Papsturkunde und europäisches Urkundenwesen · 2013-06-11 · lowing is,therefore, abrief resume....

Papsturkunde und europäischesUrkundenwesen

Studien zu ihrer formalen und rechtlichenKohärenz vom 11. bis 15. Jahrhundert

Herausgegeben von

PETER HERDE UND HERMANN JAKOBS

1999

BÖHLAU VERLAG KÖLN· WEIMAR· WIEN

c)(}(A S>t.)

The Influence of Papal Documents on EnglishDocuments before 1305 . .

JANE E. SAYERS

Historians, art historians and diplomatists have long flirted with influen-ces. Changes, however, depend on many and variable factors and often theinfluence cannot be established with certainty. If made, they may not belasting. I approach the subject then with some trepidation and caution. Ipropose to discuss the question under six main headings (1) the influenceof papal privileges and mandates on English episcopal documents (2) theeffects of the judge delegate system (3) the despatch of legates (4) the in-troduction of notaries (5) the possible influence on royal documents. Fi-nally (6) I shall look at parallel developments. .

1.The influence of papal privileges and mandates on English episcopaldocuments. .

The growth of the canon law and increasing personal contacts between theEnglish hierarchy and the Roman curia are the motive forces behind thefirst influences. Documents which were recognizably' modelled onpapal documents begin to be issued by the English bishops in the 1140s{plates lA, IB (both 1143), IC (1149), ID (1151-2». Earlier episcopal do-cuments were modelled on royal chaners and writs (e.g. plate 2A(1112x14»,J demonstrably Ranulf Flambard's charters.! This royalinfluence continued=- for example, at Norwich, in a charter of WilliamTu'rbe of c. 1150we find Notum ... oolo et precipio ... (plate 2C): Indeed,with some bishops and in some dioceses, it survived to the end of thetwelhh century. As late as 1195x1205the writ type continued to be used atBath and Wells (plate 2B). But, among more centralizing churchmen whohad visited Rome, and with a growing number of papal privileges and

I See also, e.g., English Episcopal Acta VIII (Winchester 1070-1204), ed. M. Franklin, Ox-ford 1993, no. 11 (1107x16).

Z See Durham Episcopal Charters 1071-1152, ed. H. S. Offler (= Surtees Society 179),Durham 1968, e.g.. no. 20.

162 Jane E.Sayers

mandates coming into the dioceses, papal influences began to make them-selves felt.

Influences through papal documents on individual archbishops andbishops can be readily illustrated. The English Episcopal Acta project, forwhich volumes for eight of the sixteen dioceses (Canterbury, York, Bathand Wells, Exeter, Hereford, Lincoln, Norwich, and Winchester) havenow appeared - not all are complete - enable us to examine the process ofinfiltration in more detail. A picture is emerging of very considerable va-riation in the dates of adoption of various papal styles, of differences bet-ween dioceses, of advances and of regressions.To take the arenga as an example. In contrast with the continent the

English examples of arenge are rare. In some dioceses it was never em-ployed; in some it appeared unusually early, in others late. Not surpri-singly, an arenga is usual in the documents of Archbishop Theobald of. Canterbury (1138-61), who maintained close contact with the pope, butits use declines at Canterbury between 1161 and 1193, the accession ofHuben Walter. Wtlliam Warelwast, bishop of Exeter (1107-37), who hadundertaken at least eight missions to the papal court and who continued toact for the king at the curia between 1114 and 1120 in the Canterbury andYork dispute, introduced it in his documents.' He also used serous ser-vorum Dei in a foundation charter for Launceston priory," At Lincoln, itwas increasingly used under Bishop Roben Chesney (1148-66), for whomthere are seventy-three examples: there are only fourteen fo.rBishop Alex-ander the Magnificent (1123-48).5 At Bath and Wells it occurs in two do-cuments for Monkton FarIeigh of 1123x35 and 1136x1166.6 It is possiblethat petitioners seeking re-confirmations were responsible for its survivaland continued use in some instances, of which this may be one. The aren-ga is exceptional at Hereford, while at Winchester its use by Bishop Peterdes Roches in 1205-38 has been described as archaic," Immediately onesees the volatile qualities of influence. .

Another interesting borrowing is shown by Dr Julia Barrow.' BishopRoben Foliot of Hereford models an arenga ina document of 1177 on one

: 1 English Episcopal Acta XI (Exeter 1046-1184), ed, F. Barlow, Oxford 1996, p. xxxiii,and no. 15 (?1133x1136) for Crediton minster.. . ' ,4Ibidno.17. ','5 English Episcopal Acta I (Lincoln 1067-1185), ed, D. M. Smith, Oxford 1980, p.lv. '6 English Episcopal Acta X (Bath and Wells 1061-1205), ed, F. M. R. Ramsey, Oxford

1995, nos. 9 and 39.7 English Episcopal Acta IX (Winchester 120S-1238), ed. N. Vincent, Oxford 1994,

p.Ixvii,• English Episcopal Acta VII (Hereford 1079-1234), ed, J. Barrow, Oxford 1993,

pp. Ixxxvii-viü.

The Influence of Papal Documents on English Documents before 1305 163

of Archbishop Richard of Canterbury of 1174x5,9 and there is a close re-lationship between this arenga of Richard and another of his in a charter infavour of the church of Hereford." Both were witnessed by Peter of Bloiswho may have composed the Canterbury arenga. Reginald, the Herefordclerk who drafted Foliot's document, probably accompanied his bishop toWestminster in 1177 and it may have been there that he came across a for-mulary.What is indisputable is that papal privileges and papal mandates were in-

