Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T23:03:24.301Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Canterbury Proctors at the Court of ‘Audientia Litterarum Contradictarum’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Jane Sayers
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Little is known of the early history of the court of audientia litterarum contradictarum. Professor Barraclough has suggested that its origins must be sought in the 1150's and 1160's, when under the popes Eugenius III and Alexander III there was considerable development of judicial procedure by rescript. To begin a suit before papal judges, the plaintiff or his proctor produced a letter to the pope announcing the petition, stating the ‘libellus’ or charge, and beseeching him for the cause to be heard at Rome, or, more frequently, for a mandate to judges delegate. It is likely that the plaintiff would have informed the charged party of his action, and that by this time the defendant's proctor, too, would have been instructed in the matter and would be ready to appear at the papal court.

Type
Articles
Information
Traditio , Volume 22 , 1966 , pp. 311 - 345
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Barraclough, G., ‘Audientia Litterarum Contradictarum,’ DDC 1 (1935) 1387, and R. von Heckel, ‘Das Aufkommen der ständigen Prokuratoren an der päpstlichen Kurie,’ Miscellanea Fr. Ehrle II (Studi e Testi 38; Rome 1924) 291–4. — I wish to thank Professor Kuttner for generous help in the preparation of this article.Google Scholar

2 See e. g. Historical Manuscripts Commission [= HMC] Report on the MSS. of Wells Cathedral (London 1885) 1, 59 (Liber Albus I, fols. 2v, 95r and 96r). The dean and chapter wanted their case to be heard, if possible, by the pope. In the event of this being refused, they mention judges in England and France who would be acceptable to them. Google Scholar

3 Chew, H. M. ed., Hemingby's Register (Wilts. Arch. and Nat. Hist. Soc. Records Branch 18; Devizes 1962) 99 no. 132 (dated 19 Sept. 1333).Google Scholar

4 Canterbury, Dean and Chapter Archives, Cartae Antiquae C 47 (see p. 324 infra). (Appendix, document VI). Google Scholar

5 Barnwell Register, Harley, B. M. MS 3601, fol. 78r (1266–97), printed in Willis, J. Clark, ed., Liber Memorandorum Ecclesie de Bernewelle (Cambridge 1907) 205–6.Google Scholar

6 In one form, Thomas, prior of Christ Church (also called P. and H. elsewhere), appoints and authorizes Master P. de Bononia. Google Scholar

7 John of Bologna in Ludwig Rockinger, ed., ‘Briefsteller und Formelbücher des eilften bis vierzehnten jahrhunderts,’ Quellen und Erörterungen zur Bayerischen und Deutschen Geschichte 9 (Munich 1863) 606–10. Google Scholar

8 Teige, J. ‘Beiträge zum päpstlichen Kanzleiwesen des XIII. und XIV. Jahrhunderts,’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung [= MIOG] 17 (1896) 414. Barraclough, art. cit. 1390, cites this as from Wahrmund, L. ed., ‘Die consuetudines Curiae romanae,’ Archiv für Katholisches Kirchenrecht 79 (1899) 3–19, and in particular 18, but in fact this is not the same text.Google Scholar

9 William of Drogheda, ‘Summa Aurea’ in Wahrmund, L. ed., Quellen zur Geschichte des Römisch-kanonischen Processes im Mittelalter 2 (Innsbruck 1914) 7–8.Google Scholar

10 Ibid. 8.Google Scholar

11 Salter, H. E., Pantin, W. A. and Richardson, H. G. ed., Oxford Formularies (Oxford Historical Society New Series 5; Oxford 1942) 275 no. 5. The editor, Salter, H. E., calls this ‘An appeal to the Pope.’ It is a ‘petitio,’ as it says, not an appeal (cf. Drogheda II 8: ‘Forma petitionis’). The procedure was probably identical for a case on appeal, but the grounds of the appeal would be mentioned in the impetration. Further examples in this formulary (Baltimore, Walters MS W 15) are: sections 5 (‘De Petitionibus’: Oxf. Form. 274 no. 1), 14, 34 and 41 (all unedited). Section 5 commences ‘Si quis summo pontifici aliquod negotium intimare voluerit, sic agere debet.’ I am much indebted to Father Donald Logan who lent me his complete transcription of this formulary, which is on folios 79v-81v of the manuscript.Google Scholar

