There are three main questions relating to the first phase of English history on which the evidence supplied by place-names may be expected to throw a faint ray of light. On the first of them—the fate of the native inhabitants of southern Britain—I offered a few suggestions to the Society in my presidential address last year. I propose this evening to confine myself to place-names of English origin, and to consider them in relation to the two fundamental problems which remain—the credibility of Bede's analysis of the English peoples, and the general chronology of the English conquest.

The Camden Society, of which this Society is the heir and representative, was founded in 1838, and it is only fitting that some record of its history and achievements should mark the present year. It would have been an appropriate task for the sole surviving member Dr. Hubert Hall, our director, who is not only a living link with the old Society, but has himself carried on its work and its traditions as the editor–in–chief of our Camden Series. It is at his instigation that I stand here this evening, and I must ask his indulgence and that of this Society for whatever sins of commission or omission I may be guilty of.

The Lincoln diocesan records have long been well known to historians both for their great bulk and importance and for their accessibility. Before the Reformation the diocese covered eight and a half counties; even in 1541 it lost only Northampton, Rutland and Oxford, with the result that it was divided into completely separate portions, Lincolnshire and Leicester in the north, Buckingham, Bedford, Huntingdon and part of Hertfordshire in the south. Its size alone will account for the vastness of the collection. That the muniments are accessible is due to the work of the late Canon Foster, in recognition of which the Pilgrim Trust established the present record office, as the result of a request for assistance by the bishop of Lincoln. In this Society the work of Canon Foster is so famous as to make any comment on it by me superfluous, if not impertinent, but it would be impossible to speak of the records without reference to him. For my own part, I regard it as my chief privilege to attempt to carry on his work: to try to continue on the lines laid down by him is in itself a liberal education in the care and use of manuscripts.

Roger de montgomery, 1st earl of Shrewsbury, married Mabel de Bellême, the heiress of a great house which held the castles of Bellême and Alencon, Domfront and Sées, with widespread lands along the southern marches of Normandy, not only in that duchy but in the kingdom of France and the county of Maine. The importance of the family is attested by its inclusion in L'Art de Vérifier les Dates; but the standard account in that great work was superseded in 1920 by the detailed history of the lords of Bellême published by the Vicomte du Motey. Unfortunately the author's enthusiasm for his heroes overran his discretion; and as Orderic, our leading authority, paints most of them in the blackest colours, du Motey made a bitter attack on his accuracy and even on his veracity. Moreover, he made no attempt to grapple with the chronological difficulties inherent in the received descent, nor did he show any critical idea of the comparative value of his authorities; whilst his own lively imagination added picturesque details to what might otherwise have been a “bald and unconvincing narrative”.

I must begin this paper by disclaiming any intention of entering into the detail of parliamentary procedure, a matter with which I am not qualified to deal. It has, however, occurred to me that certain changes in the administration of law, changes which begin early in the reign of Henry III, have some relevance to the origin of parliamentary jurisdiction. These changes arise from a new and more severe attitude on the part of the Crown towards franchise, and make necessary important modifications in the exchequer's methods of dealing with it. In time, I think, the many disputes between the Crown and the magnates about privilege, debt, and so forth, gave rise to a volume of petitions and subsequent trials which called for some tribunal in the nature of parliament, and these trials found a nucleus about the exchequer and the council. That is my thesis, and it is with these legal changes and their reaction upon the constitution that I propose to deal. The greater part of this paper is, therefore, concerned with the period before direct parliamentary record, and, indeed, before there is any true court of parliament. It goes very little beyond matters of law, and, if I am forced here and there to refer to the structure and procedure of parliament in later days, I do so very much subject to correction. Even for the early period with which I am concerned, I cannot attempt to assess the importance of that part of parliament which came from the commune consilium of the realm.

In the five years which elapsed between Mary's accession on 6 July 1553 and her death on 17 November 1558 281 institutions to benefices vacant in Essex are entered in Bonner's Register. Ninety–three of these vacancies, or just under a third, occurred as the result of the deprivation of the late incumbent. A similar disturbance of the personnel of the clergy was taking place all over the country during these years, but the figures quoted for Essex cannot be taken as typical, for Dr. Frere found that the numbers and ratios tended to diminish the greater the distance from London.The general nature of this disturbance, however, the processes connected with it, and the problems arising out of it can best be understood when examined in relation to a particular group of the deprived clergy. As Mr. Baskerville has suggested, “it is only by a thoroughgoing exploration of the ups and downs of the lives of the clergy in an individual diocese that the course of current ecclesiastical movements can be adequately comprehended.”

It is expected of orators in Newark-on-Trent that they should refer to the town as “the loyal and ancient borough”. Historians may accept the description as accurate, for when Domesday Book was compiled there were burgesses in Newark, and its loyalty to the crown is a part of the story of its municipal development in the vigorous phase which opened in 1549 with the grant of a royal charter of incorporation. This paper is concerned with that phase, but since the mayor and aldermen were later declared the inheritors of privileges enjoyed before the town's incorporation, it may be helpful first to outline briefly its earlier organisation.

“The election cry”, wrote the first Lord Colchester to his friend Lord Amherst, after the general election of 1826, “has been upon the Corn Laws, the Abolition of Slavery, and the Roman Catholic claims.” Not dissimilarly, the Annual Register reported that the subjects most canvassed in the election were the corn laws and Roman catholic emancipation. Croker found attention concentrated on what he called “the three C's”, corn, currency and catholics. On the other hand, Peel, observing more precisely, not merely recognised the widespread interest in the catholic question, but also was equally impressed by the importance in the various contests of personal and local rivalries. For parliamentary elections when contested were still, as in the eighteenth century, determined very largely by local loyalties, although national issues begin to play a larger part.