fluential, but at no time and in no place did the imitations come to looklike the fully blown episcopal privileges of Metz, Salzburg, Sens andRheims." It would be tedious to rehearse the evidence diocese by dioceseand episcopate by episcopate, and in any case the excellent survey of Pro-fessor Hageneder on the diplomatic of bishops' documents before 1259,read to our 8th International Congress, makes this unnecessary.P The fol-lowing is, therefore, a brief resume. Features of the hand-writing, enlargedminuscules, tittles and ligatures were copied (3A and 3B), as were the crossand the invocation ("A and 4B). In a few instances subscriptions are found,for instance, to an award made on 6 November 1200 by Bishop Eustace ofEly, Abbot Samson of Bury St Edmunds, and Roger dean of Lincoln,acting as arbiters in the suit between the archbishop of Canterbury and theprior and convent of Christ Church, Canterbury, over building a college atLambeth, where Archbishop Hubert and Prior Geoffrey subscribed theirnames Ego .h., Ego .G., preceded by holograph crosses. Their scribes com-pleted the sentence of acceptance of the arbitration, in which both digni-taries declared that they had accepted (recepz) the arbitration, had sub-scribed, and had confirmed it by the attachment of their seals, Prior Geoff-rey declaring that he had acted on behalf of the convent. Presumably theimportance and the solemnity of the document demanded subscriptions inthis case (plate 5).u Another example is provided by an agreement made in

, Hereford (as n. 8) no. 159; English Episcopal Acta 11(Canterbury 1162-1190), ed. C. R.Cheney and B. E.A. J ones, Oxford 1986, no. 198.

10 Canterbury (as n. 9) no. 136.11 See O. Hageneder, Papsturkunde und Bischofsurkunde (11.-13. jh.) in: Die Diplomatik

der Bischofsurkunde vor 1250. Referate zum VIII. Internationalen Kongreß für Diplomatik,Innsbruck, 27. September - 3. Oktober 1993, plates 2, 6, 7; and o. Guyotjeannin, L'influen-

_ce pontificale sur les actes episcopales fran~ais (Provinces ecclesiastiques de Reims, Sens etRouen, XI'-XII' siecles) in: L'Eglise de France et la Papaure (Xe-XIII' siecles): Die franzö-sische Kirche und das Papsttum (10.-13. Jahrhundert), ed. R.Grosse, Bonn 1993, plates 2-5.

12 O. Hageneder (as n. 11), pp. 39-63.IJ C. R.Cheney, English Bishops' Chanceries (= Publications of the Faculty of Arts of the

University of Manchester 3), Manchester 1950, plate 6; Epistolae Cantuarienses. Chroniclesand Memorials of the reign of Richard I, vol.2, ed, W. Stubbs (= Rolls Series 38), London1865, pp. 512-14, for the text.

164 Jane E. Sayers

1185, on the intervention of King Henry 11,where the Knights Hospital-lers of Jerusalem surrendered to Richard of Ilchester, bishop of Win-chester, the custody of the hospital of St Cross outside the walls of Win-chester. The document was subscribed by the bishop, by the warden(custos) of the Knights Hospitallers, by the prior of the Order in England,and by three of the brothers," In some episcopal chanceries the cursus wasemployed: at Hereford by Gilbert,ls at Lincoln, sometimes, by Hugh.The incipit was taken from papal documents, sometimes with no varia-

tion Iustis petentium desideriis and Quoniam ut ait, sometimes with alittle adjustment, I ustitie ac rationis and Religiosis desideriis assensum usedby Bishop Robert Chesney in 1148x60.t' In confirmations of a generalkind, the phrases concerning the liberality of kings, princes and the Chris-tian faithful, so familiar in papal documents of a similar nature, make theirappearance in documents of Bishop Roben Bloet of Lincoln, c.ll 07x23, ofBishop Henry of Blois of Wmchester, 1139xll43, and of Bishop Alexan-der of Lincoln, c.1143x7Y The phrase ,what is possessed justly now andreasonably in future' (alia omnia que iuste et canonice in presentisrum pos-sident et que futuris temporibus rationabiliter adquirere poterunt) is alsotaken over: it is found at Lincoln in 1107x23, 1150x66, and 1154x66.18

Salutations sometimes include the benedictionem.P Salutem et dei be-nedictionem occurs in two episcopal confirmations for Oseney of sometwenty years apart, 1143x7 and 1163x6, one obviously copying the other.20Archbishop Richard of Canterbury, threatening King Henry 11with ex-communication used spiritum consilii cum salute, composed by Peter ofBlois, foreshadowing the formula employed by Pope Innocent III of spiri-tum consilii sanioris," Influences might come through letter collections,

14 British Library Harley Charter 43 I 38, reproduced in Facsimiles of Royal and oth~rCharters in the British Museum, vol. i,Wtlliam I-Richard I, ed, G. F. Warner and H.]. ElIis,London 1903, plate 43 no. 67, and in J. E. Sayers, The Land of Chirograph, Writ and Seal: onthe absence of graphic symbols in English documents, in: Graphische Symbole in mittelal-terlichen Urkunden. Beiträge zur diplomarischen Semiotik. Historische Hilfswissenschaften3, ed, P. Rück, Sigmaringen 1996, plate 8 p. 544.

IS Hereford (as n. 8) p.lxxüi.16 Hereford (as n. 8) p.lxxxvü, and nos. 344, 198; Lincoln (as n. 5) no. 130.17 Lincoln (as n. 5) nos. 11 (quicquid in presentiarum liberalitate regum, largitione princi-

pum, beneficia [uielium canonice possident aut in futurum deo iuflante rationabilibus modispoterunt adipisci. In quibus dignum dux;mus bee propriis exprimenda flocabulis ...), and 53;Winchester (as n. 1) no. 27.

11 Lincoln (as n. 5) p. xlvü, and nos. 171,257.19 H. E. Salter, Facsimiles of Early Charters in Oxford Muniment Rooms, Oxford 1929,

nos. 62, 63 (c. 1149). ' ,, 20 Lincoln (as n. 5) nos. 53 and 213.