12 Among differences in transcription, most of them minor ones, Father Logan transcribes this, I think rightly, as ‘litteris.’ Google Scholar

13 Comp. I. 2.11.2, ed. Ae. Friedberg, Quinque Compilationes Antiquae (Leipzig 1882) 15; Morey, Dom A., Bartholomew of Exeter (Cambridge 1937) 48, thinks that the choice of a judge by an interested party was the exception rather than the rule in the twelfth century.Google Scholar

14 Bernold in Rockinger, ed. cit. 874 no. XIV.Google Scholar

15 See above at note 10. Google Scholar

16 Herde, Peter, Beiträge zum päpstlichen Kanzlei- und Urkundenwesen im 13. Jahrhundert (Münchener Historische Studien 1; Kallmünz 1961) 166.Google Scholar

17 Barraclough, , art. cit. 1389.Google Scholar

18 Herde, , op. cit. 166. The basis for his view is Bonaguida of Arezzo, an advocate at the Roman curia under Innocent IV, whose work was edited by Josef Teige, art. cit. in MIOG 17 (1896). The particularly important passage (on p. 409) runs, ‘… si littere contradicuntur in audientia coram vicecancellario, deveniunt postea incontinenti ad manus illius, qui est dominus et ipse querit ab eo, qui contradixit in audientia, quare contradixit …’. See also the poem of Master Henry the Poet of Wurzburg, who writes of the chancery under Urban IV (1261–4), and speaks in general terms of the duties of the arbiter contradictarum, quoted by Poole, R. L., Lectures on the History of the Papal Chancery (Cambridge 1915) 164. A comprehensive study by Dr. Herde on the audientia litterarum contradictarum from the thirteenth to the sixteenth century is in preparation.Google Scholar

19 See the constitution of John XXII in Tangl, M., Die päpstlichen Kanzleiordnungen von 1200–1500 (Innsbruck 1894) 111.Google Scholar

20 Barraclough, , art. cit. 1387 and Mollat, G., Les Papes d'Avignon 1305–78 (9th ed. Paris 1949) 471, treat them as the same; Barraclough, it seems, for the earlier period also.Google Scholar

21 Herde, , op. cit. 165 and n. 326.Google Scholar

22 Herde, , op. cit. 167. The source for this is the formulary which goes under the name of Innocent IV's vice-chancellor, Marinus of Eboli: Schillmann, F. ed., Die Formularsammlung des Marinus von Eboli (Bibliothek des Preussischen Historischen Instituts in Rom 16; Rome 1929). Numbers 3366–3425 concern the audientia litterarum contradictarum and date from 1276–7, mentioning Gerard of Parma as auditor in some of the examples. The information contained in the formulary was used by Barraclough in his article (1391). Dr. Robert Brentano, York Metropolitical Jurisdiction and Papal Judges Delegate (1279–1296) (University of California Publications in History 58; Berkeley and Los Angeles 1959), also used it. On the life and works of Marinus, see now Herde, P., ‘Marinus von Eboli “Super revocatoriis” and “De confirmationibus”,’ Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 42/43 (1964) 119–264, at pp. 120–48.Google Scholar

23 See Barraclough, , art. cit. 1392.Google Scholar

24 See Appendix, documents nos. II, IV, VIII, XIII, XIV and photographs, and Teige, J., Beiträge zur Geschichte der Audientia litterarum contradictarum (Prague 1897) 65, for a description of the seal.Google Scholar

25 It is printed by him: Brentano, op. cit. Appendix VII. Google Scholar

26 Diekamp, W., ‘Zum päpstlichen Urkundenwesen von Alexander IV bis Johann XXII (1254–1334),’ MIOG 4 (1883) 536–8 Doc. no. II: dated 1274.Google Scholar

