducts, Pardons, Credentials and many others 5 . Herein the Patent 
shows its affinity to the ancient royal writ, and this devolution is 
indicated by the general terms " Precept " and " Mandate " 6 applied 

1 An interesting form is that which mentions the persons ll ad instatuiam," of whom 
the grant was procured. The occurrence of personal Attestations in the earliest Patents may 
or may not be connected with their procurement. 

2 The words et sigillatas were sometimes added but this condition is implied. 

3 The fiscal side of the administration during this period is represented by the Liberate 
Rolls (ed. Hardy). 

4 Formula Book, Nos. 65, 66. The later Departmental Passes (for shipping) are derived 
directly from these instruments ; but they were specially enrolled in the reign of George II. 

8 Above, p. 234. 

8 From the narrative or descriptive forms used in enrolments, i.e. Praeeptum est or 
Mandatum est. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 253 

to Letters Patent equally with Letters Close and Original and Judicial 
or Departmental Writs. 

Later still a fresh batch of diplomatic titles has been added to 
describe new subjects of diplomatic concern 1 , until something like 
uniformity of official terminology is established in the Docquets of 
the 1 7th century. 

Although the above distinctive formulas occur in the large 
majority of Letters Patent, both of a missive and diplomatic 
character, it would be possible to point to instances in which the 
-absence of the Notification and the wording of the Exposition 
produce a close resemblance to Letters Close. In these cases, 
however, the real character of the instrument is shown by the 
presence of the clause announcing sealing. Perhaps the widest 
departure from the general form of the normal patent writ is found 
in the case of diplomatic instruments connected with the execution 
of treaties, such as " Letters of Credence " and especially " Pro- 
curations" or "Full Powers" for concluding peace or alliances 2 . 

Letters Patent in French, which present us with versions of the 
usual Latin formulas, may be occasionally met with towards the end 
of the 1 3th century. Possibly a further development of this conversion 
was avoided by the free use of the bilingual and eventually trilingual 
Privy Seal and Sign Manual Warrant. 

The Charter and Confirmation and their substitutes in the shape 
of Letters Patent, as became select and authoritative instruments, 
continued, until a comparatively late date, to be composed in Latin, 
whilst English was frequently employed in preference to French for 
such versions of public and private diplomata as occur before the 
1 6th century 3 . 

In one aspect Letters Close may be regarded as types of the con- 
ventional writ adapted for some special purpose by means of a 
distinctive formula. In another aspect they do not seem to differ 
essentially from the conventional form, except that they are dignified 
by a special official enrolment 4 . The chief characteristic of Letters 

1 Cf. Campbell, Matt-rials for a history of the reign of Henry VII (Rolls), passim. 

For the several types of Letters Patent in an earlier period see Rot. Lilt. Pat, Preface, and 
Formula Book, Nos. 50-70. 

2 In the case of treaty papers the year of Our Lord is often substituted for the regnal year. 

3 Instances of the latter may be found in various cartularies and the official " Transcripts 
of Deeds various." They are quite unintelligent from a diplomatic point of view. A very 
early English version of Letters Patent is seen in the famous trilingual Proclamation of 1 258 
(Pal. Soc. N.S., Part 3. No. 73). Generally speaking French is superseded by English and 
Latin from the reign of Edward IV. 

4 The distinction obviously implied by the name cannot be easily recognized owing to 



254 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

Close would seem to be that as they rarely, and then only indirectly, 
take the place of royal charters, the ceremonious formulas of Letters 
Patent are here dispensed with, and this is in keeping with their 
confidential nature 1 . At the same time they are distinguished from 
the old administrative writ by certain peculiarities of construction, 
which may be enumerated as follows. The Notification is frequently 
wanting and the Exposition is usually more developed than in the 
conventional writ 2 . The extent of this development depends on the 
nature of the Dispositive clause which gives to the writ its varying 
character. The nearest approach to the form of a charter is seen in 
the case of grants of land or offices " during pleasure " or " for sus- 
tenance." Here, as well as in grants of Pardon and Protection, 
we see some resemblance to Letters Patent, whilst a similar 
resemblance to the construction of the ancient writ is seen in the case 
of instruments intended to give effect to previous grants. In the 
above and other instances the Dispositive order, or Injunction, is 
usually introduced by a formal Notification and Exposition. The 
most frequent use of Letters Close is, however, for purely adminis- 
trative purposes, and in this aspect they may be considered as 
specialized writs in the nature of precepts or mandates, differing only 
from Letters Patent . in their application to matters affecting the 
efficient discharge of former instructions 3 or the personal interests of 
the crown 4 . These forms can be easily distinguished by the omission 
of a Notification, an Exposition, and the explanatory words et idea, 
their place being taken by an abrupt Injunction. In every case, 
however, there is a formal Attestation by the King himself, though 
this is not preceded, as in Letters Patent, by a clause announcing 

the loss of original specimens. Whether these Letters were in all cases sealed on the back, 
with the Great Seal as a cachet, or whether the seal was also affixed by a tag and the Letter 
closed by a band, cannot here be decided. 

1 As in the case of Letters Patent many of these writs in the earlier period were executed 
under the Privy Seal. 

2 This is seen in the class of writs in which the Notification is replaced by a narrative or 
hypothetical exposition such as Cum, Quia, &c., or Monstravit, &c. 

3 As an instance in point, we find the following issue of Letters Patent and Executive Writs 
on one day in connexion with the same business : 

(a) o April. 54 Hen. Ill Letters Patent appointing new collectors of the 2oth 

in Essex. 

(b) Same date. Same notifying same to the late collector. 

(c) Writ admonishing the new collectors to proceed. 

(d) Writ of Assistance to the Sheriff. 

4 e.g. Wardrobe, Household, &c. For the special uses of these instruments in legislative, 
fiscal and military business see below p. 256. Feudal business was recorded here in later 
times by writs for Livery of Seisin, &c. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 255 

Execution. There are also, as in the case of the latter instruments, 
official memoranda to indicate the agency by which the writ has been 
procured. 

The systematic alternation of formulas, which is a characteristic 
feature of the whole class of Letters Close, will perhaps be understood 
from the following table. It will be noticed that the variation in the 
Injunctive clause is really governed by the construction of the ante- 
cedent Exposition. Thus a Notification 1 followed by the usual 
Movent clause or a simple narration 2 requires the form Et ideo, &c. 
to complete the sense. On the other hand, indirect 3 or hypothetical 4 
clauses are followed by an abrupt Injunction. Finally, in instru- 
ments which lack both Notification and Exposition 5 , the Salutation is 
immediately followed by a precept which partially recalls the Anglo- 
Norman writ. 



Superscription 


Address & 
Salutation 


Notification 


Exposition 


Disposition 
(Injunction) 


Attesta- 
tion 


Date 


i, A. Rex &c. 


B. &c. 
salutem 


Sciatis quod 
&c. 


concessimus 
&c. 


Et ideo tibi 
prsecipimus &c. 


Teste me 
ipso 


A pud 
X&c. 


* 





wanting 


Monstravit 
&c. nobis 


! 


". . 


it 


3- 





wanting 


Cum &c. 


tibi prae- 


,," 


,, 










cipimus 






4- 





wanting 


Si&c. 


tune summone 
&c. 


H ' 





5- 


" 


wanting 


wanting 


Tibi praecipi- 
mus quod &c. 
or Liberate &c. 


N 

* , 


" 



It is well known that the two great series of Patent and Close 
Rolls have continued down to modern times, but marked differences 
exist between the earlier and later forms of these instruments. In 
the first place it will be obvious that the missive forms both of Letters 
Patent and Letters Close were superseded, first by the missive instru- 
ments under the Smaller Seals during the I5th century and from the 
Tudor period onwards by the cursive " State Papers " in the ver- 
nacular. For purely formal or ceremonial purposes a certain number 
of the mediaeval forms continued to be used, particularly those 
connected with ecclesiastical patronage and foreign diplomacy. In 



1 See Form No. i below. 
3 No. 3 below. 



4 No. 4 below. 



2 See Form No. 2 below. 
5 No. 5 below. 



256 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

respect of domestic administration we find that the use of certain 
instruments, particularly Commissions and Proclamations, is largely 
governed by political considerations. Again, owing to inevitable 
constitutional changes in the character of the sovereignty 1 , the older 
grants of land are replaced by Crown Leases and Pensions. 
Economic progress is signalized by the recognition of Inventions 
and by facilities for Denization. Other instruments such as Creations, 
Offices, Licenses, Charters of incorporation and Pardons are preserved 
in a very similar form. 

Although in respect of their general diplomatic composition the 
" Letters " issued under the Great Seal may be regarded as either 
Patent or Close, there are still several well-known series which would 
be more properly described as special letters and departmental writs 2 . 
Of these the fiscal writs of Liberate, Computate, Allocate, Perdono, 
Solvatis and the departmental Contrabrevia, which, frequently found 
on the Close Roll itself, are familiar examples 3 . To these may be 
added certain technical instruments connected with ecclesiatical 
matters and military service, together with the extensive group of 
Parliamentary writs 4 . Finally, amongst the original and judicial 
writs connected with the administration of justice there are various 
familiar types which have been separately preserved or enrolled 5 . 
Many of the above have well-marked individual characteristics, but it 
has only been possible to refer to them in the limited space at our 
disposal. Moreover, many of these forms have been carefully 
described in connexion with the history of English Law, and 
specimens of the same have been printed in official publications and 
legal formula books 6 . 

We have seen that since the close of the i$th century, there has 
been a growing tendency in the direction of the disuse of the Great 

1 i Anne c. i. 

2 Under the head of departmental writs of an administrative character may be included 
a vast collection of executive instruments, some of which, like the "original" and "judicial" 
writs used in legal procedure, required a return to be made by the persons to whom they were 
addressed. For this reason perhaps such writs, though composed in the style of Letters Close, 
are not regularly entered in the Chancery Rolls. For besides the originals (and returns) 
preserved in the Chancery Files, a large proportion were entered in the Exchequer Rolls. 
(The whole subject, however, like the documents themselves, is one that deserves further 
attention. Cf. above, pp. 249, 250.) 

3 Cf. C. Bemont in Roles Gascons, Supplt., T. I. p. xvii; Madox, Exchequer, 
Vol. I. p. 390; Dialogus, I. vi; Pipe Roll Soc. Vol. in. Intro, and Formula Book, 
Nos. 77-86. 

* e.g. Scutage Rolls, &c. Cf. Palgrave, Parliamentary Writs for these, and Formula 
Book, Nos. 77-86. 

9 e.g. Writs of Redisseisin. 6 See Gross, Sources and Literature, s.v. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 257 

Seal and the substitution of writs or warrants under the Smaller Seals, 
and the Sign Manual. Not only were these employed in a missive 
form, but they also served, on occasion, as warrants which dispensed 
with the issue or enrolment of Letters Patent ; just as in turn 
Letters Close, the typical missives of the I3th and I4th centuries, 
were gradually disused with the advent of the modern State Paper. 
This being so, the characteristic feature of these enrolments disap- 
pears, and the later Rolls are utilized for the registration of private 
and semi-official Deeds 1 . In this later period also new series of 
enrolments were founded, which served still further to deplete the 
ancient classes of Letters Patent and Close'' 4 . 

The diplomatic forms alluded to above are those usually associated 
with the practice of the royal Chancery in respect of writs under the 
Great Seal. Others, however, are found amongst the Records though 
only the briefest mention of them can be made. Of these a large 
class of Parliamentary instruments will be found to be either irregular 
in point of construction or consisting of Chancery writs in a common 
form 3 . The later proceedings of Parliament, like those of the King's 
Council, are of the nature of judicial or departmental Records and 
both are still preserved in external custody. Others which are 
connected with the procedure of the Ecclesiastical and Admiralty 
Courts are of considerable interest for the general study of diplomatic 
and refer particularly to certain Chancery enrolments 4 . At the same 
time these instruments are composed according to a notarial system 
which has always been regarded as alien to the native legal system. 
Moreover, an exact description of their diplomatic construction would 
involve some explanation of the procedure of the Continental 
Chanceries 5 . Finally, it must be remembered that the official 

1 e.g. Recognizances, Conveyances of several kinds, Trusts and Awards, Memorials and 
Specifications. 

2 e.g. Dispensation, Surrender and Bishop's Patent Rolls in the rjth century. 

3 These are printed exhaustively in Palgrave's Parlianitntary Writs. Their sequence is 
indicated in the Formula Book, p. 82, from the proceedings connected with the Parliament 
of York in 1321. Here notarial forms, such as proxies and certificates, will be found to 
alternate with royal writs at certain stages of the proceedings. Cf. also Stubbs, Select 
Charters, Part vn. 

4 e.g. Letters Patent connected with episcopal elections. It is well known that a sequence 
of conventional instruments may be found in connexion with ecclesiastical elections, a notarial 
document alternating with a diplomatic writ as follows: (i) Petition for license to elect, 
(2) Royal License (Conge d\ ! lire), (3) Notification of election, (4) Royal Assent, (5) Canonical 
confirmation of election, (6) Restitution of temporalities. For specimens, see Formula Hook, 
Nos. 8893. 

5 The admirable Manuel de Diplomatique of M. Giry will serve for every purpose of com- 
parison between the Continental and English systems. Cf. also Lemoine, Diplomatique 
practique (1765). 

H. 17 



258 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

collections of ecclesiastical Records 1 are not in the custody of the 
crown, while the Admiralty Records were quite recently regarded as 
purely departmental Archives 2 . 

(d) Instruments under the Smaller Seals (Missives}. 

The partial disuse of the Great Seal of majesty marks the 
beginning of the last stage in the evolution of the charter with its 
subsidiary writs. Whether this momentous change is connected with 
the growth of the personal power of the crown or with the develop- 
ment of the administrative system is a question with which we are 
not here directly concerned, any more than with certain interesting 
speculations as to the antiquity of the private seal itself. The earliest 
existing notices, however, of the official use of a secondary royal seal 
date only from the reign of King John, and the practice in point 
cannot be regarded as fully established before the reign of Edward I. 

The Privy Seal is probably mentioned as such for the first time 
in the reign of John 3 . Whether the " Parvum Sigillum" used on 

1 i.e. The Episcopal Registers (cf. the Prospectus and Publications of the Canterbury and 
York Society). For the Diplomatic of this subject see Lyndewode's Provinciate (1679), 
Ayliffe's Parergon (1734), Oughton's Forms of Ecclesiastical Law (1831), the Reports on 
Cathedral Archives prepared for the Historical Manuscripts Commission (Various Collections) 
by Mr R. L. Poole. For contemporary notices of the formulas of ecclesiastical confirmations 
cf. Wykehanfs Register (Hants. Record Society), i. n, 70, 149, 185, 229, &c. ; Matt. Paris 
(Rolls), III. 306 sq. ; Kegistrum Palatinum Dunelmense (Rolls), I. 392; Cartularinm 
Ramesiense (Rolls), I. 28 40, amongst the numerous sources of information for this extraneous 
subject. 

2 For the forms of Admiralty Records, 141!! i6th century, see R. G. Marsden, Select 
Pleas in the Admiralty Court (Selden Soc.). That there was a considerable official employ- 
ment of public notaries in the I5th century may be inferred from documents printed in the 
Foedera and specific cases like that of Hugo Helwys in the Issue Roll, Mich. 1 1 Henry IV. 

Again, it would doubtless be possible, by means of a careful selection from the texts of the 
mediaeval Foedera and from unpublished documents, to prepare a fairly complete list of more 
or less conventional forms illustrating the overtures connected with a diplomatic mission, the 
Credentials, Commendation and Safe-conduct of the envoys, and the Instructions, Mandate, 
or Powers committed to their charge, with the formal Proxies and Declarations relating to the 
same ; the execution of the treaty protocols and separate provisions or articles, according as 
the negotiations in progress relate to an Arbitration, a Treaty of marriage or alliance, 
a Pacification, a Convention, or a Truce. Finally, the securities or consideration given in 
the shape of hostages or money, the ceremonial of leave-taking and the due ratification of 
the protocols by the high contracting parties. Such an eclectic sequence could, however, be 
of no real value as indicating the normal procedure, which contrasts sharply in point of 
uniformity with the diplomatic practice of later times as represented by the conventional 
sequence of instruments during the i7th and i8th centuries that is referred to above (p. 246) 
and printed in the Formula Book (Nos. 183 194). Reference may, however, be made for the 
elucidation of the later mediaeval procedure to the following works : Maulde la Claviere, La 
Diplomatic an temps de Machiavel, and VI. E. Hraber, De Legatis et Legationibus Tractatus 
varii. 

3 Private Sigillo noslro signatas (Kot. Lift. Pat. p. 183 a). 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 259 

certain occasions in the reign of John was the equivalent of the later 
Privy Seal or was merely the king's Signet or personal seal 1 is at 
least doubtful. In any case the verification of royal instruments 
by this device was regarded as an expedient only justified by an 
emergency 2 . The same view may be taken of the occasional use 
of the personal seals of the Queen, the Chancellor or other royal 
deputies 3 , and this constitutional view was even extended to the 
prolonged abeyance of the Great Seal during a minority 4 . It is also 
clear that the validity of such instruments was open to question 5 , and 
an undertaking was often given for their ratification in due course 
under the Great Seal 8 . It is possible that this provisional use of the 
Privy Seal facilitated the adoption of the later practice of procuring 
Letters or Bills for the due issue of more formal instruments 7 . Great 
care must, however, be invariably exercised in order to avoid con- 
fusion between the formal writs of Privy Seal for the mere issue of 
the Great Seal and the missive writ with which we are at present 
concerned. The same distinction must also be observed in the case 
of Signet Letters and Warrants employed as missives, and Bills, 
Letters and Warrants issued under the Signet or other Small Seal 8 as 
authorities for the use of the Privy Seal or the Great Seal. The 
general resemblance of these two types is a very close one, and in 
both cases the Sign Manual was occasionally employed, at a later 
date, as a supplementary method of execution or expedition. But 
although these early variants must be clearly recognized, and although 
the substitution of the Smaller Seals for the Great Seal was a well- 
known abuse of later times, it is important to note that the chief, if 
not the true function of the mediaeval Smaller Seals, and especially 
of the later Sign Manual, was to authorize the issue of the Great Seal. 

1 This term does not seem to have been used in an invidious sense as in later times. 

2 Quia Magnum Sigillum nostrum nobiscum non habuimus (cf. Rot. Lilt. Clans, p. 1 14 b 
and Rot. Litt. Pat. p. 138). 

3 Just as many subsidiary instruments (including even Tallies) were made in the forms of 
the official scriptorium and employed by local officers, so precepts were issued by the sheriffs 
for certain purposes, and acknowledgments and other certificates were sealed by the Customers 
at the out-ports as Letters Patent under the " Cokel " Seal (cf. Fot imila Book, No. 134). 
Similarly, we find that in much later times warrants were issued by an authority delegated 
to Secretaries of State and local and colonial officers. Debentures on the Wardrobe were 
not issued under the Privy Seal but under the seals of the clerks. 

4 Qiioniam sigillum nondum habuimus. 

8 Numerous ordinances and cases will be found in the Statutes and Rolls of Parliament. 
B Cf. Formula Book, No. 44. This may or may not explain the necessity for the 
confirmation of existing charters in the nth year of Henry III. Cf. above, p. 241. 

7 Cf. below, p. 264. 

8 e.g. The Griffin used by Edward III, and the Eagle by Henry V and Henry VI. 

17-2 



260 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

Of the above missive writs or letters, the Privy Seal is, as we have 
seen, the earliest. From first to last this maintained its position as the 
recognized medium for conveying the royal commands, especially in 
cases where the authority of the Great Seal might be dispensed with 
on the plea of urgency 1 . Again, it will be noted that the use of the 
Privy Seal is closely associated with the development of a new 
administrative department, the Wardrobe, whilst the independent 
authority of the Smaller Seals in general is found to coincide with the 
organization of the Chancery as a Court of Law. From the first, too, 
we find the administrative use of the Privy Seal chiefly associated 
with the fiscal business 2 , which had been from a very early period 
transacted partly in the Exchequer and partly in the Chamber (Camera) 
and Wardrobe 3 . Moreover, the disuse of the Great Seal for purely 
official purposes must have presented obvious advantages. The time 
was soon to come when even the use of the Privy Seal itself was 
found too cumbrous for many departmental transactions ; but this 
further development was also due to the increasing importance and 
dignity of the office of the Keeper of the Privy Seal, and thus we 
reach the final evolution of the diploma in the shape of the Signet 
Letter and Sign Manual Warrant which could be expedited without 
needless formalities or delays which might prove dangerous. 

The characteristic formulas of missives under the Smaller Seals 
have a general resemblance to those of the executive writ (Great 
Seal) 4 ; but in connexion with the Writs of Privy Seal it should be 
noted that although the existence of a Latin form as early as the 
1 3th century is well established, the characteristic language of these 
instruments was French 5 . The Latin writs preserved side by side 
with these in the Exchequer files are mostly instruments under the 
Great Seal issued for the information or instruction of the Barons. 

1 e.g. Commissions of array, Benevolences, &c. in which the public safety is vehemently 
alleged from the reign of Edward III to that of Charles I (Exch. T. of R. Privy Seals for 
Loans). 

2 These are classified as Exchequer of Receipt, " Warrants for Issues." A considerable 
number of missive writs are filed here, and still more are found on the Memoranda Rolls of 
the Exchequer. Others will be found amongst the " Exchequer Proceedings." 

3 Cf. the several charters granted in 1251 to Peter de Rivallis, including in almost identical 
terms the offices of Keeper of the Small Seal, holder of the Third Roll (by deputy) at the 
Exchequer, and Keeper of the Wardrobe, the Chamber and the Treasury of the Household 
(Rot. Chart, 16 Henry III, mm. 7 and 9). The administrative importance of the Wardrobe 
will explain the rapid growth of this clerical department. 

* See Formula Book, Nos. 94 104. An interesting MS. precedent book is preserved 
in the Cambridge University Library (Dd. III. 53 a). 

5 Exchequer of Receipt, Warrants for Issues and T. R. Warrants for Issues (Series I). 
Cf. Madox, Hist, of Exchequer, i. 382 and 387. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 261 

The same remark applies to the writs issued under the Exchequer or 
other departmental seals on the authority of Privy Seals. Letters 
Patent issued under the Privy Seal instead of the Great Seal are 
of course exceptional, although we have evidence of serious en- 
croachments on the functions of the Chancery before the reign of 
Edward II 1 . 

In the French forms of Privy Seal writs we have evidently a mere 
version of the Latin conventional writ, and the same remark applies to 
the epistolary forms sometimes employed. 

The Seal was either endorsed, or affixed en placard or else 
suspended after the manner of the Great Seal 2 . 

It may be suggested, however, that the endorsement in this case 
differs from the perfunctory attachment of the seal in later depart- 
mental warrants for the issue of the Great Seal. If we may regard 
the Privy and Secret Seals as equivalent devices during the earlier 
period the seal was probably used to secure the folded letter in con- 
nexion with a band which tapered from one end. Certainly there is 
little difference in the size of these two seals. The Privy Seal itself 
appears to have been of inconsiderable dimensions (somewhat larger 
than a shilling) during the reigns of Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, 
and the early part of that of Edward III, wh'en it reaches the size of a 
crown piece. The use of this larger seal en placard in missive letters 
is very noticeable. 

The Signet or Privy Signet Seal, which appears in the reign of 
Edward III as rather larger than a sixpenny piece, was lozenge- 
shaped, in contrast to the circular Privy Seal, like the cachet of the 
i /th and i8th centuries. Like the Privy Seal it was invariably of red 
wax and its " scar " is easily recognized on the dorse of royal letters 
by the cross-shaped adhesion spread outside the matrix. We have 
unfortunately little information about the establishment of the Signet 
or its custody prior to the i6th century 3 . 

Signet Letters, though of later date, differ only from the earlier 
Privy Seal Letters in respect of their verification by means of the 
Signet. The characteristic form of both is epistolary, and is rarely 
that of a mere precept 4 , like the Signet Bill or Warrant for Issues 5 . 



1 Cf. Articnli super Cartas, c. 6. For the extensive use of these writs in the Edwardian 
period cf. Madox, pp. 358-9 and passim. 

2 Above, p. 253, p. 4. Letters of Privy Seal, as distinguished from Writs, are found under 
the pendent Seal after 1660 (Hardy, Rot. de Liberate, &c. p. xiii, .). 

3 For the form of the later seal see Audit Office Declared Accounts, "Engravers of Seals," 
and Wyon, Great Seals, Appendix. 

4 Vobis mandamus, &c. 5 Formula Book, Nos. 105 sq.. 



262 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

From the middle of the I4th centiny the heading Per regem occurs 
with or without the Sign Manual ; an authentication which has sur- 
vived in the modern Proclamation. The Salutation and Address 
are epistolary in character and there is frequently a Valediction. A 
noticeable Final clause is found somewhat later in the shape of an 
authorization which became the typical feature of the Royal Warrant 1 . 
Perhaps the chief interest of the Signet Letter is found in the fact 
that it served as a model for the later departmental Letter (which it 
also resembles as a paper document), though as a mere survival it had 
an independent existence till the last century. 

The Dormant writ or warrant of Privy Seal extensively used in 
the i6th and i/th centuries bears a close resemblance to the ancient 
writ of Liberate. It is distinguished by the time limit expressed 
in the Injunction 2 . 

The Sign Manual Warrant, which dates from the reign of Richard 
II, differs but little from the Signet Bill except that it is not neces- 
sarily verified by a seal, and in a later period was countersigned 3 . The 
English form "We will and command," is derived from the stereotyped 
Latin formula Nos vo/entes vobis mandamus, whilst, as we have seen, 
the clause of warranty is derived from more ancient instruments. 

The Proclamation closely follows the formulas of the Privy Seal, 
Signet Letter and Warrant with numerous variations. We can even 
recognize in certain specimens the older formulas of Letters Patent. 
It has, however, as its distinctive characteristics the heading " A 
Proclamation " and the curious final Apprecatio " God save the King." 
Alone of the recognized types of royal diplomata the Proclamation 
appears only in an English form, for the Letters Patent to which this 
title has frequently been given have no diplomatic connexion with 
this instrument in its technical sense 4 . In some respects, however, 
the Proclamation would seem to belong to the class of later depart- 
mental instruments under the Smaller Seals and Sign Manual which 
will be described in another section. As these, however, are merely 
variants of earlier diplomatic forms, the Proclamation as a distinct 

1 Et hoe literal nostrae vobis erunt super hoc sufficient ^varrantum. 

2 e.g. For payment of "liveries" at certain annual dates, "and so from year to year" 
during life or the royal pleasure. 

3 Formula Book, No. 100. 

4 It is curious that one of the earliest of these, the so-called Proclamation of the king's 
adherence to the Provisions of Oxford in 1258, was issued in English. It was composed in 
diplomatic style. Similar "Proclamations" are found on the Patent Rolls during the 
i8th century. Mr W. H. Stevenson, however, regards this Proclamation as a Letter Close 
(E. H. R. xxi. 506). It is cited by Bishop Stubbs as a trilingual document (S. C. p. 378), 
but only the English and French versions can be identified. For references to the texts see 
Formula Book, Nos. 70 a and 70 b. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 263 

species in itself should perhaps be mentioned amongst the former in 
spite of its modern associations 1 . 

(e) Warrants for Issues 2 . 

Although these instruments are usually termed "Warrants" they 
comprise, as we have seen, almost the same types as have been described 
above, namely Writs, Letters and Bills of Privy Seal, together with 
Letters and Bills under the Signet and Sign Manual Warrants 3 . These, 
however, are not used as royal missives for general administrative 
purposes, but presumably subserve a single purpose, the issue of 
instruments under the Great Seal 4 . This distinctive use can be easily 
gathered from the Injunctive clause which contains the direction 
referred to. Moreover, most of these Warrants are addressed directly 
or indirectly to the Chancellor, whilst there is also a difference in the 
titles and forms of the instruments themselves. A very large pro- 
portion consists of Bills under the Privy Seal omitting the usual 
diplomatic openings, which are replaced by the heading Per regem, &c. 
followed by the special Injunction. The antiquity of this departmental 
procedure is somewhat uncertain, but it can be traced back to the 
reign of Henry III, and possibly even earlier, in connexion with the 
principle that for certain purposes the assistance of the Great Seal 
might be invoked by a petition to the sovereign or procured by an 
initial fee to the keeper of the Smaller Seal 5 . Evidently, however, the 
official practice continued to be somewhat vague and arbitrary down 

1 Matters of State such as the change of the royal style under Henry VIII might be dealt 
with in this way and enrolled amongst the legal Records (cf. above, p. 233). 

2 See Deputy Keeper's StA Report, Appx. n. p. 189. An excellent account of the 
Procedure is given in Scargill-Bird's (itiide (2nd ed.) s.v. Privy Seals. 

3 Formula Book, Nos. 105 sq. The Bill is a form peculiar to the Warrant as distinguished 
from the Missive. 

4 Not infrequently the Chancellor is required to prepare a suitable despatch in connexion 
with political or judicial business. We also notice in the earlier period, particularly in the reign 
of Edward I, the occasional use of Privy Seal Letters to procure redress without necessarily 
implying the issue of an instrument under the Great Seal for this purpose. In fact, but for the 
circumstance that these letters were not returnable like the Original Writs tie cursu, they 
would scarcely lie distinguishable from those preserved in the Chancery files. In one case 
(Warrants for Issue, Series I, 1682, 17 Jan. 1283) the officials are reminded of the king's 
desire to encourage poor and distressed suitors to approach him. Indeed, we are almost 
tempted to conjecture that at this stage of the development of the equitable jurisdiction of the 
Chancery, the business of the court and of the seal went hand in hand. Somewhat later the 
usual process of royal intervention in the course of justice was accomplished by a Signet 
Warrant to procure a Privy Seal addressed to the justices which would be followed by a 
judicial writ of Sttpersedeas. In such cases the intervention of the seal was procured, we may 
suppose, by personal petition as in the case of Letters under the Great Seal. 

* Cf. Rot. Par!. III. 388 b, 433 b ; IV. 496 b. 



264 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

to the reign of Henry VIII 1 . But although from the reign of 
Edward III, if not still earlier, a recognized procedure existed 2 , this 
was frequently ignored in practice 3 . The good offices necessary to 
procure the issue of Letters Patent or Protections were sometimes 
performed by household officers, whose interest might easily be 
opposed to that of the keepers of the Seals 4 . At length it became 
necessary for the crown to intervene by obtaining an Act of Parlia- 
ment to establish the jurisdiction of these departments on a firm 
footing 5 . 

Previous to this declaratory Act, the procedure at different periods 
during the I4th and I5th centuries seems to have been as follows. In 
response to a petition presented to the crown a Letter under the 
Signet was addressed to the Keeper of the Privy Seal requiring him to 
prepare a Warrant under that Seal as an authority for the Chancellor 
to issue Letters under the Great Seal. This was apparently the 
normal practice and one which differed little from that of later times. 

1 From the reign of Edward I a considerable number of original Warrants exist under the 
Privy Seal, as authorities for the issue of the Great Seal. These are written in a purely 
epistolary style, and we may perhaps suspect that such informal letters, or rather Bills, 
were the official predecessors of the great series of Signet Warrants which become of 
paramount importance from the reign of Richard II. The early letters referred to are 
in the style of the departmental letters of the period preserved in the Ancient Corre- 
spondence of the Chancery, commencing with an Address and Salutation and containing a 
mandate (in rogatory terms) for the good offices of the Chancellor in the matter set forth or 
inclosed. 

2 Chancery Warrants, &c. File 1675 sq. 

3 Cf. above, p. 244 n. i. The authorities cited here seem to show that the issue of 
certain instruments under the Great Seal was to some extent a matter of course as 
early as the beginning of the i4th century. At the same time we may reasonably suppose 
that the sovereign had the chief voice in the matter, and in this connexion the writs of 
revocation of Letters Patent occasionally found are significant. Cf. Pat. 34 Edward III, 
Pt 2, m. 6, assigning as a cause for revocation that the extent of the grant nonfuit intentionis 
nostrae. 

4 Cf. Rot. Parl. m. 268, from which we learn that in 1372 the Signet was usually 
procured by the Chamberlain or Sub-Chamberlains of the Household. It was considered 
desirable that, in the case of venal instruments such as Pardons, the official who procured the 
Signet Bill should endorse the draft prepared for the Privy Seal to ensure his responsibility for 
the concession desired. Originally it would seem that the Chancellor himself had procured 
the warrant after "speaking with " the King on the subject, but this practice must have been 
replaced by the rise of the new seal-bearing officers. Occasionally we have a glimpse of the 
informal procedure which might be used in the case of such petitions for the issue of Letters 
Patent. To original Letters Patent granted to a royal debtor for pardon of arrears at the 
intercession of a certain courtier there are attached a schedule of debts and a contemporary 
note of the petition, together with several other petitions in other cases, reminding us of the 
memoranda sometimes found amongst the later State Papers relating to suits to be advanced 
by the Secretary of State with the King himself or before the Council. Cf. O. L. P. (Exchequer), 
Bdle I. and Chapter House Books, No. 139 (Papers of Thos. Cromwell). 

8 27 Henry VIII, c. n. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 265 

That it was extensively used, is proved by the preservation of a large 
series of these Signet Letters 1 . 

But besides this formal procedure, the warrant in question might 
reach the Chancery direct as a Writ or Letter under the Privy or 
" Secret " Seal, or as a Privy Seal or Signet Bill, or as a Sign Manual 
Warrant 2 . Some of these instruments again might be used as a 
covering writ or letter from the King enclosing the petition for the 
Chancellor's information, or the royal Fiat might be inscribed upon 
the Petition itself. 

In the Privy Seal writs, however, as opposed to Bills, a process 
of transition can be observed during the I5th century. The brief 
mandate with its annexed schedule are frequently, from the reign of 
Henry VI, incorporated in a single instrument which contains full 
instructions for the purpose in view. Finally, from a certain period in 
this reign the writ commences with a mandate to prepare an instru- 
ment in forma sequenti followed by a draft of the same complete 
(except as to the protocols) and concluding abruptly with the usual 
attestation, much after the manner of an Inspeximus. Similarly, the 
petitioner might submit a draft of the instrument desired, possibly in 
his own handwriting, and this was either appended to a petition, or was 
presented in the form of a draft instrument to which a petition, or an 
official docquet giving its purport, was prefixed as a heading. Such a 
draft as this, when approved by the superscription of the Sign Manual, 
was " expedited " in due course. The effect of the Sign Manual as a 
superscription to a Signet Warrant was apparently intended to procure 
its immediate execution by the Chancellor. These drafts omit the 
official details of the Initial and Final Protocols which, as in the case of 
the later King's Bill, were inserted at a further stage of the proceed- 
ings 3 . After the reign of Henry VI the date of the acceptance of the 
petition and adoption of the draft submitted is often indicated by the 
addition of an official Dating clause; but besides this an official memo- 
randum mentions the date and place of delivery of the authorized 
draft to the Chancellor for execution 4 . 

1 In the case of the great Exchequer Scries (T. of R. ), however, these Signets were 
intended to procure the Privy Seal alone. 

2 This is usually indicated by the departmental minute on the Chancery enrolment, Per 
ipsttm regent. 

3 The above change of practice in the reign of Henry VI was not uniformly observed down 
to the close of the ijth century. It is probable that the position of the applicant was con- 
sidered, and there is a common variant in the minute for issuing the Great Seal authorizing 
the remission of fees Pro Deo or Quia pauper. 

4 The origin of this practice which is commemorated in the well-known departmental 
minute, attctoritate Parliament, &c. may probably be found in the Statute 18 Henry VI. c. I 
(cf. Rot. Par!, v. 23 a). 



266 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

The formulas of the Warrant under the Privy Seal or Signet, 
whether in Latin or French 1 , exhibit numerous variations. In the 
earliest period, as we have seen, such letters are informally addressed 
to the keepers or clerks of the Chancery and bear no announcement 
of sealing. In some instances, especially in Passes, provisos may be 
added in a Final clause 2 . 

In its earliest and simplest form the Privy Seal Warrant for the 
issue of the Great Seal, whether procured by a Signet Letter or not, 
appears as an instruction to the Chancellor for the preparation of an 
instrument to meet the requirements of a Petition, which is stated to 
be annexed 3 . The motive of this instruction is usually stated in the 
Exposition of the writ 4 . The Injunction which follows this Exposition 
is generally found as a simple mandate 5 , but from the reign of 
Richard II the later stereotyped formula (Nos) volentes vobis man- 
damus begins to appear. In the case of formal instruments, such 
as Protections, it was evidently unnecessary to forward detailed in- 
structions and the Salutation is followed by a direct Injunction 6 . In 
other cases the object of the warrant was merely to authorize the 
seal to be affixed 7 to instruments already drawn, and these are to be 
returned by the bearer when sealed. 

In the composition of these instruments a uniform and technical 
arrangement is followed. Thus a warrant which refers to a grant to 
be made by royal charter 8 , enjoins the preparation of a corresponding 
instrument 9 with suitable variants in the case of Letters of Protection 
or Attorney, &c. 

During the period in which the greater number of these Warrants 
are composed in French, we are presented with an idiomatic and not 
ungraceful version of the conventional Latin writ. In the 1 5th century, 

1 Roughly speaking, these instruments are bilingual (Latin and French) from the reign 
of Edward II to that of Henry V, and trilingual in the reigns of Henry V and VI. Under 
Edward IV French is rapidly superseded by Latin and English, and the latter has achieved 
a virtual supremacy from the reign of Henry VII. In the earliest period, however, the 
Privy Seal is associated with a Latin script, whilst French is evidently predominant in 
the middle of the i4th century. 

2 e.g. to guard against a breach of the bullion laws. In the case of Protections a mere 
direction is given for the clause Volumus, &c, (as in the procedure under Letters Patent). 

3 /;/ cedula preutntibus interclusas. 

4 Quia concfssinnis, &c. suscepimus in protectionem, &c. datum est nobis intelligi, &*c. 

5 Vobis mandamus. In the case of instructions for special occasions we usually find 
scribalis. 

6 Mandelis. 7 Sigillarifaciatis. 
* Cum de gratia nostra, &c. concessimus, &c. 

9 Carlam, sub magno sigillo nostro, de concessione nostra hujusmodi habere, in forma 
debita faciatis. 



Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 267 

however, a large proportion of the existing Warrants are found as 
English versions which display considerable originality of composition, 
especially when couched in an epistolary form. 