21 Canterbury (as n.9) no. 135.


letter-books and formularies: their effects, of course, were not all in one di-recnon.The dispositio, Eapropter ..., can be found, quite commonly, following

the papal form (plate 6A) .. The sanctions were modelled on those of the papal chancery from the1120s. For Richard I (Beimeis) of London we find reddo inquam etanathematis gladio ... Si quis autem •.• in charters of c. 1127 and 1108x27. 21With Archbishop Theobald the salva clause appeared, ,saving the canoni-cal obedience of the diocesan bishop', (sa[va diocesani episcopi canonicaobediencia).ll Archbishop Richard of Canterbury, confirming documentsof Theobald, used Nulli ergo omnino ••.Pax dei and Si qua igitur, Cunctisautem.24 At Winchester, Henry of Blois employed Quod si quis iniusteattemptaverit dei indignationem nisi resipuerit se nouerit incursurum in adocument datable to 1153x67.2S At Lincoln we find Si quis uero id attemp-tare presumserit indignation em •.. Cunctis ..., and at Hereford, in a charterof 1139x40, Si quis ergo - not followed by a blessing - and in another ofprobably 1202, ••.vel ei ausu temerario contraire. Si quis oero hoc attemp-tare presumpserit indignationem dei ... se nouerit incursurum. 27 .

Examples of the use of the apprecatio show some variation. It is found atLincoln in the 1140s under Bishop Alexander in a charter of his of 1143x7,with anathema (lB), and a single apprecatio is employed under BishopRobert Chesney in 1149 (1C).v At Norwich it occurs several times, on oneoccasion with the variation Fiat,[zat,[l4t for William Turbe (1146x74), andat Bath and Wells.2S At Canterbury, it is scarce, and there is no example ofa triple apprecatio.29

One cannot put too fine a point on the inclusion or omission of thesefeatures because often we are at the mercy not only of time and decay, but.also of copyists for whom the diplomatic niceties were not important. Acharter of Bishop Richard (Fitzneal) of London of 1191 included the Beneoslete but when it was copied into the St Paul's register it was omitted."

lZ Early charters of the cathedral church of St Paul, London, ed. M. Gibbs (= Camden 3rdseries 58), London 1939, nos. 60-1.nA. Saltman, Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, London 1956, no. 304.z, Canterbury (as 0. 9) nos. 142. 176.zsWinchester (as n, 1) no. 63.14 Lincoln (as 0. 5) no. 171; Hereford (as n, 8) nos. 29 and 255.U Lincoln (as 0. 5) no. S3 and Salter (as 0.19) no. 63.11English Episcopal Acu VI (Norwich 1070-1214), ed, C. Harper-Bill, Oxford 1990, nos.

12. 29, and 89; Bath and WeUs (as n. 6) no. 9.n Canterbury (as 0. 9) pp. Ixxii-Ixxiü. 'JO Early charters of _ St Paul, London (as n. 22) no. 74.

166 Jane E. Sayers

Bene ualete was employed by Hugh of Avalon at Lincoln in 1186x94 andin 1189x93, the laner a judge delegate document from a cartulary,"

Papal influence is also to be found on archiepiscopal and episcopal man-dates. The incipit Conquestus est nobis is used by Bishop Henry of Blois ofWinchester (1HOx31 Dec 1143).32A mandate of 1151x1161 of ArchbishopTheobald has all the features (plate 6A): .•. salutem. Questi sunt nobis ...Eapropter ... precipimus quatinus ... Si autem restituere noluerint eosdem aliminibus sancte ecclesie arceatis. Valete. Easier to survey, because of a bet-ter survival, are the administrative acta of Archbishop Hubert WaIterwhich re-create the phrases of the papal mandate to judges delegate with

. consummate ease: significante nobis, conuocatis partibus ... fine debito de-cidatis;" The clauses concerning the witnesses, Testes autem,34 and the ser-vice of the judges, Quod si non omnes, follow exactly the papal pattern."

2. The effects of the judge delegate system)'

The introduction and growth of the judge delegate system had broughtmany ecclesiastics into contact with papal mandates. They thus absorbedpapal phraseology, the phraseology of the adapted Roman civil law proce-dure. Specific mandates of instruction were used at first and in difficultcases. Soon formularies, containing examples of the documents issued ateach stage of the suit, and ordines iudiciarii, procedural treatises, circulatedamongst the judges. Many ecclesiastics - and by the thirteenth century thismeant not only bishops but also abbots and priors, sometimes of quite in-significant houses - became acquainted with what came to be called theRomano-canonical procedure. The term instrumenta publica is found in aletter of English judges delegate of 1173; this is a case of direct absorptionof a Roman term." The intermediary acta of the judges thus conformed tothe terminology of a common system which would have been recogni-zable at the curia. If the judges subdelegated or ordered officers to makecitations, their letters and mandates were, too, in terminology at least

)1 English Episcopal Acta IV (Lincoln 1186-1205), ed. D. M. Smith, Oxford 1986, nos. 76,191.

32 Winchester (as n. 1) no. 47: Gloucester Cathedral Library Deeds x no.4.3) English Episcopal Acta III (Canterbury 1193-1205), ed. C. R. Cheney and E.John, Ox-

ford 1986, no. 407 = Public Record Office SClIl no. 18.34 Ibid. nos. 409, 418 = plate 6B, 649, and 654.)5 Ibid. nos. 409, 524.36 See J. Sayers, The Records of the Courts of Judges Delegate in England, in: The Records

of the Medieval Ecclesiastical Courts, pt üEngland. 00. C. DonahueJr (= Comparative Stu-dies in Continental and Anglo-American Legal History 8, Berlin 1994).