27 Herde, , Beiträge Anhang II nos. 1 and 2. Two further documents from the court, which are neither littere conventionales nor cautiones, are P.R.O. DL 4/10/21, and Westminster Abbey Muniments 32644; the latter cited by Brentano (218).Google Scholar

28 They are: Gerard of Parma in Die Formularsammlung des Marinus von Eboli nos. 3366–3382 (with examples of both documents); Stadtbibliothek Trier no. 859/1097 fols. 37v, 43v-44r, 45r (the MS contains a formulary of the audientia), and Smičiklas, T. ed., Codex Diplomaticus Regni Croatiae IV (Zagreb 1906) 493 no. 429 (a cautio of 1252), all of which are cited by Herde. To these may be added a cautio of 1249 which is registered in the Easby Cartulary, Egerton, B. M. MS 2827 fols. 319v, 320r.Google Scholar

29 Canterbury, Dean and Chapter Archives, Cartae Antiquae C 285, C 284, Sede Vacante Scrapbook [= S. V.] II. 205, Cart. Antiq. A 106, and Christ Church Letters II. 316 (Appendix, documents I-V).Google Scholar

30 Cartae Antiquae C 47, A 206, D 75, A 218, C 1291, S. V. II.102, and Cart. Antiq. L 403, C 1297 and C 1299 (Appendix, documents VI-XIV). In the course of writing this article I discovered, unexpectedly, a tenth document of this kind, also from Christ Church. It is now in Lambeth Palace Library (Papal documents no. 128a), and was forming the cover of MS 795, a Hollingbourne rental of the Dean and Chapter of Canterbury.Google Scholar

31 C 284, C 285 (Appendix, documents I and II). Google Scholar

32 S.V. II.205, A 106, Ch. Ch. Letts, II.316 (Appendix, documents III-V).Google Scholar

33 C 285, Ch. Ch. Letts, II.316.Google Scholar

34 C 284, S.V. II.205, A 106. It does not seem possible to argue anything about the diplomatic of the documents from the sealing method. Two of the letters have seals, one on a tag (C 284), and the other on a tongue (A 106), but they are both ‘super convenientia loci et judicum.’ C 285 ‘super convenientia judicum’ has a tongue, so probably does S.V. II. 205 ‘super convenientia loci et judicum.’Google Scholar

35 Numbers 3383–4 of the Marinus formulary (on p. 389 of the Schillmann edition), are printed in full in Teige, J., Beiträge (n. 24 supra) 50 nos. (I) and (II).Google Scholar

36 No. 3383; Teige (I). Google Scholar

37 Ibid.Google Scholar

38 S. V. II.205 (Appendix, document III).Google Scholar

39 A 106 (Appendix, document IV). Google Scholar

40 Teige, , op. city 51 (III). Cf. Marinus no. 3383 (Teige, op. cit. 50 (I): ‘hoc acto de communi consensu inter procuratores prefatos, quod utraque pars iudicem suum Regium adducat ibidem de causa et negotio infrascriptis iuxta rescriptum apostolicum tractaturi …’.Google Scholar

41 C 285 (Appendix, document I). Google Scholar

42 Hasted, E., The History and Topographical Survey of Kent III (Canterbury 1797) 514, says that Richard de Stratford was rector in 1277.Google Scholar

43 Duffus, T. Hardy, ed., John Le Neve, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae II (Oxford 1854) 580.Google Scholar

44 Powicke, F. M. and Fryde, E. B. ed., Handbook of British Chronology (2nd ed. London 1961) [= HBC] 248: he died 27.x.1277.Google Scholar

45 C 284 (Appendix, document II). Google Scholar

46 S.V. II.205 (Appendix, document III).Google Scholar

47 John Bacun is recorded as rector of Eastry on 2 December 1283 (Lambeth Palace Library, Reg. Pecham fol. 203v). The rectory was in the patronage of the archbishop (Hasted, op. cit. X 118), but nothing further is known of John. Google Scholar

48 Kilwardby was promoted to the cardinal bishopric of Porto in 1278. Eubel, C., Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi I (Münster 1913) 36, says on 4 April, and HBC 211, on 12 March, the date according to Eubel (p. 9) of his creation as a cardinal. He died on 12 September 1279.Google Scholar

