^{page 190 note a} This letter is, perhaps, the most interesting of all the documents in the White Book, as it preserves one of the most ancient records of the Chapter of York, showing the ancient privileges of the Archbishop and Canons dating from pre-Norman times, which probably became a model for the later foundations of Lincoln and Salisbury, as well as the sister churches of Beverley, Southwell, and Ripon. Unfortunately the letter itself is not dated, but it was possibly written to assist the Chapter of Southwell in view of Quo Warranto proceedings in the reign of Edward III., third and fifth year of his reign (A.D. 1330–3), printed at pp. 615, 636,648 in Placita de quo Warranto (Record Commission), 1818. In these proceedings the chapter and the canons were called on to show title to their privileges and jurisdictions. Until that time it would seem that Southwell possessed no separate charter, but merely general charters, giving them the same privileges as the Church of York. After the case had resulted favourably to Southwell, a special charter was granted by the King reciting the proceedings and confirming the privileges established. The letter recites fully the proceedings (in the nature of the later Quo Warranto cases) which took place in the reign of Henry I., A.D. 1106, when the privileges of York were challenged by the royal officers. A good many of the actual privileges established were recited, but not so fully, in Henry I.'s charter to York Minster, itself recited in a charter of Henry III. given at Portsmouth A.D. 1253 (White Book, p. 15), and again in an Inspeximus Charter of Edward II., from which it is printed in Placitorum Abbreviatio (Record Commission), p. 334. Dugdale also prints Henry I.'s charter under “York Cathedral,” vol. vi., p. 1180, from Abp. Greenfield's Register. The part of the verdict referring to Ripon Sanctuary has been printed in Mem. Ripon, S. S. vol. 74. Henry's charter states the customs as “under ancient Kings and Archbishops, and what most will remember under King Edward and Archbishop Ealdred.” It seems to have been given very soon after the inquiry of 1106. as Bloet, Basset, and Ridel are witnesses.

^{page 191 note a} Sic for Osbertus. The names are given in Chronicle of John Brompton, relative to Ripon.

^{page 191 note b} Gerard was a nephew of Walkelin, Bishop of Winchester, connected with the Conqueror. He had been precentor at Rouen, was a witness of Henry I.'s charters, made Bishop of Hereford, and Archbishop of York A.D. 1101–8. He died while sleeping in the garden of his palace at Southwell; on monkish authority, by means in the odour of sanctity, because a book of astrology or astronomy was found under his pillow.

^{page 191 note c} Robert Bloet, brother of Hugh, Bishop of Bayeux, Chancellor to William the Conqueror, made Bishop by William Rufus 1094, was Justiciary to Henry I.

^{page 191 note d} Ralph Basset was Justiciary under Henry I., and the first of a great legal family. He is said to have hung at onetime at Hundehoge in Herts, in 1124, forty-two thieves. He and Geoffrey Ridel, who was drowned in the White Ship in 111 were also two of the commissioners for the Winton Domesday, which was probably compiled a year or two later than this.

^{page 191 note e} Probably the Lawman of Lincoln, Peter de Volognes, mentioned in Domesday. Freeman, Norm. Conq. IV. 213.

^{page 191 note f} The Danish or Northman character of the names is very marked. One is inclined to think that Normannus and Frengerus are rather adjectives than names, and mean a Norman priest or Frank priest. At all events the foreign character of their names is marked. The names of the sons of Ulf and of Basing seem to suggest that many of the English concealed their origin under Norman names.

^{page 191 note g} The Alwin Vicecomes, of Domesday? Freeman. Norm. Conq. iv. 488.

^{page 191 note f} See Freeman, Norm. Conq. II. 488 and V. 633.

^{page 192 note a} Is this the Ligulf, father of Morkere, whose murder is related by Freeman, Norm. Conq iv., 671?

^{page 192 note b} Henry I.'s charter, as recited by Henry III., begins with these words.

^{page 192 note c} Drake, in his Eboracum., p. 548, ed. 1736, has made an odd mistake in translating this passage: “the person that takes him shall make amends by the universal judgment of the hundred, who shall give damages for the same.

^{page 192 note d} The Saxon Frithstool still remains at Beverley and at Hexham, in both places lately replaced near the high altar.