37 Durham, Dean and Chapter Archives MC 6587, printed in Historiae DunelmensisScriptores Tres, ed.]. Raine (= Surtees Society 9), Durham 1839, pp.lii-liv.


dose to papal models. Another legacy of the system was the recitation ofthe full document. This feature of the judge delegate charter had an influ-ence on the inspeximus. Important, too, is the move towards dating judi-cial acta which had some influence on the dating of episcopal awards in the1160s and 1170s under Bishop Bartholomew," His successor, John theChanter (1186-1191), was loath to date, perhaps, suggests Professor Bar-low, because he was never a judge delegate." '. But the fmal acta were frequendy in the native chirograph form in Eng-

Iand" (plate 7A), and were never notarial," Through the judge delegatesystem many Roman law concepts about judicial documents and the judi-cial process entered the ecclesiastical courts but they did not immediatelyget much further (7B). Striking examples of the influence of the language-of judges delegate are provided in the documents issued by the prior andchapter of Canterbury exercising jurisdiction in the early 1240s, when thearchbishopric was vacant (SA and SC). On the other hand, the look of thecharters themselves is very ,English', and one (8B), issued by the abbot ofCornbe, is undated. The subject of monastic chanceries badly needs inve-stigation. From a brief search my suspicion is that in most instances un-connected with judges delegate the use of papal models was rare.

3. The despatch of legates

Documentary influence might be expected to have come from the papalcuria via the legates. ,Papal' incipits and phrases are common among le-gatine documents throughout Europe, Iustis petentium desideriis, forexample, used by Guala and Konrad of Urach. 42 However, what a legatine

JIA.Morey, Banholomew of Exeter, bishop and canonise, Cambridge 1937, nos. 104, 140,142."See Exeter (as n. 3) p.xcv, where Professor Barlow examines the fluctuations of Exeter

dating. ' . _. . .40 Harald Müller reports the same for Normandy - thesis to be published.41 Further examples are provided inM. Cheney, Roger, Bishop of Worcester 1164-1179,

Oxford 1980, pp. 293-5 no. 60 and plate I (a dated chirograph); and Luffield Priory Char-ters, ed, G. R. Elvey (= Bucks. Record Society, 15 and 18; Northants Record Society, 22 and26),1968 and 1975, no. 31. ,

42 SeeF. Neininger, Konrad von Urach (t 1227). Zähringer, Zisterzienser, Kardinallegat(= Quellen und Forschungen aus dem Gebiet der Geschichte, Neue Folge, Heft 17), Pader-born 1994, and The Letten and Charters of Cardinal Guala Bicchieri, ed. N. Vincent (=Can-terbury and York Society 83), Woodbridge 1996. See also S.Weiß, Die Urkunden der päpst-lichen Legaten von Leo IX. bis Codestin Ill. (1049-1198) (= Forschungen zur Kaiser- undPapstgeschichte des Mittelalters no.13), Böhlau: Köln, Weimar, Wien, 1995, for some earliercomparative examples: 313-16 Oohn of Salemo), and 320 (Pandulf), where in no. 1, in a do-cument for the cathedral ofVolterra, Pandulf uses an imperial notary.

168 Jane E. Saycrs

document might look like depended very much on whether the draftsmenand scribes were English or Italian, and on the particular circumstances ofthe issue and on the type of document required. Mandates of legateslooked like papal mandates and legatine confirmations and privileges werelikely to follow papal forms. Originallegatine charters are scarce beforethe thirteenth century. As far as one can say, given the limitations of pre-sent research, influence from this source appears to be non-existent.John of Salemo's document for the abbot and convent of Westminster of

1201 is entirely modelled on a papal indult but the hand does not look likea papal one (plate 9A).43It is difficult to see much papal influence in thedocument of Nicholas bishop of Tusculum of 20 June 1214 (lOB), settlinga dispute. On the other hand. an indulgence for those visiting and contri-buting to a priory, has distinctly papal echoes in the rogamus, monemus ethortamus and in the final clause of relaxation (lOA).

A document of the legate Guala (1216-18) appears to be in an Englishhand (plate 9B).-«The dating clause reflects the style of the papal chancery.An original of the legate, which was printed by H. G. Richardson, showshim using the same tide and greeting and dating style.4s As a mandate, itreproduces the language of the papal mandate Quocirca 'Vobis ... manda-mus quatinus ....

There is some evidence that the legates brought trained scribes withthem. Pandulf (1218-21) enjoyed the services apparently of the erstwhilepapal scribe, master Iacobus, although I know of no document written byhim, and English scribes undoubtedly wrote many of his letters.4€.An ex-ception may be plate 11e, which, if not in a ,papal' hand, absorbs thestyle and form very convincingly. Pandulf was also bishop-elect and thenbishop of Norwich so we have here an interesting amalgam of roles. Two,hybrid' letters, one issued as bishop-elect and legate (from London), theother as bishop (from Rieti), illustrate their confused ancestry. The addressand the witnessing clause of both are undoubtedly ,English' but some ofthe letter forms and the dating clause show papal influence (plate llA and11B). Although Italian clerks came to England with the legate Otto (1237-

4' Westminste~ Abbey Muniments 12733. He was actually legate to Ireland and Scotland,but he passed through England, and certain petitions were made to him; see Councils andSynods,1.2, ed, D. Whitelock, M. Brett and C.N. L Brocke, Oxford 1981, pp. 1074-5.

44 Westminster Abbey Muniments 51111: Vincent (as n. 41) no. 129.45 Guildhall Library, London, Dean and Chapter of St Paul's Archives, A 25/1751: printed

by H. G. Richardson, Letters of the Legate Guala, in: EHR 48 (1933), pp. 250-9 no. 2, andVincent (as n. 41) no. 54.

46 See J. E. Sayers, Papal Government and England during the Pontificate of Honorius III(1216-1227), Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought 3rd ser, 21, Cambridge 1984,pp. 42-3.


41), English scribes continued to be used by the legate. English scribesfound employment, too, under the legate Ottobuono (1265-8), althoughhe had an Italian chancellor, master Ardicio de Comite, There is an originalmandate of the legate which is cast totally according to the forms andstyle of the papal chancery, although the hand is English, and the scribegives his name following the style of the papal Chancery on the rightplica, H. de Cicest' (H. of Chichester)." Ottobuono's originallegatinecharters have not so far been investigated, but letters that were used for aformula have been published, 48 and two of his letters, again not originals,but including the legate's tide, names of the addressee(s), greeting anddating clause, which may fairly be compared with Westminster AbbeyMuniments 12376, show considerable papal influence."