49 Le, J. Neve, op. cit. II 319.Google Scholar

50 Possibly Stephen (no date), or Alan, died 1283. In 1283–4 a prior of St. Mary's (this Alan?) was dean of the Arches, and therefore a likely choice (Victoria County History [= V.C.H.], Surrey II [London 1905] 111). Google Scholar

51 V.C.H. London I (London 1909) 455. Google Scholar

52 A 106. Google Scholar

53 HBC 242. Google Scholar

54 Ibid. 211.Google Scholar

55 Le Neve, J., Fasti II 319.Google Scholar

56 Christ Church Letters II.316 (Appendix, document V).Google Scholar

57 See Appendix, documents I and II. Google Scholar

58 X.2.28.47: Innocent III to the Bishop of Worcester, ‘Appellari potest, si locus non tutus partibus assignatur, etiamsi sit scriptum appellatione remota.’ Google Scholar

59 X 1.3.28; Hefele, C. J., Histoire des conciles. tr. and rev. by Leclercq, H., V (Paris 1913) 1363 (can. 37), and e. g. Lord Cooper, Select Scottish Cases of the Thirteenth Century (Edinburgh 1944) no. 17.Google Scholar

60 As shown in the Appendix — ‘A List of Some of the Meeting Places of the Courts’ — of my unpublished Oxford thesis, The Jurisdiction of the Papacy in Cases of Appeal and of First Instance in England from 1198 to 1254, with particular reference to the Southern Province (Oxford 1960). Google Scholar

61 Spalding Cartulary, Add, B. M. MS 35,296 fol. 418v. The judges delegate were the abbot of Bourne, the prior of St. John, Northampton, and the archdeacon of Buckingham. At the end, it is noted that this document was sealed by the prior of Castle Acre.Google Scholar

62 Mandates were, at the best of times, rough and small documents, written on the worst cuts of parchment, and a good deal of revision might take place without recopying. Google Scholar

63 Brentano, , op. cit. 157. Also Barraclough, art. cit. seems to suggest that this process took place in every case.Google Scholar

64 Hasted, , op. cit. III 513.Google Scholar

65 S. V. II.205.Google Scholar

66 HMC 8th Rep. 326, citing Canterbury, Dean and Chapter Archives, Register C. Google Scholar

67 A 106 and Christ Church Letters II.316.Google Scholar

68 HBC 211. Google Scholar

69 The church was in the patronage of Christ Church and exempt from the jurisdiction of the archdeacon, according to Hasted (op. cit. IX 183–4). Google Scholar

70 The church was in the patronage of the archdeacon of Canterbury (Hasted, op. cit. VIII 301). Google Scholar

71 For Robert of Selsey, see Searle, W. G., The Chronicle of John Stone … Lists of Deans, Priors and Monks of Christ Church Monastery (Cambridge Antiquarian Society 34; Cambridge 1902) 169. 176, and the references he gives there, especially Martin, C. T., ed., Registrum Epistolarum … Peckham I (Rolls Series 77; London 1882) 51, referring in a letter dated 18 August 1279 to his appointment during the vacancy.Google Scholar

72 HMC 5th Rep. 451, citing Canterbury, Cartae Antiquae P 56, 57, 58 and C 1286. Google Scholar

73 Reg. Epist. Peck. I 188, 300, and II (1884) 551.Google Scholar

74 Churchill, I. J., Canterbury Administration I (London 1933) 561, citing Cambridge University Library MS Ee v 31, fol. 65v.Google Scholar

75 Sheppard, J. B. ed., Literae Cantuarienses II (Rolls Series 85; London 1888) 150.Google Scholar

76 Brentano, , op. cit. 156–8.Google Scholar

77 Herde, , op. cit. 166 n. 334.Google Scholar

78

79 See Teige, J., art. cit. (n. 8 supra) 412, forms of petitions: ‘Attende insuper, quod de tribus diocesibus et de tribus civitatibus, ut patet exemplum in premissa petitione, possunt per illam clausulam “quidam alii” conveniri, de pluribus minime; et istud Romana curia diligenter observat.’Google Scholar

