Geoffrey de Mandeville: A study of the AnarchyRound, John Horace
History
Geoffrey de Mandeville: A study of the Anarchy
Round, John Horace
Great Britain -- History -- Stephen, 1135-1154; Mandeville, Geoffrey de, earl of Essex, -1144
HENRY
(1156).
Sciatis me fecisse Gaufridum de Magnauillâ Comitem de Essexâ.
The explanation is, of course, that the first and third are new
creations, while the second is virtually but a confirmation of the
previous creation by Stephen. So again, comparing this creation with
that of Hugh Bigod, the only instance in point—
(1155.)
Sciatis me fecisse Hugonem Bigot Comitem de Norfolca, scilicet de
tercio denario de Nordwic et de Norfolca.
(1156.)
Sciatis me fecisse Gaufridum de Mandavillâ Comitem de Essexa, et
dedisse et hereditarie concessisse sibi et heredibus suis.... Tertium
denarium de placitis meis ejusdem Comitatus.
Here the absolute identity of the actual formula of creation accentuates
the difference between the clauses relating to the "Tertius Denarius."
It will therefore be desirable to compare the clauses as they stand in
the Mandeville and the Vere charters (January, 1156):—
MANDEVILLE
Sciatis me ... dedisse et hereditarie concessisse sibi et heredibus
suis ad tenendum de me et heredibus meis tertium denarium de placitis
meis ejusdem Comitatus.
VERE
Sciatis me dedisse et concessisse Comiti Alberico in feodo et
hereditate tertium denarium de placitis Oxenfordscyre ut sit inde Comes.
It is said with truth in the Lords' Reports that "inde" is an ambiguous
word, as it might refer either to the county or to the "third penny"
itself. And, indeed, the above extract from the charter to Hugh Bigod
would lend support to the latter view. But the case of Earl Aubrey was,
we must remember, peculiar. As we saw in the charter of the empress
(1142), she recognized him as already a "comes" in virtue of his rank as
Count of Guisnes (p. 188). It is my belief that in the present charter
he is styled "comes" by Henry on precisely the same ground. For if Henry
had recognized him as Earl of Oxford in virtue of his mother's charter
(1142), he must also have recognized his right to "the third penny" of
the shire which was granted by that same charter.[738] But he clearly
did not recognize that right, for he here makes a fresh grant. Therefore
he did not recognize the validity of his mother's charter. Consequently,
he styled Aubrey "comes" in virtue only of the comital rank he enjoyed
as Count of Guisnes. And as he could not _make_ a "comes" of a man who
was a "comes" already (p. 187), he merely grants him "the third penny of
the pleas" of Oxfordshire, "that he may be earl of that county" ("ut sit
inde Comes"). Hence the anomalous form in which the charter is
drawn.[739]
Different, again, yet no less instructive, is the case of the Earl of
Sussex. There the grant runs—
"Sciatis me dedisse Willelmo Comiti Arundel castellum de Arundel cum
toto honore Arundel ... et tercium denarium de placitis de Suthsex unde
comes est."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account