4. The introduction of notaries'?

No examples of notarial documents are known for the legate, Ono," anduntil the 1250s notaries were unknown in any circles in England. This inpart explains the very superficial and piecemeal borrowing in the Englishepiscopal chanceries. By the mid-thirteenth century, however, notariesbegan to be employed by the royal court, often for marriage ar-rangements with foreign royal houses. Notaries also came in the companyof Italian bankers and papal tax-gatherers in the 1260s and were used onbusiness concerning benefices and papal taxes in the late 1270s. It is pos-sible that Ottobuono had some influence in the introduction of notaries.Notaries were employed in his courts and a notary used in 1266 was pro-bably an Englishman. After 1279 notaries began to appear in episcopalchanceries and to be native born. This was, in part at least, due to the in-fluence of the Italian notary, John of Bologna, who accompanied Arch-bishop John Pecham - resident for some while at the curia - to England,on his appointment to the see of Canterbury in 1279. The notion that do-cumentary practices should be standardized and uniform was expressed inJohn of Bologna's Summa which opens with the words ,As the Roman

41 King's College, Cambridge, WOW 1400: Dr Zutshi kindly drew my attention to this do-cument... R.Graham, Letters of Cardinal Onoboni, in: EHR 15 (1900), pp. 87-120 ... R.Graham, Cardinal Onoboni and the Monastery of Stratford Langthorne, in: EHR 33

(1918), pp. 215-16, 217-18; see also Alan Lewis, The English Activities of Cardinal Ono-buono, Manchester dissertation 1937.

50 In general on notaries, see C. R. Cheney, Notaries Public in England, Oxford 1972,chapters 2 and 3. .

51 D. Williamson, Some aspects of the legation of Cardinal Otto in England, 1237-:41, in:EHRM (1949),pp.158-9.

170 Jane E. Sayers

Church is the mother and mistress of all churches, so each church shouldcopy its usages'.S2 Precision was required in legal documents (as outlinedin the Summa) and particularly in matters concerning benefices.P English-men, who had been at Rome on business as petitioners or proctors, read-ily recognized the desirability of copying curial practices and notarialmodels, if they were to succeed in their business and suits, whether it con-cerned benefices and provisions or letters of proxy, bonds and receipts.

Archbishop Pecham had faculties from the pope to create three notariespublic in 1279 and another two in 1292. Some English notaries, such as Jo-hannes Alani de Beccles, had been engaged on business at the curia beforePecham's appointment and no doubt helped now to bring about a changeto greater uniformity in ecclesiastical circles. It was thus some measure ofpersonal influence through the archbishop and his notary, coming at atime when there was a willingness and desire to produce the most effectivedocuments, that encouraged ecclesiastics, the episcopal hierarchy and thegreater religious houses, to employ notaries.

5. The possible influence on royal documents •.

The diploma, which in any case fell rather short of the elaborate continen-tal model, with its rota, beehive etc., had largely died out by the earlytwelfth century. It lasted slightly longer where ecclesiastical matters wereconcerned. Two late examples are the foundation charter of King Henry Ifor the see of Ely of 1109,S4and a charter, again in diploma form, of KingStephen of 1136 (Apr.-21 Nov.) for Exeter (plate 12A). Monastic founds-tion charters were likely to be based on the model of a papal privilege, buthere the influence was probably much stronger when the house had fo-reign connections, as did the Cluniac house of Lewes, for which there sur-vives a diploma of Wllliam de Warenne of c.1078-82 (plate 12B). Featuresof papal documents began to be re-created in English royal charters usual-ly when ecclesiastics were the recipients, in particular where they wereNorman and probably where the scribes were supplied by the petitioners.Under King Henry II we find examples of enlarged minuscules (plate13A), tittles, and what are very close to ligatures (plates 13B and 13C) in

52 Briefsteller und formelbücher des eilften bis vierzehnten jahrhunderts, ed. L.Rockinger,no. xii, in: Quellen zur Bayerischen und Deutschen Geschichte 9 (2), Munich 1864, repd.New York 1961, pp. 593-712.

53 Cf. chapter 10, De intrusis, of the Council of London, which was held by the legate Ot-tobuono in 1268: Councils and Synods, 2.2, ed, F. M. Powicke and C. R. Cheney, Oxford1964,pp.759-61.

54 British Library, Harley Charter 43 C 11.


royal charters. Until the majority of royal charters were written by royalscribes, however, there was much variation in practice. The papal influen-ces are undeniably there, but they are few and exceptional, and usually su-perficial. ', It was not until the reign of Henry Il's son, Richard I, that somethingapproaching the diploma re-appeared. It was now distinctly comparablewith the papal privilege in some of its external features, especially in theDat. per manum clause. This particular dating clause was used by RichardI before his coronation and its adoption has been associated with WilliamLongchamps, Richard I's chancellor when he was count of Poitou. Long-champs was royal chancellor and bishop of Ely from 1189, and later to belegate in 1190-91 {plate 14A and B).55From the royal chancery, the Dat.per manum dating clause spread to episcopal chanceries.

(The per manum clause with the place date was used by a scribe of Hen-ry 11,Step hen of Fougeres, Testibus •..per manum Stephani capellani apudW'destoc'. This was seen by Galbraith" as an individual quirk, and a pos-sible reaction to the strictures of a conservative chancery which was not tobe influenced by a prevailing fashion.)'Longchamps' charters, which he issued as chancellor, bishop, and le-

gate, need serious and detailed attention which this paper cannot give. Twodocuments of his (plates 15A and B) must suffice to show the various in-fluences. The first with its precipimus vobis quod ... is like a royal writ: itterminates with the clause Teste me ipso and is sealed on a tongue: the se-cond is like a solemn episcopal charter, recording a settlement, with its ge-neral address Omnibus sancte matris ecclesie filiis and the greeting salutemin auetote salutis. It ends with the date, Dat. Cantebrege xi leal. Maii.

