Page images


p. iv. At the time this passage was written I knew nothing about the principles on which the Record Commissioners transliterated documents, and consequently my mode of transcription and theirs will be found to differ in several points; for instance, they rightly use the sign only for the loop which generally stands for the syllable us, whereas I have used it wherever the scribe makes a turn with his pen. Thus in very many places where I have printed r9, the Commissioners would have printed r'. Whether they are always consistent in their practice may be doubted; scribes themselves seem to vary a little.

p. 73, last paragraph, for To the court read To this court.

p. 89, last line but one, for grevious read grievous.

p. 128, second paragraph, for cobler read cobbler. The editors of the Hundred Rolls read Iveta, vol. 2. p. 557, and Ivetta, vol. 2. 636; so that the name may be regarded as fairly certain. On a cursory inspection of the index to those invaluable documents I have not noticed either Jua or Iva.

p. 130, third paragraph, for The entry in read The entry is.

p. 135, last paragraph but one. The observation that parcenarius occurs in no book I have looked into is absurd; the word is common, and occurs in Ducange.

p. 135, last paragraph. I have been told that it is a mistake to write Willielmus, as I have done, or Wilielmus; it ought to be Willelmus ; perhaps so, yet in the volume of plates issued by the Record Commissioners (Appendix to Reports from Record Commissioners, fol. 1800-1819) I find plate 35 called 'Sigillum Willielmi I. Regis Angliæ,' the seal itself reads Willelmvm, and in the facsimile of the charter founding St. Martinus de Bello, Willelmus occurs four times written at length. Plate 37 is called 'Sigillum Willielmi II. Regis Angliæ'the seal itself, if it be correctly engraved, reads on both sides Wilielmvs; the Commissioners themselves seem always to prefer Willielmus.

p. 138, third paragraph from the end, for two roods read three roods. p. 155, for summonire read summonere.

Notes of other misprints and mistakes will be thankfully received.








Henry W. Chandler, M.J.,




[Fifty Copies Printed. No. 25.]




P 5



THE gradual dispersion and destruction of so many of our domestic records, though perhaps inevitable, must be regretted by all who know how valuable such documents often are. The number, however, of those who possess that knowledge is comparatively small; most men, even those who pass for men of intelligence and education, are so grossly ignorant, that they will rid themselves of what they consider lumber, without the faintest suspicion that they are guilty of an act as mean as it is foolish, as sordid as it is disgraceful. For many years past, manorial rolls have been sold by the cartload, and boiled down into size or gelatine, yet they contain materials of priceless value to the historian, to the topographer, to the genealogist, to the student of social life, and even to the philologist. The rolls of Cressingham once, I believe, extended from the reign of Henry the Third, down almost to the present day; what Vandal it was who broke up a series so curious I know not, or I would gladly gibbet his name; all that I possess are here printed, and no reasonable care has been spared to make the transcript scrupulously accurate. It should, however, be remembered that whenever manuscript is transliterated into type, there must of necessity be some interpretation; for instance the name which has been printed Euina is in the original five straight undotted strokes between an initial E and a final a; Engel might be read Eugel, and so on. It would be sheer pedantry to print such words exactly as the scribe has written them, because it is perfectly clear what he meant his characters to stand for. Emna is not an English

name, nor is Enina nor Enma, and again had he intended us to read Eugel, he would have simply written Ugel, or with a medieval contempt for aspirates, Hugel; however every case in which there could be even the shadow of a doubt has been mentioned in the notes. As regards contractions, my transcript imitated the vagaries and meanderings of the scribe's pen, as far as it seemed possible for existing type to represent them, and the printers (to whom my best thanks are due) have followed most gallantly and done wonders. The men who wrote the first two rolls are quite reckless; they frequently cut a word down to one or two letters, without using any signs of contraction at all, and then again they constantly employ such signs, sometimes when they are not wanted, and sometimes in defiance of all ordinary conventions; to take a single instance, the mark which concludes the name of Alice Rust (p. 6, first line) means in this place ia, yet at the end of Clovelek's name (p. 16, ninth line from the bottom) it either stands for e, or it is a mere freak of the pen; in neither instance is it used in accordance with the conventions usual in the days of Edward the Third.

Taken as a whole, these five rolls give a very fair notion of what such records usually contain, and he who is able to decipher them will meet with few difficulties in others; but if he needs further assistance, he will find help (though not all the help that could be desired) in the Roll of the Court Leet and the Court Baron in Kitchin's quaint and useful little book (Le Court Leete et Court Baron collect per John Kitchin de Graies Inne vn Apprentice in Ley. Lond. 1623. 8vo.) Most of the legal terms are fairly explained in Cowell's Law Dictionary, Lond. 1708. fol., which has been often quoted at length in the notes on the principle advocated by Menage

« PreviousContinue »