For certain purposes, as we have seen, an impersonal form of writ 
was used, especially for procuring writs of Allocate and Letters of 
Protection. This is the well-known Fiat which may be regarded 
as an official minute, resembling the later " Signed Bill " or " Imme- 
diate Warrant," rather than as a complete diplomatic instrument 1 . 

In addition to the usual verification - by Privy, Secret and Signet 
Seals or by the Sign Manual, the distinctive armorial seals are again 
employed. In certain cases also a Bill or Fiat is procured by the 
Treasurer, Butler, Ulnager or other great Officer acting strictly within 
his departmental jurisdiction- 3 . 

So matters stood when the famous Act of 27 Henry VIII, c. 11 
was passed, which effected a complete reformation of the existing 
procedure. For some time past there had been signs of an increasing 
formality in the execution of these Warrants, and a sharper line of 
distinction had already been drawn between the several stages of 
their departmental preparation. In one direction we notice that the 
drafts are countersigned and expedited with the addition of con- 
spicuous departmental memoranda and official counter-signatures. 
In another direction we see a tendency to develop the second stage 
of the proceedings by elaborating the forms of Privy Seal Writs 
and Bills and of Signet Letters and Bills. In spite of this, however, 
it will be evident from the number of petitions with appended drafts 
preserved as Warrants under the Sign Manual 4 , as well as from the 
terms of the above Act, that the good offices of a friend at Court, 
or a convenient show of poverty, could enable the formal issue of 
letters of the Signet and writs of the Privy Seal to be readily 
dispensed with. This evasion of the customary fees struck a blow 
at the whole official system which had been gradually evolved since 

1 Cf. above, p. 266 and Formula Book, No. 1 23. The Fiat varies in form according as 
the directions given are "general" or "special." In the latter case details amounting to a 
draft of the intended writ may be given therein. 

- These Seals are invariably affixed to the dorse of the Letter, Writ or Bill and appear to 
have been intended in the case of the Signet at least to secure the document when folded 
and closed by a band. In later times a distinction between a Privy Seal Writ and Letter 
consisted in the execution of the latter by means of a pendent seal (cf. above, p. 261). In 
the case of Privy Seal Bills (Protections), however, the Seal was usually affixed on the face 
and immediately following the last word of the writing. 

3 Cf. above, p. 264 and Formula Book, Nos. 128 132. 

4 Chancery and Exchequer T. of R. Warrants for Issues, Series II. The counter- 
signatures of these instruments are noticeable, a device found asearly as the reign of Edward II. 



268 Later Charters and Diplomatic Instruments 

the reign of Edward I. Moreover, in addition to these vested 
interests two new departments of State had to be considered, those 
namely, under the charge of the Secretary of State and the law 
officers. A somewhat cumbrous procedure was eventually enforced 
by the operation of the new Act. Hitherto, as we have seen, the 
royal warrant might take the single form of a Privy Seal, a Privy 
Seal Bill, a Signet Letter or a Sign Manual Warrant, enclosing or 
appending, respectively, a Petition for, or a draft of, an instrument 
under the Great Seal. In future, however, the traditional Petition 
was to be taken under the protection of the Secretary of State, 
who procured the Sign Manual Warrant, which might no longer, 
except in special cases, serve as an "Immediate" Warrant for the issue 
of Letters Patent. Instead, the Warrant only authorized the 
preparation of a " King's Bill " which represents the mediaeval draft 
of proposed Letters Patent, which had been hitherto commonly 
amalgamated with the Petition and the subsequent Warrant. At 
the same time it should be noted that the modern procedure cannot 
be regarded as permanently established for many years after the 
passing of the Act of 1535, owing to the continued use of Signed 
Bills as "Immediate" Warrants. In the next century we find a 
greater uniformity of procedure, especially in the case of formal 
grants 1 . Moreover, it is now the duty of the department of State 2 
which procures a Warrant to submit the petition whereby it first 
originated to the law officers of the crown or other officials concerned 
in the matter. The " Reference " was followed in due course by a 
" Report," upon consideration of which a Sign Manual Warrant was 
issued for the preparation of a King's Bill for which the law officers 
were responsible 3 . 

This " Bill," which again bore the Sign Manual, was then passed 
on to the Signet Office, and thence under the Signet to the Privy 
Seal Office for formal execution. Here, in consideration of the 
payment of the official fees, the protocols were completed and the 
departmental seal was again appended. Thus the Secretary of State's 
Signet was the authority for the Lord Privy Seal to issue a writ of 
Privy Seal, which in turn authorized the Chancellor to issue the Letters 

1 See Formula Book, pp. 114 118 and below, Appendix, where a concrete instance is 
displayed. 

a These included the quasi-judicial courts of Wards and Surveyors as well as household 
officers and the independent patentees of the crown, but the great majority of Letters Patent 
were procured by the Secretaries of State. 

8 The Caveat which might be entered by interested parties at this stage was at first 
registered in the Secretary of State's Office, though regarded in later times as under the super- 
vision of the law officers. It was also employed by the Treasury Board. 



$i> 



Later Charters and $iplomatic Instruments 269 

Patent. These in an earlier period might have been already drafted 
by the applicant, or by the official department which had procured 
the authority of the Sign Manual for their expedition. 

There was, however, something else that the officials did for their 
money. At each of these stages in the slow progress of the Petition 
towards diplomatic maturity an official entry was made of the nature 
of the proposed grant which has served a useful purpose in these 
later times. An abstract was also inscribed upon the instrument 
itself in its several stages corresponding to the official Docquet * 
preserved in the well-known Docquet Books of the several depart- 
ments concerned. In addition to this abstract the usual official 
memoranda and counter-signatures were appended to the drafts. 
The seals themselves were in this later period attached by means 
of strips to the dorse of the instrument, another variation of the 
ancient practice of sealing en placard. In one case or another, 
therefore, we should find the several documentary evidences relating 
to the issue of Letters Patent which, for the sake of clearness, have 
been enumerated in tabular form as an Appendix to the present 
chapter. At the same time it should be remembered that the practice 
herein was not only conventional but somewhat arbitrary, whilst 
owing to the large number of documents missing from the several 
official series the actual procedure in individual cases can no longer 
be ascertained with any certainty. Moreover, it is necessary to 
distinguish between the regular procedure and the official practice 
whereby Letters Patent were issued for departmental or extraordinary 
purposes by virtue either of an "Immediate" Warrant procured by 
the Secretary of State or by a Signed Bill usually procured by the 
Chancellor himself 2 . These special instruments passed the inter- 
mediate stages of expedition, being merely noted by endorsement 
of the royal warrant and abstracted in the Docquet Books of the 
offices concerned, in order that the usual fees might be claimed as 
directed by the Act of 1535. 

1 This Docquet as seen in the King's Bill is possibly derived from the old official 
presentment of the original petition as a heading to the drafts of the proposed instruments. 

2 See Fornmla Hook, p. 117. An elalxirate account of this procedure will lie found 
in the Deputy Keeper's ind Report. A short and admirably clear account will l>e found in 
Mr Scargill-Bird's Guide. 



LETTERS, STATE PAPERS AND DEPART- 
MENTAL INSTRUMENTS. 



(a) Mediaeval and Modern Official Letters. 

IN the State Papers of the i6th century, regarded as Royal 
Letters or official correspondence, the devolution of the mediaeval 
writ or letter missive can be clearly traced. Specimens of these 
diplomatic forms may still be found in a considerably later period, 
but for a long time past they have been giving place to an epistolary 
modification which has been evolved from the trilingual instruments 
in use during the greater part of the I5th century. At length, with 
the beginning of the i6th century, the bulk of the official corre- 
spondence hitherto associated with the practice of the royal Chancery 
has begun to assume a conventional and vernacular form. 

An epistolary style was naturally employed in this country, as 
abroad, from a very early date. Its use, however, may be regarded 
in the light of a literary exercise rather than as a means of official 
communication, although we have seen that the composition of the 
vernacular writ was materially affected thereby, even before the 
Norman Conquest 1 . 

In one aspect, therefore, the private letter appears to furnish us 
with better examples of the epistolary style than the royal missive 
itself. On the other hand, we must remember that the existing series 
of mediaeval official letters is somewhat fragmentary and that there is 
no consistent use of epistolary forms until the general adoption of the 
vernacular style 2 . 

Whether the formulas of this vernacular letter can be derived 
directly from the French or Latin models of an earlier period is a 
somewhat obscure point. Presumably, however, they are versions of 
the French, influenced to some extent by classical models, and 
possibly also by Old English traditions. 

1 Above, p. 208. 

2 Distinct epistolary formulas were recognized by early writers in the dictation of the 
mediaeval letter which was regarded as being composed of five parts; i Salutatio, 
2 Exordium (or Benevolent its Caplalio), 3 Narratio, 4 Petit 'to, 5 Conclusio, (Cf. F. Hahn, 
Collectio Munimentorum (1724), I. 279 sqq.). 



Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 271 

In another aspect, however, they may be regarded as reproduc- 
tions of mere oral conventions, the everyday Salutation, Address 
and Valediction which were highly elaborated in a more ceremonious 
age 1 . 

The conventional letter above referred to was undoubtedly of a 
more cosmopolitan character than the true diploma. In this country, 
as in others, the influence of the Roman Curia is clearly seen in the 
royal and ecclesiastical correspondence which furnishes the greater 
number of mediaeval letters before the advent of the merchant-prince 
and the statesman-scholar. The Paston, Stonor and Cely Letters 2 
are indeed merely survivals of a large class of everyday correspond- 
ence composed in the Stilus A nglicus, which may be dated from or near 
the beginning of the I5th century. At the same time it will be found 
that the essential formulas of these vernacular letters are practically 
versions of French and Latin phrases which are in turn derived from 
an early Chancery style 3 . 

The chief distinction then between the mediaeval letter and the 
many-sided writ is seen in the transposition of the Superscription and 
Address, the omission of the official Dispositive or Injunctive clauses, 
and the substitution of a mere Valediction for a formal Attestation. 
At the same time the respective styles of the Superscription and 
Address are preserved in the modern letter, and the essential words of 
the Salutation and even of the Notification and Exposition are easily 
recognized 4 . In these epistolary formulas, however, we notice certain 
variants which are characteristic of the period or of the position of 
the scribe ; for probably every age has had its own " Polite Letter 
Writer." 

Before the middle of the I4th century the less formal and more 
direct style of Address, which is apparently of ecclesiastical origin, 
has begun to be extended to a wider circle of correspondents. The 
characteristic feature of this privileged style, whether in Latin, French 
or vernacular scripts, is the direct but impersonal Address, and the 

1 It is obvious that in our modern forms of salutation and leave-taking the.same elementary 
courtesies are preserved. The Address, however, like the Superscription or Subscription, is 
not required where the parties are acquainted ; though it is retained in the preliminary form 
of personal introduction. 

2 The remarkable vicissitudes of the first-named collection are well known. The others 
owe their preservation to having been deposited in official custody in the course of litigation 
(Ancient Correspondence (Chancery) and State Papers Supplementary). 

3 e.g. Letters Missive under the Signet or Sign Manual. The Old English writ with its 
epistolary innovations perhaps forms a link between the two styles. 

4 The abbreviated or epigrammatic forms of Address and Salutation found in mediaeval 
letters, such as Salntem qnam sibi and suo patri, &c. do not seem to be perpetuated in later 
English forms. For these and other epistolary types, see Formula Book, Nos. 155 171. 



272 Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 

displacement of the initial Superscription which, by an easy transition, 
eventually finds its place as a Subscription. The Address itself is 
completed by the endorsement of the title of the person addressed, 
whilst the title of the writer and the purport of the letter are also 
frequently appended, being docqueted in a later period as a memo- 
randum of Receipt 1 . 

With this simple change of style the evolution of the modern 
State Paper or departmental Letter is practically completed. The 
variants are few and unimportant. An Invocation may be prefixed 
to the ceremonious Address by devout correspondents. The Notifica- 
tion or Exposition may precede a parenthetic Address, whilst in more 
modern times a narrative form of letter, commonly described as " in 
the third person," comes into use, and here a formal Superscription 
once more precedes an equally formal Address and is associated 
with a ceremonious Salutation ; the Notification being usually well 
defined. 

Naturally the epistolary style, affected by a number of independent 
departments during four centuries of official activity, will exhibit 
periodical changes as in the royal Chancery itself. Again, the indi- 
viduality of the writer counts for something both in respect of the 
choice of recognized forms and in the recourse which may be made to 
certain conventional devices 2 . 

On the whole, however, the official letter, whatever its purport, was 
singularly homogeneous in point of style during successive genera- 
tions, although we are conscious of a considerable interchange of 
diplomatic and epistolary forms as late as the middle of the i8th 
century. But long before this date, the familiar Address and Sub- 
scription of the modern letter can be recognized in our official corre- 
spondence. It has been already observed that the evolution of the 
characteristic formulas would seem to have been effected by a simple 

1 It is curious to notice that this formal Address, when it is not written on the band 
secured by the Seal, seems to have been originally used in connexion with the appended 
Subscription, the former being written in the left-hand corner of the letter and the latter to 
the right of it, the seal being sometimes affixed between them in the centre of the sheet as, 

"To his dear lord A. f LS I From his humble servant B." 




In many cases, however, the Address and Subscription are used independently, though the 
practice of writing each of these in the same position has endured for several centuries. For 
a specimen of a i.sth century address see Public Record Office Museum, Case H, No. 84. 

2 Such as the plea of haste or the excuse for poverty of ideas which may (as now) precede 
the Valediction. An abrupt conclusion seems to have been equally avoided by later 
mediaeval writers, who employ an ejaculation which savours of the diplomatic Apprecatio in 
such formulas as "Which knoweth Almighty God, who, dear lord, have you ever," &c. 



Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 273 

transposition, whereby the nominative Superscription is displaced 
by a vocative Address. The Final clause announcing the terminal 
Subscription was apparently derived from an expansion of the old 
Superscription following the dative Address, and preceding the Salu- 
tation which, like the terminal Valediction, is now dispensed with. 
Thus, instead of beginning in the mediaeval Latin style, " To his dear 
lord A. his humble servant B. gives greeting and due obedience," and 
ending, " May your lordship, in God's keeping, ever fare well," the 
later correspondent, following the process indicated above, will write, 
" My lord I am, my lord, your lordship's most obedient, humble 
servant B.," addressing the letter both on front and dorse " To the 
lord A., &c., &c." 

It has also been previously observed that the process by which 
this modern version has been elaborated may be traced without much 
difficulty by means of a progressive series of formulas in the trilingual 
texts of the 1 5th century, and the same progressive evolution may be 
noticed during the two succeeding centuries. The process of evolu- 
tion is, however, slow and somewhat obscure. The vocative does not 
always replace the dative Address and the letter frequently begins 
with a Salutation 1 , and, in some cases, with a Notification or Exposi- 
tion. Even when, by the middle of the i6th century, the vocative 
Address has become well established, the ceremonious style of an 
earlier period is still preserved in a vernacular version and extends to 
the remaining clauses. The person addressed is "worshipful," "right 
worshipful," or " honourable." Formerly, he would have been " most 
excellent," or "illustrious," and he still remains "reverent." The 
idea of feudal allegiance will be found to have survived in the 
several equivalents for the mediaeval fidele servitium, debita obsequia, 
humilis minister and the like, giving us such common forms as " to 
command," "dutiful," " bounden," "obliged," "faithful" and "humble 
and obedient " (servant). 

These and kindred forms are freely used in official and semi- 
official correspondence down to the middle of the i/th century, 
side by side with a style of endearment which has equally a mediaeval 
origin. Here " dilectus," " amantissimus," " carissimus," " amicus " and 
the rest have their equivalents in "dear" (sir) and "loving" or "affec- 
tionate" (friend) 2 . 

1 "After my hearty commendations." 

2 " Sir," as a simple Address, is rare before the i;th century in the English style, though 
common in the Latin and French. After the Restoration it is the usual alternative to the 
archaic style still retained in departmental correspondence. 

H. 18 



274 Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 

Again, the inevitable Salutation, after losing its Latin form, re- 
tained for some time in French and English versions, is stereotyped 
as " After my hearty commendations," a phrase which lasts longer in 
official than in private correspondence. 

The epistolary form of the Notification is less irregular, though it is 
not an essential element of either the mediaeval or the modern letter. 
In the former, Significamus is not infrequently used instead of the 
diplomatic Sciatis, and the early vernacular version "we let you wit" 
is superseded by the equally persistent phrase, " These are to inform 
you 1 ." The Valediction lingers till the i/th century in the formula 
" I take my leave," but the pious committal to a Holy keeping was 
possibly avoided as a superstitious usage 2 . 

The use of distinct styles, for formal and familiar occasions re- 
spectively, is characteristic of the official epistolary style of the Middle 
Ages. This practice was continued by the secretariats of a later 
period, and both forms occur in Royal Letters down to the beginning 
of the last century. The Latin style was purely conventional during 
the 1 8th century, but in the use of French there was scope for some 
discrimination. The correct Address of a foreign potentate varied 
according to the circumstances of the case. At one time we find 
the mediaeval style " Tres haut, tres excellent et tres puissant prince, 
notre tres-cher et tres-aime " with a committal to the " sainte et digne 
garde " of the Almighty. At another time a more suitable Address 
is found in " Monsieur mon frere," concluding with the expression 
of a " distinguished consideration." The use of the vernacular which 
had been chiefly employed since the close of the I5th century in 
Royal Letters directed to the subjects, did not apparently extend 
to this diplomatic correspondence before the days of the Regency, 
and then merely amounts to a literal version of the familiar French 
form, as " Sire, my brother," &c. 

1 Cf. Si placet, Plese assavoir, " Plese it to understand." As an alternative to this 
Notification we have as an incipit the common form of Exposition, "Understanding that," 
as well as the expressive declaration "So it is that." 

- Other survivals of early Salutations and Valedictions will perhaps be seen in such phrases 
as "presents his compliments" and "with much truth." Even the familiar "ever" has 
some significance, for semper is used with special emphasis in mediaeval formulas ; whilst 
such common forms as "Believe me," "I remain," "Wishing you," "With kind regards," 
&c. may have their counter-parts in an ancient epistolary phraseology. 



Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 275 



(b} Secretarial Instruments. 

It will be evident from the above description of the evolution 
of the modern letter that no sharp distinction can be drawn between 
the official and the private types before the middle of the I7th 
century. This as we have seen was apparently due to the persistent 
use of certain diplomatic forms which, though mere survivals of an 
earlier practice, were chiefly employed for the composition of official 
missives down to a comparatively modern period. 

The casual division of official business between the Secretary of 
State's department and the Chancery throughout the i6th century 
has been already noticed. The changes in political and judicial 
procedure during this period resulted in the final absorption by the 
Secretariat of the political business formerly conducted by the 
Chancellor, following the precedent of the earlier usurpation of 
similar functions by the royal Wardrobe. As the result of this 
encroachment we still find preserved in the existing collection of 
State Papers a large number of drafts and copies of diplomatic 
instruments, and a long series of entry books or Docquets of Privy 
Seals, Signed Bills, Signet Letters, and Sign Manual Warrants 1 . 

The diplomatic features of these instruments have been described 
elsewhere, but their influence upon the epistolary forms of con- 
temporary State Papers and departmental Records may be noticed 
here. 

The importance of the Privy Seal and Signet " Letters " in this 
connexion is especially noticeable, since they supply the common 
form of the official missive employed during the whole of the i6th 
and the greater part of the i/th centuries 2 . These so-called letters 
"are in effect diplomatic instruments under the Privy Seal or Signet, 
distinguished only from ordinary writs and bills by their epistolary 
form. The mediaeval despatch moreover, as we have seen, is apt to 
degenerate, in the ministerial correspondence of the i/th and i8th 

1 See Public Record Office " Indexes and Lists," No. 3, and Formula Book, Nos. 172 sq. 
Proclamations might also be regarded as secretarial instruments, inasmuch as they are 
counter-signed by the Secretary of State and are concerned with political matters. On the 
other hand they are public instruments, and they are not preserved in departmental collections. 
For the modern aspect, see Anson Law and Custom of the Constitution (1907), n. (i) p. 50. 

2 e.g. The King's and Secretaries' Letters amongst the Domestic Entry Books of the 
Secretariat. The King's Letter Books contain chiefly the well-known " Royal Letters," 
being Letters of Credence, Notification, Exhortation, Congratulation or Condolence addressed 
to foreign potentates, some of which are written in a familiar style as stated above. 

I 8 2 



276 Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 

centuries, into an official affectation. Its diplomatic features may be 
described as follows. There is a vocative, impersonal Address and 
a Valediction, both in a style of affection l . The Salutation and 
Notification preserve conventional versions of earlier forms 2 . An 
Exposition is often found 3 , and the Dispositive or Injunctive clause 
when present is in the diplomatic form 4 . In some cases there is a 
Final clause in the shape of a further Injunction or Proviso which is 
of purely mediaeval origin 5 . 

In the epistolary instruments under the royal Signet and Sign 
Manual, practically the same form is preserved from the I5th century 
to the 1 9th. Indeed, but for the fact of their occurrence in depart- 
mental Letter Books it would scarcely have been necessary to 
examine their construction further. Such an examination will, 
however, indicate the use that was made of these instruments as 
models for the conventional official letter of the i/th century. 

(*:) Departmental Instruments. 

In an earlier period we should be almost justified in assuming 
that the official letter, as distinguished from these royal instruments, 
on the one hand, and private correspondence on the other, did not 
as yet exist. It was apparently called into existence by the erection 
of the new State departments under Boards of Commissioners from 
the middle of the i/th century 6 . These official bodies acting in the 
name of the crown made use of the general forms of royal instru- 
ments, but with certain necessary modifications. 

The departmental letter that was thus elaborated may be briefly 
described as follows. There is a conventional Salutation 7 in the 
place of an Address, followed by an Exposition 8 . The Injunctive 
clause is usually found as a direction or requisition 9 , and is almost 
invariably followed, as in a Royal Letter, by the usual official 
warranty 10 . There is no Valediction, but the letter concludes with 

1 " Right trusty and well-beloved and so we bid you heartily farewell." 
a w e greet you well," " And we let you wit that." 

3 " Whereas," &c. 

4 "We are pleased by these presents to grant," &c. "Our Will and Pleasure is," &c. 

5 " For it is our pleasure," &c. (cf. VoJumus enini). "Wherefore we will and command," 
&c. " Provided that," &c. "And these our letters shall be a sufficient warrant," &c. 

8 For Trade, the Navy, Admiralty, Ordnance, Customs, &c. 

7 " After our hearty commendations." 

8 "Whereas," &c. " Forasmuch as," &c. 

9 "These are to direct (pray) and require you," &c. 

10 " And for so doing this shall be your warrant." 



Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 277 

a Subscription in affectionate terms 1 . From the latter part of the 
1 7th century the full Address was usually appended to the letter 
itself, but the direction for delivery was also endorsed. These 
modifications of the traditional Royal Letter doubtless influenced to 
some extent the style of the modern official despatch, although the 
latter is mainly indebted, as we have seen, to private epistolary models. 

Again, just as the Signet Letter was utilized for the above 
purpose, so the instruments of the Chancery itself served as models 
for various diplomatic documents, which have received appropriate 
titles in connexion with the administrative work of the several State 
departments. These are the Warrants, Orders, Instructions, Com- 
missions, which furnish an independent series of diplomatic and 
epistolary forms which were used in the place of the conventional 
out-letter on formal occasions. 

In the first place, it may be observed that although the above 
forms are to be met with amongst the Records of every department 
of the State, as well as in the royal Secretariat itself, it is perfectly 
possible to distinguish between the instruments of either description. 
It is also possible, as we have already noticed, to classify the 
Secretarial instruments according to their use for home or foreign 
affairs. In the case of departmental Records, however, the official 
titles are frequently misleading. Moreover, these instruments are 
frequently entered under general headings, so that a Letter Book 
may contain warrants, and a Warrant Book, letters. 

Of the above instruments, the Warrant as a departmental Record 
must be distinguished from the royal warrants preserved in the files 
of the Chancery. The latter in the shape of Writs or Bills under 
the Privy Seal, Signet or Sign Manual were issued by the King 
in Council or by his Secretary of State or, for certain purposes, by 
a special office 2 . From an early period, however, we have seen 3 that 
it had been usual for warrants to be issued for certain purposes on 
behalf of the chief departments of State, just as judicial writs were 
issued by the several courts of law from a still earlier period. Such 
departmental warrants were countersigned by the great officers of 
State 4 and might even be entered, as precedents, in the Records 

1 " Your loving friends, A. B. C." 

2 The Privy Seal and Signet Offices the latter of which was practically a branch of the 
Secretary of State's department. For these and other Departmental instruments, see 
Formula Book, Nos. 172 208. 

3 Above, p. 267. 

4 e.g. The Treasurer, Butler, Chamberlain. These warrants were missive, or executive, 
in character and also served as orders for letters under the Great Seal. 



278 Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 

of the department concerned 1 . At the same time it will be found 
that these warrants are still preserved as Curial instruments till 
the middle of the i6th century. Thenceforward they were appro- 
priated by the Secretariat and the new departments above referred 
to, the old diplomatic practice connected with the issue of the Seals 
being left in the hands of the seal-bearing officers. 

The early Warrants of the Royal Household are followed by the 
departmental Warrants of the Treasury, and these in turn by those 
of the Ordnance, and after an interval by the Records of the 
Admiralty and War Office. All of these might take the form of 
an instrument under the Sign Manual or else that of an authority 
issued in the names of the royal commissioners constituting the depart- 
mental Board. In the latter case the Warrant might be either 
diplomatic or epistolary in form according to the occasion of its issue 
or the practice of the department. 

These Sign Manual warrants do not differ in any respect, except 
as to the subject-matter, from the diplomatic forms, neither do the 
purely departmental types differ materially from the departmental 
Letters already described or from the Orders and Instructions which 
will be presently referred to. The essential clause " And this shall 
be your warrant " is found in all alike, but special forms occur to 
which distinctive titles have usually been applied. Amongst these 
we may notice the Warrants of the Secretary of State (whether 
" general " or " special ") for the committal of offenders, " Post- 
warrants," " Licenses to pass the Sea," warrants for appointments, 
and some others 2 . Finally, the Warrant appears in common use for 
purposes of local government by an authority delegated to Colonial 
governors or country magistrates 3 . 

Although a distinction is usually made between the departmental 
Warrant and Order, these instruments are not easily distinguished 
in practice, and it might be shown that their distinctive titles are 
often loosely used 4 . Again, we find some of the earliest known 
examples of departmental Orders 5 classified as "Minutes," and the 
precise difference between Orders and Warrants, Commissions or 
Instructions could scarcely be determined from their diplomatic 

1 e.g. The Lord Chamberlain's Warrant Books. 

2 See Classified List. 

3 e.g. Warrants for pardons and licenses of various kinds, cf. Appendix. 

4 They are occasionally utilized in the composition of private instruments, and the form 
of Order prepared by Insurance Offices to authorize the deduction of premiums from official 
salaries still contains the phrase, "And this shall be your warrant for so doing." 

5 e.g. Of the Ordnance Office. 



Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 279 

construction alone. Certainly the occurrence of the well-known 
clause of warranty does not suffice to distinguish the Warrant from 
the Order. Indeed the Order has no distinctive formulas of its own, 
and we are best able to identify its occurrence in connexion with 
naval 1 and military 2 rather than with civil 3 or fiscal 4 operations. 

Possibly the Order may seem to be on the whole somewhat less 
formal than the Warrant. The conventional Salutation is often dis- 
pensed with and the Injunctive clause is somewhat impressive. 
Finally, like the Warrant, Commission and Instruction, the official 
entry of the Order often takes the form of a mere Docquet 5 . 

The Instruction here referred to resembles in some respects an 
Order and in others a departmental Letter. In some cases, as in 
connexion with naval and military operations or diplomatic missions, 
it has a technical significance. 

The departmental Commission, as distinguished from the formal 
Patent of Office, is more carefully drawn than either the Order or 
Instruction, and presents a very similar form for both the naval and 
military services. There is also a distinctive form in use for the 
diplomatic service. The Commissions issued under " the power and 
authority " of a departmental Board differ only, from the royal Com- 
missions in not bearing the Sign Manual. 

In the letters and instruments described above we have examples 
of true diplomatic construction, illustrating the successive stages of 
the devolution of the charter from the close of the Middle Ages to 
our own times. In addition to these, however, there are several special 
and casual types amongst the "Departmental Records" which possess 
a certain interest for the purpose of diplomatic study. The depart- 
mental procedure in respect of the registration and consideration of 
correspondence and other business which formed the subject of the 
official Letters and Orders, has been already referred to in another 
connexion 6 . This procedure is to some extent represented in an 
earlier period by the "Acts" and "Minutes" of the Council and of 
the extraordinary courts erected during the Tudor period, but it 
attains its highest point of development in the case of the several 

1 "Orders and Instructions," &c. 2 "Marching Orders," &c. 

3 "Orders in Council," &c. These are diplomatic instruments resembling Proclamations. 

4 "Money Orders," &c. These are rather Minutes. 

* In fact the official entry books of Warrants, Commissions and Orders compiled during 
the i8th and igth centuries are little more than lists of names for specific dates, and it has 
sometimes proved to be a matter of considerable difficulty to ascertain the form of one of these 
instruments in a particular period. 

8 Cf. above, p. 277. 



280 Letters, State Papers and Departmental Instruments 

departmental Boards and the Committees of the Council which form 
a new feature of the royal administration during the I7th century. 

The practice in question is accountable for an extensive collection 
of Registers, Minutes and Reference or Report books in which there 
is little scope for variety of form. These Registers, indeed, can 
scarcely be regarded as diplomatic documents though interesting for 
the purpose of comparison with similar official compilations in an 
earlier period. 

The Minutes or Journals, however, exhibit a conventional formula 
which is preserved to the present day. This includes an official 
heading of an archaic character, followed by the names of the officials 
present 1 . The business in hand is duly recited and disposed of by a 
Minute which is sometimes regarded as an Order. 

Mention has previously been made of the common official practice 
of referring intricate or technical matters to other departments or to 
individual experts. The formula of Reference is very much the same 
in every case. Usually, it is in the form of a memorandum, personal 
or impersonal, stating that the matter under consideration is referred 
to certain officials who are to consider thereof and report their opinion 
as to what is fit to be done in the same. In many cases the matter is 
already under the consideration of another department, which has 
transmitted the case for an expert opinion, and here the Reference 
appears in the shape of an enclosure. 

The Report, Representation 2 , or Opinion 3 is returned in due course 
as a result of the Reference. This return is made in a conventional 
form, characterized by a show of deference 4 . In some cases space is left 
after the entry of the Report for the final Order of the Board thereon. 
In a later period the style of these reports, especially in the case of 
legal opinions, is less ceremonious. 

It will be gathered from a previous account of the remaining 
types of Departmental Records, such as precedent and commonplace 
books and deposited documents, that these are semi-official or private 
compositions which do not concern our present purpose. The latter 
types, indeed, cannot be regarded in any sense as departmental 
instruments, but unlike the casual deposits amongst the ancient 
Records their diplomatic construction is scarcely worthy of serious 
consideration, whilst the former kind are usually so much abbreviated 
as to present no diplomatic features whatsoever. 

1 "At a meeting of the, &c. At X. the day of &c. Present, A, B, C," &c. 

2 So termed in the records of the Board of Trade. 3 Of the Law Officers. 
4 Cf. the Notification "May it please," &c. and the conclusion "All which is humbly 

submitted," &c. 



ROYAL SURVEYS, INQUISITIONS AND 
ASSESSMENTS. 



(a) Agrarian Surveys. 

THE origin of the English royal Inquest, which has produced one 
of the largest and most important classes of our Public Records, may 
or may not be found in the precisely similar device employed in the 
administrative system of the Prankish kingdom. Such an origin has 
been assumed in the case of the native diplomata on evidence of a far 
less substantial character. Nevertheless we are warned that the close 
resemblance between the laws and ministerial proceedings on either 
side is nothing more than plausible analogy. To derive one constitu- 
tional practice from the other would, we are told, be positively unsafe. 
It is fortunately unnecessary, for the purpose of a diplomatic com- 
parison, to press this interesting analogy any further. The pre- 
existence of certain diplomatic forms in the court of Charles the 
Great may be noticed without insisting that the constitutional pro- 
cedure which those forms might imply was borrowed from this foreign 
source by the Conqueror or his predecessors. The suggestion, how- 
ever, is so obvious that it can scarcely be suppressed 1 . 

The resemblance which is observable between the Prankish and 
Anglo-Norman systems of agrarian valuation is rendered still more 
striking by the use in both of identical formulas and terms which 
often have a technical significance 2 . In both cases, moreover, it is 
noticeable that the Inquisition as a piece of ministerial procedure 

1 It is interesting to find, in an official survey made of the holdings of the North French 
colonists of Acadia in the year 1752, the following formula which bears a curious resemblance 
to the Prankish surveys of the pth century. " The homestead that B. occupies was given to 
him verbally by A. It contains about toises frontage on the sea-shore. There are on it 
bench and scaffolding for the drying of the fish and 2 boats, and enough land cleared to sow 
a barrel of wheat. There is a very good garden which contains all sorts of fruit trees. It has 
men and boys. He has in live stock one bull, one cow and 3 goats and 1 2 fowls " (Report 
on Canadian Archives, 1906). 

3 Cf. Capitulare Aquense, 807 (ed. Pertz), c. 7 ; Capitulare de Villis, 812, c. 62 ; and the 
Forma fnquisitionis, printed in Pertz, III. 175 ; Capitulare Aquisgranense, 812, c. 5 and c. 7 ; 
Annales ffincmari, s.a. 869, in Pertz, I. 48 1 ; and Polyptichum Inninionis Abbatis (ed. Gue"rard), 
pp. 30 sq. and 306. 



282 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

may not only be employed for distinct purposes on several occasions, 
but for all of these purposes at one and the same time. This compo- 
site character is apparently due to the fact that these inquisitions 
were frequently consequent on royal edicts of a more or less statutory 
character. 

Traces of a similar ministerial device may be found in the 
States of Southern Europe, that were influenced by the Norman 
civilization 1 . 

The agrarian survey itself presents the same diplomatic construc- 
tion as will be observed in the case of other royal Inquisitions. 
There is a royal Precept 2 , to which may be appended an explicit 
Forma Inquisitionis*. To this a categorical Return is made by a 
sworn inquest, and the official record is delivered into official custody 
at a given date. Finally, a carefully arranged copy or digest of the 
original returns may be preserved in a Register for official or private 
custody. 

The constitutional distinction which appears to exist between the 
agrarian survey and the fiscal inquest need not perplex the student of 
diplomatic formulas. Both alike are royal inquests and the collection 
of the geld may become an ordinary incident in the manorial 
economy. 

In the case of agrarian surveys, we know that such valuations were 
made on the continent at a very early date. In this country, how- 
ever we have no evidence that these surveys were prepared as the 
result of royal precepts. A brief Return of this nature is found as 
early as the 6rst years of the loth century, in the Beddington Survey, 
which has been printed in the Cartularium Saxonicum*. This in- 
teresting fragment, which doubtless owes its preservation to the 
diplomatic form in which it was composed, is unfortunately unique, 
and it should be added that it is derived from a suspicious source 5 . 
Perhaps such agrarian descriptions had already taken a common form 

1 Cf. Codex Ravennatensis and Inquirifaoes dos primeiros reinados de Portugal (passim). 

2 In the Carolingian capitularies (cf. Capit. de Villis, c. 62) the substance of the writ is 
given as an "edict." For the Anglo-Norman writ ad inquirendum see Liber Eliensis (ed. 
Hamilton), p. xxi. 

3 Cf. M. G. II. 175, Liber Eliensis (loc. cit.), and Domesday Book of St Paul's, p. in. 
In most cases nothing more than a descriptive heading is found which recites the procedure 
indicated by the writ in a narrative form. Cf. the Canterbury surveys of 1216 in Exch. K. R. 
Ancient Extents, 46. 

4 C. S. 618, 619. 

5 The Winchester cartulary (MS. Add. 15350), 12th century. The text of this return is 
evidently corrupt in respect of the stock entries, but can be to some extent reconstructed from 
the conventional formulas of the 1 3th century. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 283 

throughout western Europe, whilst from a still earlier date occasional 
descriptions of land and stock are found in Old English wills or 
conventions 1 . 

The Domesday Survey, stands alone as an agrarian valuation, 
although we may well suspect that some system of royal survey 
was in use during the pre-Conquest period 2 . Again, although the 
characteristic formulas of the Domesday Survey are found to prevail 
in the mixed fiscal and agrarian inquisitions of the 12th century, 
this circumstance must not be regarded as proving the abeyance 
of the agrarian survey of a Prankish type such as may be seen 
in the Beddington "charter" above referred to. It is true that 
no surveys of this nature have been preserved before the close of 
the 1 2th century, but the abstracts of manorial accounts recorded 
in the Pipe Rolls prove that this conventional enumeration of 
agrarian products was still in use 3 . There can be little doubt, 
however, that purely agrarian surveys during this period were 
subordinated to the all important business of the assessment 
and collection of the royal geld. Not only were the geld 
inquests more carefully preserved, but the new and inquisitorial 
formulas employed on these occasions were utilized for the purpose 
of agrarian and even of feudal valuations. To this composite type 
belong such descriptions as that of the Peterborough manors in the 
reign of Henry I 4 , the inquisition taken by the Canons of St Paul's, 
beginning in the reign of Henry II 5 , and the Rotuli de Dominabus of 
the same reign 6 . In these, besides a calculation of the hidage ad 
geldum Regis and of military service or feudal incidents, the number 
of men and ploughs, the rent-roll and services, and the condition of 
the stock is also ascertained 7 . At length, when the basis of fiscal 
valuation was shifted, in the I3th century, to the knight's fee and 
the tithe, the agrarian survey resumes its old diplomatic aspect under 
the title of a "royal extent." Here, whilst the process employed was 
strictly inquisitorial, the object in view is not merely fiscal supply but 

1 Cf. above, p. 205. 

1 Mr L. O. Pike, however (Public Records, p. n), regards the royal inquisition of 1086 
as a new departure, in the shape of a returnable writ. 