By the thirteenth century, although some of the influences were stillpretty cosmetic, for example, tall ascenders in the first line of charters ofHenry 111,57there was much closer and more meaningful contact andexchange between the papal and the English royal chancery. Henry III hadproctors, some English, some Italian, who carried out his business at thecuria, men familiar with the practices of both courts. We have already re-ferred to the papal nuncios, tax-gatherers, clerks of the Chamber and thelegates, coming into England with increasing frequency. Common areas of

ssNo. 14B is printed in: Ancient charters. royal and private, priorto A. D. 1200, ed.J. H.Round (= Pipe Roll Society Publications 10), London 1888, no. 55. For further fine exam-ples, with the king's name and the regnal year in capitals, and the dat. per manum of WilliamLongchamps, see Westminster Abbey Muniments 657 and 659. ' , ,,' .',,,56 V. H. Galbraith, Seven charters of Henry 11at Lincoln cathedral, in: Antiquaries' Jour-nall2, 1932, pp. 274, 278.

57 P. Chaplais. English royal documents, King John - Henry VI, 1199-1461, Oxford 1971,plate4.

172 Jane E. $ayers

business, especially concerning benefices, account for the adoption ofphrases in royal documents. The non obstante clause is first found em-ployed under John in 1205 and then again in 1206. Both instances concernecclesiastical benefices - the grant of a rent to Peter des Roches, notwith-standing any mandate or other letters to the contrary, and the presentationof a royal clerk, Master Henry of Hereford, notwithstanding the presenta-tion of another clerk." Geoffrey Barraclough, in an important article in1954, showed that phrases which permeated benefice business in the mid-thirteenth century were taken from the papal chancery," These were thephrases which the clerks read in papal letters and came to introduce intothe English royal chancery. Now, indeed, they come to use the papal terms,mandate', ,mandate of provision' and ,grace' for the English ,writ', lettersand ,letters patent'. Barraclough concluded that ,it seems certain that pro-visions were the door through which, more generally, the forms and styleof the papal chancery made their way into England'. More correctly itmight be said that these forms and terminology affected the royal chancerymuch as the forms of papal mandates to judges delegate had influenced thebishops' chanceries fifty years previously. Indeed, the quod si non omnesclause, found also in benefice documents, was one familiar to all papal jud-ges delegate.

6. Finally I come to what I have called parallel developments

The similarity between the English writ and the papal mandate has alreadyreceived some cornment.f The writ was at the heart of English admini-stration, as essential to royal government and the common law as indeedwas the papal mandate to the judge-delegate system. All chanceries hadtheir mandata, but in none did they assume such importance as in theEnglish royal chancery. This is because the writ form brought about thedevelopment of the writ-charter, while at the same time maintaining itsoriginal purpose as a mandate and becoming a keystone - in the shape ofthe judicial writ - of the developing Common law. It is thus distinctlycomparable to the papal judicial mandate, but there is no evidence that one

S8 Rotuli chartarum 1199-1216, ed. T. D. Hardy, London 1837, p. 57 col. 1, and Rotulilitterarum patentium 1201-16, ed. T. D. Hardy, London 1835, p. 62.

S9 G. Barraclough, The English royal chancery and the papal chancery in the reign of Hen-ry Ill, in: MIÖG 62, 1954, pp. 365-78.

60 W. J. La Due wrote a thesis on the subject from which an excerpt was published: Papalrescripts of justice and English royal procedural writs 1150-1250. A comparative study(Pontificia Universitas Lateranensis, Institutum Utriusque Iuris no. 155: Rome, 1960), but itis not a full investigation.


affected the other. They were rather parallel developments with no realsigns of reciprocity.

The same may be said of registration. While scribes would have been fa-miliar with original papal privileges, mandates, letters of grace and ofjustice, they would not have seen the registers and rolls of other administra-tions. Registration commences in the English royal chancery in 1199,although fmancial records had been enrolled in the Exchequer from atleast 1131 - and the Cartae Antiquae rolls of the Exchequer exist from thereign of King Richard I. Various scholars have endeavoured to traceEnglish chancery registration to papal influences and to connect the equal-ly momentous beginnings of registration in episcopal chanceries to theFourth Lateran Council. A detailed comparison between thirteenth cen-tury papal registers and thirteenth century English royal rolls shows nodirect borrowing in the method. The royal charter rolls commence int t 99, patent rolls in 1200, and close rolls in 1203. The distinction betweenpatent and close rolls is according to the sealing - whether the letter wassent open or sealed to close, being dependent on its purpose. It is a diffe-rent and earlier distinction than that between common and curial letters inthe papal registers. It is also apparent that the enrolment on the close andthe patent rolls (as opposed to the charter rolls) does not proceed from theactions of the recipients. The charter rolls, on the other hand, do, and likethe papal registers, consist of full transcripts (plate 16A), while the patent(plate 16B) and close rolls are entirely in shortened form.

Bishops registers, which start in England with the rolls of the bishop ofLincoln (Hugh of Wells, 1209-35), are more easily compared, as adminis-trative records, with the royal records than with the papal registers (for anexample of a papal register, Gregory X's, see plate 17A). For Hugh ofWells there were originally from 1214 two classes of registration record (1)charter rolls and (2) rolls of institutions. The charter rolls consist of out-going letters, in full except for familiar and set phrases and thus similar toroyal charter rolls, and to papal registers to some degree, while the institu-tion rolls are summaries of administrative acts, quite unlike anything to befound in the papal registers and with only slight similarities with the closerolls," Both the bishop of Lincoln, Hugh of Wells, and the archbishop ofYork, Walter de Gray, for whom there are also early rolls, had been in theroyal chancery under Archbishop Hubert Walter of Canterbury and theinnovation of registration, it has been argued, is likely to be due to that ex-

6. See D. Smith. The rolls of Hugh of Wells. bishop of Lincoln 1209-35, in: Bulletin of theInstitute of Historical Research 45 (1972). pp. 155-195. I have, however, differed from Pro-fessor Smith in seeing more influence or similarity between episcopal and royal registrationin the latter class. .

