No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 June 2012
In the general confusion of the Middle Ages, one class of the people, the burghers or inhabitants of cities and fortified towns, alone succeeded in preserving something approaching to real independence. This independence was not, as it has become a sort of maxim in law to believe, a boon granted from the Crown by the Norman monarchs, but it was a right arising out of uninterrupted possession from a period of remote antiquity. It is by a comparison with what happened on the continent of Europe that we can best understand the manner in which such independence was preserved in our own island. An eminent French antiquary, M. Raynouard, has clearly proved that the Roman municipia (or civic corporations) in Gaul survived the invasions of tlie Barbarians, and he has traced them through various modifications in name and form, though they remained the same in spirit, under the different races of the Frankish monarchs. The more extensive researches which have since been made, under the directions of MM. Guizot and Augustin Thierry, fully confirm the opinions of Raynouard on this subject. There can be little doubt that this was equally the case in Britain, where the circumstances were precisely the same. When the Barbarians began to settle in the Roman provinces, the fortified towns, often obstinately defended, opposed the greatest difficulty to the invaders.
page 299 note a A more detailed account of the Roman municipal constitution and laws will be found in Raynouard's Histoire du Droit Municipal en France.
page 300 note b It may be observed that the destruction of Roman towns is rarely mentioned in our earlier historians. The Saxon Chronicle speaks of the entire destruction of Andredescester in 491 as though it were a remarkable occurrence.
page 301 note c Hanc prænominatam terram quidam homo bonus nomine Aldhun, qui in hac regali villa inlustris civitatis præfectus fuit, pro intuitu internæ mercedis fratribus nostris ad mensam tradidit. Kemble's Codex Diplomaticus Anglo-Saxonum, vol. i. p. 231.
page 301 note d Quam gens Anglorum a primario quondam illius, qui dicebatur Hrof, Hrofescestir cognominat. Bede, Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 3. In another place, lib. ii. c. 6, Bede calls the city, in Latin, civitas Hrofi.
page 301 note e Osborn's Life of Dunstan, in the Act. SS. Benedict. Sæc. V. p. 683. W. Malmsb. de Gest. Reg. p. 63. (Ed. Savile.)
page 301 note f Ða hi Þider comon, Þa woldon hi innian hi Þær heom sylfan ge-licode. Sax. Chron. From the circumstance of their arming before they came to the town, we might be led to suspect that Eustache and his men had had a previous dispute with the townsmen of Dover on this subject, perhaps when they first came to England.
page 302 note g The above version of the story is taken from the Saxon Chronicle as printed in the text and in the notes of the Collection of Historians edited by order of the Record Commission (but not yet published), which appears to be the best authority. The subsequent historians have confounded the two riots, and made only one. See Florence of Worcester, sub an. 1051; W. Malmsb. de Gest. Reg. p. 81, &c.
page 302 note h Burgenses dederunt xx. naves regi una vice in anno ad xv. dies; et in unaquaque navi erant homines xx. et unus. Hoc faciebant pro eo quod eis perdonaverat sacam et socam.
page 303 note i Saxon Chron. sub an.
page 303 note k Saxon Chron. Florence of Worcester.
page 303 note l Illos [Cornewallenses] quoque impigre adorsus, ab Excestra, quam ad id temporis æquo cum Angis jure inhabitarant, cedere compulit. W. Malmsb. de Gest. Reg. p. 50.
page 304 note m See the Saxon Chron, sub an. 457.
page 304 note n Bede, Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 3.
page 304 note o Et ipsa multorum emporium populorum terra marique venientium. Bede, ib.
page 304 note p Bede, Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 4.
page 305 note q Bede, Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. c. 7, and lib. iv. cc. 6, 12, 22.
page 305 note r Thorpe's Anglo-Saxon Laws, p. 14. Some antiquaries have supposed, very erroneously, that Lundenwic is here another name for Sandwich.
page 306 note s Judicia civitatis Lundonias, viii. § 2, 3. Thorpe, p. 100.
page 306 note t Et dicebant cives Lundonienses fuisse quietos de theloneo in omni foro, et semper et ubique, per totam Aagliam, a tempore quo Roma primo fundata fuit, et civitatem Lundoniæ eodem tempore fundatam. Josceline de Brakelonde, p. 56.
page 307 note u Compare W. Malmsb. de Gest. Reg. Angl. p. 69, with the Saxon Chronicle.
page 307 note x Saxon Chronicle.
page 307 note y Mandans omnibus familiæ suæ militibus, quos lingua Danorum huscarles vocant, ut alii eorum per extremas civitatis portas seditiones concitent, alii pontem et ripas fluminis armati obsideant, ne exeuntes eos cum corpore sancti Lundanus populus præpedire valeat.
page 308 note z Timebat namque civium interruptiones.
page 308 note a Translatio S. Elphegi, by Osborne, ap. Act. SS. Ordinis Benedict, sæc. VI. part i. pp. 124–126. Osborne received his account from people who were present, see p. 125.
page 309 note b An interesting account of this affair is given among the miracles of St. Edmund, MS. Cotton. Tiber. B. II. fol. 25 and 26. See also W. Malmsb. De Gest. Reg. p. 71.