3 Pipe- Roll of the Bishopric of Winchester (1902), p. ix sq. 

4 Chron. Petroburg. (Camden O.S.), p. 157. 

8 Domesday of St Paul's (Camden O.S.), p. in, which may be regarded as a private 
survey in imitation of royal inquests. 

Ed. S. Grimaldi. 

7 In addition to the above the Boldon Book (1183) and Survey of the Templars' Lands 
(1185) may be regarded as agrarian surveys, though neither was authorized by a royal 
writ. 



284 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

the improvement of the royal economy 1 . On the other hand, notices 
of agrarian conditions figure incidentally in most of the political 
inquisitions of this and a still later period 2 . Moreover, such matters 
formed part of the routine business of the judicial Eyres or special 
commissions chiefly in connexion with royal escheats 3 . 

For general purposes, however, and especially for the convenience 
of private owners, the " Extent" was recognized as the approved method 
of agrarian survey throughout the remainder of the feudal period, and 
its procedure has even been formulated by a reputed Statute 4 . A single 
glance at the Forma Inquisitionis of the Extenta Manerii will show 
that we have here the final evolution of the agrarian survey, a familiar 
feature of the Carolingian administrative system and fitfully traced 
in English royal or private instruments from the loth century to the 
1 3th. 

(b) Fiscal Inquisitions. 

It has been previously suggested that in the Domesday Survey 
with its "satellites" and fiscal successors, we can recognize the 
normal diplomatic constituents of the Prankish imperial inquest. 
At the same time, in these Inquisitions made by local juries as to the 
extent, profits and stock of royal or beneficiary estates, together with 
the titles, customs and services relating thereto, special stress is laid 
upon the assessment of the King's "geld," or its later equivalents 
in the shape of carucage, scutage, or other devices of imperial 
taxation, and the instruments with which we are here concerned 
receive their characteristic form from this exigency. The formula of 
the existing Returns clearly implies the issue of an antecedent precept 
which was also expounded in a Forma Inquisitionis. Finally, we 
can ascertain the probable nature of this Writ and Form of Inquisition 
alike, whilst we can classify the Returns themselves according to their 
local variants and official enrolments. 

Here, however, we are confronted at the outset with a difficulty 
which is only one of many that have occurred to those who are 
concerned with the interpretation of these early texts 5 . In the case 

1 Cf. Chancery Misc. Inquisitions, passim, and below, p. 296. In some cases apparently 
the agrarian conditions form part of a semi-judicial enquiry. Cf. the "extent" of Ospring 
in Testa de Nevill, p. 2 1 7 sq. 

2 e.g. The Hundred Rolls. 3 See below, p. 297. 

4 Slat, of Realm, \. 242. Cf. also the provisions for the Escheatry (ibid. I. 238). 

5 The present writer must disclaim any special knowledge of the internal or external 
history of this famous survey, which has formed the subject of important studies by several 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 285 

of the Domesday Survey more than one MS. of the existing Returns 
has been preserved and these are apparently connected with different 
stages in the compilation of the official Record and possibly also with 
distinct local interests. 

In the first place, it will be observed that no contemporary or 
authentic specimens of the Writ and Forma Inquisitionis have been 
preserved in the case of the Domesday Survey itself. The issue 
of such a writ is easily assumed, whilst the " form of inquisition " 
would, as usual in this early period, have been deduced therefrom. 
References of this nature are to be found in nearly contemporary 
chronicles 1 , but in any case the precise formula of the existing Returns 
would enable us to reconstruct without much difficulty the " form of 
inquisition," contained either in a writ or schedule. Indeed, the diplo- 
matic description of the Great Survey, which is given by mediaeval 
writers, refers more particularly to the actual Returns which are 
designated by various more or less unintelligent titles 2 . By some 
writers they are referred to as Cartae or Cartrilae and by others as 
Brevia, terms which are apparently applied indifferently to the original 
Returns (now missing), to the Exchequer volumes, or to any 
particular passage thereof. To these titles may be added the still 
more general references to a Scriptum, Rotnlus or Liber, which seem 
to apply to the existing official compilations. In one account, of 
which mention has previously been made 3 , the Returns presented to 
the Conqueror are termed an Imbrcviatio which was ordered to be 
copied in uno volumine. This mention of a single volume reappears 
in Higden's narrative which seems to have been derived from another 
source. 

With regard to these Exchequer Returns, it is sufficient for our 

distinguished scholars, to one of whom, Mr W. J. Corbett, he is indebted for friendly advice. 
The diplomatic theory propounded here is purely tentative and has only been hazarded because 
a reference to the subject could scarcely have been omitted. 

1 e.g. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and the works of Florence of Worcester and Henry of 
Huntingdon. The most detailed and intelligent description of the probable procedure will be 
found in the anonymous Cotton MS. Vitellius, c. 8, fo. isb, edited by Professor Liebermann 
in Ungedruckte Anglo-Normanische Geschichlsquellen, pp. 15 24. For an apparently 
contemporary reference recently discovered by Mr W. H. Stevenson in a Bodleian MS. in 
the shape of a note by Robert, Bishop of Hereford, on the Chronology of Marianus Scotus, 
see English Historical Review, xxii. 72. 

- Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Rolls), I. 353; Flor. Worcester (ed. Howard), p. 449; Will. 
Malmesbury (Gest. R<g.), II. 317 ; Hen. Huntingdon, p. 207; Hoveden (Rolls), I. 139; Rob. 
of Gloucester, n. 552 sq. ; Matt. Paris, Chron. Majora, II. 18; Heming (ed. Hearne), I. 77, 
288, 298; Inquisitio Eliensis (ed. Hamilton), p. 127; Hist. Eliensis (ed. Stewart), p. 228; 
Red Book of the Exchequer (Rolls), I. 14; J. de Oxenedes, p. 37 ; Higden, vn. 308. 

Cott. MS. Vitell. c. 8. 



286 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

purpose to observe that the two volumes in which they are contained, 
appear to represent two distinct stages of official enrolment. In the 
larger volume the Returns for the Northern, Southern, Western and 
Midland counties, as far as they were surveyed, have been considerably 
abbreviated. They have also been arranged on a different plan, 
presumably for convenience of official reference ; that is to say the 
royal and baronial manors have been sorted out from the surveys of 
the Hundreds and have been collected under individual fiefs, the 
future units of a new feudal taxation. In the smaller volume the 
Returns for the three Eastern counties have been arranged according to 
the same official method, but apparently in an unabbreviated form. 
Moreover, differences in the Forma Inquisitionis are here denoted, the 
significance of which will be presently referred to. The now famous 
Inquisitio Cantabrigiensis, which has survived in a I2th century 
transcript, has been usually regarded as reproducing the form and 
substance of the original Returns as recorded in the evidence of the 
jurors for every hundred. This theory, we have been told on the 
highest authority 1 , must be accepted with considerable reservations. 
In this version of the survey the Hundreds and vills are in their 
proper order and the general tokens of a royal inquest are preserved. 
It has a further textual value (which does not concern us here) and 
its evidence does not stand alone, for the same view of the inquisi- 
tional procedure may be obtained from another I2th century transcript 
of local Returns known as the Inquisitio Eliensis. 

The characteristics of this MS. and its relations both to the 
Exchequer volumes and the Cambridgeshire Returns have also been 
authoritatively discussed 2 . The importance which has been attached to 
this MS. is chiefly due to the accident of the preservation herein of the 
supposed Forma Inquisitionis of the Domesday survey itself. On the 
other hand, no real evidence is forthcoming to support this conjecture 3 . 
Indeed, we might consider that the Forma Inquisitionis in question 
was applicable to the procedure adopted in the three Eastern counties 
only, in view of certain peculiarities of the formula employed 4 . Again, 
we have to consider the possibility that this Forma Inquisitionis was 
utilized for a special inquisition of the holdings of the church of Ely 

- 1 For the whole subject see Mr J. H. Round's exhaustive and masterly criticism in Feudal 
England, pp. i 146. 
Ibid. 

3 To Mr Round belongs the great credit of having been the first to question this 
assumption, and his researches have made it possible to regard this compilation in a new 
light. 

4 e.g. The threefold enumeration of the value. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 287 

authorized by a royal Writ which is still preserved 1 . Whether the 
inquest was really taken, or whether the Writ and Forma Inquisitionis 
afford another instance of the daring forgeries associated with this 
church, we cannot pause to discuss. It is at least certain that the 
Returns thus preserved, furnish an exceedingly intelligent local gloss 
upon the sources of the Exchequer survey. As a Liber Terrarum, or 
record of the church's possessions on the lines of the Great Survey, 
expounding incidentally certain obscure points in a favourable sense, 
this compilation may be the type of a large class of local muniments 
of which a few fragments only have survived. 

The origin of the Inquisitio Cantabrigiensis is less easily con- 
jectured. The compilation does not, as in the preceding instance, refer 
exclusively to the holdings of the church of Ely, and its connexion 
with that church has not been suggested. A collation of these two 
" satellites " with the Exchequer volume 2 will show that the Cam- 
bridgeshire inquest omits Crown lands in the nature of ancient 
demesne, although it has notoriously preserved a complete record 
of other holdings. The Ely inquest, on the other hand, consistently 
rejects external interests, and the impression has thus been given 
of an interested transcript of the original Returns. Possibly the 
motive of such a compilation may be found in its record of ex- 
tensive claims advanced by the church of Ely to lands which had been 
invaded by encroaching neighbours 3 . Moreover, the church of Ely 
had a special interest in the distribution of the collective liability in 
respect of local wards and other customary services which are duly 
accorded in the survey. Finally, there are the textual discrepancies 
between the official and private versions which appear to be con- 
sistently favourable to the church 4 . 

The above view of the Ely inquest as a special compilation 
in the interests of a local proprietor, with the analogy of the 

1 This writ (ed. Stewart, p. xxi) is a composite instrument in which three distinct subjects 
are referred to, and it must lie regarded with considerable distrust on diplomatic grounds, 
though some such writ might well have been issued for this purpose. 

2 e.g. In the case of Soham, where I. C. C. gives a reference to the Breve Regis for details 
of the Terra Regis. 

3 To indicate the true holdings of grasping neighbours as a safeguard against still further 
encroachments was perhaps a work of more practical value than to append useless claims and 
protests. 

4 The Exchequer digest would inevitably suppress trivial details which might, however, 
appear of great importance to the injured party. Thus the latter has a particular relish for the 
word abstiilit, though sumpsit is good enough for the Exchequer clerks. It was also expedient 
to suppress or ignore the open verdict (ncsciunt quomodo) of jurors who had not the courage 
to call a spade a spade. 



288 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

continental "briefs" already referred to, enables us to realize the 
significance of the formula habet in brevi suo. The scribes of the local 
Inquisitions will refer in these terms to the Exchequer version when 
they are not concerned to copy certain details of the Survey. Equally 
they can refer to their own Breve or Abbreviate as a private copy. 
Thus the term may come to mean something like a counterpart, 
official or private, with variants emphasizing respective interests. The 
"Magister" of the royal Scriptorium, intent on his hides and capital 
fiefs, will ignore or condense local claims which the scribes of Ely 
(who have omitted the details of " ancient demesne ") will carefully 
preserve, for these may some day be tested. 

Of the remaining "satellites" of Domesday Book the Liber 
Exoniae 1 has a special local interest, and possibly an official con- 
nexion with Winchester which is not unfortunately clearly indicated in 
the existing MS. The " Winton Book," apart from its curious inquest 
of burghal holdings, is of considerable diplomatic interest as preserving 
in a narrative form the substance of the originating writs and a Forma 
Inquisitionis. The Boldon Book on the other hand has a slighter 
resemblance to the official formula of the Exchequer survey and can 
by no means be regarded as a belated survey for the northern 
counties omitted from Domesday Book 2 . The series of diplomatic 
instruments connected with the position of the church of Worcester in 
the Great Survey 3 bear a strong resemblance to those already described 
in connexion with the church of Ely. We find the same grievance 
existing in respect of the invasion of church lands, and we notice the 
same resentful tone in the compiler's protest against these violations 4 . 
Here, again, the statement of claim in respect of these Terrae ablatae 
appears to be the motive for the interpolation of certain glosses on the 
Exchequer Record. It does not, however, appear from these notices 
that this church possessed a private version of the Worcestershire 
survey. The chief interest of such allusions is connected with the 
references to certain Placita*, which remind us of the Rochester and 
Ely cases, and to the description of the liberty of Oswaldslaw as 



1 See the suggestive and important essays by Mr Reichel and Mr Whale in Trans. Devon 
Assoc. 1895 and 1903. 
8 See above, p. 283 n. 

3 MS. Tib. A. 13 (ed. Hearne), ably dealt with by Mr J. H. Round in Feudal England. 

4 Cf. above, p. 187, and Hearne, pp. 248, 283, 285. 

6 Ed. Hearne, pp. 75 83, 269, 287, 298, 312. Cf. Bigelow, Plac. Anglo- Norm. The 
whole procedure is most lucidly described by Mr Round in Domesday Studies, n. 54459. 
(See below, p. 322.) 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 289 

given in autenticA Regis cartula, preserved in thesattro regali cum 
totius Angliae descriptionibus. It is somewhat disappointing to find 
that this reference (more than once given) is merely to the Exchequer 
digest with the addition of a few clumsy interpolations intended to 
emphasize the dictum of the official record 1 . During the century 
which followed the making of the Great Survey we meet with several 
fragments of purely local inquisitions which appear to reproduce 
to some extent the same formula 2 . These fragments are probably 
the remains of a once numerous class of royal and private inquisitions 
taken with the object of ascertaining the extent of " hidage " within a 
certain district or holding and the corresponding liability for the 
payment of geld. This object will perhaps account for the difficulty 
of distinguishing between an actual survey and a mere hidage-book, 
which in some cases must have been " abbreviated ' from a detailed 
inquisition. In one aspect, indeed, Domesday Book itself may be 
regarded as a Liber Hidarum* abbreviated, in its present form, from a 
mixed fiscal and agrarian inquest, for convenience of official reference, 
and abbreviated still further during the I2th century for use as a 
hidage-book and nothing more. 

The " Breviates " of Domesday Book, which are still preserved 4 , 
offer this interesting fact for our further consideration. It will be 
evident that if these official or semi-official compilations can be traced 
far back into the 1 2th century we have here an explanation of the 
origin as well as of the purpose of some, at least, of the local "hidages" 
above referred to. That such a "Brevi^te" of Domesday Book existed 
in the I2th century may be inferred from the preservation of a local 
copy of that date. This was made apparently for Margam Abbey, 
a house founded by Robert of Gloucester in 1147*. Still earlier 

1 Cf. above and Hearne, pp. 77 and 283. The phrase Descripliones is not, however, 
necessarily confined to the original Returns now missing. The monkish interpolator is 
revealed by the phrase nee aliquis regalis servitii exactor. 

z e.g. The Lindsay Survey (Claud, c. 5, ed. J. Greenstreet) ; the Leicester Survey 
(Exchequer K. R. Knight's Fees f , F. E. p. 196) ; the Northampton Survey (Vesp. E. 11, fo. 94, 
F. E. p. 215) ; and the Worcester Survey (ed. Hearne, pp. 298, 313). These have all been 
learnedly described by Mr J. H. Round in Feudal England, 

3 Red Book, p. 4. 

4 For a full account of these see Athenaeum, 15 Sept. 1900, and W. de G. Birch in 
Domesday Stiidies, Vol. II. p. 500 sq. The date of the "Breviate" connected with the 
Chamberlains' department in the Treasury of the Receipt may be assigned from the character 
of the writing and illuminations to the early part of the reign of Edward I or possibly slightly 
earlier. The companion volume, however, held by the King's Remembrancer, appears to be 
of a considerably earlier date, probably of the first years of the F3th century. This volume 
curiously enough contains several notices of Welsh affairs on the fly-leaves. 

5 This "Breviate" is now preserved in the Arundel collection (No. 153), but formerly 
belonged to the Abbey. The writing has been positively assigned to the nth century by 

H. 19 



290 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

allusions to an Exchequer " Breviate " may be found in connexion 
with single copies of the possessions of certain churches made at the 
end of the I ith or beginning of the I2th century. Of these, the well- 
known reference in the Worcester cartulary to the Exchequer Domes- 
day as the exemplar of the list of the churches possessions proves 
to be to the text of the existing " Breviates 1 ." It is, however, con- 
ceivable, though scarcely probable, that the compilers of the Exchequer 
"Breviate" and of this local excerpt both made an abstract from Domes- 
day Book itself in identical terms. On the other hand, the Worcester 
cartulary contains a still briefer abstract, which is evidently home- 
made 2 , and the same remark applies to another very early abbreviation 
of the holding of the church of Burton sic\iti\ continetur super Domesday 
apud Wintoniam*. In the Liber Eliensis there is more than one brief 
hidage list, amounting indeed to little more than tables of hidation, 
which are given here secimdum brevia regia quae facta sunt in vice- 
comitatibus*. 

Thus it is possible that the manufacture and use of " Breviates " 
on a very similar plan was pursued both by royal clerks and local 
scribes throughout the I2th and I3th centuries. Moreover, the practice 
may have existed even earlier, for the famous " Geld Inquest 5 ,'' on 
which the Domesday Survey itself was presumably based, is really a 
hidage-book, whilst the fragment of a geld-roll for Northamptonshire 6 
which has been dated several years before the Great Survey is actually 
composed in the vernacular 7 . 

official experts. From the fact that the Eastern counties are omitted, coupled with other 
imperfections, we may perhaps assume that it was a copy of the Exchequer " Breviate" made 
for local use. The official connexion of the founder of this church with the royal Exchequer 
is well known (Dialogus, I. xi; Birch, Hist, of Alar gam, ch. 5). 

1 MS. Tib. A. 13 (ed. Hearne, p. 298). This passage, however, is not in Heming's 
original compilation, but in the i2th century continuation. The reference is given assecundum 
cartam Regis quae est in thesauro Regis, 

2 Feudal England, p. 169. 

3 This does not appear to have been made from an Exchequer ' ' Breviate. " This Burton 
" Breviate" was apparently first entered on the dorse of a charter of Ethelred II (Ordnance 
Facs. Part III.), and the writing has been regarded as being of the nth century (Salt 
Society Trans, v. (i), p. 3 n.). It is certainly a compilation not later than the earliest years 
of the 1 2th century, and was apparently derived from another official text of the Domesday 
Survey than the Exchequer volume which it corrects in more than one particular. 

4 Liber Eliensis (ed. Hamilton), pp. 168, 174, 184. 

5 Domesday Book (Record Commission), IV. i 26. 

6 Ellis, Intro, to Domesday, I. 184; Round, Feudal England, p. 215. The formula of 
this " Breviate" has a slight resemblance to that found in the Burton compilation. Whether 
the well-known Numerus Hidarum found in Old English law-books has any connexion with 
this fiscal system is a question that cannot be discussed here. 

7 See Mr Round in Feudal England, p. 147 sq. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 291 

Such lists as these point back to the first institution of the Dane- 
geld, though in their later aspect they were no longer associated with 
an actual assessment 1 , but served as a check upon the new devices of im- 
perial and local taxation which had taken the place of the ancient geld 2 . 

With the last years of the I2th century a slight but eventful modi- 
fication was made in this conventional system of fiscal valuation. The 
unit of assessment is now the plough, or plough-land, instead of the 
hide, which, however, is still used as a convertible symbol and is 
apparently retained for the purpose of local taxation 3 . With the 
institutional aspects of this plough-tax 4 we are not here concerned, 
but it will afford an interesting diplomatic comparison with the earlier 
geld inquests. 

From the description of the procedure employed in connexion 
with the revision of the judicial eyres in I IQ4 5 and the collection of the 
great carucage of iigS 6 we notice at once that the term imbreviare 
was applied to the record of the verdicts of the local jurors prepared 
for official information, just as it is used in a local " breviate " of the 
Great Survey 7 . 

From the historiographer's description of the carucage of 1 198 we 
obtain a suggestive parallel to the procedure of the earlier surveys. 
Here, for the purpose of levying an equivalent tax to the old Danegeld 
on every hide or carucate, commissioners and assessors were appointed 
for every county to co-operate with the sheriff, local officers and jurors 
in accordance with precise instructions contained in a Forma Inquisi- 
tionis. The verdicts found were committed to writing (in scriptum 
redigebantiir\ a copy (rotulus) being prepared for each of the com- 
missioners, whilst a third was compiled by the sheriff, and a fourth 
was apparently preserved by the representatives of local magnates 8 . 
In the case of serjeanties, moreover, a. very similar procedure was 

1 Possibly, however, the lost " Danegeld Roll," which was in use at the Exchequer in the 
reign of Henry I may have been based upon the official " Breviate. " Some attempt must also 
have been made to revise the existing hidation from time to time, and this may have been the 
origin of some of the local hidage-lists above referred to. For example, the Lindsey survey 
is written upon rolls of the Exchequer pattern and in what appears to be an official hand. 

3 Cf. Dialogus, I. xi, and below in the following pages. 

3 Cf. below, p. 299. Examples of the use of "hidage" as a general term will be found in 
monastic and even in official compilations, cf. Cart. Raines (Rolls), passim, and Red Book, 
fos. 29 d and 180. 

4 Cf. J. H. Round and Miss K. Norgate in E. H. R. m. 501 and 702 and iv. 105. 

5 HoveJen (Rolls), in. 262 267. Ibid. iv. 46. 

7 Inq. Eliens. (ed. Hamilton), p. 168. Hie imbreviatur quot earuaz Sancta sEJeldreda 
habet et quot habent ejus homines secunditm brevia Regis qua facta sunt in vicecomitatibus. 
This abstract, however, might he regarded as a hidage-list rather than a " Breviate." 

8 This reminds us of the possession of a breve of the Ely inquest by the abbot's legatus. 

19 2 



292 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

adopted. The extent and value of the holdings were to be returned 
into the Exchequer and this Return is termed an imbreviatio. Frag- 
ments of the Returns made to the inquest of 1198 have fortunately 
been preserved in the collection known as Testa de Nevi// 1 , whilst 
another version is preserved in at least one case which formed the 
subject of proceedings in the King's Court 2 . 

In the later carucates of the years 1220 and 1224 the diplomatic 
procedure is still more clearly defined. Here there is a royal Writ 
which combines a precept with a Forma Inquisitionis*. It should be 
noticed, however, that the Returns in this, as in many other instances 
under the new system of taxation, take the form of accounts instead 
of that of verdicts 4 . 

The inquisitions on the basis of the hide and plough described 
above are connected with the fiscal business of the kingdom. Besides 
these, the same plan of assessment was employed for an obscure 
system of local taxation which is indicated by a few fragmentary 
Returns dating from the latter part of the I2th century 5 . In one 
aspect these local assessments are of communal or even of seignorial 
interest ; but in another they may be regarded as a distinct source 
of royal revenue and one that has survived in a direct descent 
to modern times 6 . The local assessments referred to are connected 
with the collection of the " Sheriff's Aid " and court-fines or rents 
paid in respect of commuted suits of court. These and similar 
liabilities were assessed upon the basis of the hide, following the 
system of the geld assessment 7 . We know from the evidence of the 
Exchequer precedent-books and inquisitions, as well as from the 
extensive proceedings on writs of Quo Warranto during the Edwardian 
period, that from the close of the I2th century the Crown was prepared 
to assert its claims to local contributions and compositions which had 
been allowed to swell the Sheriff's perquisites or had become attached 

1 Cf. p. 72 b (Record Commission). The existence of these interesting Returns was dis- 
covered by Mr J. H. Round, who has given a valuable account of the procedure of the 
Inquest of 1198 in . H. R. in. 501. 

2 Rot. Cur. Reg. (Record Com.), p. 216, and J. H. Round in E. H. R. loc. cit. 

3 Rot. Claus. I. 437. 4 Testa de Nevill, p. I3i b . 

5 Cf. Red Book, n. 774. Specimens of such fragments will be found in Exchequer 
Records under the following references : Accounts (K. R.) -%*-, Miscellanea -fa and L. T. R. 
Misc. Rolls \. It is possible that these incidents have a good deal to do with the struggle 
over the encroachments of private franchises in the i3th century. The commutations of the 
liabilities of certain districts to suit and service in the sheriffs' courts may be traced in the 
Pipe Rolls down to the ipth century. 

6 Cf. the modern records of the Land Revenue Office under the head of "Viscontiel 
Rents." 

1 Dialogus, I. xi. 



Royal Surveys, Inqiiisitions and Assessments 293 

to some encroaching franchise by collusion 1 . The suits or rents that 
were thus " withdrawn " and in turn " recovered " by the Crown from 
an ordinary subject-matter of the ministerial proceedings by way of 
Inquisition and Returns during the I3th century. 

Long before the final disappearance of the fiscal system repre- 
sented by the hidages and carucages of the I2th century a new one 
was in course of skilful preparation. The institution of Scutage was 
not merely an addition to the existing sources of revenue. It marks 
the beginning of a new method of assessment on the basis of the 
knight's fee which prevailed for another century. This resembles in 
its main features the geld inquest of an earlier period 2 , and here again 
we find the three-fold procedure represented by the Writ, Form of 
Inquisition, and Returns. The earliest specimens of this class are 
certainly imperfect, but as early as the reign of Henry II we are able 
to reconstruct the normal diplomatic process 3 . It would appear that 
in the case of the personal Returns made by military tenants a Form 
of Inquisition could be dispensed with, the procedure enjoined being 
categorically stated in the Writ and duly recited in the Return 4 . In 
the case of a general inquisition made by local juries the Form of 
Inquisition may have been more distinctly indicated, but the Writs 
and "certificates" or other Returns connected with the earliest military 
inquests are rarely preserved, and the existing Record takes the form 
of a schedule of assessments closely resembling a Compotus*. In 
a later period the Writ itself is preserved in the Chancery enrolments, 
the Returns being preserved for official reference in a precedent book. 
The Form of Inquisition, recited from the Writ, is also occasionally 
given as a heading to the Return 6 . 

1 Besides the copious pleadings connected with the ministerial inquisitions above referred 
to, the vigilant interest of the Crown herein is seen in many cases which were recorded in 
the Chancery during the i4th and i5th centuries. Many of these "records" are still preserved 
amongst the Miscellanea of the Chancery. 

- A transition may be seen in the Peterborough Survey (temp. Hen. I), in which the 
number of the knights is appended to the extent of hides and virgates. 

3 This has been indicated in the case of the 1166 returns by Bishop Stubbs and Mr J. H. 
Round. 

4 Personal returns by local officers were also made in the Chancery in connexion with 
summonses for military service as late as the reign of Edward III. 

8 The formula of the Writ and Return for the marriage aid of 1235 seems to have been 
closely modelled on that of 1166 and 1212 (cf. Testa, II. 749). The form of a compotus is 
seen in the Aid of 1346 (K. R. Miscellaneous Book, No. 3). 

6 Cf. Feudal Aids (Rolls), passim. Variants are found in the case of the "Scutage" 
and "Marshalsea" rolls (S. R. Scargill-Bird in Genealogist, i. 65). Specimens of the 
original Returns from which the official precedent books were compiled are preserved 
between 1166 and 1431. For the composition of these official lists see Red Book Vol. II. 
(Preface), and the Rolls edition of Feudal Aids (Preface). 



294 Royal Sun>eys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

The system of fiscal assessment based on the knight's fee was 
mainly applicable to a single class, and for this special purpose it was 
utilized down to the reign of Edward III. Long before this date, 
however, the commutation of military service for a conventional 
payment had given rise to new expedients for imperial taxation. 

As early as the reign of Henry II an equivalent levy in lieu of 
scutage was made upon the non-military classes in the shape of a 
Donum, Auxilium or Tallagium, contributed by the knight's fee, or 
distributed upon the village or burgage holdings. Later still we find 
assessments calculated in convertible terms of the knight's fee or the 
hide, each of these in turn being approximated to a statement of 
liability in terms of pounds, shillings and pence or even of marcs. 
Before the close of the I3th century the normal holding of a tenant 
by knight's service is officially computed by librates 1 alone, and this 
method prevailed down to the i/th century. 

The formula of valuation employed in the earliest general Aids of 
the 1 3th century would seem to have been partly connected with the 
librate valuation and in part again with the tithe custom of imme- 
morial antiquity. The latter connexion may be traced in the series 
of ecclesiastical assessments from the " Saladin Tithe" of 1 189 to the 
Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1535- The former is seen in the general Aids 
levied from the beginning of the 1 3th century. Thus, for the Aid of 
1207 an assessment was made at the rate of \2d. on each marcate of 
property, and this is commonly regarded as a Thirteenth 2 . On other 
occasions any percentage from a Fourth to a Fortieth might be called 
for 3 , but the system of the librate, which was applicable equally to real 
and personal property, finally prevailed, whether as a levy of so many 
shillings in the pound by way of a land-tax or as an ad valorem duty 
on commodities. 

The diplomatic construction of these assessments does not differ 
from that of the earlier fiscal inquisitions except that, the consent of 
the Council or Parliament being now assumed, the royal precept may 
practically be regarded as a " writ in aid " of the sheriff for the purpose 
of collection 4 . The Forma Inquisitionis, however, is set out with 
careful details, including even the oath to be taken by the jurors, and 
instructions for sealing the Returns and safeguarding the treasure 
collected 5 . 

1 K. R. Knight's Service Bdle i and Miscellanea of the Chancery Bdle i. 

2 Rot. Litt. Pat. i. 72, Ann. Waverley (Rolls), p. 258. 

3 Stubbs C. H. and S. C. passim. 4 Cf. Pat. 3 Hen. IV, m. 23. 

5 Cf. Pat. 25 Edw. I, Pt 2, m. 3 (in cedula). In later times the Form of Inquisition may 
take the shape of-a permanent official precedent book, such as the Book of Rates for levying 
Customs duties. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 295 

The Returns in question naturally resemble accounts in their 
general construction, but in many cases they revert to the form of the 
agrarian survey 1 . They have a further interest from the fact that the 
original assessments appear frequently to have served as taxing lists 
which were examined and checked by another set of assessors, some- 
thing after the manner of the estreats of amerciaments returned to 
the Exchequer 2 . 

(c) Feudal Inquisitions. 

A large group of miscellaneous Inquisitions will be found holding 
a somewhat anomalous position half-way between Agrarian Surveys 
and Fiscal Inquisitions, and Assessments and the Political or Judicial 
Inquisitions, which have distinct characteristics of their own. 

The class referred to is composed of the more purely feudal 
inquisitions connected with such matters as serjeanties, wardships, 
escheats, assarts, qualifications for knighthood, inquests of lunacy, 
and proceedings Ad Quod Dampnum. It is true that several of 
these have an agrarian or fiscal character 3 , but a distinction may con- 
veniently be made between the instruments which concern the royal 
prerogative or feudal droits of the Crown and those which have a 
special fiscal interest 4 . Moreover, although these feudal interests are 
recognized in several Edwardian statutes and royal inquisitions, we 
should find that for the most part escheats, alienations, purprestures 
and the rest, are usually the subjects of an inquisition sui generis, 

The diplomatic construction of these instruments is liable to con- 
siderable variation. Thus, the I2th century inquisition of widows and 
wards, known as the Rotuli de Dominabus, touches on both agrarian 
and fiscal matters, its real object being to ascertain the rights of the 
Crown in respect of feudal wardships and marriages 5 . No Writ or 

1 Cf. Pat. 24 Edw. I, m. 22. The Taxatio of 1291 and Valor of 1535 may be regarded, 
in one aspect, as clerical extents like the "Parliamentary Surveys" of the Commonwealth. 
The Returns, in the form of Indentures, to the Inqttisitiones Nonarum in 1316, refer only, like 
the subsidy assessments, to a valuation ad hoc, though this is of an agrarian nature. 

2 Cf. feudal Aids, passim. Specimens of these judicial amerciaments will be found in the 
Exchequer Accounts. 

3 e.g. Rotuli de Dominabits, and many of the " Extents" formerly included amongst the 
Inquisitions post mortem. 

4 Cf. the "Rotulus de escaetis, viduis, valettis et castellariis " for Norfolk amongst the 
unprinted Hundred Rolls (No. 13). 

5 Ed. Grimaldi, above. The agrarian and fiscal surveys of an earlier period are recalled 
by the use of the verbs valeo and possum and the enumeration of the stock. On the other 
hand the personal descriptions resemble those found in the Exchequer Feodaries and 
Accounts (cf. Testa de Nevill, passim, and "Receipt Roll of the Exchequer" (1185), 
p. 22). 



296 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

Form of Inquisition of this interesting record has been preserved, but 
these could without much difficulty be reconstructed from the original 
Returns. 

In the next century we find inquests de valettis et puellis...d4 
custodia domini Regis, forming part of the regular proceedings of the 
eyre, and in the same connexion we have a judicial supervision of 
escheats and serjeanties. Moreover, these proceedings seem to have 
formed part of a considerable collection, fragments of which are still 
preserved 1 . 

The periodical " Regards " of the royal forests constitute a distinct 
type of feudal inquisition, being obviously of a technical nature. The 
conventional visitations must, however, be distinguished from the 
special inquisitions of forest jurisdictions such as those held in con- 
nexion with the charter of 1217 and its later confirmations 2 . These 
must have been taken on an extensive scale, but for the most part 
only the Writs and the subsequent pleadings appear to have 
survived 3 . 

Inquisitions Ad quod dampnum, which might also be regarded 
as remedial measures, derive their feudal character from a typical 
exercise of the royal prerogative 4 . The same view will perhaps be 
taken of inquests De lunaticis. In another direction the feudal rights 
of the Crown furnish us with one of the largest and most important 
classes of ministerial Records. The familiar Inquisition Post Mortem 
is the chief representative of this class, which includes, besides pro- 
ceedings under the writ Utrum sit escaeta nostra*, a large number of 
miscellaneous extents which are frequently of an agrarian nature 6 . 
The wide scope of these feudal inquisitions will be seen from the 



1 Cf. Testa de Nevtll, pp. 270 and 390"". An interesting description of a still earlier 
Return of feudal Reliefs is given in Feudal England, p. 308, from the Worcester cartulary 
(ed. Hearne, I. 79). This is actually in a diplomatic form, but its authenticity must be 
accepted with considerable reserve. 

2 An excellent description of these will be found in Mr Turner's learned Introduction 
to the edition of Select Pleas of the Forests issued by the Selden Society. For the inquisitions 
or perambulations connected with Disafforestations, see below, p. 298. 

3 For the great inquest of 1244 see Matt. Paris (Rolls) IV. 400. A fragment of pleadings 
hereon is perhaps preserved in the L. T. R. Miscellanea ^. Offences against the property 
of owners of parks and chaces (cf. Pleas of the Forest, p. xcii sq.) formed a subject of 
enquiry in the judicial eyres. For the proceedings in 1218, see Pat. 18 John, m. 2 and Pleas 
of the Forest, p. xciv. 

4 Cf. Dialogiis, II. x on the subject of Purprestures and the printed List of Inquisitions 
ad quod dampnum. 

5 Cf. Bracton, n. 345. 

8 Cf. "Ancient Extents " and " Chancery Miscellaneous Inquisitions," passim. These relate 
to manorial stock, repairs, serjeanties, tolls, customs, fisheries, warren and other profits or 
rights of the Crown. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 297 

" Ordinances of the Escheatry," preserved in several collections 1 , 
whilst the directions for extending lands which may be found in both 
official and private precedent books may be compared with the 
hidage-lists connected with several aspects of fiscal assessment. 

The diplomatic procedure observed in these feudal extents is 
clearly defined. The Writ ad inquirendutn is usually preserved with 
the Return, and it is also recited, almost verbatim, in the heading of 
the latter 2 , a separate Form of Inquisition being unnecessary in the 
case of mere escheats. The statutory Articles 3 administered to the 
jurors for the purpose of manorial Extents may indeed have been 
appended to the Writ as a separate schedule ; but they are probably 
more or less conventional. Their occurrence in various precedent 
books is, however, authenticated, and constitutes a link between these 
Feudal Inquisitions and those of a statutory or political nature, whilst 
the relationship of both to the judicial inquisitions recorded in the 
Eyre Rolls will be presently referred to. 

(d} Statutory arid Political Inquisitions. 

Although the Domesday Survey itself might easily be regarded 
as a political measure, the statutory inquisitions of the I2th and I3th 
centuries possess certain well-marked characteristics which are only 
faintly indicated in earlier records. Thus, besides the usual procedure 
denoted by the presence of a Writ, a Form of Inquisition and volumi- 
nous Returns, recording the verdicts of local juries, two further stages 
of institutional development may be frequently observed. These are 
the Pleadings consequent on the aforesaid verdicts and the Accounts 
of profits accruing to the Crown, whether from fiscal assessments or 
political delinquencies. These Pleadings and Accounts must be 
classified according to their diplomatic construction 4 , but their con- 
nexion with these " Ministerial Proceedings" will be found -instructive. 

Already the mixed agrarian and fiscal inquests of the Norman 
period have reminded us of the early activities of royal Justices in 
Eyre and Exchequer Barons. The nature of the political inquisitions 
of the 1 2th century is, however, clearly indicated by the existing 
articles of enquiry, although the inquisitional procedure may not have 

1 Cf. Statutes of the Realm, \. -238; Annals of Burton (Rolls), p. 479, &c. 

2 The writ Ad inquirendum contains the precept diligenter inquiras. In the writ Ad 
extendendum a wider scope of enquiry may be indicated by the formula diligenler extendi 

facias quantum, &c. valeat, &c. et qualiter, <5rv. plus valere potent adopus nostrum. In some 
cases the Return is in an epistolary form and in others the royal writ is recited in haec verba. 

3 Cf. n. 4 supra. 

4 i.e. under "Judicial Proceedings" and "Accounts" respectively. 



298 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

differed from that employed for fiscal or purely judicial purposes. 
Moreover, the scope of the enquiry will appear strictly limited when 
compared with the very miscellaneous and speculative articles ad- 
ministered during the latter half of the I3th century 1 . 

Probably the earliest existing record of a political inquisition 
dates only from the year 1170. This is the well-known "Inquest of 
Sheriffs," of which the Forma Inquisitionis alone is preserved 2 , though 
several fragments of the original Returns have been identified amongst 
the miscellaneous Records of the Exchequer 3 . If this identification 
is correct, the Returns in question throw little light on the official 
procedure. It would appear, however, that the Inquisition was not 
made, as usual, by hundreds and vills, but by baronies and vills 4 , and 
that the Returns of each vill to individual articles of enquiry were 
separately entered on loose pieces of parchment, an unusual method 
of " imbreviation 6 ." In a few cases "hearing notes" are appended to 
the Returns 6 . 

