[963] The only authority for this demand for a confirmation of the Charter, Roger of Wendover, places it in 1223. Its true date, however, seems to be 1224. Roger says it took place “in London, on the octave of Epiphany,” _i.e._ on 13th January. But in 1223 the court, which had kept Christmas at Oxford (as he says), and thence gone into Wiltshire, Dorset, and Hampshire, did not return to London till 20th or 21st January (_Close Rolls_, vol. i. pp. 527–529). In 1224, on the other hand, the King was at Westminster from 8th January to 26th February (_ib._ pp. 580 b–586). Moreover, in January, 1223, there were, so far as can be seen, no circumstances likely to suggest such a demand; but in January, 1224, the suggestion would be obvious. I think that Roger has betrayed at once his own confusion, and how he fell into it, in the words which immediately follow his report of Henry’s reply: “Et rex protinus, habito super hoc consilio, misit literas suas ad singulos vicecomites regni, ut per milites duodecim vel legales homines uniuscujusque comitatus per sacramentum facerent inquiri quae fuerunt libertates in Anglia tempore regis Henrici avi sui, et factam inquisitionem apud Londonias mitterent ad regem in quindecim diebus post Pascham” (vol. iv. p. 84). It is clear that the inquisition here spoken of is that ordered on 30th January, 1223 (see above, p. 201), which Roger took to be an inquiry into the ancient liberties of England, instead of (as it really was) into those of the Crown. Thus mistaking its character, he further mistook it for a consequence of the demand for the Charter: a demand which (as I believe) it really preceded by nearly twelve months, and with which its connexion--so far as the two things were connected at all--was quite the reverse of that which Roger implies; the inquest into the royal privileges having been, in all likelihood, one of the provocations which led the barons to ask for a confirmation of their own rights. [964] _Quer. Falc._, pp. 262, 263. Cf. _Ann. Dunst._, p. 89, which gives the names of the envoys, Robert Passelewe and Robert of Kent. [965] _Roy. Lett._, vol. i. p. 543. [966] We arrive at this date by comparing _Quer. Falc._, _l.c._, with _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 593 b, and vol. ii. p. 72 b; see below, footnote 1047. [967] _Quer. Falc._, p. 263. [968] _Roy. Lett._, vol. i. p. 225. [969] See above, p. 175. [970] He was ordered on 18th July, 1222, to give them up to the Archbishop; _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 505 b. [971] _Pat. Rolls Joh._, p. 148 b. [972] _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 479 b. [973] _Ann. Dunst._, p. 75; _Pat. Rolls_, vol. i. p. 301, safe-conduct from 17th September to Christmas, 1221. [974] _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 527 b. [975] Cf. _Roy. Lett._, vol. i. pp. 183, 184, and _Ann. Dunst._, p. 85; the latter says he went after the Welsh war--_i.e._ in October or November--but we shall see that he must have gone some time before July. [976] _Close Rolls_, vol. i. p. 549 b.