80 See John of Bologna's formulary in Ludwig Rockinger, op. cit. 608–9. Google Scholar

81 Teige, J., Beiträge 56 (II) gives a plain form.Google Scholar

82 See notes 26 and 27 supra. Google Scholar

83 C 47 (Appendix, document VI). Google Scholar

84 Master Richard of Langdon became the official of archbishop Edmund Rich, see Stubbs, W. ed., The Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury II (Rolls Series 73; London 1880) 165, 170–1).Google Scholar

85 Langton became archdeacon in 1227, see Major, K. ed., Acta Stephani Langton (Canterbury and York Series 50; Oxford 1940) xix.Google Scholar

86 Walter de Eynesham (or Hempsham), monk of Canterbury (J. Le Neve, Fasti I 11). He was a clerk of archbishop Langton (Acta Stephani Langton 18, 37, 42, 47, 52–3, 55, 59, 61), and official (xlviii n. 1). Google Scholar

87 Master Robert of Somercotes, an Englishman, was auditor litterarum contradictarum from at least 1 March to 20 May 1238 (Lucien Auvray, ed., Les Registres de Grégoire IX [Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, série 2, 9; Paris 1896–1955, hereafter cited as Reg. Greg. IX] no. 4123: A 206). He is not included in Bresslau's list (H. Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien I [2nd ed. Leipzig 1912] 284 n. 1). His career illustrates how a man with legal training might rise to a powerful position within the curia. He was possibly a relative of master Laurence of Somercotes, the author of an election tract, who is thought to have come from the Lincolnshire town of Somercotes (J. Russell, C., A Dictionary of Thirteenth Century Writers [Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, Supplement no. 3; London 1936] 81). He had been educated at Paris and at Bologna (P. Bruno Griesser, ‘Registrum Epistolarum Stephani de Lexinton,’ Analecta Sacri Ordinis Cisterciensis 8 [Rome 1952] 315 n. 101). From 1235 until 1237 he was in the service of the Crown, expediting the royal business at Rome (W. Shirley, W. ed., Royal … Letters … of the Reign of Henry III I [Rolls Series 27; London 1862] 463: Calendar of the Patent Rolls 1232–47 [H.M.S.O. London 1906] 95, 134–5, 156, 173, 176: Close Rolls 1234–7 [H.M.S.O. London 1908] 130, 300: Calendar of the Liberate Rolls 1226–40 [H.M.S.O. London 1916] 243). By 23 May 1236 he had become a papal subdeacon (Reg. Greg. IX nos. 3155, 3171). In 1239 he was created cardinal deacon of St. Eustace by Gregory IX (Eubel, op. cit. 6). From 1239 to 1241 he acted as an auditor from time to time (e. g. Reg. Greg. IX nos. 4709, 6091: Cardella, L. Memorie Storiche de’ Cardinali I [Rome 1792] 256). It is intimated by Matthew Paris that he would have been elected pope as successor to Gregory IX, had he not died in 1241 in the course of the conclave which finally elected Celestine IV (Sir Madden, F. ed., Matthaei Parisiensis … Historia Anglorum II [Rolls Series 44; London 1866] 457). He had been provided with the churches of Croydon and Castor (Northants.), which it was later endeavoured to obtain for his relative, probably nephew, John of Somercotes, who was chaplain to the Roman, Richard de Annibaldis, cardinal deacon of St. Angelo, and in the employ of the King of England (Reg. Greg. IX nos. 946, 3171, 5981–2: Llanthony, P. R. O. Cart., Chancery Masters Exhibits C 115/A 1 fol. 125r, 125v: Close Rolls 1242–7 [H.M.S.O. London 1916] 146). He is buried in the church of St. Chrysogonus in Trastevere (L. Cardella, op. cit. I 257).Google Scholar

88 A 206 (Appendix, document VII). Google Scholar

89 Marinus nos. 3366–9 and 3376 (Schillmann edition, Formularsammlung, 387–8). Google Scholar

90 D 75 (Appendix, document VIII). Google Scholar

91 A 218 (Appendix, document IX). Google Scholar

92 Marinus nos. 3366, 3369; ‘Cautio super hiis “ea que de bonis” in maiori forma’ and ‘ “Ea que de bonis” in minori forma.’ Google Scholar