^{page 192 note e} This paragraph is obscure. It very probably means “the Canons were called the household of S. Peter and their lands his table.” But if so the “in” is untranslated.

^{page 193 note a} “Namum” or “namium” from a word akin to German “nehmen,” to take, i.e. distress; security taken.

^{page 193 note b} The right of seizing and hanging or beheading a thief. In Henry's charter it is spelt “infangenetheof.”

^{page 193 note c} In Henry's charter here is inserted “quatinus canonici placitantes, pulso signo, ad horas canonicas cito possint regredi. Archiepiscopo vero per senascallos suos et milites suos facilius erat” &c. Doubtless the copyist omitted by mistake this pleasing picture of the canons in court adjourning to choir for service.

^{page 194 note a} Henry I.'s charter ends here, except that there is added a clause which, if genuine and not a lèter invention, goes to prove the existence (hitherto denied) in England, before the Conquest, at least in Edward the Confessor's reign, of the judicial duel. “Hanc igitur consuetudinem sive dignitatem habent canonici Sancti Petriab antecessoribus Regibus, nominatim quorum a rege Edwardo, concessam et confirmatam, ut nullus de familia regis, vel de exercitu ejus in propriis domibus canonicorum, nee in civitato, nee extra hospitetur. Ubicunque sit duellum Ebor. juramenta debent fieri super textum, vel super reliquias Sancti Petri; et facto duello, victor arma victi ad ecclesiam Sancti Petri offerebat, gratias a Deo et Sancto Petro pro victoria.“Then comes another short clause to the effect that whenever the canous or their men sue in the king's pleas their claim is to be determined before every case, so far as it can be determined saving the diguity of the Church.

^{page 195 note a} Viz., probably of S. Peter in Cathedra, 22 February, S. Peter the Apostle, June, and S. Peter ad Vincula, 1 Aug.

^{page 196 note a} The Ouse.

^{page 196 note b} Sic.

^{page 196 note c} “The Rev. W. Hunt refers me to Chron. de Abingdon, ii., 30, 131. Rolls Ed”. where hora or ora means a number of pennies, viz., 16. Ten times that sum being mark, that is probably the sum meant here rather than 20d., the value of the ora in some places in Domesday. See Ducange under ora.

^{page 196 note d} The Archbishops, like the Kings, seldom stayed more than a few days in the same place. Their trains ate up the provisions of the country at such a pace that they could not be provided for long. Hence the large number of manor-houses possessed by them were not so much a luxury as a necessity.

^{page 197 note a} “This is so full and so early an inventory of church goods that it seemed to deserve special notice.

^{page 197 note b} Sic.

^{page 197 note c} Now commonly called the maniple, a word not found in English before the Reformation.

^{page 197 note d} The napkin used to cover the bread, i.e. the Lord's body.

^{page 198 note a} The Lord's table is not the altar; but a long table set out for the Easter communion of the parishioners.

^{page 198 note b} The summa summarum must be the book (or a book of like character), Brit. Mus. Harl. Ms. 106 m. This is a MS. of the first half of the fourteenth century. It is literally a summary of summaries, containing extracts from Summulæ on the Decretals, the Summa Raymundi on peritentials, the Summa Predicantium of Bromyard, a summa of Grossteste of Lincoln, …c.

^{page 198 note c} The “manuele peche” was no doubt William of Waddington's book translated by Robert de Brunn (or Bourne) in 1303 under the name of “Handlyng Synne,” and published for the Roxburgh Club in 1862. According to De la Eue (Archæl. xiii.. p. 236) Waddington wrote it or adapted it from Floretus “about the middle of the thirteenth century.” It is an odd book for the vicar, as, Under the guise of a religious work, it is really a collection of Boccaccian stories.

^{page 198 note d} John de Burgo, who was Chancellor of Cambridge in 1384, wrote the famous Pupilla Oculi, or instructions on the Seven Sacraments, the Decalogue, …c, …c, which was subsequently printed. The second book begins, “Libri secundus vel dextera pars oculi sacerdotis.” But if this is the same book an earlier date must be assigned to it than has hitherto been supposed. He describes it as “compilata,” so the book here mentioned may be one from which it was compiled.