174 Jane E. Sayers

perience. Hugh of Wells' rolls pre-date the Fourth Lateran Council and soinfluence from that source is impossible. But perhaps no such steps to ad-ministrative improvement would have been made without the interdictimposed by the pope on England from 1208-1213 which resulted in acomplete breakdown in the administration of the dioceses. No registersurvives for the premier province and diocese until Archbishop Pecham in1279 (plate 17B). It is close in style to other contemporary episcopal re-gisters, is in book form, and shows no signs of notarial influence, althoughthe archbishop's registrar, Johannes Alani de Beccles, was a notary in thecourt of Canterbury in 1271, and, as has been pointed out, the archbishopbrought John of Bologna with him to England."

Canterbury rolls or registers may have existed from earlier. We simplydo not know. The problem highlights again the difficulties of arguing frominadequate evidence in such a fluid and elusive subject as influence.To sum up: need and usefulness always conditioned the drafting and ef-

fectiveness of documents. The documents that were produced came out ofthe needs of the administration, the phraseology being at the heart of theact. The real influences are to be seen in the legal/business spheres in thephraseology which was introduced through the judge delegate systemfrom the late twelfth century onwards and through the benefice businessof the mid to late thirteenth century. Channels of contact between govern-ments and administrations opened up clearly in these areas. Though theother influences may seem of a more superficial kind and were to some ex-tent antiquarian, they were ,the outward and visible sign' of the purpose ofthe document, re-enforcing authority and giving some sense of uniformi-ty to the type of document. Native traditions survived and some influen-ces were probably very transitory, yet there was a common European ex-perience in which the Papal chancery played a key part."

References to the Plates

1. A Salter (as n. 19) no. 69B Salter (as n. 19) no. 70C Salter (as n. 19) no. 63D BL (as n. 14) 28 pl, xvüi

62 D. L.Douie, Archbishop John Pecharn, Oxford 1952, p. 60.63 In 1997, since this paper was written, two further volumes of English Episcopal Acta we-

re published: XIII (Worcester 1218-(8), ed. P.M. Hoskin, and XIV (Coventry and Lichfield1072-1159), ed. M. J. Franklin.


2. A English Episcopal Acta V (York 1070-1154), ed.J. E. Burton, Ox-ford 1988, pl, 1 no. 19

B Bath and Wells (as n. 6) pl. iv no. 255C Norwich (as n. 28) pI. iino. 79

3. A Exeter (as n. 3) pl. vi no. 219B Canterbury (as n. 9) pl. vii

4. A Norwich (as n. 28) pl, i no. 43B Salter (as n. 19) no. 5

5. Cheney (as n. 13) pl. vi6. A Salter (as n. 19) no. 72

B Canterbury, D(ean) and C(hapter), Christ Church Letters ii no.231

7. A Wmchester (as n. 1) pl. iü no. 204B Canterbury, D. and C., Chartae Antiquae H 120

8. A Canterbury, D. and C., S(ede) V(acante) (Scrap)b(oo)k II 204B Canterbury, D. and C., Christ Church Letters ii no. 230C Canterbury, D. and C., SV bk II 201

9. A W(estminster) A{bbey) M(uniments) 12733 (john of Salerno)B WAM 51111 (Guala)

10. A WAM3779B Bodleian Library, Oxford University Archives WP/P/xii/l

(Nicholas of Tusculum)11. A P(ublic) R(ecord) O(ffice) E40/14104 (Pandulf)

B PRO E 327/533C Cumbria Record Office, Carlisle, D/MH/4

12. A Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum iv 1066-1154, ed. H. A.Cronne and R.H. C. Davis, Oxford 1969, pl. xlii

B Early Yorkshire Charters, ed. C. T. Clay, viii pl. 1 no.213. A Salter (as n. 19) no. 29

B BL (as n. 14) 54 pI. xxxvC T. A. M. Bishop, Scriptores Regis, Oxford 1961, pl. xxxi (b)

14. A BL (as n. 14) 70 pl, xlvB Bishop (as n. 13 C) pl. xxxvü (b)

15. A Guildhall Library, London, St Paul's MS 25, 122/770; printed:Early charters (as n. 22) no. 75 p. 54

B PRODL27/316. A Charter Roll18 Edward Im. 2 (Oct. 1290)

B Patent Ro1l4 John m. 7 (Nov.-Dec. 1202)17. A Register of Pope Gregory X, Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Reg. Vat.

37, fol. 115B Register of Archbishop Pecham, Lambeth Palace Library, fol. 48

176 Jane E. Sayers

1 a


1 b

178 Jane E. Sayers

R.ld _oi L...l...;f.[ (I' L\.;;U..J IJ.rr~u.l..; ,~'i"" to. ,_. (<torfl"Q) ,1, wmot1l-n~' ..g:CIO. fnl) fcaaomb: ~uafa\~r Inq'mlcmi ~tlll(1'1: .}\1lIil __ NIIi

;~ii ybn' l[ftlfq-. QUOtt~~ ~ffimO'J.~1DJJ..~.mn01lIC(71..:..i~t _'n l~eul.-

~{ ~LmDt\\ . ),\UU\cntt\.~': ~'1ff- f~ ,nf~ dano~,i Cl'I\~rn'O\mtlf

im~fuo In q ~Iumomanap';"tl'lfwo. etttl~ G~t19Ut ftm ~ In cajlJlo Qtmf'f,f mtatuT'\ 'lpolfdhontlr.:j cü om,b, 1\ WlJt udii uuna,J,.fClr. mo.AIIL id<nnll( i/'./ +-1\l~n\b;. itri i ~~f.irnf:i f"fouf. ib.{io. i"YI<l1~~ onl\~.ll,if ,~:.hi·\'l1ilb:~Qll)aald,. ~tmtlb;'~f c~ ((([I~S(", Gi"''':-''' kl(nut' In-;X1'.t liic$oo;. ~ td h,"\aut'\~ eel"alOl\.f Uu d~~~~I (If ,11}~unt fo~rlhl'\lJ, ,·,f ~ r«"df~'i ft~tt',ucnit 111~m .f.tiitJbum: Inu~lr"~('!lI1\I\l\ .h;n tam \,(tl cJ~\t Oft'1l.he at ~\'Je 1flir t.(t\~(I~ llhII'i'tt