93 S. V. II.102 and C 1299 (Appendix, documents XI, XIV). Bracketed readings are those of the second document.Google Scholar

94 Marinus nos. 3367, 3368. Google Scholar

95 C 47, C 1291, L 403 and C 1297. Google Scholar

96 C 1291 (Appendix, document X). The date of the mandate, a mandate of protection, would seem to be correct since it corresponds with the date of the mandate to the judges to hear the case, a not uncommon procedure in the same suit. It seems probable, therefore, that the scribe wrote ‘xv Kal. Jan’ incorrectly for ‘xv kal. Feb’ in dating the auditor's document. It is odd, however, that the mistake was not noticed and rectified. Google Scholar

97

98 Herde, Ope cit. 166-7 and n. 330. Google Scholar

99 C 47, A 206, D 75 and A 218, C 1291 and S. V. II.102, L 403, C 1297, C 1299.Google Scholar

100 On the professionalism of the proctors and the rise of procuratorial families (e.g. Peter and Philip of Assisi 1289–96, and Peter of Anagni), see R. von Heckel, op. cit. (n. 1 supra) 320. Google Scholar

101 See MIOG 4 (1883) 536–8 ‘J. de Ancora’; P.R.O. DL 41/10/21 ‘J. Bhont’ (for Bohun, J.?); L 403 ‘R de lacu’, and Westminster Abbey Muniments 32644 ‘P. de asisio’.Google Scholar

102 See above p. 322f. Google Scholar

103 Reg. Epist. Peck. III (London 1885) 1023, 1058 (fols. 65v and 151r: see also 20v, 22r, 24v, 27v, 28r, 28v, 142v, 143r, 143v, 150v).Google Scholar

104 Canterbury, Dean and Chapter Archives, Cartae Antiquae C 224. Google Scholar

105 HMC Var. Coll. I (London 1901) 259: (Eastry Letters III 119). Google Scholar

106 C 1291, S. V. II.102 (Appendix, documents X, XI) C 224 and Var. Coll. I 259 (Eastry Letters III 119).Google Scholar

107 Herde, , op. cit. 95 100.Google Scholar

108 Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford I (Oxford 1958) 560 (hereafter cited as Oxf. Reg.), additions in Bodleian Library Quarterly 7 (1964) 152, and L 403.Google Scholar

109 Oxf. Reg. I 560.Google Scholar

110 Smith, R. A. L., Canterbury Cathedral Priory (Cambridge 1943) 75, and C 1297 (Appendix, document XIII).Google Scholar

111 E. Göller, Die Einnahmen der Apostolischen Kammer unter Johann XXII (Paderborn 1910) 139. Google Scholar

112 Lit. Cant. I (1887) 186–9, 237.Google Scholar

113 Oxf. Reg. III (1959) 1681.Google Scholar

114 Ibid. II (1958) 1209, has a master Ralph de Maillng, who was rector of Stourmouth (Kent) from 1323 to 1354, but no John.Google Scholar

115 Lit. Cant. I 230.Google Scholar

116 D 75 (Appendix, document VIII): this document mentions him as canon of Chieti. Google Scholar

117 C 284 (Appendix, document II). Google Scholar

118 Deedes, C. ed., Registrum Johannis de Pontissara (Canterbury and York Series 19; London 1915) 271 -2: Lambeth Palace Library, Reg. Rob. Winchelsey fol. 313, and see Graham, R., ‘The Administration of the Diocese of Ely during the vacancies of the See, 1298–9 and 1302–3,’ Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 4th series 12 (1929) 58.Google Scholar

119 Jules Gay and Suzanne Vitte, ed., Les Registres de Nicolas III (Bibliothèque des Écoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, série 2, 14; Paris 1898–1938) no. 634, and Maurice Prou, ed., Les Registres d'Honorius IV (Bibliothèque … série 2, 7; Paris 1888) no. 671. Google Scholar