The articles of enquiry connected with the Assize of Arms of 
1181 have been preserved by contemporary historians 7 , but in this 
case no single fragment of the Returns has survived, though their 
general character may be easily realized from the well-known Muster 
Rolls of a later period 8 . 

The same deficiency exists in respect of the Assize of the Forest 
in 1 184" whereby Assarts were to be "imbreviated" at regular intervals, 
but perhaps this may refer to the " Regards," which form an incident 
of purely feudal interest. 

An important inquisition as to the malpractices of royal ministers 
in the year 1196 may have fallen through owing to the sudden death 
of one of the two commissioners 10 . In any case no record of this 
enquiry has been preserved. Again, following King John's sub- 
mission to the Pope in 1213 a general inquisition seems to have been 
ordered for the purpose of ascertaining the losses suffered by the 
Church 11 , and this information may have been utilized by contemporary 
antiquaries for statistical purposes 12 . A local inquisition of the year 

1 Below, p. 318. 2 stubbs, 5. C. 148. 

3 These have been printed in the Red Book, p. cclxvii sq. where another origin has been 
suggested for them in connexion with a local inquest relating to military service, a suggestion, 
however, which has not been generally accepted. 

4 These baronies were separately filed. * Cf. Hoveden (Rolls), III. 262 sq. 
6 Below, p. 323. 7 g en- Abbas. (Rolls), I. 278. 

8 Cf. S. R. Scargill-Bird in Genealogist, I. 65. 

9 Ben. Abbas, II. clxi. G. J. Turner, Select Pleas of the Forest (Selden Society), p. Ixxvii. 

10 Hoveden, IV. 5. " M. Paris, Chron. Major, II. 569. 
12 Cf. Red Book, p. 772. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 299 

I2I2 1 may have been really of a fiscal nature, but four years later the 
general inquisition concerning forests and rivers promised by the 
Great Charter seems to have been held, though our information on 
this point is very scanty 2 . 

The frequent use of Inquisitions for fiscal purposes during the 
reign of Henry III has been already referred to 3 . From the chaotic 
state of the Returns made to these fiscal Inquisitions it would not be 
surprising if the Records of other enquiries of a political nature had 
also disappeared. This, at least, has been the fate of the Inquisition 
concerning the Forests in I244 4 , whilst of the important political 
inquisitions which are recorded during the last twenty years of this 
reign two only are preserved to us in an imperfect form 5 . 

It has been already observed that in the case of the political 
inquisitions of the Edwardian period considerable difficulty will be 
found in distinguishing between inquisitions of an administrative and 
those of a purely judicial nature. This is scarcely surprising when we 
remember that the form of these conventional articles was constantly 
paraphrased by official scribes. Moreover, the procedure which they 
indicate was inspired by an official policy subject to frequent variations. 
We have also seen in the case of the fiscal and feudal inquisitions 
of the latter part of the I2th century that attention is chiefly given to 
the due valuation of the plough-land or plough-team 6 . A little later 
the fiscal interests of the Crown are centered in the Knight's fee and 
the Serjeanty 7 , whilst the liabilities of non-military tenants, and the 
capabilities of churchmen, Jews and merchants have become subjects 
for special consideration 8 . Thus, it has come to pass that Matthew 
Paris, writing in the year 1254, can inveigh against the "unheard of 
writ, issued by the Chancery of our lord the King " for inquisition to 
be made by the reve and four men concerning the plough-teams in 
every manor of the Religious, after the form of other days 9 . 

1 Pat. 14 John, m. 2. 

2 Pat. Rolls (Record Commission), I. 180, cf. Select Pleas of the Forest (Selden Soc.), loc. 
cit. and McKechnie, Magna Carla, p. 482 sq. 

3 Above, p. 294. 

4 Cf. above, p. 296. 

8 i.e. those of 1255 (printed in the "Hundred Rolls"), and 1266. 
6 Above, p. 293. 7 Ibid. 

8 Cf. the Vetera Capitula Itineris cited below and the documents given in Stubbs, S. C. 
for the first half of the I3th century. 

9 The writ given by M. Paris (v. 464) is not found in the Chancery enrolments, but those 
are imperfect for the period and the King was in Gascony at this date (13 Oct. 1254). Some 
light is thrown on the matter by a Gascon writ dated 9 October 1254 (Rdles Gascons, ed. 
Michel, No. 3727), addressed to the official of the Archbishop of Canterbury requiring him 
to make inquisition as to the exact value of all the benefices of England (cf. M. Paris, vi. 



300 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

But it is not the carucage only that has become archaic whilst 
Paris and Bracton are still at work. In this same year (1254) we seem 
to see the beginnings of a new form of inquisition which is destined to 
play an important part in later constitutional developments. 

What has happened is unconsciously explained by the monastic 
chroniclers themselves. Thus the Burton annalist has recorded, under 
the year I254 1 , the form of a certain inquisition taken before the 
itinerant justices at Lichfield, and the text thus incidentally pre- 
served and dated is found to agree with the conventional form of the 
Vetera Capitula Itineris as set forth in Bracton 2 and in the Statutes of 
the Realm*. It is true that the conventional form of the " Old 
Chapters of the Eyre" which has been handed down from the age of 
Glanvill to that of Bracton, can scarcely be stated with any degree of 
precision. The same may be said of the "New Chapters of the Eyre " 
which should be better known to us in connexion with the Hundred 4 
and Quo Warranto rolls and which are also preserved in a conventional 
form 5 , but it is improbable that the "New Chapters" were evolved 
directly from the " Old Chapters," and therefore some intermediate 
type of inquisition must be looked for 6 . 

This transitional form is possibly recorded by the Annals of 
Burton, in connexion with an extensive enquiry made before the 

298). For the papal grant of a Tenth for the Crusade made in 1252 (Foedera, I. 272 274) 
and vigorously opposed by the English clergy, cf. Ann. Burton, 350 sq. and 360 sq. and 
M. Paris, v. 324 sq. For the whole subject see Miss R. Graham in Transactions R. Hist. 
Soc. xviii, and E. H. A*., July, 1908, cf. Rev. W. Hudson in Norwich Arch. Soc. Trans. (1908). 
The form of the ' ' Norwich Taxation " of 1 254 56 as preserved in local lists (cf. Ann. Burton, 
pp. 327 and 366, Cotton MSS. Claud, D. xi (Malton) and Harl. 1005 (Bury)) shows no traces 
of an inquest of ploughs (cf. Ann. Burton, p. 357). But these valores obviously omit 
agrarian details such as are occasionally preserved in the Taxation of 1291. 

1 Annals of Burton (Rolls), p. 330. 

2 Rolls, ed. II. 240, cf. Select Pleas of the Crown (Selden Soc..), p. xxiii where Professor 
Maitland has given the pedigree of these articles. A version preserved in the Gloucester 
cartulary (li. 276) seems to be of the same date. For the form adapted for a civic inquisi- 
tion, cf. Liber Aldus, I. 72, and Add. Charter 5153, which appears to be of the date 1276. 

3 I- 233. 4 Record ed. Vol. i. p. 13. 

5 Bracton, n. Appx. i. Stat. Realm I. 235. 

6 It would probably be found a matter of some difficulty to prove that the conventional 
chapters of the Eyre as we find them stated in 1254 were habitually supplemented by the 
new inquisitorial articles of 1255. Probably it would be safer to suggest that the latter were 
utilised side by side with the former during the Eyres protracted between 1255 and 1257 and 
that they were succeeded by further special inquisitions administered by the itinerant 
justices between 1258 and 1266 being finally replaced by a conventional series of "New 
Chapters" in 1274 which also have their origin in a special Inquisition. It is only when the 
pleadings upon the Hundred Rolls draw to a close that the Old and New Chapters assume 
the stereotyped juxtaposition which is such a familiar feature of the Rolls and law-books of 
the first half of the i4th century (cf. below, pp. 303 and 318). 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 301 

justices at Stafford in the year 1255', the political character of which 
may be shrewdly suspected. Here the resistance of the church to the 
collection of the new papal tithe is punished by inquisitorial articles 
which led to the protests of the clergy in the Synods of London and 
Merton 2 . For the baronage and landed gentry there is reserved a 
strictly legal but highly disagreeable process of proprietary rectification 
at the hands of officious jurors. Even the traders are to be reminded 
by a sweeping inquest of measures 3 that they cannot count on the 
protection of local franchises. Such sharp dealings with the privileged 
classes would be generally approved, and to conciliate the new com- 
mercial interest, Jews and foreigners were sacrificed in turn. Finally, in 
1259, popular attention was diverted towards public and private wrongs 
suffered at the hands of unjust ministers. Ample facilities were to be 
afforded for the hearing of Querclce and the country, as we know, 
was glutted with vengeance on its oppressors 4 . It is true that along 
with these Querelce were certain Gravamina which reflected severely on 
the royal methods of government, but these matters could scarcely be 
thrashed out by local jurors 5 . 

Of the political inquisitions here alluded to, that of the year 1255 
alone has been preserved to us, although the procedure for the great 
inquisition of 1258, continued in the next year, is known to us through 
the Provisions of Oxford and Westminster 6 . It is interesting to learn 
that the original Returns on this occasion were formerly preserved in 
the royal Treasury in a chest bearing the distinctive press-mark 
" Inquisitiones 7 ." 

The inquisition of 1255 does not need the authentication of a 
contemporary chronicler. The Writ directing its execution is enrolled 8 , 
and the Form of Inquisition has been separately preserved 9 . Finally, a 
considerable portion of the Returns has been transcribed in an official 

1 Ann. Burton, p. 337. There is nothing in the few surviving Returns for Stafford to 
illustrate the assertion that the commissioners conducted this enquiry with marked harshness. 

2 Wilkins, Concilia (1257), I. 723; Ann. Burton, pp. 419 420. The articles chiefly 
complained of in these conferences can be identified in the capitula of 1255. 

3 Ann. Burton (1256), p. 375; M. Paris, V. 595. 

* M. Paris, V. 714, 720; vi. 396 7. Flares. Hist. pp. 426, 437 and the Assize Rolls for 
the period. 

5 Ann. Burton, sub anno. 

6 Cf. Ann. Burton, pp. 446 456, M. Paris, VI. p. 215, Foedera, I. 375 and 381, Pat. 
42 Hen. Ill, m. 2, and 43 Hen. Ill, m. 10, and Close Roll, 44 Hen. Ill, m. i8 d . 

7 Palgrave, {Calendars, I. 9. 

8 Pat. 39 Hen. Ill, m. 9 d . 

8 Ann. Burton, p. 330 and Hundred Rolls (Record Commission) passim. Interesting 
variants may be found in the latter source. 



302 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

collection and is actually in print 1 . It is surprising, therefore, that no 
attempt has yet been made to assign these instruments to their proper 
place in the sequence of constitutional events which overflow into the 
reign of statute law. For if the position assigned here to the inquisi- 
tion of 1255 is correct, it follows that the famous records known to us 
as the Hundred Rolls and the pleadings in Quo Warranto and 
" Rageman," together with the proceedings connected with some 
miscellaneous Querelce, must be ultimately derived from this prolific 
source. Again, it will be evident that these administrative and 
remedial measures are associated with a string of enactments extend- 
ing from the Statute of Merton in 1236 to the Statute of Gloucester 
in 1278. 

As in the case of the reputed " Hundred Rolls" of 1255, the diplo- 
matic construction of the true Records forming this collection has been 
well preserved. The royal Writ is entered on the Patent Roll 8 with 
a schedule of Articles which are better known to us as the " New 
Chapters of the Eyre" before referred to. The Returns to these 
Articles are, however, only partially preserved, though this does not 
affect our knowledge of the procedure employed 3 . 

One point, however, remains in some obscurity. References occur 
in the body of these Returns to a separate inquisition De ministris and 
to Articles of enquiry with corresponding verdicts presented and 
returned in distinct Rolls 4 . But in the Writ itself which called forth the 
proceedings taken in 1274 provision is made for an enquiry into the 
conduct of royal ministers, and numerous Returns to the Articles pre- 
sented for this purpose will be found in the printed Hundred Rolls 5 . 
Proof of the former existence of distinct records relating to this 
ministerial enquiry is furnished by the discovery of certain fragments 
of Articles and Verdicts 6 which may probably be regarded as sub- 
sidiary to the existing pleadings connected with the statute of 



1 Hundred Rolls (Record Commission), vols. I. and II. 
* Pat. 2 Ed. I, m. 5. 

3 The official arrangement and condition of these Records is well described in Scargill- 
Bird's Guide and in the official lists which give an inventory of the whole collection. 

4 Hundred Rolls (Record Commission), I. loa, De ceteris articulis nihil sciwit nisi quod 
dicitur in rotitlo de Ministris Regis et aliis. Cf. Palgrave, Kalendars, I. 95 units rotulus de 
diversis articulis ad inquirendum super Ministris Regis cum copia cujusdam brevis super 
declaratione prcedictorum articulorum. 

6 These proceedings are distinguished in the writ itself by the use of the word insuper. 
The articles also are for the most part presented en bloc and are very frequently ignored. 

6 Cf. Extract Hundred Rolls, No. 4, and Miscellanea of the Exchequer ^. Perhaps the 
Articles printed in Bracton, n. Appx. ii. are connected with the same proceedings. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 303 

"Rageman 1 ." It would appear therefore that at a certain point the 
procedure relating to the punitive inquisitions De ministris breaks off 
from that relating to the fiscal inquisitions which chiefly figure in the 
existing Returns. A similar distinction may be observed in the case 
of the Quo Warranto and " Rageman " pleadings amongst the Assize 
Rolls, the former relating to the fiscal and the latter to the punitive 
Articles of the inquisitions of 1274 and 1279*. 

The origin and relations of the further inquisition of 1279 which 
forms part of the " Hundred Rolls " collection are still more obscure. 
The connexion of this group with the Statutes of Westminster and 
Gloucester and with the Quo Warranto plea rolls has been generally 
assumed, but in many respects this inquest may be regarded as an 
isolated ministerial measure designed to carry out on a larger scale the 
earlier inquisition Dejuribus et libertatibus of the year 1255 as well as 
the corresponding articles of 1274. The special reference of this later 
inquisition to the feoda and feodalia of the Crown can thus be easily 
appreciated 3 . From this date the origin and political significance of 
the "Chapters of the Eyre" are lost to sight in the purely conventional 
form of the judicial proceedings which will be referred to elsewhere 4 . 
With the enlarged scope of the judicature 5 compared with the fitful 
operations of the earlier itinerant justices there was no longer need for 
special ministerial action in such cases. Moreover it must be remem- 
bered that the new importance of the statutory inquisitions between 
1255 and 1279 does not imply the disuse of the older system. In any 
case during the succeeding period we find the "New Chapters of the 
Eyre" ably administered by the justices as a supplement to the " Old 

1 Stat. of the Realm, I. 44. This statute distinctly refers to an inquisition on Articles to 
be delivered to the justices. The very title of the Statute is borrowed from an inquisitional 
form, i.e. the seals affixed to the original Inquisitions (cf, Halliwell, Dictionary, s. v.). For the 
contents of the original Baga de Ragemannis see D. K. <)th Report. Another use of the 
term, however, occurs in Rot. Part. III. 432, where we read of "Ragman," or chartes blanches, 
but the allusion may be to blank indentures executed under the seals of the parties. 

2 It is possible that a more or less distinct enquiry was made regarding encroachments on 
royal franchises, cf. Miscellanea of the Exchequer -fa. 

3 Pat. 7 Ed. I, m. 2i d . The Forma Juramenti is appended but not the Forma Inquisitionis 
which, however, can be easily gathered front the printed Returns in vol. n. of the Record 
edition of the "Hundred Rolls." The Writ indicates that the Returns were to be entered in 
"books" supplied to the commissioners for the purpose, but there seems to be no evidence 
that these were actually used although the exclusive character of the Returns might easily 
have suggested their employment in preference to the narrow rolls which have survived in 
connexion with the inquisitions of 1255 anc ^ I2 74 But as we only have the Returns for 
five counties no general conclusion on this point is possible. 

4 Below, p. 318. 

6 Stat. West in. (2) 1285. During the stormy reign of Edward II the political inquisition 
seems to crop up again, cf. Pat. 14 Ed. II, Pt 2, m. 13 d . 



304 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

Chapters," until the increasing activity of the Court of Exchequer and 
the new procedure of the Chancery and Council gradually curtailed 
the peculiar functions of the itinerant justices in this direction 1 . 
Political or statutory inquisitions of a special kind, in no way con- 
nected with the above procedure, are represented during the later 
Edwardian period by such well-known records as " Kirkby's Quest 2 " 
(1285) and the " Nomina Villarum" (1316). Of these the former 
is chiefly associated with returns of feudal services, but it has been 
clearly shown that one of the chief objects of this inquisition was 
to account for out-standing Exchequer tallies according to the 
directions issued in the Statute of Rhyddlan 3 (1284). The essential 
parts of this inquisition are well-preserved 4 , namely the Writ, the 
separate Form of Inquisition and the Returns now chiefly represented 
by later transcripts. The pleadings connected with this inquisition 
are represented by a few miscellaneous Assize Rolls 5 . 

The record known as "Nomina Villarum" has also a regular diplo- 
matic construction. The Writ is enrolled 6 and is also recited in the 
heading of the Return, but owing to the simple character of the 
information required there was no need here for separate articles. The 
Returns in this case also are preserved only in the form of later 
transcripts 7 and a statutory origin can again be found for these 
proceedings 8 . 

Besides these inquisitions of an administrative character, others 
were taken during the I3th and I4th centuries to discover the forfeited 
estates of political offenders. Of these the Returns to the inquisitions 
concerning the " Lands of the Normans and Britons," forfeited by 
reason of the tenants' adherence to a French suzerain, may be found 
scattered throughout the feudal inquests of the first half of the 1 3th 

1 Cf. below, p. 319, for the use of both series in the same presentment. The political 
inquisitions which followed this procedure were superseded by the special commissions issued 
by the Exchequer and Chancery during the Tudor and Stuart periods whilst the Council and 
Secretariat also played a leading part in such enquiries. 

2 An admirable description of the MSS. and procedure connected with this measure will 
be found in the Preface to the Rolls Calendar of Feudal Aids, vol. I. p. viii sq. 

3 Slat, of Realm, \. 69. An original unprinted fragment of the proceedings of the 
commissioners in Cornwall will be found in L. T. R. Miscellaneous Rolls \ . This shows 
the procedure with regard to tallies. These entries can actually be identified in an existing 
Assize Roll (see below, p. 325 n. 3). 

4 For the texts and literature concerning the same, see Feudal Aids, I. c. A specimen of 
a complete return for a single Hundred is printed here on page 86. 

5 e.g. Nos. n6and 194. 
8 Close 9 Ed. II, m. i6 d . 

7 Cf. Palgrave, Par!. Writs, n. (iii) (Intro.) : Feudal Aids, vol. I. (Intro.) and Surtees 
Society's Publications, vol. 49. 

8 Statutes of the Realm, i. 174. 



Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 305 

century 1 , but no regular sequence of diplomatic instruments is here 
preserved 2 . 

The Records relating to the confiscated property of the Jews 3 and 
Templars 4 chiefly take the form of Accounts, though the inquisition of 
Templars' Corrodies in 1307 8 5 gives us an interesting diplomatic 
formula. Of far greater value for the purpose of diplomatic study 
is the inquisition " De Rebellibus" taken in 1265, which preserves the 
royal Writ, the Form of Inquisition, in the shape of distinct capitula, 
and the Returns in their original form 6 , together with certain pleadings 
thereon 7 . 

In the case of two later famous inquisitions of the same nature 
relating to the " Contrariants " of 1322" and the "forfeitures" (De 
forisfacturis) of 1386 89 9 respectively, the bulk of the existing 
Records will be found to consist of Accounts. 

Here again, however, the Returns of several political inquisitions 
of considerable importance no longer exist 10 , whilst others appear 
to be rather of the nature of judicial pleadings 11 though clearly 
connected with some special enquiry. Amongst the latter may be 
mentioned the so-called " Trailbaston " proceedings and a more 
obscure inquisition, De malefactoribus, arising out of a protracted 



1 Cf. Testa de Nevill (passim) and Hunter, Rotuli Selecti, p. 259 sq., cf. also the 
Extents of Alien Priories, &c. from Edward III onwards amongst the Exchequer Accounts. 
For the formula of these Extents a specimen of 24 Edward I from K. R. Exchequer Accounts 
will be printed in Formula Book, Part II. 

2 A few Writs and Returns in the form of Extents will be found amongst the Chancery 
Miscellaneous Inquisitions. 

3 Cf.,Scargill-Bird's Guide; Transactions of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Society, Vol. 3. 

4 Chancery Miscellaneous Rolls f|; L. T. R. Miscellaneous Accounts 18 21, 
Monasticon, vi. 813 sq. For the formula preserved in the Petitions for Templars' Corrodies 
see below, p. 324. 

5 Cole, Select Documents, p. 139. 

6 Cf. Pat. 49 Hen. Ill, m. 9 d . The Returns are preserved amongst the Chancery 
Miscellanea (under arrangement). In addition to these there is a valuable belated Return for 
Kent amongst the Miscellaneous Inquisitions of the Chancery ff . 

7 Hunter, Rotuli Selecti, p. 105. 

8 L. T. R. Enrolled Accounts, Nos. 13, 14, 18. The Writ and Form of Inquisition will 
be found in Pat. 15 Edw. II, Pt. 2, m. i2 d and some Returns are placed with the "Ancient 
Extents" (Exchequer K. R.). 

9 But no trace remains of the inquisition referred to in Pat. n Ric. II, Pt. 2, m. 25 d , i6 d . 

10 e.g. the inquisition of 1 340 following the disgrace of the great officers (cf. Stubbs, C. ff. 
II. 404). The writ is entered in the Patent Roll 14 Edward III, Pt. 3, m. 3 and m. 8 d . 

11 See below, p. 321. 

12 Cf. Pat. 33 Edw. I, m. io d , m. i4 d , m. 23 d and 35 Edw. I, m. i6 d . The jurors who 
present the Chapters of the Eyre for Surrey in 1307 (cf. below, p. 319 n.), allege in respect of 
the observance of the Statute of Winchester that proceedings under this statute are reserved 
for the justices of Trailbaston. 

H. 20 



306 Royal Surveys, Inquisitions and Assessments 

enquiry concerning the due observation of the Statute of Winchester 1 . 
Again in the case of the famous " Robbery of the Treasury " in 1303, 
we find the inquisition used for the purpose of a State trial 2 . 
From the close of the I3th century, as we have seen, the old 
inquisitorial procedure of the eyre was largely utilized for fiscal 
and political enquiries alike 3 , though traces of special inquisitions 
can still be found down to the I5th century. Thenceforth, as we 
have also seen, we have to do with a new procedure devised by the 
Chancery and the Exchequer. 

In these " Special Commissions " of a later period the same 
diplomatic construction is still preserved. There is a Writ, now 
styled a commission, together with separate Articles of enquiry and 
more or less voluminous Returns. Connected with these we may 
have Pleadings and Accounts as formerly. Of this nature are the 
numerous and often important inquisitions and political "surveys" 
of the Tudor and Stuart periods, represented by such Records as 
the two great inquisitions of Depopulation through inclosures, in 
1517 and 1605 4 , and the Parliamentary surveys of Crown and Church 
lands under the Commonwealth 5 together with inquisitions of forfeited 
estates extending as late as the Jacobite rebellions of the i8th 
century 6 . Occasionally these special inquisitions appear to be grafted 
on to the ancient procedure of the leet, and an archaic effect is pro- 
duced which reminds us of the antiquity of these devices of local and 
ministerial government 7 . 

1 Statutes of the Realm, I. 245. This ordinance has actually been regarded as a statute of 
34 Edw. I under the title of Articuli inqiiisitionis super Statutum Wyntonia. The point of con- 
tact with the " Trailbaston " enquiry is perhaps seen in the form of enquiry Quando observatur 
et in qnibus [casibus] non ; et qui nolnerunt observari, aut qui . . .observari nan permiserunt ', if 
we may regard the system of " Trailbaston " as one of intimidation. 

2 Palgrave, Kalendars, I. Appx. 

3 Cf. the order for inquisitions to be made per justitiarios ad assisas in Pat. 25 Edw. Ill, 
Pt. I, m. 23 d , and the case of the State Trials of 1289 (R. Hist. S. Camden, 3rd Ser. Vol. ix.). 
A supplementary procedure was available with the institution of the Justices of the Peace 
under Edward III, as seen in the cases connected with the Statute of Labourers. 

4 Ed. Leadam in the Domesday of Enclosures (R. Hist. Soc.) ; cf. E. F. Gay in Trans- 
actions R. Hist. Soc. xiv and xvm. 

6 Cf. D. K. ^th Report, Appx. n. 224. 

6 Petty Bag, "Forfeited Estates." 

7 Miscellaneous Surveys of the Ordnance Department (cf. Ordnance, Miscellanea, 1073). 



ROYAL ACCOUNTS. 

THE ancient system of Account known by the comprehensive 
title of the Compotus can be clearly shown to have existed con- 
temporaneously with the diplomatic writings in use under the 
civilization of the later Roman Empire 1 . 

It is true that the persistent employment of the symbols known as 
Dicae, tallies, and numerates acervi ("jettons") down to a comparatively 
modern period would seem to indicate an aversion from clerical 
accounts in the archaic practice of the Exchequer itself. It is not, 
however, in this direction that we shall find the connecting links 
between the practice of the royal Exchequer in England in the I2th 
century and the continental system from which the diplomatic 
arrangement of the conventional Account must be derived. 

The practical necessity of administering princely estates by some 
closer system of reckoning than that of the notched stick gave rise to 
an official formula which is the characteristic feature of the manorial 
Account evolved from the agrarian survey of the 6th century. Here 
a Descriptio of the tenement is combined with an Imbreviatio of the 
stock, both being ascertained by means of a sworn Inquisitio"*. 

But besides these periodical valuations, we have references, under 
the Frankish system, to yearly manorial accounts in which the 
Receipts, Disbursements and Balance are carefully distinguished 8 . 
In this distinction we may recognize the germ of the later con- 
ventional manorial account which is arranged on a similar plan 
for entries of stock or cash 4 . The connexion between the two types 
cannot indeed be traced in existing documents between the loth 

1 Cf. G. Friedlein, Die Zahlzeicheu, &c. votn 7 bis 13 Jahrhundert ; Dialogus (Clarendon 
Press), Intro, p. 39. 

2 Cf. above, p. 281 sq., and for the technical significance of imbreviare, p. 292 sq. 

3 Man. Germ. (Leges), p. 174 sq. Cf. Assize of Northampton (1176), Art. 10. 

4 Cf. the Winchester Pipe Roll, 1208 9 (1902), p. vii. In the conventional Minister's 
Account of a later period the cash account is on the front and the stock account on the dorse. 

20 2 



308 Royal Accounts 

century and the middle of the 12th 1 ; but the loss of earlier manorial 
accounts is not altogether surprising. The Account, regarded as a 
diplomatic document, the Return made to a Writ of summons or 
inquisition, is broadly distinguished from literary Returns by the 
presence of appropriate formulas based on the tripartite arrangement 
above referred to. The terminology of the Account naturally varies 
according to the subject-matter and the period of its execution ; 
but whatever may be its official character or date, every account will 
normally contain the following divisions 2 : 

1. The Heading, or Title, setting forth the subject of the Account, 
its date or locality, the name and capacity of the accountant and, 
in a later period, a reference to the royal Writ to which the Return is 
made 3 . 

2. The Arrears of the last Account (if any) and how disposed of. 

3. The Charge (Oneratio) for the Receipts, Imprest, or Profits 
for which the accountant is required to answer. These are set out 
by items of value or quantity at the several dates of receipt, and the 
total follows, marking the first stage in the tripartite division above 
referred to. 

4. The Discharge, sometimes distinguishing between cash paid in 
and Disbursements and Allowances authorized or customary, showing 
the respective totals and the sum total. 

5. The Balance or result of the subtraction of the Expenditure 
from the Receipts, indicating by a three-fold formula whether the 
Accountant is "quit," or "indebted," or possessed of a surplus 4 . 

It will be evident that this normal construction of an Account, 
with the many variants which occur 5 , affords considerable scope for 

1 The manorial accounts of Bishops' Temporalities entered in the Pipe Rolls of Henry II. 
The admissibility of the icth century inventory of Beddington (C. S. 618) has been previously 
referred to (p. 282). 

2 For a more detailed analysis of a manorial account see Winchester Pipe Roll {Intro- 
duction). 

8 In the Declared Accounts of the Pipe and Audit Offices, the Writ (of Privy Seal) is 
usually recited in extenso. In the case of the process of the Exchequer, the Writ of Summons 
was actually issued and may even be regarded as the most ancient form of an official writ de 
cursu, but in other cases the appearance of the accountant at the audit and the obligation of 
presenting an Account at certain terms seem to have been understood without the issue of an 
official reminder. Moreover, ihe issue of the writs de cursu, above referred to, was requisite 
in order to put in charge accruing debts which were appended as a schedule. 

4 When the Account showed a normal excess of receipts over expenditure the clear profit 
made was frequently indicated by the word Clarum or Remanet. In other cases this profit 
was anticipated by a system of " assignment " as to which see Sir J. H. Ramsay, Antiquary, 
Vols. i. iv. vi. vni. x. xiv. xvi. xvin. and H. Hall, Customs Revenue, u. 185. 

5 In the case of the Exchequer Pipe Rolls a precise charge is not always formulated, but 
may be inferred from the balance declared after a statement of disbursements and allowances, 



Royal Accounts 309 

conventional terms and formulas of a quasi-diplomatic nature 1 . This 
aspect of the Account may be also modified by the technical or official 
form in which it is presented. 

Usually every Account passed through several stages of preparation 
or declaration which may be enumerated as follows : 

1. The Particulars of the final Account, contained in the 
accountant's ledger or day-book, or in the separate Returns of sub- 
accountants 2 . These were usually annexed to the final Account in 
the shape of vouchers which are rarely preserved. 

2. The Original (final) Account above referred to 3 . 

3. "Estreats" and "Parcels" of Accounts in the form of abstracts 
communicated or preserved for official information 4 . 

4. The Enrolment of the Original Accounts in a continuous 
series for the purpose of an audit or for official reference 5 . 

5. Entries or compilations, usually in book form, to serve as 
precedents or for statistical purposes 6 . 

In connexion with this sequence of forms there are several other 
types of a subsidiary nature 7 , and in the case of certain sources of 
receipt or disbursement the Account may assume a narrative and 
literary form 8 . Again it is often difficult to distinguish between 
a mere Account and certain forms of Inventories, Taxations and 
Assessments which are usually classified with diplomatic Records 9 . 

each item being separately accounted for (cf. Cunningham, Industry, I. 158; H. Hall, 
Antiquities of the Exchequer, p. 143 sq. and Dialogus (Oxford ed.), p. 52. 

1 For some of these see Winchester Pipe Roll, he. cit. and Pipe Roll Society's 
Publications, Vol. III. For the terminology of the Audit cf. Antiquities of the Exchequer, 
P- 135 sq. 

8 Thus a manorial bailiff's Account was usually compiled from the Returns made by 
subordinate accountants like the flock-master, granger, &c. In the Exchequer itself the 
"day-books" on the Receipt side served as vouchers for Accounts presented for audit. 

3 Represented by the great class of "Exchequer Accounts." The Visus compoti, or 
interim Account, can scarcely be regarded as a distinct form. 

4 e.g. Estreats of amerciaments (extracta debitoruni), "Parcels of the Pipe" and the Pedes 
parcellarum amongst later Records. 

8 For a description of these see Public Record Office Indexes and Lists, " Foreign 
Accounts," Introduction. 

8 e.g. The Abstracts of the Pipe Rolls in the Red Book of the Exchequer and the 
conventual accounts in the "Miscellaneous Books "of the Augmentation Office. Previous 
to the reign of John these were probably in the form of Rolls. The lost Records known as 
the Rotulus Exactorius and the Danegeld Roll were of this nature. 

7 These include some deposited documents. It was not till the igth or i6th century that 
variants of the universal Compotus were familiarly designated as " Inventories," &c. 

8 e.g. the Fine, Imprest, Mis<e and similar memoranda of the Chancery. 

9 e.g. Inventories of Jewels, Plate and Records; the Taxation of 1291 and certain assess- 
ments for Parliamentary Subsidies and Knight's Service ; also special Inquisitions such as the 
well-known Extents of Templars' &c. lands. 



310 Royal Accounts 

Finally it may be noticed that the royal Writ employed in 
connexion with these Records assumes several recognized forms 
according to the occasion of its issue. Thus the Writs which precede 
the Return made in the Account are those of Summons 1 or Assign- 
ment 2 of various kinds. Also every order or writ of allowance must 
be produced as a voucher at the audit of the Account 3 . Finally there 
are the writs of execution or special pardon which might be issued in 
consequence of the accountant's indebtedness 4 . 

In spite of the presence of precise and technical formulas in the 
conventional type of account described above, the title has been 
somewhat loosely applied to a large mass of Exchequer Records 
which includes such utterly dissimilar forms as Diplomata, Letters, 
Inquisitions and Returns, Certificates, and even Pleadings. In one 
aspect indeed these documents may fairly be regarded as Accounts, 
since they can convey the same information in a diplomatic, epistolary 
or narrative form 5 . Reference has already been made to the difficulty 
that is frequently experienced in distinguishing between true Accounts 
and the statistical forms of certain agrarian and feudal surveys and 
inquisitions, but here we approach more nearly to the common origin 
of these two sections of our ministerial Records. 

1 Dialogus, II. i. Cf. Bigelow, Procedure, on this subject and above p. 308 n. 

2 Local supply writs entered in the Close Rolls, 

3 e.g. the writs of Allocate, Comfutate, &c. Cf. Dialogus, I. vi. 

4 Entered in the Memoranda Rolls of the Exchequer and in the Patent, Close or Liberate 
Rolls respectively. 

8 Cf. the well-known narrative account of Richard de Anesti (ed. Palgrave, Common- 
wealth} and the Returns of knights' fees in the Exchequer Feodaries. 



JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. 

(a) Judicial Records. 

AMONGST the many legal terms that have passed into the 
vocabulary of mediaeval history, few are more familiar than the title 
which is somewhat indiscriminately bestowed on 'the more ancient 
Archives of the State. 

In a legal sense, the " Record " has a purely technical significance, 
but as a conventional expression it stands for the purest sources 
of history. If we wish to know the meaning of the term in its legal 
aspect, we shall find a learned and indisputable definition in some 
ancient commentary. But if we ask the further question "when 
were judicial pleadings first recorded in this country, and what was 
their earliest form and object ? " an answer will not be easily forth- 
coming. 

It is true that, from one point of view, the earliest extant form of 
a judicial Record is seen in the royal charter which was admitted 
as an evidence of title and whych even served as a medium for 
recording judicial pleadings. Several interesting reports of cases, 
which in a later period would have been duly recorded in the Plea 
Rolls, are imbedded in the texts of Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman 
charters 1 . Narratives of law-suits which remind us at one time of the 
famous pleadings on Pendon Heath, and at another time of the 
adventurous litigation of Richard de Anesti, have been preserved 
from the 8th century onwards, besides a considerable number of 
official writs, and a few inquisitions, licences and oblations. Naturally 
the authentication of these evidences is not always complete. A few 
are preserved in contemporary and presumably genuine charters, 
others in cartularies of both good and bad repute. Such as they are, 
however, they have been freely used to illustrate the legal procedure 
of the Anglo-Norman period 2 . 

1 C. S. 378, 386, 387, 574, 575, 591, 1063, 1064, 1097; C. D. 758. For the composition 
between the churches of Canterbury and York in 1072, see Wilkins, Concilia, s. a. 

2 Bigelow, Placita Anglo- Normannica (passim). 



312 Judicial Proceedings 

In one respect, indeed, these diplomatic documents may be 
regarded as Records of consequence, for a grant contained therein 
was treated by the courts as res judicata in spite of the purely 
evidential nature of the instrument itself. At the same time it may 
seem somewhat futile to regard the Old English " land-bocs " and 
writs as a species of primaeval Record. To do so might tempt us to 
ignore the obvious distinction between the opportune production 
of many of these evidences and the systematic registration of royal 
grants, or private deeds, or the judicial conventions framed upon 
a diplomatic model, whereby land is securely held or easily conveyed 
in a later period. 

Setting these diplomata aside, we have still to discover the earliest 
date which can be assigned to the actual Records of the courts of law. 
Here we must distinguish between the judicial proceedings recorded 
in official enrolments and the private reports of certain famous Placita 
which have been preserved in monastic registers 1 . The reports in 
question have been generally accepted by historians ; but it must 
not be forgotten that they are merely ex parte versions of the alleged 
proceedings, in most cases compiled long after the date of the events 
which they commemorate. Moreover, in some cases at least, the 
veracity of these relations is seriously impugned by the character of 
the charters which have been introduced as the subject-matter of 
reputed pleadings. 

Possibly a certain number of these narratives may give a true 
though confused version of the judicial procedure employed. Again 
it might be alleged that the charters cited therein, however glaringly 
false, would have been accepted without demur by the courts in 
a later age and recorded in their official enrolments. In any case 
these picturesque relations would appear to have been accepted by 
most modern writers without any suspicion of a possible motive for 
their composition. 

It is generally agreed that the Rolls of the King's Court date only 
from the reign of Richard I, just as we have learnt that the enrolments 
of the Chancery begin with the reign of John ; whilst no judicial 
proceedings of the Court of Exchequer have been identified before 
the reign of Henry III. 

Of course we have Domesday Book, with its Appendix of 
"Claims" and its incidental references to pleadings, the exact value 
of which as precedents for curial procedure it has not been found 

1 e.g, of Rochester, Worcester and Ely, together with Chronicles like those of Abingdon, 
Ramsey and Battle. 



Judicial Proceedings 313 

easy to determine 1 . Again we have further references in the Great 
Rolls of the Exchequer which at least afford the presumption of an 
organized machinery of justice in the reign of Henry I though 
obviously this cannot be regarded as continuous. 