~r{ l\~~1tUi \~ t.l ~ttt tcdt~ ~~ GCOt_~tt \c\",\fr.rtttant n,\un ~Jymom.le r-~ «""IQ. r+fui .U\~ ~1bra\1..Jta.:. JIlO~. hu~5ttft eott\ba.m{~ ~(~ ~ ~~. (on~ luti b~\al~(';i;.~:·1.~ f ti. _"

1 c


'Ii'.. I.... ~---1 cl

2a

180 Jane E. Sayers

2b

2e

3 a


3b

4 a follows on the next page

4b

182 Jane E. Sayers

4a


5

184 Jane E. Sayers

6a


6b

7a

186 Jane E. Sayers

7b

8 a

8b


8c

9a

10 a


10 b

190 Jane E. Sayers

~'::"f'iJ"'f"~ ""n5 "~~""'5r~~j·'!~~t> 'l":~'<'.'';-;-d~'5'),.;"~r..'.,..,M ,., .. 'i··"Frt. f~s' ~ ..s'.~..tr."~,·.._.11~, ... """"1'~\Im. ",~ If " '1-.-, ':-.lrc= fl,,, -&..~~'tL-...0;-;;.:::-1:t:;-,o ~" .. ,~~t1-.f.'~" ....\\",:;;- \"';:-.n~,,, .,.17i~~-F':"'ln'~;- .-n-tn." ..1.\ r',~)jt;.\ ,e=- ~,n,I'JT"-.'I~'\.I :,., ,·rt 'l~.rvJn.1tI"~~)"l.~~ r"\·";,J.. '~7~'~\','.n-"üm.~"~\A~f'-"s .rc:t-": f'n ....').:or,i··..... ,.,'.;_rltn".~t.J. C\,t1.'" ......"~lh"..'Jr 1'''''''''''''''fdll'_<; '" .."Ii1~~q-I'~I,nuM"~,. ;..,t",...~.~c-nt-t'':-.!!p'ttr\n\:'<'ltl n.:..' ....+....'U~_J.,Tr<"1''':''\,.m:" "''''.jLC"f'lI .. ßg-t;.tttlS f'~'-"'.N':'" <'C'''~~'' •D.-\r\".~7.'\, ,Y<ntt;-~~,nf~.,'h.--;-; ..~ö':.if:"" .1""0 Q.l. .... ,,~.

lla

..)·_-u··~~. ~~.... . "~ . .!i:.

llb


11 c

192 Jane E. Sayers


12 b

13 a

194 Jane E. Sayers

13b

13c


14 a

196 Jane E. Sayers

14 b

15 a

,../

I


~~'"~ \Jt.1Tr.( ~~r Nil". q"~ 1·ltihJrfn~ll!C11tnlC'Mr,r\:""OtI.r.t qi~ ~.\~,....oM' ~,:~11~'t'Juo.:l\,n," .it~, . In "'~ ...""'It,!~J~\.nll~r ~,.,Mi \~1~ .r'~Il"C mtm~lIn{iÄ IIf \~'!.. \1~ ~ \c JoUII' -: }'W~tt'llr~r'!J to ~ tb r:'t:. lIt'll ':'llutm> ,,\raSu cl1,"~I' ~ h'l\!l &"l\mü l'\I'U" pu ~ ~_ ta\'T!'I'm:\ ~,I" 'x ~\I\' 'n..,~ \'I!.=~'" qll"'l'M ~:l':'lt-~r ~ ft1Ubsn~ln""~ ~,,\t'Iltr.U'" ,,''Dtfctm3 ni"J t~I{I'(.~n;t)1\, t;t:, 'It-e\.m- ~ ~"\-1. ~ lc~~._ ~ (\I~ "",\n, ~Jt('~ \~ ''-l''tlltt\ ., (, In :m;,\,I'Ifruttnnd',..,. ttn\~4_., • i • l ",.,

~ r."",\11UUI 'to,.StIlGI .\nbm"ti f~rh ~li~ r-;.'x ~~"' ~\\...;fll~''r'~; ,~"l' ,-<bltl"\;'[".·~ \.11t,~U\~ a~' t&,~ttr. t.;:- 't l'l'\.cat""It ~ v.n\N~',r. t"'l(" ~,~t.ttI ~\C'I\; ~~:' ,"cl t\td:l",t ": lIo\lInttt'ri 1ft 1\hli~\~r\tN ".\~,\t"',M'x ~M.~~:ut·,\,;'.\\"" \~~ 'l< w-nt1A te-tu"~, \....,.~Ia-~ ~r ":''ü-m:m" .;ft' .m '\nu' '~ttontI"~ ,,",\.et?' tar.': "';ne: I~"~¥ CN.,\ ~ .\thl. .ct-'Aru - n u\"ü'~ ~'~.~\\'';'' '1dnnl'\1tßltl ~,;~ ~..rn.~D"

,\, :.;tdt'\.',"~. ~nr' ".'n~~.~.& ".J.l~'tI:"I'" t..~1'!I~ .~·t.~~A~ \pt""htfl' (\\.l,;1~ ~'I~A-U' ' ~\.l_cr.ihI- {lq~r. '.\i.~,,,,l1I~tU~,

.. ~ ),.\tTt' \'l'I~ .,_;,1\ \"'I.cf. ,,;)\;.,.,_",·",~n .~ 'lrr -~\l" .~~~ \'~u,

. n:'M·~[~.~hr~IIt;: .. \l-t IN"I~~'~\~''~'~#~'~~ m\tmfa\u ' ~.~ \1l~Cli" ',' \. l:\ . ~\t .~

15 b

..

198 Jane E. Sayers

16 a

16 b

..,.".P-~),_:;~ . .:. r-"

'..~

17 a


17 b

Date post:	07-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times