120 A 218 (Appendix, document IX), MS Lambeth 795, and Reg. Nic. III no. 589. Google Scholar

121 A 106 (Appendix, document IV). Google Scholar

122 Oxf. Reg. II 1155, L 403 (Appendix, document XII).Google Scholar

123 Göller, , op. cit. 168.Google Scholar

124 Oxf. Reg. II 1155, and Bliss, W. H., ed., Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain: Papal Letters II (H.M.S.O. London 1895) 399, 406. It is noteworthy that he himself was bishop-elect of Salisbury by 1333 (Calendar of Papal Letters II 410).Google Scholar

125 Göller, , op. cit. 98.Google Scholar

126 Hemingby's Register (note 3 supra) 110 no. 166.Google Scholar

127 C 1297 (Appendix, document XIII), Göller, op. cit. 51–2, 60, 78, 173, 182, 197, 200. Google Scholar

128 Calendar of Papal Letters II 172, 300, 354, 366, 374.Google Scholar

129 Oxf. Reg. II 965, and see Göller, . op. cit. 60, 78, 173 and LXXXV, also Shadwell, C. L. and Salter, H. E., Oriel College Records (Oxford Historical Society 85; Oxford 1926) 261 n. 303.Google Scholar

130 C 1299 (Appendix, document XIV). In 1331 as rector of St. Mary's, Gateshead, he received a canonry and became prebendary of Beverley on the petition of Queen Isabella (Calendar of Papal Letters II 359). Göller (op. cit. 215) gives him as appearing on behalf of St. Alban's also in 1328. Google Scholar

131 Göller, , op. cit. 93 96, 241, 248.Google Scholar

132 Curia Regis Rolls IX (H.M.S.O. London 1952) 52.Google Scholar

133 Salter, H. E. ed., Cartulary of Oseney Abbey VI (Oxford Historical Society 101; Oxford 1936) 339.Google Scholar

134 Dover Cartulary, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 241 fols. 50v, 51r. Google Scholar

135 St. Neot's Cartulary, Cotton, B. M. MS Faustina A IV, fol. 111v (2 cases) and fol. 112r. St. Neot's presented three beneficed clerks, Robert parson of Barnwell, Bartholomew, rector of Barton Bendish, and T. rector of Brampton.Google Scholar

1 Text ‘nostrum’. Google Scholar

2 17 April 1277. Google Scholar

1 17 April 1277. Google Scholar

1 25 November 1278. Google Scholar

1 13 February 1279. Google Scholar

1 Text ‘monachum’. Google Scholar

2 23 March 1279. Google Scholar

3 Mentioned in HMC Var. Coll. I 243. Google Scholar

4 Text ‘dsrabilis’. Google Scholar

1 Text ‘adugentes’. Google Scholar

2 The scribe has left a space after ‘exibere.’ Google Scholar

3 Text ‘possessionis in civile’. Google Scholar

4 10 September 1230. Google Scholar

5 20 May 1238. Google Scholar

1 11 May 1276. Google Scholar

1 Text ‘pascia’. Google Scholar

2 5 September 1278. Google Scholar

3 7 September 1278. Google Scholar

1 ‘ ad’ deleted.Google Scholar

2 Text ‘quam’. Google Scholar

3 This is presumably a mistake, see p. 327 at n. 96 supra. Google Scholar

4 8 January 1287. Google Scholar

1 Written twice. Google Scholar

2 8 January 1287. Google Scholar

3 ‘ et’? deleted.Google Scholar

1 Text ‘ingresse’. Google Scholar

2 Text ‘diffininitivam’. Google Scholar

3 Text ‘idus’. Google Scholar

4 13 December 1316. Google Scholar

1 Text ‘domini’. Google Scholar

2 20 December 1319. Google Scholar

3 Something scratched out with a knife here, and the scribe has drawn a line to prevent forgery. Google Scholar

1 Text adds ‘dicuntur’ here. Google Scholar

2 Text ‘hujus’. Google Scholar

3 15 February 1328. Google Scholar

4 Same date. Google Scholar