The date of the "earliest recorded plea" has been the subject 
of several learned and interesting speculations in recent years 2 . 
Certainly no original pleadings earlier than the reign of Richard I 
are known to exist, but a plea-roll of the year 1207 recites the record 
of a case heard in Hilary term of the 27th year of Henry II, which 
has been identified with that year 3 . This belated reference will 
remind us of the existence of certain " Rolls of justices itinerant " 
alluded to in the Dialogus*, though we have been warned against 
attaching a conventional meaning to a title which may possibly refer 
to mere lists of amercements 5 . 

In the case of the " Fines " of the King's Court, which have already 
been traced back to the year 1175, it is also necessary to distinguish 
between official rescripts which have been continuously filed in official 
custody and the private copies of alleged judicial Concords which 
occur in certain monastic registers for a still earlier date 6 . The exist- 
ence of these entries, however, coupled with the notices of judicial 
Concords found in the Pipe Rolls prior to the reign of Richard I and 
the fact of the great antiquity of the Concord or Convention as 

1 It is noteworthy that as long ago as 1886 Mr J. H. Round in a remarkable paper in 
Domesday Studies (Vol. II. p. 539 sq.) pronounced a decided opinion in favour of the judicial 
character of these proceedings. The "reconstruction," by the same learned writer, of the 
Worcester law-suit (1082 86) and other early pleadings is referred to below, p. 322. 

1 E. H. R. xi. 102, and below n. 6. 

3 Select Pleas of the Crown (Selden Soc. ), pp. xxvi xxviii. Mr Round in Domesday 
Studies (n. 548) adduces a reference from the Colchester. charter of Richard I to Inquisitions 
taken before the justices itinerant in this reign. 

4 Dialogus, n. i. 

5 History of English Law (Pollock and Maitland), I. 135, n. 2. It might still be urged 
with considerable diffidence, that the Rolls referred to in the above passage of the Dialogus 
must have been something more than mere lists of amerciaments, as we are told that these had 
to be picked out from the Rolls at the Exchequer. In a later period such lists (estreats) of 
amerciaments were separately returned. Again, we know now that these amerciaments were 
entered as above in the Exchequer Receipt Roll, and the Pipe Roll of 1 185 tells us that the 
record from which they were derived made mention of the "causes" of amerciaments pro 

forestd. It is certainly difficult to read the story of Richard de Anesti's law-suit without 
supposing that some record of judicial pleadings was preserved before 1159. A later and 
clearer allusion is to be found in a passage of the Rotuli de Dominabus (below p. 323, n. 7). 

8 Cf. J. H. Round in Feudal England, p. 509, and E. H. R. XII. 293; F. W. Maitland 
in Select Pleas of the Crown (Selden Soc.), pp. xxvi xxviii; Pollock and Maitland, History 
of English Law, II. 96, n. 5 ; E. M. Poynton in E. H. R. XVII. 282, and Genealogist. The 
date 1163 has been assigned by Mr Round to a Concord confirmed by the Curia (Pipe Roll 
Society, Vol. X. p. 67). Cf. also Pipe Roll, 31 Henry II, the Fine of Wm de Griseleia (p. u). 



314 Judicial Proceedings 

a diplomatic instrument, should perhaps prepare us for further dis- 
coveries in this direction. 

Now and again certain of our older antiquaries have implied in 
oracular terms that the losses which we have suffered in respect of 
early Records are even more extensive than we have imagined 1 . 
Mediaeval writers, it is true, are reserved as to the precise contents of 
the Record-chests in the royal treasuries at Winchester or West- 
minster ; but, at the same time, some recent discoveries of unsuspected 
Records would seem to justify a further consideration of the subject. 

A specimen of the writ of Liberate described in the Dialogus has 
lately been re-discovered amongst the Exchequer Records 2 . The Pipe 
Roll of the first year of Henry II can be to a large extent restored 
from an abstract that has been preserved in an Exchequer register 3 . 
Quite recently there has been brought to light a considerable portion 
of a noble Receipt Roll of the year ii85 4 , whilst Memoranda Rolls of 
the English and Norman Exchequers can be identified with the reigns 
of Richard I and John 5 . 

Now the Dialogus, which enumerates certain well-known Records, 
makes mention also of others, none of which were until quite lately 
known to have survived 6 . It might fairly be argued, therefore, that 
the unexpected recovery of Records dated many years anterior to the 
earliest known examples of their class should lead us to attach greater 
importance to the statements of the above treatise with regard to 
these prehistoric plea-rolls. After all, however, the existence of 
a royal administration of justice before the last years of the I2th 
century does not depend on the survival of actual Records of its 
proceedings. That such an administration existed, we know well ; 
that its proceedings were unrecorded save in the form of a casual 
reference in a charter or Pipe Roll or of an interested narrative, we 
may believe or not as we please ; but to many it must still appear 
that a gulf is fixed between the earliest informal notices of judicial 
proceedings dating from the middle of the I2th century and the 
unbroken series of rolls and chirographs that date only from its close. 

1 Cf. Quarterly Review, XXXIX. 60; Ayloffe, Calendars (Preface). 

2 Printed in Pipe Roll Society's Publications, Vol. X. This interesting relic was found 
amongst some miscellaneous Exchequer fragments. 

3 Red Book, p. 648 sq. 

4 L. T. R. Miscellaneous Rolls, Bdle. I. Nos. t and i, edited by the Palaeography Class 
of the London School of Economics (1899). 

5 L. T. R. Memoranda Rolls, Bdle. I. Nos. 3 and 4, and Exchequer Accounts 505/4. 
Cf. also a curious reference to Exchequer proceedings about the year 1196 in the Chronicle of 
Jocelin de Brakelond. 

6 Dialogus, I. xiv. and 11. v. vi. Red Book, CCLII, 659 and 771. 



Judicial Proceedings 315 

(b) Judicial Inquisitions. 

There is one persistent feature of the prehistoric Records above 
referred to that must attract our attention. The claims asserted in 
Domesday Book and its surviving satellites, the picturesque reports of 
royal pleas and early decisions of the Exchequer court have this in 
common with the later series of judicial Records, that they are equally 
Returns to royal Writs. 

From this point of view the Writ itself may be regarded as a 
Record, and as the Writ was returnable to the court which issued it, 
so it would become a material part of the Records of that court. 

In some cases, indeed, the Record, as we have seen, may assume 
a diplomatic form, and, in the case of the Concord, or Fine, the form of 
the private Convention has been utilized 1 . The Writ, however, was 
from the first a royal instrument. Even before the Conquest it was 
employed, as we know, for business of a ministerial character which 
may also have a judicial tendency 2 . With the accession of Henry II 
the Writ enters upon a new epoch of ministerial activity. In addition 
to the increased number of Returns made to royal inquisitions, we can 
trace the new influence of the Writ in the steady accumulation of 
Exchequer Records 3 . But, more than this, in the same reign we find 
the first organized machinery of royal justice towards which the com- 
munal and seignorial courts, the moots and sokes of immemorial 
antiquity, must henceforth preserve an attentive demeanour. 

It has been admirably suggested that the ministerial inquest 
provides the connecting link between the old judicial system and the 
new 4 . That is to say, the royal inquisition, whether of stock or 
tenures, or taxation, or for general purposes of local administration is 
extended to the procedure of justice in civil causes. The path of 
reform is marked by the judicial assizes of the reign, and these are 
supplemented by other litigious processes until the frame of the old 
royal Writ is covered by a net-work of complex forms. But although 

1 It must be remembered, however, that the originating Writ on which the judicial Concord 
was based had an important part in the proceedings. We find, indeed, that these writs were 
ordered by Statute (5 Hen. IV, c. 14) to be enrolled as though they constituted the essential 
part of the Record. No such special enrolments seem to have been preserved, however, 
before the reign of Elizal^eth. 

2 Cf. above, p. 213 sq. 

3 Bigelow, Procedure, p. 113 sq. The "Summons of the Pipe" is not only responsible 
for returns in the shape of various Accounts, but also for the proceedings (Pleadings) thereon 
known to us as Memoranda, which in turn give rise to further Extracts (Estreats) used for 
departmental purposes. 

4 History of English Law, I. 118 sq. Cf. C. Haskins in A. If. R. July 1903. 



316 Judicial Proceedings 

the pleadings which resulted from these instruments have been duly 
placed amongst judicial Records, the significance of their evolution 
from the ministerial Writ has not been recognized in any scheme of 
Record classification. 

From a purely diplomatic point of view, therefore, a Record, as we 
have seen, may be regarded as a Return made to a special Writ of 
inquisition or else as a report of the proceedings on Original and 
Judicial Writs recorded in a court of law. In the former aspect we 
have to do with a long series of Inquisitions and Returns, made for 
a variety of purposes, from Domesday Book to the Special Com- 
missions of the 1 8th century. In the latter and more restricted sense 
of the term we have the. actual Records of the several courts, the 
Pleadings and proceedings subsidiary thereto. 

The official distinction between the two classes of Records has 
been very sharply drawn, but we have already discovered from a 
diplomatic examination that some ministerial inquisitions, under the 
existing arrangement, are really curial Records, whilst others now 
classified as judicial proceedings are to be regarded rather as mere 
inquisitions. The true nature of either type of inquisition may be 
obscured, by accidental detachment from the covering Writ, or by the 
abnormal form of a lengthy schedule. 

In most cases, however, the essential construction can be easily 
perceived. The relationship of the Return to the parent' Writ is in 
fact only a matter of degree. In one case this Return will take the 
conventional form of a diplomatic instrument which may embody the 
information required by the Writ or may append the same in a 
schedule. Indeed we are often able to reconstruct the Writ itself, 
where it has not survived, from the formulas preserved in the Return. 
In other cases a special type of diplomatic construction has been 
evolved from a judicial procedure, and this will continue to preserve 
its own distinctive formulas 1 . Finally there are cases in which we 

1 It is true that the ministerial and judicial writs of the i ith and i2th centuries are very 
general in form, and do not, except in the case of instructions for taking an inquisition, usually 
present any regular or conventional formulas which could serve as a basis for the*form of sub- 
sequent pleadings. At the same time we cannot ignore the fact that such common forms were 
utilized in the case of Returns to official Writs or Articles of inquisition in the reign of Henry II, 
as in the well-known instances of the feudal circular of 1166 and the Inquest of Sheriffs in 
1 1 70. However, as so few authentic pleadings exist prior to the age when royal writs were 
issued de cursu, and when the pleadings thereon assumed an appropriate form, the point 
cannot be insisted on. Probably the pending investigation of the Norman diplomata by 
Prof. Haskins will throw fresh light upon this subject. 

For the agrarian origin and use of the nth century Breve cf. above, p. 281 sq., and Ducange, 
Glossarium s.v. 



Judicial Proceedings 317 

find no regularity or persistence of formulas, whilst from the first a 
class of sterile Writs has existed to which no precise Return whatever 
is anticipated. 

Evidently, therefore, it will be a matter of some difficulty to 
distinguish between certain ministerial inquisitions executed by the 
royal machinery of justice and certain judicial proceedings in their 
ministerial aspect. Possibly this difficulty is due to our own narrow 
view of the relations between ministerial and judicial procedure and 
their respective Records. As matters stand, however, a rather fine 
distinction must either be made between judicial inquests and judicial 
pleadings, or we must, as far as possible, exclude from either category 
documents which assume the form of judicial proceedings whilst 
subserving a purely ministerial purpose. 

On the other hand we might be tempted to include amongst these 
judicial inquisitions certain ministerial Records which present a quasi- 
diplomatic form. One such feature is seen in their execution as 
a matter of official routine. Thus the Coroner's inquest with its 
ancient procedure 1 may be regarded as subsidiary to the judicial 
proceedings of the eyre. In another aspect, however, these functions 
have been regarded as of a ministerial and particularly of a fiscal 
nature 2 . From this point of view the coroner's inquest will resemble 
the " office " taken before the Escheator, a minister with whom he was 
frequently associated. Moreover his official rolls are auxiliary rather 
than subsidiary to the pleas held by the king's justices 3 , whilst their 
form is somewhat diplomatic. This may even consist of a Writ and 
Return, whilst the mere inquest ex officio is usually furnished with 
a narrative preamble. Some interesting variants are found in the 
kindred judicial Records known as "Ancient Indictments," especially 
in connexion with the custom of "abjuring the realm 4 ." 

Another type of the conventional judicial inquisition is seen in 
the proceedings under the well-known writ De odio et atia. Although 
this and some kindred instruments have been included in a new 
official class of " Criminal Inquisitions," its ministerial character can 
scarcely be insisted on in view of the ex parte use of the Writ itself 
and the judicial proceedings which it originated 5 . 

1 Capitttla placitorum Corona (Hoveden, he. cit.) and see Gross, Coroners' Rolls (Selden 
Soc.), p. 14 sq. 2 Cf. Gross, op. cit. pp. xxiv xxvi. 

3 The Justices had the rolls both of the Coroners and Sheriffs before them when dealing 
with the presentments made to the " Chapters of the Eyre" (Hist. English Law, II. 643). 

4 Cf. A. Reville on the Abjuratio regni in Rev. Hi$t. t. 50. A narrative form of Return 
occasionally in the first person, is found in the Ancient Indictments. 

8 History of English Law, II. 585. 



318 Jiidicial Proceedings 

Indeed, we are reminded that the early procedure of the Chancery 
itself was, in one sense, of a ministerial character, and possibly these 
" Criminal Inquisitions," like other waifs and strays from the "Chancery 
Files," should be regarded as subsidiary judicial records. 

Closely related to these judicial inquests in their legal aspect, 
though differing widely from them in their diplomatic capacity, are the 
presentments of the county by its " hundreds," " vills " and " liberties," 
made before the royal justices in their eyres. These, whether accusa- 
tive or merely inquisitive in character, are not actually Returns made 
to a special Writ. They cannot even be regarded as differing per- 
ceptibly from the like presentments that had been made in the local 
courts as determined by the ancient dooms. The "hundreds" and "vills" 
continue to make use of the old machinery of justice. The sheriff 
takes many a "turn" in the long intervals between judicial eyres and the 
coroner is in attendance to collect materials for future indictments. 

On the other hand the inquisitional nature of these formal judicial 
presentments is revealed by documentary evidences the royal com- 
mission to the justices in eyre, the royal mandates to the sheriffs and 
coroners, the long schedule of the Articles of Inquisition with their 
Returns, and the subsidiary documents by which these will be verified, 
all tell of the new device of a " prerogative process " which here, as 
elsewhere, has been imposed upon an earlier judicial system. 

The inquisitional procedure of the old judicial eyres from 1194 to 
1275 has been previously referred to 1 as the basis of the special or 
statutory inquisitions which assume such prominence between the 
years 1255 and 1275. These well-known returns, owing to their 
political environment, have been accepted without question as minis- 
terial records although they appear to have been administered for 
the most part by the same judicial machinery that sets in motion the 
detailed presentments to the " Old Chapters of the Eyre." These, in 
turn, from their fiscal and feudal importance, might even appear to be 
rather of a ministerial than a judicial type 2 . Indeed, it may be that 
the king's justices inherited some of the administrative duties of the 
sheriffs whom they had replaced for judicial purposes since the close 
of the 1 2th century, just as they were relieved in turn of certain 
administrative functions by the justices of the peace under the new 
regime of the Tudor monarchy. However this may be, it is a some- 

1 Above, p. 300 sq. 

2 Cf. above, p. 291 sq. We gather from the Rolls of Parliament (ill. ii? b ) that inquisitions 
taken before the Justices of Assize ex ojficio as to the value of franchises granted by the Crown 
out of the county might prevent a serious injury to ministerial interests. 



Judicial Proceedings 319 

what significant fact that the enrolments of the presentments made to 
the " Chapters of the Eyre" have not been preserved with the judicial 
pleadings, although their extensive nature may be realized by reference 
to one of the few complete returns that have survived 1 . 

In the case of the judicial Records above referred to, namely the 
Coroner's Inquest, the so-called "Criminal Inquests" and the "Chapters 
of the Eyre," we have to do with the more obvious types of the judicial 
inquisition in its official or conventional aspect. In addition to these 
there are other types the exact position of which is more obscure. 

It has been seen that the royal inquisition of the nth and I2th 
centuries could be utilized for the purpose of a special judicial investi- 
gation. The exact nature of the judicial proceedings connected with 
the Domesday Survey is by no means clear 2 , but a good deal of 
material exists for a reconstruction of the presentments and pleadings 
consequent on several of the great political inquisitions of the I3th 
century in which the Returns made to the original Writ of inquisition 
serve in turn as information for a prosecution by the Crown 3 or for 
claims advanced by individual plaintiffs 4 . The actual pleadings 
referred to will be noticed elsewhere*, but something remains to be 
said with regard to the form of the inquisitions in question. 

It has been acutely suggested that the origin of the judicial 
inquisition may probably be found in the continental procedure which 
existed in the Norman and Angevin provinces before the accession of 
Henry II, as indicated by the famous Bayeux register 6 . But even 
before the memorable reforms of the first Plantagenet king, or the 
innovations of his continental predecessors, the judicial inquest can 
be recognized as an essential device of the fiscal inquisition of the 
Anglo-Norman period on the authority of certain monastic Registers 7 . 

In any case the machinery for this inquisitional procedure is 
clearly indicated before the close of the I2th century. The ordinance 
for holding the judicial and fiscal eyres in 1 194" may be regarded as 
the starting point of a newly-organized system of royal inquisitions, 
and this is followed by the notices which occur with increasing 

1 Assize Rolls, Nos. 890 906, a series of eyre presentments to both the Old and New 
Chapters for the county of Surrey alone, apparently of the date 1305. The Returns present 
some interesting local variants, e.g. the condition of the salmon fisheries in several reaches of 
the Thames (cf. Pat. 33 Edw. I, m. 7 d and 6 d ). 

2 Mr J. H. Round in Domesday Studies, II. 539 sq. 

3 e.g. The Quo Warranto Rolls. 

4 e.g. The Placita occasion* Turbationis (1252), ed. Hunter, and the State Trials of 
1289, &c. ed. R. Hist. Soc. Camden (3rd Ser.), Vol. ix. 

6 Below, p. 322. 6 C. Haskins in A. H. R., loc.cit. 

7 Cf. below, p. 323. 8 Cf. above, p. 291. 



320 Judicial Proceedings 

frequency during the I3th century of special inquisitions in close 
connexion with this organization 1 . It would even seem that the 
machinery of the local courts could be utilized for the purpose of 
these extra-judicial enquiries. In this connexion we may notice an 
interesting series of inquisitions or Extents relating to the royal manor 
of Ospring 2 towards the middle of the I3th century. Articles of 
inquisition were administered to the local jurqrs, presumably in 
accordance with a Writ which has not been identified. These Articles 
comprise, in addition to the usual subjects of an agrarian Extent, 
questions concerning the alleged trespasses of local officers in the 
manner of the political inquests which have been previously described. 
Here, too, we find traces of pleadings and decisions of the court in 
individual cases which closely resemble the pleadings in Quo Warranto 
and " Rageman " of a later period. 

It is, however, the connexion of the two last-mentioned Records 
with the ministerial inquisitions so well-known to us as the " Hundred 
Rolls " that affords the clearest view of the development of the usual 
official enquiry into formal judicial proceedings, based in some cases 
upon further local presentments. In one direction we have these 
well-known Returns indicating the results of a royal Writ and Articles 
of inquisition ; in another we have the pleadings thereon which 
were communicated to the itinerant justices in order that informations 
might be laid thereon to recover the " rights " of the Crown. Again, we 
have special Articles of enquiry and special inquisitions and pleadings 
relating to the trespasses of evil ministers 3 . Of these, the pleadings 
on writs of Quo Warranto can be easily identified with the precedent 
inquisitions in the printed volumes of the Hundred Rolls 4 , but of the 
further proceedings taken under the statute of " Rageman " against the 
royal ministers we find only a few slight traces fn the printed 
collection of pleadings in Quo Warranto' 1 '. Unfortunately, however, 

1 The Record of the royal inquisition, whether ministerial or judicial, should properly 
include, besides the Writ, Form of Inquisition and Return, the Noniinajuratorum, These, 
however, though they are, as we know, preserved as early as the Domesday Survey, are rarely 
met with as a separate schedule to the Return. A nearly complete list for all the hundreds 
of Gloucestershire, in 13 Edward I, apparently in connexion with Kirkby's Quest, will be 
found in L. T. R. Misc. Rolls \. 

2 Testa de Nevill, p. 217. Somewhat similar cases occur amongst the large and miscel- 
laneous class of "Ancient Extents." 

8 Cf. above, p. 302. 

4 Cf. Vol. I. p. 100 and 103, the case of Thomas de Well's sergeanty, and the subsequent 
proceedings in the Placita de Quo Warranto (p. 181), from the Assize Roll (203) of 6 Edw. I. 
For a special enrolment of the presentments against the Earl of Gloucester in divers counties, 
see Misc. of the Exchequer ^. 

6 Cf. p. 382 b , where the king's attorney informs the court that quoad presentata in le 



Judicial Proceedings 32! 

the form of the articles connected with the special inquisitions " De 
Ministris " cannot now be ascertained from existing Records 1 , whilst 
pleadings " De Ragemannis," analogous to the pleadings "de Quo 
Warranto," can be occasionally identified in the sparse collection of 
surviving Assize Rolls 2 . 

One other type of royal inquisition may be noticed here as pre- 
serving, externally at least, a judicial form. The reference is to 
those political inquisitions which are recorded in the form of judicial 
presentments, as in the well-known case of the proceedings connected 
with the robbery of the royal treasury at Westminster in the year 
1303". 

Such an inquisition as this must be distinguished from certain 
political commissions in which the court is constituted by a royal 
commission, but instead of the presentments of local jurors the Querelae 
or Petitiones of individual plaintiffs are the subject of formal pleadings 4 . 
Finally it may be noticed that, while certain types of the judicial 
inquisition, such as the Coroner's Inquest, may be met with down to 
a comparatively late date, the procedure that is associated with the 
great political inquests of the I3th and I4th centuries is practically 
unrepresented from the beginning of the Tudor period, not so much 
from " poverty of justice " as from the paucity of local Records. 

Rageman nondum est paratus, an allusion to the distinct proceedings in such cases enjoined 
by the Statute of 1276. Some pleadings, however, are recorded here (cf. p. 387 b ). 

1 The fragments preserved in Misc. of the Exch. -fa are not of this nature as claimed by 
an old official endorsement. In the Extract Hundred Rolls, No. 4, we find references to a 
" Rotulus de Inquisitione," and this can be identified with the " Hundred Rolls," which give 
references, in turn, to special inquisitions De ministris. 

2 Cases relating to Norfolk and Suffolk will be found in Assize Roll, No. 1233 for 6 Edw. I, 
some of which can be clearly identified with the Hundred Roll inquisitions and the proceedings 
De ministris above referred to. For the noticeable variants occurring in these several versions 
see the case of J. de Gymmingham in Hundred Rolls, I. 534 a , Extract Hundred Rolls, No. 4, 
m. i d , and Assize Roll, 1233, m. s" 1 . 

3 Palgrave, Calendars, I. Appx. Here a commission was issued (Letters Patent) indicating 
the form of the proceedings. 

4 Cf. the trials of the justices in i289-*-9i as recorded in two special Assize Rolls (edition 
R. Hist. Soc. Camden (3rd Ser.), Vol. IX.). The special character of these proceedings 
is confirmed by the contemporary judicial ruling (cf. Abbrev. Placitortim, p. 305) that appeals 
from the commissioners lay only before the King and Parliament. The petitions and 
other proceedings respecting the Templars (Cole, Documents}, and the forfeited lands of 
Normans and followers of de Montfort (Hunter, Rot. Selecli) and Lancaster (Abbreviatio, 
p. 343 b ) are certainly consequent on extensive inquisitions, but no information with regard to 
the process by which these further proceedings were originated has been discovered. A good 
deal more information is forthcoming with regard to the prosecutions under the Statute of 
Labourers (Assize Rolls 170, 312, 313, &c.) and the Extents made at several times of Aliens' 
lands, in both of which the inquisitional procedure is well developed (see below, p. 326). 



H. 21 



322 Judicial Proceedings 

(c) Pleadings on Inquisitions. 

The origin of pleadings in English courts of law has been the 
subject of various learned and somewhat conflicting speculations. 
Regarded as a national and also as a professional usage, this legal 
procedure with its infinite niceties does not concern us here. Indeed 
it is not in the forms of pleadings at large that the study of English 
Diplomatic has any part. In a very restricted sense only can we venture 
to claim an interest in a subject that properly belongs to the depart- 
ment of the legal antiquary. 

The extent of the present enquiry has been already indicated in 
the preceding sections dealing with the somewhat anomalous position 
of those ministerial or judicial records which derive a certain diplo- 
matic character from their connexion with a royal writ. Here then, 
as before, the Writ with its complement in the shape of a Form of 
Inquisition and an appropriate Return is at the bottom of our 
diplomatic investigation. 

But even before the writ itself was conceived as an instrument of 
royal justice, and again during its earliest infancy, we are able to 
discover traces of judicial pleadings recited in a royal charter or 
inquisition. Certainly we must not hazard the suggestion that, from the 
first, judicial pleadings were modelled on the form of the originating 
writ ; nor can we, during the earliest period of the administration of 
royal justice, detect so much as a tendency in this direction. We 
should search in vain amongst the Old English charters for records 
of pleadings resembling the notarial reports which may be found in 
Prankish charters as early as the 8th century 1 , although certain 
narrative forms occur in the Codex both in Latin and vernacular 
charters 2 . 

With the Domesday Survey, however, we can begin to collect notices 
of many famous Placita and in the well-known proceedings preserved 
in Heming's cartulary there is at least much scope for diplomatic 
criticism 3 . 

1 Cf. the charter of Pepin, A.D. 749 (ed. Bouquet, iv. 714). 2 Cf. above, p. 311. 

3 The memorable law-suit between the Church of Worcester and Abbey of Evesham 
(c. 1082 86) reconstructed by Mr J. H. Round, with a valuable commentary, in Domesday 
Studies, II. 539 sq. from the confused text of Heming's cartulary (ed. Hearne, pp. 75 83). 
The procedure described is as follows : 

(1) Writ to the royal commissioner to hold the Plea. 

(2) The record (comtneworatto) of the Plea. 

(3) Writ to give effect to the decision. 

(4) Certificate by the commissioner as to the finding. 

(5) Convention between the parties consequent thereon. 

(6) Entry of the finding (pro evideiitia} in Domesday Book. 

(7) Breviate of the entry in Domesday Book. 



Judicial Proceedings 323 

Equal caution should perhaps be exercised with regard to the 
interesting record of the litigation between the Church of Ely and its 
encroaching neighbours preserved in the I2th century Inquisitio 
Eliensis. In this case, moreover, the existing MS. is of later date and 
the reputation of this Church is somewhat indifferent 1 . 

Whether the famous Clamores and Invasiones appended to the 
existing official digests of the Domesday Survey can be properly 
regarded as rudimentary pleadings is at present merely a matter of 
learned speculation 2 . It may be conceded, however, that formal 
pleadings are referred to, if they are not actually recited, in the 
famous Record 3 . It may be of interest to note, in this connexion, that 
a very simple formula of a Calumpnia, such as might be found in the 
group of Domesday inquisitions, is preserved amongst the pleadings 
on official Extents of forfeited lands at the close of the reign of 
Henry III 4 . It is also possible that the primitive formulas of the 
Placita Aulae connected with claims to offices in the royal household 
may be of great antiquity 5 . 

Even as late as the reign of Henry II we have seen that, apart 
from the florid and usually suspicious narratives of contemporary 
chroniclers, there would be found only vague and casual references to 
judicial proceedings from which some disconnected fragments of 
formal pleadings may be recovered. 

A few of these, it is true, are of exceptional interest, such as the 
recital of certain pleadings before the royal commission of enquiry as 
to the misgovernment of the sheriffs in 1 170". 

Slightly later we find in a well-known collection of Extents of 
escheated lands, the recital of proceedings before the justices itinerant 
in which a technical formula may now and then be recognized 7 . 

1 The Writs are printed in Hamilton's edition, together with a Commemoratio placiti, 
&c. 

2 It is not difficult to infer that such a high authority as Mr J. H. Round inclines to credit 
the existence of contemporary pleadings, as did also at one time the late Mr Elton. The 
learned author of the Placita Anglo-Normannica assumes the fact without any hesitation. 

3 Cf. D. B. I. 377, i. 164, I. 56!), n. 99 b, n. 449. 

4 Hunter, Rotuli Selecti, p. 85. 6 Cf. Red Book, p. 755 sq. 

9 Red Book, pp. ccclxix and ccclxxviii, where the count and pleadings may be distinguished 
as follows : 

(i) xv. dies ante Pnrifiaitioneni, &c. Servientes Comitis de A.cepenmt, &c. sictit nil 

comiti debut. 

(i) Respondent ballivi Comilis quod pro defectti servifii C. cepertttit, &*c. 
(3) Et ipse cottfitetur et conqueritnr de C. . 

In another case we have apparently a recital of pleadings in a seignorial court with the 
refrain, Et idea reddidit (dederunf) domino per veredidum (jitdicium). 

7 Rotuli de Doininabits (1185), L. T. R. Miscellaneous Rolls, Bdle. I. Cf. Et hoc fuit 
prius ostensum justiciariis. A. invenit plegios habendi warrantum stmm iij septimanis post 
festutn Sancti Michaclis ad Staciariutn. Plegii . 

21 2 



324 Judicial Proceedings 

Finally we may remember that long before the close of the same 
reign pleadings recited in a diplomatic formula of great antiquity 
were officially recorded 1 . These " Final Concords," in which, as in 
the Old English convention, the inserted formulas of a normal 
diplomatic instrument can be easily recognized, may be regarded as 
one of the many official devices for preserving a formal record of 
judicial pleadings which have been ordained by national custom and 
refined by legal ingenuity. In like manner we have witnessed the 
resourcefulness of royal clerks in the official treatment of the Domes- 
day inquisition, and further evidence in point would be afforded by 
the apt memoranda recording current fiscal determinations in the 
earliest Exchequer court rolls' 2 and in the Chancery estreats 3 . 

The clerical licence to which allusion has been made is a subject 
which seems to stand in need of a closer investigation. In spite of 
some authoritative statements and many plausible surmises, it cannot 
be fairly concluded that the procedure adopted for the purpose of 
placing on record the pleadings in an English court of law during the 
1 3th century has been exhaustively expounded 4 . 

While this professional problem is one with which we are not here 
concerned, the uncertainty which appears to prevail upon the point in 
question may help to explain the neglect of the diplomatic study of a 
certain class of judicial proceedings during the above period. In the 
first place we may notice that besides the usual method of recording 
pleas of the Crown held by justices itinerant or royal commissioners, 
the same end might be attained by an unconventional record which, like 
the Fine itself, is based upon some principle of diplomatic composition. 
Thus in the case of the judicial enquiry ordered for the purpose of 
verifying the corrodies claimed by the Templars at the suppression of 
the Order, a special formula is employed as a more advantageous 
method of displaying the documents exhibited to the Court 5 . 
Whether these findings were tested by further judicial proceedings 

1 Cf. above, p. 31 3 n. 

? Cf. L. T. R. Miscellaneous Rolls, Bdle. I. Nos. 3 and 4. 

3 Cf. Rotuli de Liberate, &f. regnante Johanne (Record Commission). 

4 Mr G. J. Turner's edition of the Brevia Placitata has not yet unfortunately been 
published for the Selden Society. A learned essay on the subject has recently been published 
by Mr W. S. Houldsworth. 

6 Cf. Cole, Select Documents, p. 1 39 sqq. where the Record is made up as follows : 

(1) The royal commission. 

(2) The petition for allowance supported by production of the original deed of 

corrody. 

(3) The judicial order for inquisition to be made thereon. 

(4) The Return to the inquisition (recited). 

(5) The decision of the commissioners. 



Judicial Proceedings 325 

has not been ascertained, but in the somewhat similar procedure 
adopted in connexion with the forfeited lands of rebels and aliens 
during the I3th and I4th centuries, we find, in addition to petitions, 
with the decisions thereon 1 , more than one style of recorded pleadings 
of a more conventional nature 2 . 

In the second place we may notice that, even when the pleadings 
recorded in certain of these early Eyre Rolls are presented in a purely 
conventional form, they must in some instances be compared with 
precedent inquisitions or other records for the full elucidation of their 
purport. Thus the records preserved in the Assize Rolls relating to 
" Rageman" and "Kirkby's Quest" are at times obscure without such 
cross-references. We may in fact suspect that in the case of these 
statutory and extensive inquisitions and the resultant judicial pro- 
ceedings, the facts at issue being recorded specialiori modo in the 
Inquisition itself (which we know was in the hands of the justices), 
the form of the pleadings was influenced by this consideration 3 . On 
the other hand in the case of casual and local commissions ordered 
by the Crown, or by the justices for their fuller information, the 
actual inquisition is frequently recited verbatim, the pleadings thereon 
being thus rendered fully intelligible. 

It will indeed be evident from an inspection of the certified 
" Records " of Civil Pleas as late as the close of the I4th century that 

1 As in the fragment of a roll of proceedings, formerly preserved amongst the early Eyre 
Rolls of the reign of Henry III, which was discovered by Major Poynton and which presents 
the following formula : 

A. petit terra in X. qua capta est in manu domini Regis, &c. ea ratione, quod habuit 
de dono B; qui prins habuit de dono domini Regis, &-Y. Et nichil aliud habet extra regnum 
Anglite. 

2 Cf. Hunter, Rotuli Selecti, where we have in cases brought before the court : 

(1) The king's writ to put in force the provisions of the statute. 

(2) The commission to the justices. 

(3) The verdict or presentment of the jurors. 

(4) The pleadings in conventional form. 

3 Cf. above, p. 302, for the connexion between these inquisitions and the subsequent 
proceedings thereon. Cf. also the remarkable fragment of the original " Hearing Notes" of 
Kirkby's Commission for Cornwall in L. T. R. Miscellaneous Rolls J and the relationship of 
these to the judicial proceedings during the same eyre recorded in Assize Roll 1 16. The 
procedure thus indicated would seem to have teen as follows : 

(i) The Writ. 

(i) The Form of Inquisition. 

(3) The Returns of the local jurors in the shape of presentments. 

(4) Pleadings on the same before the commissioners. 

(5) Proceedings of the commissioners recording (a) Precepts issued in connexion with 
the above inquisitions and pleadings, (A) Memoranda of matters to be reported to the King's 
Council, (c) Recognizances of persons implicated, (</) A register of tallies outstanding in the 
hands of the sheriffs. 



326 Judicial Proceedings 

in the hands of an experienced prothonotary, the briefest memoranda 
were sufficient for the purpose of reconstructing the conventional 
pleadings upon a formal writ or bill. The notes made for this 
purpose were endorsed on the several instruments by which process 
was effected, and then, even if the Roll of the year and term were not 
available, these could be expanded at pleasure in the form of con- 
ventional pleadings after the lapse of many years 1 . 

By the time that judicial pleadings have attained their fullest 
development as an exotic form of Record composition, the special 
inquisition has fallen into disuse as a ministerial or political expedient, 
to be replaced by an elaborate indictment 2 or else by a Special 
Commission, the technical findings of which can be viewed with 
greater deliberation in the congenial atmosphere of the Chancery or 
the Exchequer 3 . 

1 For examples, see the Chancery Miscellaneous Files (formerly "County Placita"), 
e.g. Bundle 47, File 2, No. 21, and Bundle 48, File 2, No. 19. Cf. also the prominent part 
played by the antecedent inquisition, or presentment, in the Records of the proceedings taken 
under the Statute of Labourers (e.g. Assize Rolls 170, 312, 313). The same technical skill in 
expanding these brief notes of pleadings may have been possessed in an equal degree by the 
officials of the local courts and special tribunals such as the Marshalsea (cf. the Record of 
proceedings in the Nottingham County Court, 19 Edward I, amongst the " County Placila" 
and the Records of Placita Aitlte in several counties in the same collection). From the reign 
of Edward III, however, the Records subsidiary to pleadings coram Rege were apparently 
preserved in "bags " for each session and noted in the Controlment Rolls. 

2 Cf. "Ancient Indictments " passim and the elaborate informations pro Rege entered at 
full length in the Controlment and Crown Rolls, based on sworn depositions the originals of 
which were formerly preserved. The proceedings in the "State Trials" of the period 1450 
1 600 seem to have been preserved specialiori modo in the bagae de secretis, the precursors of 
the "dossiers" still preserved amongst the Treasury Solicitor's Records. 

3 e.g. Revenue cases or matters of public policy in which the inquisitions or informations 
are recited at great length. Instances of these narrative enrolments will be seen in the cases 
of the Marian exiles and Polydore Vergil printed by Mr I. S. Leadam in Transactions R. 
Hist. Soc. N. S. xi. and xix. 



APPENDIX I 1 . 
A CLASSIFIED TABLE OF DIPLOMATIC INSTRUMENTS. 

I. DIPLOMATIC DOCUMENTS. 

(i) OFFICIAL INSTRUMENTS. 

A. Royal Charters (Grants). 

1. Anglo-Saxon (597 io66) 2 . 

(a) General Form (Land-bocs). 

(b) Special Forms (Foundation, grant of Liberties, exemption from 
Taxation, &c.) 3 . 

2. Anglo-Norman and early Angevin (1066 1200). 

(a) General Form (Feoffment). 

(b) Special Forms (Free-Alms, Liberties, Assart, &c.). 

3. Later Charters (1200 I5i6) 4 . 

(a) General Form. 

(b) Special Forms : 

Incorporation 6 . 

Fee- Farm 8 . 

Office. 

Market. 

Fair. 

Disafforestation 7 . 

Imparking 8 . 

1 For examples of the following selected forms of diplomatic instruments see Formula 
Book (passim). 

2 Confirmations, writs (vernacular) and private conventions will be found under their 
appropriate headings. 

3 These are mentioned as the most familiar, if not the most characteristic instruments for 
this period. The same remark applies to the selections which follow. 

4 The date of the abandonment of separate enrolments ; but the charter had long since 
ceased to possess a really distinctive character. 

6 This term has also been applied to the later incorporations by Letters Patent. 
8 The words ad feodi firmam do not seem to be essential in early times. 

7 Usually in the limited sense of exemption from forest jurisdictions or with special reference 
to the grievances mentioned in the Forest charter. 

8 More correctly "enclosing a park," this term being familiarly applied to the impounding 
of stray animals. 



328 Appendix I 

Warren. 

Commutation of Service 1 . 

Warranty' 2 . 

