[441] So great, indeed, is the difficulty of forcing them into accordance with Dr. Stubbs’ view, that he himself makes them all four refer to a single surrender of Nottingham and Tickhill (Preface to Rog. Hov. III. lvii., lviii.; cf. p. lxiii.), and assigns the Mortimer incident to the earlier campaign, though it is described by Richard of Devizes, who _ex hypothesi_ is narrating the later one. [442] Gesta Regis Ricardi, ii. 208 note. [443] Ed. Howlett, p. 337. [444] It is a further illustration of the difficulty which even those who accept Dr. Stubbs’ view find in adhering to it, that Miss Norgate pronounces it “chronologically impossible” that the archbishop of Rouen can have been sent to John by Longchamp, as stated by Richard of Devizes (‘Angevin Kings,’ ii. 299 note). She must have forgotten that Richard of Devizes _ex hypothesi_ is describing “events in the summer or autumn” (Rog. Hov., iii. 134); and that she accepts April 27 as the date of the archbishop’s arrival (ii. 298). [445] “Legationis suæ officium per mortem Romani pontificis exspirasse.” [446] This suggestion is strongly supported by the fact, which has been overlooked, that the bishop of Worcester was consecrated by Longchamp “adhuc legato” on May 5 (Ric. Devizes, p. 403); that the chancellor still styled himself legate on May 13 (‘Ancient Charters,’ p. 96); and that he even used this style on July 8 at Lincoln (_vide infra_). This implies, as I pointed out so far back as 1888 in my ‘Ancient Charters’ (Pipe Roll Society), that he continued to use the style after Clement’s death and before he could have known whether Cœlestine would renew it to him or not. Indeed, if we may trust the version of Giraldus, he was using it even so late as July 30 (iv. 389). It is notable that in a communication dated “Teste meipso apud Releiam xxv die Augusti,” he no longer employs it. [447] England under the Angevin Kings, ii. 299. [448] 9th Report Historical MSS., i. 35 _b_ (where the document is dated “1190–1196”). [449] 35th Report of Deputy Keeper, p. 2. [450] This cannot be made public till my Calendar of Charters preserved in France is issued. In it this evidence will be found in Document 61 (p. 17). [451] The dating clause at its end is a blunder admitted on all sides. [452] Preface to Rog. Hov., III. p. lxiv. This is, according to me, the imaginary conference. [453] Rog. Hov., iii. 135 note. So also ‘Gesta,’ ii. p. 208: “in which John was recognised as the heir of England.” [454] Pref. to Rog. Hov., III. lix. [455] Ibid. p. lxiv. [456] Gesta, ii. 207–8; Will. Newb., ii. 339. [457] Roger Hov., iii. 135 note. [458] Compare my ‘Geoffrey de Mandeville,’ pp. 176, 183, with Hoveden’s text.