Special Reservations 3 . 

Assignment. 

Composite Charter 4 . 

B. Royal Charters (Confirmations). 

(a) General Form (597 1225) 5 . 

(b) Inspeximus (1225 I5i6) 6 . 

(c) Special Forms : 

Pancarta 7 . 

Confirmation of private donations. 
Innovation of earlier Charters (royal) 8 . 
Innotescimus*. 

Confirmation of grant under smaller seal. 
Confirmation of an earlier instrument with the clause Licet 
added to condone dis-user 10 . 

C. Writs and Letters under the Great Seal, 
i. Royal Writ (Executive). 

(a) Old English 11 . 

(b) Anglo-Norman (bi-lingual). 

(c) Anglo-Norman (Latin) 12 . 
(</) Transitional 13 . 

(e) Ministerial or Departmental 14 . 

I e.g. money-payments for a nominal rent, or a special tribute such as hawks, &c. for 
which a scale of values existed. 

- To ensure the fulfilment of the grant or its equivalent. 

3 e.g. in the case of grants to a prince royal to provide for reversion to the Crown. 

4 Including more than one subject. 

5 The Anglo-Saxon forms are almost invariably suspicious. For the conventional form 
1066 1225 cf. above, p. 24059. 

6 The charter form to be distinguished from that of Letters Patent. 

7 The term is usually applied in this country to private compilations which have little 
diplomatic value. 

8 See above, p. 240. 9 See above, p. 243. 

10 Licet plene usi non ftterint vel abusi. With application lx>th to the past and future. 

II i.e. the vernacular writs of the Confessor as to which cf. above, p. 201 sq. 

12 The conventional writ of the i2th century. 

13 i.e. between the last-named and the Letters Patent and Close at the beginning of the 
1 3th century. 

14 Including many writs not regularly enrolled in the Chancery Rolls but preserved in 
Files or entered in Curial Records, especially the Memoranda Rolls of the Exchequer, 
together with some quasi-legal writs. 



Appendix I 329 

2. Royal Writ (Legal) 1 . 
(a) " Original." 

(b} "Judicial." 

3. Letters Patent. 

(a) General Form (1199 1907). 

(b) Special Forms*: 

*Grant (Feoffment), *Grant (Lease), *Grant (Pension), *Grant 
(office), Grant (Liberties), *Creation, *Commission, *Ap- 
pointment 3 , Commission of Array 4 , Confirmation of private 
donations 5 , Insjxximus*, Innotescimus*, *Exemplification, 
*Constaf, Letters obligatory 6 , Acquittance 8 , Assignment 6 , 
Protection (simple) 7 , Protection (with clause Volumus)*, 
Safe-Conduct 9 , Free Pass 10 , *Pardon u , Release (from 
prison) 12 , Exemption 13 , * Licence (to alienate in mortmain), 
*Licence (to "crenellate") 14 , *Licence (to hunt or hawk), 
*Licence (for " artillery ") 15 , *Letters of Denization, 

1 For the forms of pleadings upon these writs cf. above, p. 311. They are derived in 
point of diplomatic construction from the preceding form (Executive). 

2 Omitting those in use during the reign of John which have only a contemporary interest 
(cf. Hardy, Rot. Pat. Preface), together with such artificial forms as are denoted by the 
mediaeval terminology applied to the various " Letters " (e.g. " commendatory," 
"deprecatory," "excusatory," "monitory," "mandatory," &c.). Those marked with an 
asterisk are found in the later period in one form or another. 

3 e.g. of Collectors, &c. of taxes (Assignavimns}. Also of proctors for diplomatic 
missions (Constituimus). Appointments of Customers and Escheators were entered on the 
Fine Rolls. 

4 Other forms under both the Great and Smaller Seals were used for this purpose (cf. 
Palgrave, Parliamentary Writs, \\. (i)). 

6 Cf. the charter forms for a like purpose. 

6 Connected with the financial affairs of the Crown and apparently modelled chiefly on 
private instruments. 

7 Chiefly for suspension of legal processes against those engaged in the King's wars or 
service ; but also granted to merchants and even for the purpose of enabling the religious to 
ask alms. 

8 Cf. other variants such as Qttia moratur, Profecturns, and Nolumus. 

9 This was commonly used in the sense of a Protection. In the modern sense of the 
term, examples abound in the " Treaty Rolls" during the wars with France and Scotland and 
in the " Protection Rolls" of Edward I. 

10 e.g. to cross bridges without toll. Similar forms of exemption were frequently granted 
by later warrants. 

11 "General "and "special" (cf. the later "conditional" form). 

12 Also effected by Letters Close. Deliberare is the essential word. 

13 Relieving subjects from liability to hold onerous (though distinguished) offices. 

14 More than one form was used according to the extent of the fortification desired (cf. 
Turner, Domestic Architecture, I. Appx.). 

15 The parent of the modem gun-licence. 



330 Appendix I 

Letters of Reprisal (Marque) 1 , *Invention 2 , Writ of 
Assistance 3 , Prohibition 4 , *Revocation 5 , *Proclamation 6 , 
Statute 7 , Credentials 8 , *Full Powers 8 , *Convention 
(Treaty) 8 , *Licence to elect 9 , *Royal Assent, *Restitution 
of Temporalities, *Presentation, *Collation. 

(c) Departmental Forms: 

*Grant of Arms 11 , Coket 12 , Dispensation. 

4. Letters Close. 

(a) Getieral Forms : 

i Notificatory. 

Declaratory. 
4 Narrative. 

Injunctive. 
v Conditional. 

(b) Special Forms: 

Fiscal Writs 14 (Liberate, Solvatis, Allocate, Computate, Perdona- 

vimus). 

Summons (military). 
Summons (parliamentary). 
Election. 

Wages (Parliamentary). 
.Prorogation 13 . 

1 These were properly issued by the Lord Admiral under the authority of General Letters 
Patent, cf. Prothero, Documents ^rd ed.), p. 464. 

2 The English form is best known. A licence was also conferred by Letters Close. 

3 Also used with Letters Close. 

4 e.g. to restrain the Spiritual Courts. 

5 i.e. of former Letters Patent. 

6 For Proclamation to be made. In later times the actual Proclamation though it was 
usually enrolled on the Patent Roll was not in a purely diplomatic form nor was it procured 
by the usual instruments. 

7 Cf. Statute of Wales (1284). Many statutes and ordinances were enrolled on the 
Patent Rolls. 

8 These instruments used in foreign diplomacy were composed in a notarial form in later 
times (cf. French Rolls, Hen. VII Chas. II, and above, p. 258). 

9 For the sequence of this and the following ecclesiastical forms, see above, p. 257 sq. and 
Formula Book, Nos. 88 93. 

10 See above, pp. 747, 259. 

11 Issued by a King at Arms. 

12 Issued by the Customers at the out-ports under a special seal (Coket) as indicated in the 
clause announcing sealing. Similar instruments under the Great Seal were procured by the 
household officers in connexion with their duties. 

18 Cf. above, p. 254 sq. These are enrolled on the Close Rolls. 

14 Cf. above, p. 256 and Formula Book, Nos. 77 81. They are also specially enrolled. 

15 See Formula Book, p. 82, for the sequence of these instruments. 



Appendix I 331 

5. Miscellaneous Letters and Writs 1 . 

Letters of Exchange 2 . 
Scutage Writs 3 . 
Writs of Redisseisin 4 . 

D. Writs and Letters (Missive) under the Smaller Seals. 

(a) Writs and Letters under the Privy Seal. 

The Privy Seal substituted for the Great Seal 5 . 

Writ of Privy Seal (Latin) substituted for the Great Seal". 

(French) used as a missive 7 . 

Letters of (English) 8 

(b) Letters under the Signet 9 . 

Signet Letter (French). 
(English). 

(<r) Warrants under the Sign Manual. 

Sign Manual Warrant (English) 10 . 

(<t) Special Forms of Privy Seals, Signet Letters and 
Warrants. 

Benevolence 11 . 

Commission of Array 12 . 

Council Warrant 13 . 

Household Warrants 14 . 

Debenture 18 . 

Dormant Warrant 1 " (Privy Seal). 

1 These are "serial writs" forming special Chancery enrolments. 

2 Licences (to foreign merchants, &c.) to issue letters of exchange with a proviso against 
exporting bullion. The Exchange Rolls are now classified as "Supplementary Close Rolls." 

3 e.g. pro habendo Scutagio, enrolled on the Scutage Rolls (Chancery). 

4 Entered on the Redisseisin Rolls and on the Originalia Rolls of the Exchequer. 

5 An early phase noticeable during the reign of John and minority of Henry III. 
8 e.g. in the Edwardian period. 

7 The usual form in the early period. 

8 The usual form in the later period. 

9 An epistolary style ; some are paper documents. 

10 Cf. above, p. 262. 

11 From Henry VI to Charles I (French and English forms). 

12 From the Edwardian period ; including impressment of shipping. 

13 Countersigned by the Lords of the Council. 

14 Issued by the household officers (Chamberlain, Steward, Butler, Ulnager, &c.) in 
connexion with the administration of their several departments. 

15 e.g. of clerks of the Wardrobe, under their own seals, as certificates for payments due 
from that department. 

16 Providing for continuous payment of salaries, &c. from term to term. 



332 Appendix I 

E. Warrants under the Smaller Seals for Issue of the Great 

Seal. 

(a) Early Procedure (Henry III 1536). 

Petition for Letters Patent. 

Signet Letter (French, English) for issue of the Privy Seal. 

Privy Seal Writ (Latin, French, English) for issue of the 

Great Seal. 

or Privy Seal Bill (Latin) for the same 1 . 
or Signet Bill (Latin, English) for the same". 
or Sign Manual Warrant (French, English) 3 . 

(fy Special Forms. 

Fiat*. 

Departmental Warrants 5 . 

(c) Later Procedure (1536 1851). 

Petition 6 . 

Reference 7 . 

Report 8 . 

Sign Manual Warrant 9 . 

King's Bill 10 . 

Signet Bill". 

Privy Seal Writ 12 . 

(d) Special Forms of the above 13 . 

Signed Bill. 
Immediate Warrant. 

F. Later (Secretarial) Warrants under the Sign Manual (i6th 

igth centuries) 14 . 

(a) For domestic affairs 15 . 

1 Dispensing with the Signet Letter and formal Writ of Privy Seal. 

2 Embodying the Petition and draft instrument for expedition. 

3 Usually the actual Petition or draft instrument authorized by the Sign Manual. For 
variants, see above, p. 263 sq. 

4 For Protections, Writs of Allocate, &c. 

5 Commissions and other instruments procured by officers of State (Treasurer, Treasurer 
at War, Lord High Admiral, Clerk of Works, <&c.) under their own seals. 

6 For Letters Patent. 7 To the Law Officers, &c. 
8 Of the Law Officers, &c. 9 For the King's Bill. 

10 For the Signet. " For the Privy Seal. 

12 For the Great Seal. For the latest practice, see Anson, op. cit. p. 55 n. 

13 To dispense with the usual procedure, see Formula Book, p. 117. 

14 The Royal Warrant largely supersedes the earlier formal instruments during this period, 
owing to the new importance of the Secretary of State's Office. 

5 These are chiefly preserved amongst the Domestic State Papers, 



Appendix I 333 

1. Royal Warrant (Latin) in the Chancery form 1 . 

2. (English) in the same form 1 . 

3. in an epistolary form 2 . 

4- > 

Special (Chancery or epistolary) 3 forms: *Commissions 4 , 
*Grants of Office 5 , *Pardon fi , Reprieve 7 , Approbation 8 , 
Warrant for Game 9 , to swear 10 , for engraving new Signets, 
for ambassadors' wines, &c. duty-free 11 , to press ships 12 , for 
civil 11 or military Establishments 13 ; Licence to plead 14 , to 
print 18 , to kill stags 16 , to return to England 17 , to enclose 18 ; 
to enter foreign service, or wear foreign orders, &c. ; to 
search for pirates 1 ", wreck, &c. ; for denization, change 
of name'-" , to bear arms; for inventions 21 , to be absent from 
duty 2 "-. 

5. Proclamation 23 . 

6. Secretary of State's Warrants 24 . 

1 Chiefly used for procuring Letters Patent ; distinguished (in English) by the precept 
"Our will and pleasure is"; including warrants for Creations, Writs of Error and other 
special judicial processes ; for ecclesiastical instruments (Commendanis, Dispensations, Royal 
Assent, &c.), Revocations, &c., &c. 

2 Chiefly used as missive instruments; distinguished by the address "Trusty and well- 
beloved," &c. 

3 Characteristic of the ijth and i8th centuries. Those marked with an asterisk are also 
largely used as warrants for issue. 

4 e.g. military down to 1 794. 

8 i.e. those no longer granted by Letters Patent. 

8 e.g. Special Pardons for insertion in a General Pardon. Also conditional Pardons. 

7 For respite or non-execution of the death sentence. 

8 Of the election of Mayors, Recorders, Town-clerks, foreign agents, &c. 

M For the preservation of game in a certain district by a local magnate ; also for the 
King's game. 

10 To swear in household officers, &c. 

11 Later effected by Treasury Warrant. 

13 In much the same form under Charles II as under Edward III. 

13 Later procured by the Secretary at War. 

14 For King's Counsel to take private briefs. 

15 A " privilege" in the nature of a monopoly. 
18 Usually for keepers of royal forests. 

17 For Jacobites and other political offenders. 

18 Paths and high-ways, &c. 

19 e.g. for East India-men. 

20 Including that of a foreign vessel (prize). 

21 Pending the grant of Letters Patent. 

~ For Secretaries of State or for sheriffs, &c. to reside outside their counties. 

23 See above, p. 330, n. 6. 

24 For search, apprehension, and commitment of suspected persons ; to seach the Presses 
for treasonable documents; to prevent duels; to keep in custody; to deliver to messengers; 
to "take up" witnesses; to admit a prisoner's friends; to discharge from custody; for the 
protection of individuals. All of the above were attested by the Secretary of State. 



334 Appendix I 

7. Secretary of State's departmental Warrants. 

Special Forms: Pass 1 , Pass-port 2 , Post-warrant 3 , Caveat 4 . 

(ti) Foreign affairs. 

8. Pass. (For envoys and subjects travelling abroad 5 .) 

9. Credentials. (Letters of credence for envoys to foreign courts 8 .) 
10. Letter of Recall (or "Revocation") for the same 7 . 

n. Full Power 8 . 

(a) Notarial Form. 

(b) Chancery Form. 

12. Certificate for an envoy to kiss hands on his departure or return 9 . 

13. Commission for a Consul 10 . 

(c) Royal Household 11 . 

(d) Delegated authority to local officials 12 . 

G. Royal Letters 13 . 

i. King's Letters (Mediaeval). 

1 A safe-conduct or licence to travel (for discharged soldiers, foreign agents or refugees, 
emigrants, &c.). 

2 For ships. Addressed to admirals and governors of forts, &c. 

3 Either an order for the supply of post-horses, &c. to king's messengers, &c. or a "bill 
of craving" allowed to ambassadors, &c. for "postages," &c. generally known as his 
"extraordinaries. " 

4 A minute to suspend the placing of the Signet to instruments intended to pass the 
Great Seal in view of official or private interests to the contrary. 

5 Latin (till middle i8th cent.) and English; the former in a notarial style as letters 
commendatory addressed to all foreign princes, &c. 

6 Later in an epistolary style. Also "Recredentials" for the same. 

7 In a two-fold form (a) addressed to the envoy, enclosing (b) an intimation to the foreign 
court that his services are required elsewhere. 

8 Originally a commission appointing a royal proctor. The essential words were 
"plenam potestatem...communicandi, conferendi et concludendi...spondentes,...in verbo 
principis quaecunque,...nostro nomine transigentur,...rata, &c. habituros." 

9 Countersigned by the Secretary of State, but not under the Sign Manual. This formality 
was probably to indicate the period of employment and consequent allowances. 

10 Commissions were also issued to Secretaries of Legation. Two forms of Consular 
commissions were used, (a) for a new port, with a preamble setting forth the advantages to 
Trade from the appointment, (t>) for an existing port, omitting this preamble. 

11 Addressed to the Lord Chamberlain's and Lord Steward's departments, including 
Warrants for servants, stables, public funerals, &c., provisions, swans, playhouses, &c. 

12 e.g. prerogative of Pardon exercised by Colonial governors ; Passes issued by Consuls ; 
Warrants of Justices of the Peace, &c. 

13 These do not include (according to the usual practice) letters addressed to the Sovereign. 
The former should be classified from a diplomatic point of view amongst semi-official docu- 
ments preserved amongst State Papers as "Royal Letters" or official "In-Letters." 



Appendix I 335 

(a) Early style (i2th and i3th centuries) (Latin and French) 1 . 

(b) Later style (i4th and i5th centuries) (Latin, French and English) 1 . 

2. King's Letters (Modern) 2 . (Latin, French and English 1 .) 

(a) Ceremonious (Latin, French). 

(b) Familiar (French, English). 

3. Secretary's Letters. (English.) 
(a) In the King's name 3 . 

(b} In the Secretary's name 4 . 

4. Departmental Letters 5 . (English.) 

H. Departmental Instruments 8 . (English.) 

1. The Minute 7 . 

2. The Reference. 

3. The Report. 

4. The Order. 

5. The Instruction. 

6. The Warrant. 

7. The Commission. 

8. Miscellaneous Instruments 8 . 

(ii) SEMIOFFICIAL INSTRUMENTS. 

A. Conveyances". Deed Polls 10 , Indentures", Releases 13 , Fines 13 , Leases 
and Pensions 14 . 

I See alwve, p. 270 sq. 

3 These are the "Royal Letters" addressed to foreign potentates on ceremonious 
occasions which are preserved under that title amongst the Foreign State Papers. 

a In the style of Signet Letters (see above, p. 275). 

4 One of the forms of the official letter still employed. 

5 From a board of officers or individual minister or agent. Another form of official 
letter still in use. 

6 Special forms or developments of the departmental letter. 

7 For this and the sequence of forms that follows, see above, p. 276 sq. 

8 e.g. Certificates, Debentures, Cartels, &c. 

9 Enrolled or filed by favour or common practice in the Rolls of Chancery (Close, Fine) 
or King's Courts. 

10 Feoffments. 

II Lease and Release, Bargain and Sale. 

18 Acquittances, Quit-claims (in favour of the Crown), Surrenders of Office, &c. 
1:1 Concords made and enrolled in Courts of Law. 
14 Conventual Leases, Pensions and Corroclies, &c. 



336 Appendix I 

B. Contracts 1 . Bonds 2 , Recognizances 3 , Assignments 4 , Indentures 5 , 

Oaths 6 . 

C. Certificates. Notifications 7 , Acknowledgments 8 , Awards 9 , Mis- 

cellaneous 10 . 

D. Letters and Reports 11 . 

E. Petitions and Addresses 12 . 

F. Notarial Instruments 13 . 

(iii) DIPLOMATIC DOCUMENTS (Private) 14 . 

A. Conveyances (original and derivative). 

1. Feoffments. Fee-simple, Fee-tail, Demise for life, Demise for 

years, Fee-farm, Frankalmoigne, Mortgage, Will, Manumission, 
Exchange, Partition, Rent-charge, Pension, Corrody or Pit- 
tance, &c. 

2. Confirmations. 

3. Releases. Quit-claim, Surrender, &c. 

B. Contracts. Concord, Use, Simple bond, Defeazance, Letters of 

Attorney, Letters of Proxy, Assignment, Oath, Fealty, Ho- 
mage, &c. 

1 Enrolled, chiefly, in the Close Rolls or Exchequer Memoranda Rolls. 

2 Jewish " starrs," obligations to "royal merchants," Statutes Staple, &c. 

3 For due performance of office, &c. 

4 Of interests, appointment of attorneys, proxies, &c. 

5 Articles of Clerkship, Disentailing Deeds, Charitable Uses, Indentures of War, for safe 
transfer of jewels, records, &c. 

6 Official or judicial and political (enrolled or entered as precedents). 

7 For naturalization, change of name or residence, sacramental certificates, &c., 
" Deputations" of persons to perform the duties of certain offices on behalf of Household 
officers and others. 

8 e.g. by married women under the Act of William IV. 

9 Enclosure Awards, &c. 

10 By local officers, &c. 

11 These written by private individuals and addressed or communicated to ministers 
form a large portion of the State Paper collection. Their semi-official character is due to 
their having been filed or entered in the Archives. 

12 Classified here for the same reason as above. For Petitions in Chancery see above, E. 
(a) and (c). 

13 Executed by order of the Crown or procured by royal officers in connexion with 
diplomatic correspondence or semi-official business. Also occasionally enrolled from an 
ecclesiastical source. Later a large mass of Admiralty Records of this nature is preserved. 

14 For examples of the following types see Madox Formulare Anglicanum^ and Calendar 
of Ancient Deeds (Rolls). Many collections of formulas exist both early and modern, 
printed and manuscript. It has been explained elsewhere that these instruments and letters 
have found a place amongst official documents by casual or arbitrary means, and we are not 
directly concerned here with their evolution or significance. 



Appendix I 337 

C. Certificates. Notitia, Receipt or acquittance, &c. 

D. Letters 1 . 

E. Notarial Instruments 2 . 

II. MINISTERIAL AND JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. 

(i) ROYAL SURVEYS, INQUISITIONS, AND ASSESSMENTS*. 

(a) Agrarian Surveys. 

(b) Fiscal Inquisitions and Assessments. 

(1) Assessments on the Hide (Geld Rolls, Inquisitions of 

Hidage, Hidage Books, Inquisitions of Carucage, 
Local Assessments, &c.). 

(2) Assessments on the Knight's Fee (Scutage, Aid, &c.). 

(3) Decimal Assessments, &c. (Tithe, Poundage, Capi- 

tage, &c.). 

(c) Feudal Inquests (Escheats, Proofs of Age, Sergeanties, Knighthood, 

Lunacy, Ad quod Damnum, Regards of the Forest, &c.). 

(d) Statutory and Political Inquisitions. 

(ii) ACCOUNTS. 
A. Royal Accounts. 
(a) Original. 

(1) Subsidiary 4 ("Particulars" or vouchers). 

(2) Final 5 (as engrossed for audit). 
(b} Enrolments. 

(1) Exchequer (Revenue) Rolls 8 . 

(2) Departmental Accounts 7 . 

1 From one private individual to another. 

2 Indulgences, &c. casually deposited in official custody. 

3 For examples of these Records, see Formula Book, Part n. 

4 The details in the ledger or sub-accountant's return, rarely preserved and referred to in 
the final account as " Particulars." 

8 Summarizing the above in a conventional form. 

6 i.e. Pipe Rolls, Foreign Rolls, Receipt and Issue Rolls, Declared Accounts. The Pipe 
Roll itself embodies returns made to the Summonses of the Exchequer. 

7 i.e. Journals, Ledgers, &c. of the several Departments of State. 

H. 22 



338 Appendix 1 

(c) Estreats (or Parcels) 1 . 

(d) Precedents 2 . 

B. Private Accounts 8 . 

(iii) JUDICIAL INQUISITIONS. 

(a) Original Writs. 

(b) Judicial Writs. 

(e) Pleadings. 

1 Abstracts communicated by one department to another or preserved for convenience of 
reference. 

2 i.e. Compilations or statistics entered in various Registers such as the " Miscellaneous 
Books " of the Exchequer departments. 

3 Usually following the same forms as Royal Accounts (a) and (d) and to be regarded 
(like private deeds and correspondence) as casually deposited in the Archives. 



APPENDIX II. 

Early Diplomatic Criticism. 

Numerous instances of diplomatic criticism could probably be found in 
mediaeval histories or chronicles in addition to the following passages to 
which reference was made in the text 1 . 

Next to the pseud-Ingulf and the chronicler of Battle, the author of the 
Historia Monasterii Sancti Augustini is the most explicit of our mediaeval 
commentators upon the Old English diplomata. Although the naivete of 
this writer's explanations may provoke a smile, we should really be grateful 
for any explanation at all. It was in connexion with the foundation charters 
of this church that a hot dispute between the Abbot and the Primate was 
brought before the Roman Curia 'in the reign of Henry II 2 . Fortunately for 
us this local rivalry caused one of the greatest of the Canterbury scholars 
to take part in the diplomatic discussion concerning the validity of the above 
" charters." This was Gervase the historian, who remarked 3 in connexion 
with the famous instruments which still occupy the place of honour in our 
Codices*, that the oldest erat rasa et subscripta, ac si esset emendata, et absque 
sigillo, whilst the next in date multo erat recentior, de qua bulla plumbea..., 
nova valde, dependebat. He also notes that objection was made to the material 
of the bitlla and to the phraseology which a Romano stilo dissona videbatur, 
The History of Ramsey, compiled in the i3th century, preserves some ex- 
tremely curious notices of Anglo-Saxon charters, including an explanation 
of the absence of seals which apparently comes from the same source as that 
previously referred to in connexion with the works of the pseud-Ingulf and 
Thomas of Elmham 5 . 

Another instructive topic of early diplomatic criticism is found in the 
discussion by mediaeval writers of the admissibility of Latin versions of Old 
English charters. Here, whilst admitting the possibility of a certain amount 
of scepticism being excited by the non-production of vernacular deeds, the 
inconvenience of reference to these barbarous instruments 6 is held to justify 

1 P. 185. 2 Hist. Mon. S. Aug. (Rolls), p. 118. 

3 Gervase, I. 296 (Rolls ed.). 4 C. S. I. 

B Chron. Rames. pp. 65, 161, and above, p. 209 sq. 

8 Some instructive comments on the etymology of the place-name Thorney will be found 
in W. Malmes. Gest. Pont. 326; Liber de ffida, 182; Chron. de Abingdon, H. 262; Poly- 
chrotticon, v. 426 (cf. C. S. 1228, and Ordn. Facs. Part II. Preface), throwing some light 
on the authenticity of a supposed 8th century charter (C. S. 245). 

22 2 



340 Appendix II 

an idiomatic translation into Latin. In other cases, however, the vernacular is 
preserved alongside of the version to satisfy any scruples that may be enter- 
tained by the parties concerned. 

In other cases, however, the commentaries of mediaeval writers will be 
found to be of very little value. Heming, the faithful and industrious carto- 
grapher of the church of Worcester, was apparently unable to distinguish in 
every case between a genuine document and a forgery, and the same remark 
will apply to the equally ingenuous compiler of the Textus Roffensis. Again, 
Matthew Paris, who may be regarded as the type of the scientific historian of 
his age, did not hesitate to accept the mythical origins of the earliest diplomata 
of his own house '. 

Although the inclusion of so many worthless forgeries in our printed Codices 
must deter us from passing any harsh judgment on the critical intelligence of 
the mediaeval historian, we may feel some surprise and impatience at the 
general indifference displayed by these learned clerks for diplomatic niceties. 
An archdeacon, for instance, should surely have known better than to certify 
to the Pope that a disputed charter of King Edgar appeared to be genuine 
because it was sealed with the seals of that king, of archbishop Dunstan and 
of Alfred, duke of the Mercians 2 . Nevertheless the mere fact of these forgeries 
being questioned is of interest. Still more interesting is the action taken by 
the Roman Curia in the case of a forged bull in the year 1198, the canons of 
diplomatic criticism that were laid down on this occasion being singularly 
valuable 3 . A little later we have another interposition by the same authority, 
in the famous suit between the bishop of Worcester and the Abbot of Evesham. 
On this occasion a commission was issued for the examination of certain 
suspected charters which purported to have been procured by bishop Egwin in 
the reign of King Offa 4 . 

At the same time it may be necessary to distinguish between the critical 
capacity of the monkish historian and that of the official scribe. The know- 
ledge displayed by writers like the author of the Dialogus de Scaccario, Glanvill 
and Bracton 5 is quite remarkable. This knowledge is even shared by the 
clerks who drafted ordinances of Parliament 6 or entered royal letters in the 
Chancery rolls 7 . 

1 Gest. Abbot. I. 39; Chron. Major. VI. A more critical account is, however, found in 
Gest. Abbat, I. 151, and II. 262. 

8 Rot. Chart. I. xxxv. n. 6; Hickes, Dissert. Epist. p. 71. 

3 Potthast, No. 365 ; Giry, Man. de Dipl. p. 682 sq. 

4 Hist. Evesham (Rolls), pp. xviii, xix, 17, 193. 
8 Cf. Rolls ed. III. 208, VI. 140 sq. 

6 See the Indexes of the Statutes and Rolls of Parliament and cf. (huens College Historical 
Essays, p. 193 sq. 

7 Above, p. 230. 



APPENDIX III. 

The Charters of King /Ethelstan. 

This comparatively short reign of less than 15 years has enriched our 
Codex with upwards of too diplomata of which, however, about a third are 
negligible forms 1 . Of the residue of credible examples, by far the largest 
proportion (18) is furnished by the church of Winchester, whilst Abingdon (12), 
Malmesbury (8), Christ Church, Canterbury (6), Exeter (5), and Worcester (4), 
are well represented. The following houses contribute the remaining forms : 
Shaftesbury (3), Wilton (3), Sherborne (2), Crediton (2), Bath, Chichester, 
St Augustine's, Canterbury, Chertsey, York, St Paul's, Thorney (i). 

Whether we have here the bulk of the genuine diplomata executed during 
this reign is a question that could not easily be answered 2 . Those enumerated 
above may be regarded as permissible forms merely on account of their 
regular construction and without regard to their origin or probable authenticity 
which would depend on considerations that have been expressed elsewhere 8 . 
Fourteen of the charters of this reign purport to be in an original form, and 
thirteen have been reproduced in the official series of Facsimiles 4 , whilst the 
remaining specimen has recently been printed 5 . Of these, however, one is a 
later imitation 6 ; another is an nth century copy 7 , and four of the Exeter 
group may be regarded with a certain amount of suspicion. Twenty-eight 
charters of this reign are marked as suspicious in the Codex Diplomatics, though 
one of these at least may be considered genuine 8 ; whilst several others which 
have not been "starred" by Kemble might be considered doubtful. 

It should be noticed, however, that two of these charters (C. S. 670, 671) 
should be dated 941 instead of 931 on the high authority of the editors of the 
Crawford charters, and therefore belong properly to the reign of Edmund. 
At the same time the obviously mis-dated charter of Edward (C. S. 635) has 
been counted amongst the charters of his successor, whilst the charter of 943 

1 i.e. imperfect, irregular or grotesque examples. 

2 In any case the position is in this respect the same relatively as that of other reigns. 

3 Above, p. 184. 4 British Museum and Ordnance Office. 

5 Napier and Stevenson, Crawford Charters, pp. 5, 65. 

6 Cotton Charter, vil. 11. 7 Add. Charter 19526. 

8 C. D. 66q, on the authority of the learned editors of the Crawford Charters (p. 65). 



34 2 Appendix III 

(C. S. 785) attributed to this king has been ignored. Another charter marked 
by Kemble as suspicious (C. D. 740) is dated 939, but will be found to be a 
barefaced attempt to transfer the formulas of ^Ethelstan's reign to that of 
Alfred 1 . 

Below will be found a general concordance of the formulas which are 
found in three charter-forms of this reign. These types have been selected from 
a complete concordance of formulas for this reign which is excluded by con- 
siderations of space. For a similar reason the minor variants have also been 
excluded. Certain misplaced or imperfect specimens have been indicated by 
brackets. 

Specimens of Charter Formulas of the reign of sEthelstan. 
I. Preambles. 

(a) Flebilia fortiter detestanda "date et dabitur vobis 2 ." 

C. S. [635], 674, 677, 689, 692 (Winchester). 
C. S. 691 (Shaftesbury). 
C. S. 695, 696 (Sherborne). 
C. S. 675 (Abingdon). 
C. S. 694 (Crediton). 

Invocation. Wanting. 

Superscription. Ego ^Ethelstanus rex Anglorum per omni- 
patrantis 

Subscription (Royal). Ego yEthelstanus singularis privilegii 
ierarchia 

Exposition. Qua de re jocunditatem. 
Dispositive Clause. Quandam telluris particulam 

Sanction. Si autem, quod absit, aliquis diabolico inflatus 
spiritu 

Date. Hujus namque a Deo...inspiratse atque inventae 
voluntatis schedula 

(b) Fortuna fallentis saeculi suavia audiantur 3 . 

C. S. 702 (Winchester), A.D. 934. 

C. S. 703 (York), A.D. 934. 

C. S. 704, 718, 719 (Malmesbury), A.D. 937. 

C. S. 745 (Wilton), A.D. 937. 

Invocation. Wanting. 

1 This is presumably a composition of ^thelstan's reign assigned to that of Alfred. For 
other cases of borrowed formulas see Crawford Charters, p. 1 1 1 . 

2 As in C. 5. 677 and 694, with a few variants. 

3 As in C. S. 702, with a few variants. 



Appendix III 343 

Superscription \ 

c , ... > As in (a). 

Subscription ) 

Exposition. As in (a). 
Dispositive Clause. As in (a). 
Sanction. As in (a). 
Date and Attestation. As in (a). 
(<r) Egregius agonista sermocinatus est properemus ad regna 1 . 

C. S. 728 (Malmesbury), A.D. 938. 

C. S. 730, 734, 740 (Winchester), A.D. 938 9. 

Invocation. Absent*. 

Superscription. Favente superno nutnine basileos industrius 
Anglorum 

Subscription. Ego yEthelstanus...praefatam libertatem cum 
sigillo sanctae crucis confirmavi. 

Exposition. Quamobrem...desiderio regni coelestis exardens 
Dispositive Clause. Cuidam adoptive fideli 
Sanction. Denique vero si quis, nobis non optantibus 
Date. Acta est haec praefata donatio anno ab Incarnatione 

II. Style. 

(i) Superscriptions. 

(a) With Flebilia, crc. and Fortuna, &c. 

Ego ^Ethelstanus, rex Anglorum, per omnipatrantis dexteram 

totius Brytanniae regni solio sublimatus 3 . 
c - ^ [635], 674, 677, 689, 692, 694696, 702704, 716, 718, 

7i9> 745- 
(ft) With Egregius. 

Favente superno numine basileos industrius Anglorum cunc- 

tarumque gentium in circuitu persistentium 4 . 
C. S. 728, 730, 734, 740 (with variants). 

(ii) Subscriptions (Royal). 

(a) With Flebilia, &>c. and Fortuna, <$r>c. 

Ego ^thelstanus singularis privilegii ierarchia (florentis 
Britanniae monarchia) praeditus rex, hujus indiculi acumen 

1 As in C. S. 734, with a few variants. 

2 In C. S. 728 an Invocation has been prefixed in a later copy. 

3 With variants, e.g. per omnipetentis, in most of the Fortuna fallentis series. 

4 C. S. 734 has a noticeable variant. 



344 Appendix III 

(fulcimentum) cum signo sanctae semperque amandae 
(adorandae) crucis corroboravi et subscripsi 1 . 

C- s - [ 6 35] 6 74677. 689, 691, 692, 695, 696, 702704, 716 
(with variants). 

(b) With Egregius, &>c. 

Ego ^Ethelstanus, rex totius Britanniae, praefatam donationem 
cum sigillo sanctae crucis confirmavi. 

C. S. [694], 728, 730, 734, 740 (with variants). 

III. Expositions. 

(a) With Fortuna, &c. 

Cujus amore felicitatis illectus, fastidiunt jam infima, dulcescunt 
superna, eisque pro percipiendis semperque specie inde- 
fectiva fruendis 2 . 

C. S. 702704, 716, 718, 719, 745. 

(6) With Flebilia, &c. 

Qua de re, infima quasi peripsema quisquiliarum abiciens, 
superna ad instar pretiosorum monilium eligens, animum 
sempiternis in gaudiis figens, ad nanciscendam mellifluae 
dulcedinis misericordiam, perfruendamque infinitae letitiae 
jocunditatem. 

C. S. [635], 674 677, 689, 691, 692, 694 696 (with variants). 

(c) With Egregius y 6-v. 

Quamobrem...desiderio regni coelestis exardens. 
C. S. 728, 730, 7 4 o 3 . 

IV. Dispositive Clauses. 

(a) With Flebilia, &c. and Fortuna, &c. 

Quandam telluris particulam meo fideli ministro...; id est... 
cassatarum in loco quern solicolae...vocitant, tribuo, ut ille 
earn, sine jugo exosae servitutis, cum pratis, pascuis, silvis, 
rivulis, omnibusque ad earn utilitatibus rite pertinentibus 
liberaliter ac aeternaliter, quamdiu vivat, habeat; et post 
generalem, qui omnibus, certus incertusque, homunculis 

1 C. S. 694 has the form in (b) below. C. S. 718, 719, 745 are incomplete or imperfect. 

2 With noticeable variants in C. S. 719 and 745. 

8 C. S. 734 has Quapropter and no more. This Exposition is closely involved with the 
Superscription, a not infrequent occurrence. 



Appendix III 345 

constat transitum, cuicumque successionis haeredi voluerit 
imperpetuum derelinquat '. 

C- s - [ 6 35]> 674677, 689, 691, 692, 695,696, 702704, 745 
(V) With Egregius, &c. 

Cuidam adoptive fideli meo...vocitato ob illius amabile obse- 
quium dignatus sum largiri.-.mansas agelluli ibidem ubi 
vulgares prisco more mobilique relatione vocitant...; cum 
pratis, pascuis necnon et silvis, silvarumque densitatibus : 
ut haec prospere possideat ac seternaliter teneat dum hujus 
aevi fragilis cursum uti audebit; post se autem, veluti 
affirmavimus, cuicumque voluerit heredi derelinquat. Fiat 
etenim praefata terra ab omni servili jugo libera, exceptis 
his tribus, expeditione, pontis arcisve coedificatione 2 . 

C. S. 728, 730, 734, 740. 

V. Sanctions. 

(a) With Flebilia, &c. and Fortuna, &c. 

Si autem, quod absit, (non optamus) aliquis diabolico inflatus 
spiritu hanc mese donationis breviculam infringere vel elidere 
temptaverit, sciat se novissima ac magna examinationis die, 
stridula clangente Archangeli salpice, bustis sponte de- 
hiscentibus, somata jam rediviva relinquentibus, elementis 
omnibus pavefactis, cum Juda proditore, qui a satoribus pio 
sato "filius perditionis" dicitur, aeterna confusione edacibus 
ineffabilium tormentorum flammis periturum 3 . 

C- s - [ 6 35]> 674677. 689, 691, 692, 694696, 702704. 

(b) With Egregius, &*c. 

Si quis autem, quod non optamus, hanc nostram difinitionem, 
elationis habitu incedehs, infringere temptaverit, perpessus 
sit gelidis glaciarum flatibus et pennino exercitu malignorum 
spirituum, nisi prius inriguis poenitentise gemitibus et pura 
emendatione emendaverit 4 . 

1 With many variants, notably a curious periphrasis for quamdiu vivat. In some a condition 
is inserted, and in others the assertion quamdiu Christianitas vigeat occurs. The dispositive 
word in the Exeter group is largitus sum. For the special form of C. S. 694 see Formula 
Book, No. 4. 

2 With special variants in C. S. 734. 

3 This corrupt composition has numerous interesting variants, as though successive 
rhetoricians were bent on enhancing the impressive effect produced by the description of 
the Day of Judgment and Eternal Punishment for transgressors. In C. S. 716, 718, 719 
and 745 (the last being incomplete), from the Church of Malmesbury we find the simple 
version Quod si quisquam temptaverit, a Deo imperpetuum Jampnandum sciat. 

* This is the "glacial curse" referred to above (p. 198). Cf. also C. S. 753, 756, 757, 759, 
767, 781, 783, 813, 821. 



34 6 Appendix III 

C. S. 728, 734 (with variants in the former. A different type 
occurs in C. S. 730 and 740). 

VI. Dates and Attestations. 

(a) With Flebilia, &c. and Fortuna, &c. 

Hujus namque a Deo, Dominoque Jesu Christo inspiratae atque 
inventae voluntatis scedula, anno Dominicae Incarnationis..., 
regni vero mihi commissi..., indictione..., epacta..., con- 
currente..., kalendis..., luna..., in villa omnibus notissima 
(opinatissima) quae . . . nuncupatur : episcopis, abbatibus, duci- 
bus, patriag procuratoribus regia dapsilitate ovantibus, (tota 
populi generalitate sub alis regiae dapsilitatis ovanti), per- 
scripta est. Cujus etiam inconcussae firmitatis auctoritas 
his testtbus roborata constat, quorum nomina subtus 
caracteribus depicta annotantur 1 . 

C- S. [635], 674677, 689, 691, 692, 695, 696, 702704, 716, 
718, 71 9 . ( No. 7 4 5 is u nfinished. ) 

(b) With Egregius, &*c. 

Acta est haec praefata donatio, anno ab Incarnatione Domini 
nostri Jesu Christi..., Indictione.... 

C, S. [694], 728, 730, 734, [740]. 

1 With numerous variants. See the note on this formula in Crawford Charters, p. 72. 
In C. S. 994 the (K) form given below is used. 



APPENDIX IV. 



Table showing the Relationship of the Pre-Conquest and 
Post- Conquest Diplomata. 

Continental Diploma 



Anglo-Saxon 
Charter or "Land-hoc" 
(subscribed) 


Anglo-Saxon Charter 
(sealed) 


Old English Writ 

(unsealed) 


Old English Writ 
(sealed) 



Post-Conquest Charter 
(subscribed and sealed) 



Anglo-Norman Writ 
(sealed on tag) 

Anglo-Norman Writ- 
Charter 
(Seal on tag or pendent) 

New- Model Charter 
(Seal pendent) 







5" c c a 




4-> d 3 ^ 


<O O V rt 




c .2 S ^ 








r? en rt j/j rt 
g S OH S PH 




PH . j?" W JJ PH 


,2 < 'e fli rrt 


to 


uj *S "S J 75 W) *-< <n 


C rt _, C 
X _ .2 


I 


8 52 "S If 2 1 
B 4l'0" -d 8 '5 OT " uSTlS^'P 8e-P 8 

ogTjOgfcgJ; gc fcflb^ ,0 = g o o =H g g 

Sjt>8tgJ-Sia -S := "7 * Si 5 S -2 J S 

gPSS-rtfvjQpicrtfv;^ P< b S'SStJS^ISu'* ^ 
SjSi 1 2 "3 !- i> T) a) >--2 t '_*'-'', ^ 


. 5 >2 Sl"rt 
M > <U ^ C K S 

t-a o >,!& as 

o aj 43 > Jr c i- 

i_i u * 'C O <u CJ 

l-Ufi C PH <u S 

> C '^ 2* "o c 

"^ ni S >- <u 




rt ^ rt t* i rt r*i , g < ^ C JH rt 5 


. .3 a S e c &, 




9 M A S! MI m 9 M M ^ rt /, rti?rti?rt._^fT^j o 


C 45 -3 is - W rt 




fe<Hfe<^J<^Q<i^ S H ^fe^fe^<J^O< ta 


0) 72 rt T5 -Q ^ C 




:i TI Ct :i r* :i 


t> " W *" C/5 rt o 


1 


U U U U 4) f/1 

oooo^^^ GO; 

O O O v5 


o||^| J3 ^ 

ojo-'C^rt CJm 
5 S'o^'w o ~ 




vj jn jn ,tn 


.S O.TJO-^ . ^ >s 


1 


B >,S S S-''' Sx jpy ". >~,^. 


^ w o o b/j i o -5 


*, 


cnTJcn c cn e cn en Q^ cy^'o <^ 


MH^ D ^ ^ " N m ^ 





otnO'SO'Ho '~ <J "^^-tC -. , g - 


/"' o ) *S 


6 

r*f 


^ s b^'-g >-,' >, >, xc^ SS*BO^'^ s^ r >>^'^ 


"S T3 


i 


asS^S*! . s s . s S'|tJS co ts 8 -12' 






enP^len^cn^en U en en PH cnO W PH ptlcjHcj 


||| ga | ||| 






O. ^) ;n^ O ^"^PP 




>S 


"" C S ""2 Jj w>,< 


^ 


, , , , 


.3 U U5 T o **- TJ C 


* 


^^J^^Xl) 43 ro 


TJ : -CC o_>> w "^ob^ 


i<-> 






>i 


TJ NH ^1 C* TJ "^ *< 


l-.^!-. " S * -Gcjl) 1 


s^ 


j"! I . 1 i ' 1 . m - j 5 ^3 ~' ' j^ * ^ ^ ~ 


| ^ {3 ^ "o g ^^-5 


* 


w H * _Q "^ S n*^O< O. 




,jj 


rt L& ^ r^ rt ^"a,* 1 ! **< 


!l^ si .2 |8 


1 


a " < 

o> 

* 


S* . ^>> ^, Soo 
^u-*j Pn,n ^ - 






^* >^'^ ^i 1* '*Ij r~ 




c 


c u-n rt s u 

rt rt .5 * - U) JJ w v 




.2 


i-.v-e <^4> %- -S 2L -a 
b/jtufj < o 09 S 










JU 


rtjj^ -^CL, "*J t? 1 ^^ 




C Q. 


.^ en ^ ^ k. jj 




o 


t/> ^ *- ^* pj "*^ 'S > 


^ 


r >^ "* ^ 


.3 S^ SoiJ -c ' 


1 


O S OH -*- 1 


w " grt.U "5"^ 

|.sf.|||^ ^ 




u g S I 'i-^''^ 1 ^-, ^^ S 

"rt SD "rt ^^5 g "rt3"rttj"rtr iD'rtgr i"S 


^""O "ts^ t ^ t(O 
O c *C ^ "c '^ *^ tj 




'Si^ 1 1 i 1 -! ^'SD 1 ^ ^ s* " f 'So ^'So 5"a-5 g"a's -5 * 

-' J -'(]j2^s^"-2"tfo "CCo'CO'CcO 

oBsswwwoQwo 2, B, oaoooaaowao 


42'Z3i^ "rt2o ^ 1)^5 


3 
8 




4-> ' n I- w /; t. 1) 

is i? i|l|8| 


Subsidiary Docume 


<u 


= "J.s .^l^^l 
= |ss il^"4 

iHi ^nu 

_c S c " ^ 'JT 

s.:i| il/Jil 
S|S| s*S^g| 






J5<uj>g j pd o b ^ 1 




<s 


4> . 4; _. 3- CJ W 42 cJ -^ O 

j y **~j2 ^ "^ ""*" *"* *-* rt 


I 
1 


q 

L 1 i 

D ^ _^ 


-111 H<P! 

cS^g ,g-^fe u >,^ 
"g^o ^-Sg^ 

^ ii -C ^~ t/1 W V. K B - 

S 4^ rt "t: -t; tao b/),O CX ^ rt 


1 


.2 a 3 ^ 

T3 C/5 
OJ 'O tn *-> 

"M = b 

S jjo . .So -g 


isiaiiC^iJ 

.sgej'iiif ;U 

H -S" : 3S""|l3l 

C gU ^ O-p;^ 



APPENDIX VI. 
FEES of the SEAL. 

The Accounts of the Clerk of the Hanaper 1 at the close of the reign 
of Edward I show that the average receipts approximated to ^1000 yearly. 
This revenue was of course that derived from the " Fees of the Seal " alone, 
the greater portion being derived from writs for which the usual fee was 2s. 
Charters were divided into two classes, those paying the "small fee" of 
i6s. ^d. and those paying the "large fee" of n marks and 5^. It was this 
latter class which showed the least satisfactory returns owing to the anticipation 
of the revenue in the shape of Fines in the Chancery or Wardrobe by virtue 
chiefly of Privy Seals. It was the constant object of suitors to avoid the 
latter extortion and to pay only the "fees of the seal." Petitions presented 
to the Crown to this effect were not successful in obtaining further indulgence 
than a distinction between writs "of course" and writs "of grace," the former 
being only required to pay the " fees of the seal." As to the latter it was 
replied that "men might not take away the King's profit herein," though 
the commons had vainly endeavoured to prove that the Crown would gain by 
the proposed reform owing to the increase of writs and litigation 2 . The fact 
is, however, that these cash receipts, though highly useful for replenishing the 
privy purse or satisfying importunate creditors, were not relatively as profitable 
as the bargains that could be made in another direction by way of Fine. 
Many instances, however, occur in the Chancery Files of the period of writs 
issued Pro Deo. 

1 K. R. Exchequer Accounts and L. T. R. Enrolled Accounts (Hanaper). 

2 Rot. Par/, in. 24i a , 376". 



APPENDIX VII. 

Note on the Bibliography of English Diplomatic, 

In spite of the admitted neglect of this auxiliary historical study, to which 
reference has been made above, the fact that materials exist for such a pro- 
visional classification as that which has been attempted below is decidedly 
encouraging. 

At the same time it would be found that the distribution of this special 
literature is somewhat uneven. The "Bibliography of Bibliographies" is 
almost entirely supplied by foreign scholars, and the same remark must apply 
to the "General Authorities" in the shape of modern treatises on this subject. 
For the purpose of the following table, publications dealing with the diplomatic 
documents of the sister kingdoms are included only in the interests of a com- 
parative method of study, though for the most part the forms of Irish and 
Welsh instruments differ little from our own. 

The distinction that can be made between the works of an earlier and 
a later period of diplomatic study is noticeable and important. It will also 
be remembered that we owe our only Formula Books to the former period ; 
but on the other hand we are far better equipped than our ancestors in 
respect of Facsimiles and adequate texts. Indeed we can afford to pay little 
attention to the class of Transcripts which supplied them with most of their 
examples and which are answerable for many misconceptions and positive 
errors. 

On the whole, however, the strength of our native diplomatic literature 
will be found to lie in the special studies of a few mediaeval scholars which 
have been published during the last twenty years in certain journals. Besides 
these diplomatic essays, the cognate auxiliary studies that are concerned with 
the special subjects of genealogy, sigillography, numismatic, biography and 
linguistic are well represented in this learned periodical literature, together 
with the general subject of archaeology. Whether from these combined 
sources we can muster an adequate diplomatic apparatus is a question as 
to which some doubts may be reasonably entertained. After all our chief 
wants are a text-book of English Diplomatic with a Formula Book and 
Establishments of the seal-bearing offices, and there is at present no sign that 
these wants will be fully supplied. 



Appendix VII 351 



Classification of the Bibliography of English Diplomatic. 

1. Bibliography of Bibliographies: 

(a) Early works. 

(b) Modern works. 

2. General Authorities : 

(a) Early. 

(b) Modern. 

3. Special Authorities : 

(a) England. 

(b) Scotland, Ireland, Wales. 

(c) Continental States. 

4. Cognate Auxiliary Studies : 

(a) Palaeography. 

(ft) Sigillography. 

(c) Numismatic. 

(if) Chronology. 

(e) Biography. 

(/) Topography. 

(g) Archaeology. 

(ti) Linguistic. 

5. Dictionaries of Diplomatic Terms. 

6. Formula Books. 

7. Diplomatic Documents : 

(a) Inventories and Lists. 

(b) Calendars. 

(c) Texts. 

8. Facsimiles. 



PART III 

THE PALAEOGRAPHY 

OF 

OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 



H. 23 



INTRODUCTION TO THE PALAEOGRAPHY 
OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS. 

THE definition of Palaeography as the study of mediaeval writing 
at large cannot be wholly disregarded even for the purpose of a brief 
essay on the official writing of this country, which can scarcely be 
distinguished as such before the close of the nth century. By 
common consent, an elementary knowledge of the evolution of writing 
since the beginning of the Christian era is requisite for the study of 
the earlier specimens of the national writings of Western Europe. 
It is true that the exact division in point of date between the classical 
and the national writings would seem to be of less moment in our 
own case, since we are told that the Anglo-Irish script is not derived, 
like the continental type, from a Roman Cursive stock. But even if 
the native " graffites " or other literary remains of the Roman civili- 
zation in Britain may have had no influence on the Anglo-Saxon or 
the Anglo-Irish calligraphy, this early writing is still worthy of our 
attention. For if we can derive much profit from the comparative 
study of the continental diplomata and capitularies from the 8th to 
the nth centuries, we should not grudge the pains of acquiring some 
knowledge of the system on which these documents were constructed. 
Again, we shall find that, from the pth century onwards, the successive 
styles of Franco-Roman and Gothic writing which prevailed through- 
out Western Europe may be regarded as a common national script. 

It is surely worth the pains of mastering the slight palaeographic 
variants^ between the national hands during the later mediaeval period 
in order that we may utilize the foreign archives when occasion 
arises. Similarly a systematic study 'of Palaeography will enable us 
to master with comparative ease the familiar forms of mediaeval 
Epigraphy represented by the inscriptions of seals, coins, or ancient 
monuments, as well as the pseudo-Gothic lettering of later mural 
documents. 

We may, indeed, be reminded that practically the whole of the 
historical sources for this early period have been already printed. 

23 2 



356 Introduction to the Palaeography 

Nevertheless a knowledge of their manuscript forms is of considerable 
interest. Even in the case of our own Anglo-Saxon charters many 
later enrolments still remain to be collated 1 . When we pass into the 
1 2th century the materials for a much needed Codex Anglo-Nor- 
mannicus would afford ample scope for palaeographical enterprise. 
As for the official sources from the I3th century onwards, it is 
notorious that by far the greater number are still unpublished, or 
published in the unsatisfying form of an English prtcis. There is 
also the painful reflexion that a large percentage of the texts available 
is far below the standard of modern scholarship if not actually un- 
reliable. The last circumstance alone should furnish a sufficient 
inducement for including Palaeography amongst the "honours" subjects 
in every academical curriculum of mediaeval history. 

At the same time the claims of Palaeography for such consideration 
must be maintained without any display of pedantry or intolerance. 
It must not be forgotten that, presumably, the student of History is 
unskilled in this auxiliary study not from choice but from necessity. 
So long as accurately printed texts are available, he can afford to 
dispense with this accomplishment, better, perhaps, than with some 
knowledge of Bibliography and Diplomatic. This is a fact that 
should be borne in mind by the teacher who would smooth the path 
of learning for those who are grappling with the neglected study of 
historical sources. It is certainly an indubitable fact that the ability 
to read old manuscripts can be acquired by an intelligent student 
without any instruction whatever. This fact is frequently demon- 
strated in the case of those who pursue their studies in an atmosphere 
of Records with many willing helpers at hand. Indeed an environ- 
ment of this kind may even be created by means of an extensive 
collection of facsimiles, but it would be found that there is a con- 
siderable difference between the ability to transcribe documents 
verbatim et litteratim and the further capacity of extending the same 
texts for the purpose of an intelligible citation. Moreover this 
practical method of self-help lies outside the serious study of the 
theory of Palaeography and equally ignores the kindred study of 
Diplomatic, the science of Archives, and the principles of historical 
Bibliography. It may fairly be claimed, therefore, on behalf of a 
system of palaeographical instruction that some difficulties and 
dangers can thus be overcome, whilst the student's view of the subject 
is widened by the comparative study of continental Archives. 

1 Mr W. H. Stevenson in E. H. R. xi. 733. 






of Official Documents 357 

There are, however, a few hints which may be offered to beginners 
by any one who has spent some years in the company of Records. 
In the first place it is desirable that the student should appreciate the 
importance of possessing or acquiring some sort of apparatus for the 
study of the subject. It is here that the linguistic question must be 
dealt with, whilst a sound knowledge of European history and 
geography is the best possible preparation for the indispensable 
study of Diplomatic. 

In the next place, close attention should be paid to the written 
forms of the Capital alphabet ; for a reader who fails to recognize the 
initial letter of a difficult place-name is in a hopeless position from 
the first. 

It may be assumed that the student will be already familiar with 
the conventional as well as with the actual contraction signs and 
other symbols found in mediaeval MSS. Further than this, he would 
do well to note the method adopted by individual scribes in the 
use of these compendia. At the same time he must not be guided 
only by a rule of thumb. The coup d'ceil method noted by the 
Benedictines of old also has its value, and the student need not be 
ashamed to leave what Elizabethan clerks called " windows " in his 
transcript to be filled in by a minute revision both of the script and 
sense. But above all it should be the object of a reader of MSS. to see 
the words, letter by letter, as they are written, and not words that 
were never written by the scribe, creations of a perfervid imagination. 
Hereafter it will be possible to recognize at a glance the actual words 
that underlie the bare compendia of the script, but a long apprentice- 
ship must be served before this second sight can be relied upon. 

Scarcely less important is the mental attitude adopted by the 
student towards an unfamiliar subject. On the one hand a credulous 
acceptance of impossible presentments is to be avoided, and on the 
other an unreasoning aversion from the archaisms or seeming bar- 
barisms of the mediaeval vocabulary and syntax. A sceptical or 
apathetic frame of mind is usually fatal to any rapid progress in the 
subject, but a really intelligent interest in the cryptic method of the 
scribe will to some extent obviate the danger of crediting him with 
the expression of manifest absurdities. 

A sound knowledge of the forms of the mediaeval or artificial letters 
and of their more common ligatures and accentuation having been 
acquired together with an equally thorough mastery of the principles 
and types of contractions, the student will perhaps be sufficiently 
equipped for his initial exercises. These will naturally be confined at 



358 Introduction to the Palaeography 

first to the calligraphy of the pre-Conquest and post-Conquest periods. 
Comparatively slight difficulty will be found in deciphering these scripts, 
for the Minuscule letters, at least, are as clear as print and contractions 
of a complex type are relatively rare. In fact the only serious obstacle 
is presented by the abnormal forms of a few vernacular letters and 
by an irregularity of spacing for which the reader will be already 
prepared. 

A sound opinion as to the approximate dates of various mediaeval 
documents is not to be thought of at this stage of study any more 
than an accurate diagnosis of diseases is expected from a medical 
student. Nevertheless in the further course of reading and instruction 
the usual method of tracing the development of the national writing 
may be safely followed. The excellence of the Franco-Roman 
calligraphy during the I2th century may be observed in several 
stately national styles. Next the gradual deterioration of these 
writings will be indicated, culminating in the substitution of machinery 
for hand-labour. Finally particular attention must be called to the 
existence in this country from the close of the I5th century to the 
middle of the i8th, of a four-fold official script which is the despair of 
foreign palaeographers. Indeed it might be a difficult question to 
decide at what precise date these artificial curial writings finally 
disappear. An Exchequer clerk was still living within recent years 
who in his youth had written Latin Records in the Court hand, and 
traces of another archaic writing may still be found in legal documents 
registered by the Courts of Law, if not in actual judicial enrolments. 

At the same time some preparatory instruction in the method of 
palaeographical description is likely to be of service to the more ad- 
vanced student. In this connexion, a list of palaeographical terms 
would form a useful supplement to the conventional lecture course or 
the class-work which is confined to the reading aloud or transcription 
of a progressive series of facsimiles. Such a list must necessarily be 
compiled by the teacher or the students, and this task might be 
allotted to the seminar. 

Other lists might, indeed, be usefully prepared by the same agency, 
including selections from the ample but confused materials contained 
in published lists of contractions, Latin and French forms of Christian 
names, surnames and place-names, with a modest glossary of the 
technical words which occur most prominently in several classes of 
official Records. The last of these lists should be supplemented by a 
" common-place book " for preserving references to obscure or inter- 
esting words. 



of Official Documents 359 

It will be seen that in our search for assistance in interpreting 
the archaic forms which are unfamiliar even when the writing or 
the compendia are intelligible, we have entered upon the border- 
land of the neighbouring study of Diplomatic. When the time 
has come for pursuing his studies in this direction the student 
of Palaeography will obtain much useful information connected 
with the formulas of documents, the characters of seals and coins, 
the titles of official personages and the system of the mediaeval 
calendar. If, however, a distinct course of study in Diplomatic is 
prohibited, attention should be given to these subjects in compiling 
the classified list of select terms above referred to. 

When such useful if not indispensable adjuncts to a course of 
palaeographical study have been put in hand, one other piece of 
seminar work will remain to be attempted, namely, the compilation 
of a classified Bibliography of Palaeography with special reference to 
national, local or professional interests. This list of works, however 
discouraging it may appear to the well-wishers of native learning, will 
at least supply the titles of several scholarly essays on the appliances 
and materials of mediaeval writing, a subject which will furnish an 
agreeable interlude to the serious business of learning to read MSS. 
Again these bibliographical selections will provide a valuable object- 
lesson in respect of the progressive development of the system of 
reproducing MSS. in facsimile. When the persistent use of litho- 
graphic plates for palaeographical instruction in this country has been 
finally abandoned we shall perhaps be within measureable distance of 
an official recognition of the importance of the subject. 



PALAEOGRAPHY. 

(a) Old English Writing. 

THE conventional theory of the evolution of the national writings, 
including the English branch, does not immediately concern the 
position of our national Records prior to the close of the I ith century, 
for the simple reason that no such Records exist before that date. 
On the other hand, in default of official enrolments or rescripts of 
royal diplomata prior to a still later date, we must depend for our 
knowledge of the diplomatic formulas upon such originals as have 
survived from the 7th century to the I2th. Moreover it is desirable 
to notice the general conditions that prevailed in Western Europe in 
connexion with the evolution of a universal Minuscule writing, which 
not only superseded the insular hands before the end of the nth 
century but also influenced the development of our national writing 
between the middle of the i$th century and the beginning of the i/th. 

The conventional theory above referred to has been variously 
expressed during the last two hundred years both by native and 
foreign writers, and it is possible that the conclusions at which they 
have finally arrived may still be subject to further modifications. It 
would obviously be impossible to discuss these conclusions at large 
in the course of a slight essay on the characteristic features of the 
English official writing only, and a statement thereof in tabular form 
would certainly be inconclusive and might also seem invidious. The 
version which is given in a Table in the Appendix is an independent 
attempt to indicate the position of the several recognized types of 
English official handwriting in this country in the general scheme of 
national evolution. 

The writings in use under the Roman civilization were obviously 
the parents of the various scripts practised by the several nations 
of Western Europe which sprang up from the ruins of the Roman 
Empire. Of these writings the two Majuscule forms affected our 
own national script in a particular manner. In the first place it 



Palaeography 36 1 

will be clear that the only traces of Capital writing are found, 
after the pth century, in initial letters and conventional compendia, 
though the use of Capitals in commercial printing is sufficiently 
familiar. On the other hand, traces of Uncial writing are found in 
English books and diplomata of the /th century, whilst the Half- 
Uncial writing derived from this Majuscule stock is actually 
regarded by all authorities as the immediate progenitor of our earliest 
insular script. Again the Roman Cursive writing which was at first 
produced by the debasement of the ordinary Capitals has left no 
traces upon our own national hands. We know indeed that during 
this early period a true Minuscule writing was produced and utilized 
for certain purposes, but this can scarcely be distinguished from the 
Cursive writing which is usually identified with this younger Roman 
script. 

In its later form of Half-Cursive this primitive Minuscule writing 
joined with the Half-Uncial writing for the production of the reformed 
Minuscule writing of the Qth century. But already there has been an 
admixture of these well-defined species of Majuscule and Minuscule 
writings, reaching its height in the national civilizations of the 7th 
and 8th centuries. Whether "Mixed writing" can be regarded as 
a distinct species would seem to be somewhat doubtful, nor was it 
even a permanent variety. At the same time the prevalence of this 
hybrid script under the Merovingian dynasty is very noticeable 1 . At 
no time was its presence conspicuous in the writing of this country, 
though it occurs as late as the first quarter of the I3th century, 
especially in- Exchequer Records. It will be remembered that the 
archaic use of Mixed writing in this country has been the subject of 
a felicitous comment by the great historian of the Exchequer*. 

There is probably room for a considerable divergence of opinion 
with rega/d to the respective influence of the Half-Uncial and Half- 
Cursive forms of writing upon the development of the continental and 
insular hands. Whether the Half-Cursive writing, as it is found 
abroad, could have worked out its own salvation as a " plain 
Minuscule" writing without the interposition of the Half-Uncial 
models used by foreign scribes, is a question that scarcely concerns 
us here. We may notice, indeed, the superficial resemblance between 
the continental writing (Half-Cursive) employed as a book-hand in the 
8th century and the " pointed " forms of Anglo-Irish writing which we 

1 Cf. L. Delisle, Notice sur un MS. d'Eugyppius, &c. 

3 "This is... often a mark of the great antiquity of the hand; and how improper soever it 
may seem to be, many things thus written do look very fine and elegant " (Madox, History of 
the Exchequer, Pref. xii). 



362 Palaeography 

must not derive from a Roman Cursive stock. On the other hand the 
co-existence of a " rounded " insular hand, which is obviously derived 
from the Half-Uncial, and a "pointed" insular hand, for which no 
other derivation is admissible, is at least remarkable and reminds 
us of certain difficulties that have been experienced in the con- 
ventional derivation of the old Italian national scripts. Without 
questioning the general correctness of this theory, it is evident that 
the term "cursive" can be used in two different senses. We have 
already seen that in the early Roman period Cursive writing is 
Minuscule writing, equally with the later Half-Uncial. In the same 
way this Minuscule writing may be " cursive " or fair, according as it 
is written in the " set-hand " used for books or in the " running-hand " 
chiefly found in documents. 

These remarks will apply broadly to all the national handwritings 
of Western Christendom. But besides these general types of books 
and private charters, we must continue for some time to come to 
recognize as a distinct species the Cursive writing of the Imperial or 
the Papal Curia, furnished with fresh exaggerations in the national 
chanceries. It is certainly true that the insular scribes, who were 
themselves the pupils of the Roman missionaries, were excluded from 
the influence of this curial writing. At the same time we have no 
proof that the normal development of the national scripts from Half- 
Uncial, Half-Cursive and Mixed to " plain Minuscule " writing would 
have proceeded any the less surely if the curial system had not 
survived the Empire. But if the Half-Cursive type of Old English 
writing cannot be derived from continental models, whence proceeds 
the later insular script which, abroad, was based chiefly upon Uncial 
models? It might naturally be thought that as the insular scribes 
had succeeded in the difficult task of evolving a quasi-cursive writing 
from their own Half-Uncial script, the latter would be recognized 
as a common type. 

Again, however, this natural supposition is forbidden to us. The 
origin of the later Old English calligraphy is found in the gradual 
conversion of the insular writing to the reformed models of the 
Franco-Roman writing disseminated by Charlemagne. 

It is well known that the French hand invaded the English 
Scriptorium towards the close of the loth century. The new calli- 
graphy was apparently adopted by the English scribes for their own 
national writings, at first with obvious difficulty, but soon with ease 
and with an elegance of form that excelled their models. At length, 
with the opening of the nth century, the native pointed Minuscules 
have been transformed. 



Palaeography 363 

With the Conquest the national hand disappears altogether and 
its place is taken by a French court hand. That the stilus Anglicus 
continued to be used in the script of a few English books and 
of a few English versions of Latin diplomata does not affect this 
theory, since although the typical Old English letters were still 
employed in a degenerate form, the character of the writing is that of 
the Franco-Roman or Gothic hands of the period. 

Whether these sweeping conclusions are wholly warranted by the 
evidence that is now available is a question which need not be dis- 
cussed here. Some exception may, however, be taken to the 
inevitable conclusion that the Old English writing must have been 
brought into harmony with continental forms by a summary process 
of conversion. 

It would seem that the statement that these calligraphic reforms 
and notarial influences were fostered during the reign of the Confessor, 
if not earlier, and were forcibly completed at the Conquest, is chiefly 
founded upon the dicta of Mabillon, Hickes, the Benedictines 1 and 
other writers, who in turn relied upon the testimony of the mediaeval 
chroniclers 2 . This statement has been tacitly accepted by many later 
authorities, but it will be found that the above references lead us back 
to a tainted source of Anglo-Norman history 3 . 

That the relations of Alfred and his successors with the Prankish 
civilization were close and fruitful and that the reformed Franco- 
Roman writing exercised a supreme influence over all other national 
writings may be readily admitted ; but that this writing virtually 
displaced the Old English calligraphy before the Norman Conquest is 
an assumption that would seem to stand in need of more convincing 
evidence than that which has been hitherto adduced from a fictitious 
authority. 

Although a certain number of Latin diplomata from the middle of 
the loth century onwards are certainly written in a French hand, 
the facility with which scribes, who are responsible for at least 

1 The assertion that Alfred a Gallis doctoribtis in literis institutes erat (Mabillon) scarcely 
finds support in Mr W. H. Stevenson's lucid exposition of these relations (Asser, pp. 303 
311). Still less probability attaches to the statement of the Benedictines that this king "lira 
de France des moines savants qui porterent dans cette ile la litterature et les caracteres 
fran9ais usites au ix c siecle" (Nouveau Traite, ill. 373 sq.). Hickes (Gramm. A. S. 139, and 
Dissert. Epist. 66) follows suit. 

a Cf. Hickes, Gramm. A. S. 160 n. Gale, Scriptores, I. 61, 71. 

3 Cf. Nouveau Traite", in. 373, 374, 375 n. Hickes, Dissert. Epist. 144, 145. Mabillon, 
De re Dipl. p. 52, where we have such references as the following: " 1'autorite d'Ingulfe, 
Abbe de Croyland, ne permet pas d'en douter"; " En effet, Ingulfe, auteur du temps, dit," 
&c. ; Ut cum Ingulpho loquar ; testante Ingulfo in historia Croylandensi, 5rV. 



364 Palaeography 

some of these instruments, continued to use the insular style is very 
noticeable. 

Again there is an alternative source of production in the case of 
the Anglo-French diplomata above referred to, some of which are 
believed to have been written by foreign monks in English houses. 

At the same time it has to be considered whether in any case 
examples are sufficiently numerous or important to justify the sup- 
position that French monks were introduced into this country for the 
purpose of reforming the insular script. We may remember, indeed, 
that a similar argument has been disputed on very high authority 1 . 
We are forbidden to assume that the native Gallo-Roman style was 
influenced by the Irish-Saxon models that were undoubtedly intro- 
duced into the continental Scriptorium in the 8th and Qth centuries, 
and the more agreeable explanation is now accepted that the Anglo- 
Irish scholars were in demand as illuminators and not as scribes. 

But there is another consideration which appears to have been 
entirely overlooked in the course of these interesting discussions. 
From the reign of Cnut the use of the formal diplomata, in which the 
foreign handwriting and notarial influences may be most frequently 
detected, begins to give way to that of the vernacular writ. It would 
seem, therefore, that so far from these influences being paramount in 
the diplomatic writing of the first half of the nth century, they are 
connected with a decaying practice and also (it may be added) with 
a class of instruments which in themselves compare unfavourably with 
vernacular forms. The authenticity of a large number of these later 
diplomata is far from certain, and suspicion might well attach to 
specimens which have hitherto been accepted without question. 

Perhaps the time has not yet come for entertaining the suggestion 
that the " English rounded minuscules " of the loth and I ith centuries 
were in fact evolved from an earlier calligraphy which is associated 
with the insular Half-Uncial script, and that this stately hand existed 
side by side with a Half-Cursive vernacular script and with wholly 
foreign writing. Nevertheless, as it is now admitted that the " Caroline 
minuscule" was evolved from the Half-Uncial and Minuscule models 
which were clearly at the service of continental scribes, we may 
fairly consider the possibility of a parallel evolution of the insular 
writing. Be this as it may, such speculations are certainly less 
harmful than the tacit acceptance of an ancient dogma which leads us 
back, through an almost incredible series pf confident mis-statements, 

1 L. Delisle, Essai sur tecole calligraphique de Tours. 



Palaeography 365 

to the most suspect source of Anglo-Norman history. And if we 
do not need the hypothesis of an enforced reform by Alfred the 
Great, or by the Confessor, or by the Conqueror to account for the 
resemblance of the " rounded minuscules " of the later Old English 
script to the reformed continental writing, still less shall we need the 
artificial distinctions built up by older writers on the evidence of 
lithographs and fantastic forgeries. 

Indeed few scholars would now trouble themselves with the dis- 
tinctions between a " Roman-Saxon " and a " set Saxon," a " cursive 
Saxon," a " rryxed Saxon," and an " elegant Saxon " ; between an 
" Anglo-Saxon " and a " Dano-Saxon," a " semi-Saxon " and a 
"Norman-Saxon 1 " script. 

It has been well said that " les ecritures minuscules romaines sont 
plus ou moins elegantes a proportion de l'habilit dcs mains qui les 
ont tracees 2 ," and Old English scribes possessed at least abilities and 
traditions which would have enabled them to play their part in the 
international movement which led to the assimilation of all the 
Western national scripts to a common type. 

With certain limitations, then, we may claim a national continuity 
for our own branch of the great Latin family of writings from the 
6th century to the nth. Even after the Conquest, there is unmis- 
takable evidence of the existence of local schools of English scribes, 
undismayed by French fashions and certainly undisturbed by Norman 
chancery clerks. Of these men, some at least must have been young, 
and we have here, as has been lately pointed out 3 , one means of 
bridging the gap between the revolution of the Conquest and the 
reorganization of the I2th century. 

(b) Mediaeval Writing in Latin. 

We have seen that the Frank ish calligraphy was destined to 
influence the national writings between the end of the 8th century 
and the beginning of the I3th. It is no easy matter, however, to trace 
the progress of the new Minuscule writing in this country during 
the period which immediately followed the Norman Conquest. This 
difficulty may be partly due to the survival of insular traditions, but 
it is certainly much increased by the scantiness of surviving specimens 
of the Anglo-Norman script. It has also been alleged by early 

1 Astle, Origin of Writing, 96 sq. Hickes, Gramm. A. S. 134 sq. 
3 Nouveau Traitt, III. 267 ; cf. ibid. 275. 
8 Mr W. H. Stevenson in E. H. R. xi. 733. 



366 Palaeography 

writers that the Norman writing itself displays Lombardic rather 
than Prankish characteristics, and although this view may be easily 
disregarded, it must be evident that the more cursive forms of 
diplomatic writing before the end of the I2th century exhibit con- 
siderable divergencies from the typical calligraphy of the Franco- 
Roman school. The latter may, however, be recognized amongst the 
few existing originals of the period. A more upright and angular 
writing is found in official registers down to the beginning of the 
1 3th century and a characteristic hand is seen in the Pipe Rolls of 
the whole period. Finally we have occasional glimpses of the con- 
ventional script which was once known as " elegant Saxon " and which 
is still employed in the vernacular specifications of the boundaries in 
the hybrid diplomatic forms of the period. It is almost useless to say 
that we must eliminate from our examination many suspicious docu- 
ments which pass as contemporary charters. 

From the end of the first quarter of the I2th century a marked 
change is noticed in the insular calligraphy no less than in the diplo- 
matic writing of the continental chanceries. The curial writing of 
this century is perhaps unique in its artistic development of the best 
characteristics of the Franco- Roman calligraphy. Power rather than 
elegance of style is indicated in the thick upright compact letters and 
the long tapering strokes above the line. A marked feature of this 
writing is that both the letters on the line and the upper strokes 
preserve an exact level. Another is that whether this hand is large 
or small, its characteristics are well preserved. Possibly, too, the 
attractive features of the earlier type of I2th century calligraphy are 
enhanced by the excellence of parchment and ink and the scientific 
methods of the contemporary Scriptorium 1 , whilst the accentuated 
contraction marks, the occasional ligatures and the introduction of 
Majuscule letters in the middle of a word lend a peculiar distinction 
to the writing of this period 2 . 

At the same time we may fairly conclude from the discovery of an 
increasing number of original fragments that an alternative form was 
freely used in the shape of a Half-Cursive writing. This may be 
either small or pointed, or, especially in the middle of the century, 
larger and broader and more loosely constructed, with some Gothic 
characteristics. 

Towards the close of the century this stately curial writing is 
already beginning to lose much of its pure grace of outline. The 

1 Hardy, Catalogue, Vol. II. Introduction. Dialogus de Scaccario, I. 5. 

2 Cf. above, p. 361. 



Palaeography 367 

letters are loosely formed, notches and other embellishments are 
introduced, and in judicial Records we notice a fine incisive writing 
which reminds us of the cursive glosses in literary MSS. 

The curial writing of the I3th century will be found to differ in 
its general character from the Franco-Roman calligraphy above 
described and by a gradual transition it assumes the form which has 
been styled Gothic. The Franco-Roman writing may, however, be 
traced, especially in such documents as Royal Charters and Pipe 
Rolls, at least as late as the reign of Edward I. The so-called Gothic 
writing can be recognized from an early date in the I2th century, but 
is at first almost exclusively confined to literary MSS. In the I3th 
century we may sometimes find this hand in official registers, and 
its influence is doubtless to be traced in the greater angularity both 
of the calligraphy and the cursive writing of the period, as well as in 
the fanciful embellishments which in the shape of " clubbed " strokes 
and " bows " are so familiar between the end of the reign of Henry III 
and the beginning of the reign of Edward III. The typical official 
hand of the first half of the I3th century is a small, loose Cursive, 
in which the letters appear broad or elongated according to the 
extent of the influence which the fine writing of the previous century 
continues to exercise. The characteristic official " register " hand of 
the same period is small and compact, the letters being somewhat 
thick and square in shape rather than rounded or angular as in the 
case of diplomata and literary MSS. respectively. 

In the last years of the reign of Henry III the influence of the 
Gothic style begins, as we have seen, to affect the curial writing 
materially. During the reign of Edward I the new fashion of 
" clubbed strokes " and " bows " reaches its height. It is continued in 
the next reign, but the writing of the first quarter of the I4th century 
has to some extent an individuality of its own. 

Curial writing it is true exhibits little change during the 1 4th century, 
but the bulk of the semi-official documents and registers of the period are 
written in a large and somewhat angular Gothic hand which continues in 
vogue during the whole of this century, becoming loose and irregular 
in the reign of Richard II. The note of decay is indeed struck before 
the end of the reign of Edward III. The curial writing in which the 
principal series of Records are inscribed begins to undergo a rapid 
decadence which is eventually arrested by the appearance of a uniform 
and practically artificial hand known as Half-Cursive Gothic. Before 
the reign of Edward IV this conventional hand is further responsible 
for two eccentric offshoots known as "Chancery" and "Court-Hand," 



368 Palaeography 

which effectually superseded all other forms of curial writing in Latin. 
The general characteristics of the Gothic hand may still be traced as 
late as the reign of Charles I in vernacular cursive writing. From 
that date it is completely superseded by the Humanist calligraphy. 

(c) Mediaeval Writing in Old French. 

The mere fact that a considerable proportion of the official writings 
of this country between the latter part of the I3th century and the 
middle of the I5th is found to be in the French language, does not 
necessarily imply the existence of any real palaeographical distinctions 
between the contemporary French and Latin scripts. On the con- 
trary the same Gothic characters are clearly recognized in both, and 
herein the French of Stratford-le-Bow, as it was written, cannot be 
distinguished from the French of Paris. 

At the same time, though not in this palaeographical sense, there 
is a considerable difference between the mediaeval French and Latin 
scripts from the point of view of the modern student. In the first 
place the comparatively uncontracted form of the French MSS. will 
be easily noticed. But, as though to counterbalance a facility of 
perusal in this respect, new difficulties of a linguistic nature must be 
encountered. Here, indeed, the mediaeval scribe is seen to labour 
under the same disadvantage as our modern students. French is not 
the mother tongue of either, whereas a learned familiarity with Latin 
may be assumed in the case of both. Even the orthographic eccen- 
tricities of native writers in the vernacular are governed by a phonetic 
system which is fairly intelligible to the foreign reader ; but the official 
French, as droned in English courts, was ever attuned to a false key 1 . 

A necessary auxiliary to the study of this branch of Palaeo- 
graphy must therefore be sought in a working knowledge of the 
grammar, syntax and vocabulary of Old French as used, and much 
abused, by English clerks. To this small accomplishment we might 
add with great advantage an elementary knowledge of the philology 
of the language itself. But although a comparatively slight acquain- 
tance with these archaic phrases will give us the sense of a typical 
document, it will not enable us to reproduce the text in an extended 
form without certain misgivings. A ceaseless vigilance will be needed 
to ascertain the method or rather tastes of individual scribes, and, 
despite every heed of precedents and idiosyncrasies, we can only 
proceed in many instances by guess-work. 

1 Year Books (Selden Soc.), Vol. I. Intro. 



Palaeography 369 

Perhaps one cause of these difficulties may be traced to an un- 
conscious disinclination to take the conventional compendia of this 
Gallic script quite as seriously as we should do in the case of their 
Latin equivalents. In fact the very poverty of the scribe's resources 
diverts our attention from his occasional use of orthodox devices. 
For example, if the article makes as good sense as the pronoun in the 
form of /es, we are liable to ignore the almost invisible contraction 
which signifies that the word is leurs. These pitfalls may doubtless be 
avoided with the exercise of due circumspection, and the assistance of 
certain elementary hand-books ; but nothing less than pure intuition 
will enable us to divine which of two or three orthographical forms a 
scribe would have selected for the extension of a word which may be 
represented by a single letter. It must be admitted, however, that 
these are extreme cases, and that in the great majority of mediaeval 
official documents written in French these supreme difficulties will not 
be encountered. Indeed, we may remember that the forms of Old 
French preserved in English official documents are comparatively 
intelligent when compared with the usual renderings of Old English 
terms. Moreover it should be borne in mind that, many of these 
French documents contain mere versions of recognized Latin formulas 
and the student will receive considerable assistance from this circum- 
stance. A French version of Letters Patent or of a Privy Seal, for 
instance, can be more easily read than an Ancient Petition. From a 
still more practical point of view these Old French documents are of 
secondary importance, since, numerous as they are during the I4th 
century, they form but a small proportion of the historical documents 
of the whole mediaeval period. Moreover, a large percentage of the 
more important series, notably the Rolls of Parliament, has been 
already printed. 



(d) Later Official Writing. 

A careful study of the development of our national writing will 
reveal a very considerable change in the character of that writing 
between the close of the I4th century and the beginning of the i6th. 
At the same time it would not be an easy matter to determine the 
approximate date of the change referred to, or to indicate its precise 
nature in the case of official writings. It is well known that the 
change in question was accelerated by certain external causes such as 
the official recognition of the vernacular from the year 1362, the 
H. 24 



3 7 O Palaeography 

discovery of printing, and the loss of the clerical monopoly of writing 
under the influence of the New Learning. 

Closely connected with these agencies we have the important 
revival of the old Franco-Roman calligraphy in the I5th century. At 
one time this stately script seemed in danger of disappearing before 
the inroads of the modern Gothic ; but the Humanist studies gave a 
new impulse to the artistic feeling which has kept alive the traditions 
of an elegant Minuscule writing down to our own times. In another 
direction, however, the increasing use of the vernacular produced a 
fresh tendency towards national individuality. In the meantime, as we 
have seen, the Gothic writing of the I4th century had already begun 
to assume a Half-Cursive form. Finally, before the close of the I5th 
century a new cursive vernacular script had been evolved, in which, 
however, the forms of several Gothic letters can be traced at least 
as late as the close of the i6th century. 

In another direction the conventional characters of the Gothic 
script are preserved in an artificial style of writing to which the terms 
"Court-hand," "Chancery," and "Secretary" have been applied. This 
style of writing continued to be used for the enrolment of legal 
Records with scarcely any change till the beginning of the i8th 
century. 

We may fairly assume, however, that from the middle of the 
i6th century the spontaneous habit of writing in a Gothic hand had 
been lost, although the forms of many Gothic letters were preserved 
for a century longer. The scribe who wrote love letters and kept 
accounts in a cursive vernacular writing, deliberately cultivated an 
artificial hand for recording the proceedings of the Courts of Law or 
for enrolling an instrument in the Chancery. Other official writers 
who laboured in the Signet Office or in the study of some minister of 
the Crown, affected the more elegant hand which is known as 
" Secretary." Naturally we shall find every sort of combination 
between the new cursive and official hands, but this is a circumstance 
which must depend in every period upon the individuality of the 
scribe. The writing of a mere clerk will continue to be as conventional, 
relatively, as mediaeval script whether the characters are formed upon 
a Gothic or an Italian model. But when for the first time the laity 
begin to write for themselves, the ultimate triumph of individuality, 
expressed in the cursive vernacular, is assured. 

Thus the bulk of the official writings of the i/th and i8th 
centuries is endited in the natural handwriting of statesmen, governors, 
military and naval officers, and their numberless correspondents. Even 



Palaeography 371 

when the services of a secretary are employed his "copper-plate" 
writing ceases, from the end of the iyth century, to retain any vestige 
of the Gothic script The latter, preserved as an artificial Court-hand, 
is henceforth confined to the purely legal Records. It is true that the 
volume of these Records has considerably increased in the I7th 
century, but their historical and legal interest has proportionately 
diminished. The State Trials and Law Reports which are printed 
or else accessible in cursive MSS. provide convenient evidence and 
familiar case-law for the modern historian or lawyer. 

The indiscriminate use of the terms Court-hand and Chancery in 
connexion with the later Gothic writing of the I5th or even of the 
1 4th centuries is probably responsible for some confusion. As a matter 
of fact the form of writing which is usually described under these 
titles is really that which occurs in the post-mediaeval period, though 
earlier writers regarded the term Court-hand as equally applicable to 
the reign of Henry I or to that of Henry VII. It is obviously un- 
desirable that a table of the forms of the written alphabet during the 
Tudor period should be regarded as descriptive of the three preceding 
centuries. Such a table, however, is presented to us in more than one 
of the most authoritative treatises upon the subject, and the impression 
is thus conveyed that "Court-hand" is a general term for all official 
writings. The term itself, however, is a very convenient one and might 
be retained with advantage if its use were confined to the proceedings 
of the Courts of Common Law and Exchequer from the reign of 
Edward IV onwards. This date may be regarded as approximately 
marking the final evolution of this conventional hand from the de- 
cadent Gothic 1 . The chief point of resemblance between the two 
styles of writing is seen in the angularity of the Minuscule letters, but 
in the later period a lozenge-shaped construction is noticeable in the 
bodies of the letters b, c, d, g, o, p, q and s. A further characteristic 
of this Court-hand writing is found in the habit of continuing the 
bottom of the down stroke in the letters a, c, k in an upward direction 
so as to form a bow. A third distinction is seen in the "minims" 
themselves, the strokes being disconnected, broad throughout and 
conspicuously erect. These peculiarities are also responsible for the 
undoubted difficulty found in reading this distinctive hand, and they 
constitute a marked distinction between this writing and the older 
Gothic. 

The actual forms of the Court-hand letters differ from the Gothic 

1 See Appendix. 

24 2 



372 Palaeography 

in a very slight degree. Some capitals closely resemble those of an 
early period. Others are clearly of an uncial type and the eccentric 
outlines of a few more do not constitute a specific distinction. On 
the other hand some letters, notably P and S, do present important 
differences, and these once more give trouble to the reader who is 
accustomed only to the Gothic script. 

The "Chancery" hand which runs a parallel course with this Court- 
hand in the i6th and i/th centuries may probably be distinguished 
from the Gothic before the middle of the I5th century 1 . Its structural 
resemblance to that form of writing is in fact much closer than in the 
case of the conventional Court-hand, although certain letters are much 
alike in both. In their general aspect, however, the difference between 
the "Court-hand" and the "Chancery" hand is very marked. The 
latter is not only rounder and flatter in appearance, in distinction to 
the upright and sometimes backward lines of the Court-hand, but the 
letters are more open and loosely formed. The two styles, however, 
possess this common characteristic, that they are equally artificial and 
uniform in point of execution so that the writing of the i6th century 
presents almost the same features as that of the i8th. 

The third conventional handwriting of the post- mediaeval period 
is usually known as "Secretary" owing to its use as the fair hand 
in which letters and formal documents were prepared for signature or 
for official preservation. 

This writing was developed more slowly than the preceding forms 
but it is evidently based upon the calligraphy of the late 1 5th century 
with an admixture of Gothic and a few Court-hand letters, especially 
C and S. One of its most characteristic letters is a small p, which is 
often mistaken for an x. In the i6th century this hand abounds in 
flourishes which disguise its close affinity to the Humanist calligraphy, 
whilst many letters used in the Court-hand and Chancery alphabets 
are introduced. From the middle of the i/th century looped capitals 
begin to replace the Gothic forms. In addition to official documents, 
numerous private deeds and formal writings in this hand have been 
deposited amongst the legal Records and State Papers, for this calli- 
graphy was largely practised by the scriveners whose professional 
successors still preserve its general forms. 

A detailed description of the cursive vernacular writing 1 which 
was used with increasing freedom from the middle of the I5th century 
would be impossible here. Moreover, this new style must be regarded 

1 See Appendix. 



Palaeography 373 

as a hybrid growth containing many forms of letters that were clearly 
borrowed from the Gothic itself as well as from the later official 
writings above referred to. This is especially evident in the case of 
certain capitals which continued for another century to be modelled on 
the artificial Gothic forms. The use of these and even of small letters 
derived from the same source by individual writers may probably 
be explained by the use of certain models in the course of instruction. 
At the same time archaic or artificial forms would naturally be affected 
by those engaged on official or legal business, whilst the influence 
of the Humanist learning is seen in the "copper-plate" writing of 
many statesmen or scholars. An examination of a variety of hands 
during the i6th century might lead us to suppose that certain letters 
were usually formed on a different plan to that which has prevailed 
since the close of the I7th century. This fact is noticeable in respect 
of certain small letters as well as several capitals. Of these some may 
be regarded as mediaeval survivals whilst others are derived from 
Court-hand models. At the same time several partial ligatures occur 
as in the conjunction of t with the vowels o and e, and that of h with 
s, c and t. The use of back strokes in this vernacular writing resembles 
a device of mediaeval scripts, continued in the artificial curial writings. 
The cursive vernacular writing above described occupies a middle 
place between the artificial Gothic script and the Humanist calligraphy 
of the period. For another century the resemblance to the former 
is very noticeable; but from the beginning of the i/th century the 
Franco-Roman Minuscule resumed its former sway. At the same 
time it is interesting to observe that, in purely cursive writing at least, 
these conventional characters are insular in their formation. That is 
to say, a national type of writing may be distinguished from the 
1 6th century onwards in distinction to the cosmopolitan scripts of the 
four preceding centuries. We might even venture to proceed a step 
further and to assert that just as the Scottish writing of the i6th 
century exhibits several traces of the close political relations of that 
country with France, and as the vernacular Irish script continued 
with little change of form until the reign of Henry VIII, so this new 
English cursive bears an inherited resemblance to the Old English 
cursive of pre-Conquest times. 



374 Palaeography 

(e) The Royal Scriptorium. 

It has been previously observed 1 that the information available as 
to the institution of the Chancery in this country and its working 
establishment is of a very scanty kind. The same remark must 
almost necessarily apply to our knowledge of the actual apparatus for 
writing the royal acts or official compilations which comprise practi- 
cally the whole bulk of the Records preserved in the State Archives 
before the end of the I2th century. It must at least be assumed that 
such documents were written within the precincts of the Court, but 
this necessary assumption is the cause of a serious difficulty. 

In the case of a foreign Court the needful apparatus was naturally 
provided by the Chancery with its elaborate notarial establishment, but 
the existence of such an establishment in England before the Conquest 
has not yet been proved 2 . Even a century later we fail to find any 
traces of such a curial department 3 , and when its existence can be 
clearly distinguished, a large part of its duties are performed by other 
clerical agencies 4 . 

Indeed in the case of the most ancient and characteristic instru- 
ments, Royal Charters and other public acts, we are scarcely justified 
in assuming that the actual writing was performed by an official 
scribe. 

There is no uniformity of style such as distinguishes the acts 
of the foreign Chanceries at a glance, and the O. E. " land-boc " and 
Anglo-Norman charter are clearly home-made 5 . We have some 
evidence of the employment of experts for this purpose by certain 
religious houses, but these scribes do not appear to have formed a 
professional class of notaries 6 . In fact the actual writing of the great 
bulk of the diplomata issued before the middle of the I2th century was 
apparently provided by individual enterprise, and the ceremony of 
execution itself involved no clerical apparatus, whilst no official rescript 
of the original instruments was apparently preserved until the be- 
ginning of the 1 3th century. 

Even as late as the Tudor period we have seen that it was usual 
for the tenor of a royal grant to be prepared ostensibly at least by 
the grantee himself, and this original draft was submitted for the 

1 See above, pp. 157 162. 

2 See above, p. 163 sq. 3 Dialogus, I. 5. 4 The Exchequer and the Wardrobe. 
8 Cf. above, p. 175 sq., and below, p. 377. Is it possible that Bishop Stubbs had this in 

mind when he wrote : "Abundance of charters... attest the activity of the Church, and of the 
monasteries " (C. H. \. 241) ? 
6 See above, p. 175. 



Palaeography 375 

royal signature and is still preserved as a record of the first stage of 
an official transaction which was now protracted with a sole regard 
for fees 1 . One reason for this display of individualism is to be found 
in the well-known fact that in England the Church was before the 
State and that in this connexion as in others its organization was 
utilized for the requirements of the whole community. That the 
clergy alone possessed a knowledge of letters was not a circumstance 
peculiar to this country, but probably in this country alone we find 
the very ink supplied for the royal Scriptorium by the nearest church, 
which also took charge of the most precious contents of the royal 
Archives and still harboured these Records almost within the memory 
of living men 2 . Moreover the allusions of mediaeval writers would 
seem to indicate a conversance with affairs of State on the part of 
certain learned canons or monks, which might well have been acquired 
by them in the exercise of some official task. When, during the 
controversy relating to the Scottish supremacy, Edward I requi- 
sitioned the monastic Archives for early State Papers the extent of 
these intimate relations was at once revealed 3 . 

Perhaps we shall find that very similar relations between the 
Church and the clerical departments of the State existed on the 
Continent, at least as late as the prohibition of notarial employment 
to the regular clergy 4 . But although we find no traces of a " notarial 
art " in connexion with the earliest establishment of the royal Scrip- 
torium in the shape of formula books or other technical precedents, 
we must not suppose that on this account the business of the State 
was inefficiently conducted. Whether in the Curia or the Camera, 
the Chancery or the Exchequer, important instruments and extensive 
accounts were dispatched with remarkable skill and precision. 
Earlier still the Great Survey remains a monument of clerical labour 5 , 
and this was the precursor of a long series of stupendous inquisitions. 
These will be found to extend throughout the whole of the succeeding 
period, but of the actual apparatus employed for the execution of 
these writings we have no exact knowledge. One thing indeed is 
certain; clerks there were in plenty. England in the I2th century, 
we have been assured, was a " paradise of clerks." We have un- 
fortunately no means of ascertaining whether the clergy who found 
maintenance and advancement at the Court formed an organized 

1 See above, pp. 263 sq. and 349. 

2 Dialogus, \. v. Cf. E. H. K. Apr. 1904. 3 Above, pp. it, 24. 
4 By the Council of Rheims in 1131. 

6 Eyton, Notes on Domesday. 



376 Palaeography 

official body ; whether they were borne, so to speak, on the establish- 
ment of the Chancery and Exchequer or eked out the emoluments of 
a canonry or benefice by fees or perquisites. Especially we should 
wish to know under what conditions they worked and whether they 
wrote these charters and rolls with their own hands or dictated the 
entries to subordinate scribes, and if so, whether those scribes affected 
the character of a learned caste. Such evidence as we have perhaps 
seems to indicate that clericus and scriptor were in most, cases 
convertible terms, and in mediaeval illustrations the clerk is de- 
lineated in the act of writing. In some cases the clerk appears to 
have been an executive officer, acting as the deputy of an officer of 
State and merely supervising the labours of the official scribes 1 . In 
other cases a clerk held a permanent appointment as the writer of 
a particular record and was paid, not as a clericus, but as a scriptor. 
The records of such payments are, however, very infrequent and we 
are tempted to suppose that the permanent officials or patent 
officers provided such clerical assistance as they required 2 , a practice 
followed in the government departments until comparatively recent 
times. 

The patent offices referred to, which were held antique jure, were 
nevertheless few in number and quite inadequate to supply the 
requirements of the most primitive system of administration. The 
greater number of clerical posts must therefore have been filled by 
" supernumerary " clerks paid by fees received on a recognized 
scale from suitors or accountants 3 . Such a system would tend 
towards the creation of a professional class such as the Cursitors 
afterwards became, whilst in the Curia itself the necessary writing was 
no doubt undertaken by the prothonotaries. 

It will be evident from the above instances that a practically un- 
limited supply of competent scribes could be provided for the service 
of the Crown before the close of the I2th century. In addition, 

1 In this connexion we may remember that clericus was a recognized rank in the mediaeval 
Household, being that above the sergeant and next to the hereditary chief (Magister) of a 
department (ministerium) or his nominee. 

2 Thus the Magister Scriptorii (Regis), who was in receipt of a large salary, was required 
to provide (invenire) suitable scribes at the Exchequer for writing the Chancery rolls and 
writs there (Dialogus, I. v.). One of these, however, was paid with the Exchequer staff. 
Cf. Red Book, p. cccxxxv, citing a contract in the reign of Edward I, from which it appears 
that as many as 68 supplementary clerks were employed during vacation in 1290 by the 
permanent officials at the Exchequer who were reimbursed by the Crown. 

3 As for instance in connexion with the "Judaism " (Hoveden, in. 262). That such fees 
were not unknown in an earlier period is clear from Dialogtts, I. vi. In the reign of 
Henry VIII the system was carefully protected by legislation (27 Hen. VIII, c. u). 



Palaeography 377 

however, to the original diplomata and rolls written or compiled in 
the royal chapel or Treasury, or in the Camera Clericorum of the 
itinerant Household, a large portion of the existing Archives was 
composed at the instance of the local officers of the Crown. Thus 
nearly every original or judicial writ that issued from the Chancery, 
Exchequer, or Curia bore an appropriate Return endorsed or in a 
schedule. In the case of the great inquests of the period, these 
Returns were, as we know, voluminous, and the Accounts of sheriffs 
and bailiffs were even more extensive. To these must be added the 
documents connected with the local administration of justice, so far 
as they were not prepared by the itinerant justices or their clerks. 

Here we have no question of an official machinery in the shape of 
notarial bodies in certain local centres. The writings which emanated 
from these scattered bailiwicks must have been provided out of purely 
local resources. How was the thing done ? It was a simple matter 
for the Crown to give an order for the taking of a general inquest with 
the injunction added Facias inbreviare or redigere in scriptum, but the 
burden thrown upon an unlettered community must have been a 
heavy one. For we can scarcely doubt that these Returns were 
home-made, by the hands of domestic chaplains, village priests and 
itinerant scholars. The few surviving fragments of I2th century 
inquests written by unskilful hands in uncouth Latin upon odds and 
ends of precious parchment bespeak their origin 1 , and here we have 
another process of casual production to add to the primitive methods 
of the royal Scriptorium. 

For an exact description of the materials or implements of 
writing used by the official scribe, we should look in vain amongst 
the earliest mediaeval Archives, seeing that we do not know with any 
certainty where he was housed. We have already seen that ink 
was specially provided, and we know on the same authority that 
parchment was supplied by the permanent scribes 2 . The necessary 
implements of his craft in the shape of pens, knives, compass, &c. 
would obviously have been the same as those which are known to us 
from other sources. The recognition from an early date of the im- 
portance of the office of the Magister Scriptorii* might certainly lead 
us to infer that the same discipline and professional traditions were 
observed as in the case of the well-ordered monastic copy ing- room 4 . 

1 Exch. K. R. Knights' Service, Bdle. I. 

2 Dialogus, I. iii and v. In the reign of John the latter is supplied out of the royal 
revenues (Rot. de Mists, &c. passim). 

* Dialogus, I. v, vi. Red Book of the Excheqtter, p. 807. 
4 Hardy, Catalogue, Vol. II. Intro. 



378 Palaeography 

We know at least that it was a point of honour to copy accurately 1 , 
to space consistently 2 and to avoid erasure 3 . 

The conventional system of cancellation and interlineation is well 
preserved 4 and at a later date is deserving of careful attention. It is 
even clear that the rubrication and illumination of official or semi- 
official registers was as usual performed by a distinct hand, since we 
find many spaces for these ornaments left in existing Records. At 
the same time we owe to the individual talent or enterprise of official 
scribes, from the I3th century onwards, many curious marginal figures, 
together with a code of symbols which has a special archaeological 
value in connexion with the history of the Exchequer 5 . The clerks 
of that ancient court were also credited with an exclusive system of 
arithmetic but, beyond the use of a curious combination of points or 
" dots " in the margin of Accounts 6 , this distinction is not apparent in 
official MSS. The writing of tallies was entrusted to a special clerk, 
but the device was not employed in official circles only. Although 
the official scribe of the post-Conquest period scarcely attained the 
high standard of calligraphy set in the preceding period by the Old 
English school, his work on the whole compares favourably with that 
of his foreign contemporaries. In point of intelligence and accuracy 
moreover he was not their inferior, although subject to the same 
failings that characterize the methods of the whole fraternity. His 
worst mistakes, in spite of the widely circulated glossary known as 
Expositiones Vocabulorum 1 , are committed in copying Old English 
terms, whilst his difficulties in respect of insular French have recently 
been the subject of an enlightened criticism 8 . But in connexion with 
the severe test of personal names and place-names we can scarcely 
fail to be astonished at the extent of his general information. In the 
mere copying of continuous works we have, it is true, frequent 

1 Dialogus, I. v. 

2 Ibid. Official punctuation, so exasperating in a later period, is almost a negligible 
quantity during the Middle Ages. A noticeable feature in Accounts is the point usually 
placed before and after the individual figures of a sum. 

3 Ibid. The use, or rather abuse, of palimpsests, the particular aversion of continental 
notaries, seems to have been very rare amongst English official scribes. 

4 Dialogus, I. v. 

5 For the explanation of these signa see Palgrave, Calendars, and Antiquities of the 
Exchequer, p. 55 sq. 

6 To represent the counters used in various combinations of figures, cf. Antiquities of 
the Exchequer, p. 146. English official scribes appear to have been conservative with 
regard to the use of Arabic figures. The earliest of these noticed by the present writer 
occur in the Hargrave MS. 313, which probably had an official origin and which was 
compiled soon after 1250. 

7 Red Book of the Exchequer, p. 1032 sq. 8 Above, p. 368 n. 



Palaeography 379 

instances of carelessness and arbitrary treatment of an exemplar, but 
work of this kind was often merely of a semi-official character. 

In this connexion it may be worth while to point to the need for 
some special term descriptive of the compilations in book-form which 
are written in a style that seems to occupy a middle place between 
the curial writing in rolls and diplomata and the set-hand of the 
monastic Scriptorium. Perhaps the term " Register-hand " may be 
regarded as sufficiently characteristic of the large class of official and 
semi-official compilations which are technically known in the present 
day as " Registers " and " Books of Remembrance." 

(f) Palaeographical Terms. 

If we are able to enumerate a fairly extensive series of technical 
terms connected with official writings in this country in ancient and 
modern times, it will also be found that this terminology is of a 
somewhat promiscuous and casual type. It will in fact be desirable, 
in order to avoid confusion, to discard entirely such terms as have 
been coined by later official antiquaries, in the i/th and i8th centuries, 
without any regard to recognized mediaeval forms. The latter in 
turn appear to have been frequently confused with classical analogies, 
real or fancied, and an adequate list of native terms is still a desidera- 
tum. Under these circumstances it will only be possible here to give 
a few indications of the contexts in which these terms generally 
appear. 

In the first place the written document itself is very variously 
described and, as a rule, it is only in official documents that the terms 
employed in this connexion amount to anything more than a generali- 
zation or even to a mere abstraction. This is especially noticeable in 
the case of cultured but unofficial writers. The clerks of the King's 
Court at least attached some weight to the terminology of their profes- 
sion. Such words as scriptura, conscriptio and scriptum for example may 
mean anything, but descriptio, inbrevatio and abbrevatio have a special 
significance 1 . We do not, however, find these general terms employed 
in a technical sense according to the style of the continental notaries 2 , 
and their use on the whole has little scientific value. 

The same conclusion must apply to the several terms employed 
to describe the materials of writing. The composition and quality of 

1 These are the terms used for royal surveys or inquests, for the compilation of the statistics 
ascertained by inquest, and for the brief digests of the results for convenience of reference, 
respectively. 

3 e.g. Scriptum donalionis, &c. 



380 Palaeography 

mediaeval ink are subjects that have little concern for us here. The 
respective uses of incaustum and atramentum, of chrysography and 
rubrication play their part, it is true, in the bella diplomatica of the 
i/th and i8th centuries. Possibly too the probability that the 
monastic forgers of Westminster or Winchester used the very ink 
that was supplied for the writing of Domesday Book, the Pipe Rolls 
and the Royal Charters of the I2th century is a fact of little 
more than sentimental interest. Whether the ink of the later official 
Scriptorium differed in any important respect from other preparations 
may well be doubted. At the same time a superficial difference 
between the appearance of the ink in official and literary MSS. may 
be easily remarked. This effect, however, is possibly due to the 
quality of the parchment which in the former case is usually less 
finely dressed and of a darker tint. Owing to this circumstance, 
perhaps, the ink of rolls and loose membranes appears to have been 
applied with a lavish hand, and this is particularly noticeable in the 
smaller "pieces" on which so many original documents were written. 
In fact when thickly laid on the rough surface of this stout parch- 
ment the viscid and lustrous ink of the I2th century stands out like 
black enamel. 

The terminology of the earliest Archives is notoriously per- 
plexing, as may well be the case when such widely different forms 
as a roll, a file, a book and a single sheet may be described in con- 
vertible terms as rotulus, liber, volumen, carta and breve 1 . The rotulus 
itself may consist either of membranes sown together end to end, or 
of membranes and portions of membranes filed at the head. The 
former type is officially distinguished as a "consecutive" and the 
latter as a " headed " roll, but these terms like that of " rotulet " 
applied to the individual membranes of a " headed " roll are of modern 
origin. There appears, however, to have been a well-marked dis- 
tinction between the use of membrana and rotulus in the above 
connexion, for the membranes of headed rolls are always referred to 
as rotuli. Again, a somewhat vague distinction is made between the 
" pagination " of official and the " foliation " of unofficial books. 

Writings made on separate pieces of parchment but connected 
with the main entry were described as in cedilla, a term which had 
not, however, at any time an exclusively official usage. 

A rarer term occurs in the use of peciae to denote the component 
parts of a file of loose documents. 

1 Instances will he found in the literature of Domesday Book. A variety of synonyms for 
a single document will be found in the collections of Old English charters. 



Palaeography 381 

The practice of filing (in filaciis) was very ancient, though in the 
1 2th century it seems to have been also the custom to preserve loose 
documents in separate compartments (/';/ forulis), an alternative 
method of filing which perhaps suggested the official " pigeon- 
holes " of modern times. 

Such points as these would be of purely antiquarian interest were 
it not for the importance of noticing the recognition of each 
membrane or leaf as a distinct unit for the purpose of official 
reference. Each has its front and its dorse, and before the period of 
consecutive foliation cross references are made according to the 
number of precedent or subsequent leaves 1 . We even find the 
continuation of a particular entry not only carried from the front to 
the dorse of a membrane and thence to a new membrane, but also 
to any convenient position in the roll with an appropriate direction 
in each case 8 . These precautions were doubtless the outcome of the 
very ancient practice of regarding every diplomatic document as 
consisting properly of a single roll written only on the front and 
complete in itself 3 . Paper as a substitute for parchment can scarcely 
be regarded as a recognized official material before the 15th century, 
and even for another century the great majority of documents in this 
form were received from private sources. 

The various terms employed to describe the external tegument of 
official documents when bound or sewn together have no distinctive 
character. Such terms as Liber Albus, Liber Pilosits> &c., denoting 
the colour or texture of the cover, were in general use, but it should 
be remembered that it must not by any means be assumed that either 
the existing binding or outer covers of official books or rolls are of 
contemporary date with the record itself. This remark applies with 
special force to the lettering, pagination and even to the order of the 
contents. It is of some interest to find that the date of the existing 
binding of several historical records can be ascertained from official 
entries 4 . 

1 Reference was even made in the case of a complete roll to the first or other roll 
preceding. 

* Plus in dorso Adhuc de Residwim de Post &c. 

3 So we have even in the i.^th century such official terms as parvi rotuli, longi rotttli, &c. 
and a considerable number of single, rolled membranes written and preserved in the same 
manner as papyri. 

4 The Exchequer Books appear for the most part to have been bound in the i-fth century, 
and repaired in the i6th. Few, if any, ancient books of the Chancery can be recognized. 
The later Decree Books, like many other official books compiled after the I5th century, were 
usually bound in vellum. For the modern series, including the State Papers, calf was 
largely used. A large number of registers, which are now preserved amongst the Public 



382 Palaeography 

There is of course another aspect of the terminology of official 
MSS. which is occupied with their contents rather than with their 
composition or preservation ; but this is a subject which does not 
concern us here. 

(g) Palaeographical Tests. 

The conclusions which may be drawn from the character of the 
handwriting and other external indications afforded by official MSS. 
have been referred to generally under the head of Diplomatic. 
Obviously certain palaeographical tests must form part of the process 
of scientific " description " by which we seek to determine the purport, 
date and authenticity of a given document. This description, however, 
involves the consideration of other features of the MS. besides the 
handwriting itself. In fact as a final test of date or authorship, the 
results of a close examination or comparison of handwriting are 
admitted by most ancient and modern writers to be unsatisfactory. 
Even though an expert can usually satisfy himself at a glance as to 
the approximate date or general character of the greater number of 
historical MSS., it does not follow that others will agree with his 
opinion. Moreover the most confident opinions have in so many 
cases 1 proved to be erroneous that a wise reticence is usually observed 
in matters of any consequence. It has been recorded in his own 
handwriting by a famous official antiquary 2 that a certain Register is 
of the time of King Henry VII from the character of the handwriting, 
and this opinion, he adds, is confirmed by the style of illumination 
peculiar to that period. Later official authorities have assigned the 
date of the MS. without hesitation to the reign of Edward I, and this 
is now the accepted date 3 . 

Curiously enough, another " Breviate " of Domesday exists in 
official custody 4 to which the same date has been officially assigned. 
A third " Breviate" however, which is not in official custody 5 , has been 
authoritatively described as a I2th century MS. although the writing is 
to all appearance of the same character as the last mentioned official 

Records were not compiled in official custody. From an early date rolls, whether headed or 
consecutive, were protected by a thick vellum flap. 

1 The evidence of experts in handwriting can scarcely be regarded as convincing in really 
difficult cases. 

2 Peter le Neve, Norroy King of Arms (1704-29) in the case of the " Breviate " of Domesday 
referred to below. Possibly the cause of his error is to be found in the descriptions of the 
illuminations scribbled on the fly-leaves in a late Gothic hand. 

3 Scargill-Bird, Guide, p. 122. Cf. Court Life under the Plantagenets, p. 203. 

4 Exch. K. R. Miscellaneous Book, No. i. 5 MS. Arundel, 153. 



Palaeography 383 

volume, and on the strength of this resemblance and other indications 
it has been suggested that both these additional "Breviates" are MSS. 
of the late I2th century or early years of the ijth 1 . 

This uncertainty and inconsistency in dating comparatively 
obscure records is perhaps excusable, but more than one historical 
text of the highest constitutional importance has been derived from 
a misdated MS. Thus the Feodary known as the Black Book of the 
Exchequer has been persistently ascribed to the reign of Henry II 
by mediaeval historians whilst by official experts it is connected with 
the reign of Henry III. 

The actual date of its compilation must be placed towards the 
end of the reign of King John 2 . The imperfect description of the 
collection known as the Testa de Nevill is another instance in point 3 , 
and when we recall the early misconceptions which prevailed with 
regard to the famous Pipe Roll of 1130* we may even feel prepared 
for a disillusionment concerning the contemporary date of Domesday 
Book itself. For from a purely palaeographical point of view the gulf 
fixed between the existing volumes of the Great Survey, between the 
official transcript and the official "Breviate," appears indeed impassable 
within the span of six months or of six years. 

If therefore we have to admit that the comparison of handwritings 
is unsatisfactory, it is clear that we must employ this palaeographical 
test as sparingly as possible. Other methods that are based on the 
observations of the materials employed possess the same defect of 
inconclusiveness. In theory the exceptions to a convenient generaliza- 
tion may prove the rule, but in practice, especially legal practice, they 
are clearly inconvenient. Such are the general indications afforded 
by the texture or tint of the parchment and the spacing, lineation, 
punctuation, rubrication, illumination, contraction marks and accents 
of MSS. Moreover the periods determined by these distinctive signs 
are usually too wide to be of much practical value. 

The familiar rules of the "dry point," of the "tagged e," of the 
acute contraction mark, of green or blue initials may fix the date to 
a century or to half a century, but for official documents we require 
some narrower margin. This is frequently supplied by diplomatic 
evidence, such as the style or signatures, and therefore on the whole 
the above indications are of less service in the case of Records than 

1 Athenaittn, 15 Sep. 1900. 2 Red Book (Rolls), p. Ivi. 

3 Ibid. p. ccxxi sq. This was written before the publication of valuable essays by Dr J. H. 
Round and Mr O. J. Reichel. 

4 Madox, History of Excheq. (Dissert. Efist.). 



384 Palaeography 

of literary MSS. For indications of the nationality or even of the 
provincialism of the scribe, as well as to some extent of the antiquity 
of documents, philology may assist us to good purpose. There are, 
however, certain inferences to be drawn from obvious defects or 
blemishes in Records. Of these the most harmless are blanks which 
only the most daring forger would attempt to utilize ; but lines left 
unfilled are often furnished with an important postscript in the case of 
official Registers for the purpose of bringing an entry up-to-date. 

In diplomatic writings, however, such opportunities were more 
rarely furnished, new paragraphs being carefully avoided. Even when 
the insertions and "posteas" above referred to were duly authorized, their 
true character must be carefully distinguished, and much inconvenience 
may be caused by their adoption in a later transcript as part of the 
original text. 

Naturally the most frequent interpolations in all MSS. are those 
effected by way of interlineation. Here the practice of inserting 
additional matter must be distinguished from that of supplying words 
omitted at the time, which are obviously required by the context. In 
some cases a supplementary entry may be regarded as a mere 
embellishment due to the taste of the corrector 1 . When this identifi- 
cation is not possible the acceptance of the addition must depend 
chiefly on the absence of any motive for forgery. 

The same attitude has been usually preserved in respect of 
erasures. These were positively forbidden by the rules of the 
Scriptorium*, but their frequent occurrence in spite of this prohibition 
is not necessarily a suspicious circumstance. On the contrary a 
palpable and especially an extensive erasure may be regarded as 
a presumption of bona fides if we are convinced that it was made 
by the original scribe. In no age have official regulations been taken 
altogether seriously, at least by the officials themselves, and the public 
confession of a blunder by the process of subpunctuation must have 
been particularly distasteful to a mediaeval scribe. In fact we are 
assured that a scribe who valued a reputation for penmanship rather 
than for accuracy frequently ignored clerical errors, the correction 
of which would have spoilt the appearance of his MS. But whatever 
the nature of these clerical err