^{page 39 note a} word interlined.

^{page 39 note b} MS. sicus.

^{page 39 note 1} Brandon Ferry, Suff.

^{page 40 note 1} This document is immediately followed in the roll by the receipt dated i October 1297 (no. 145). For a similar loan to this one made by Reginald de Brandon on 18 February 1297, repayable at Easter, for which he received letters of obligation from Walter Langton, the treasurer, see E 159/70, m. 17.

^{page 41 note 1} Similar instructions were issued on the same date to the keepers of the customs at Hull, permitting the Frescobaldi to export 134 sacks 8 stones of wool, the remaining part of a total of 250 sacks (E 159/70, m. 110). Earlier, on 4 December 1296, the Frescobaldi had been granted 400 marks out of the customs at Boston in payment of debts, and permission to export 100 sacks of wool to Brabant or Holland, with respite of payment of customs until Easter (E 159/70, m. 100d). For licences to the Spini to export 84 sacks from Boston and 16 sacks.from London, and the Frescobaldi for 500 sacks from Newcastle, with the customs duty being used to pay off the crown's debts to them in part, see E 159/70, m. 113d.

^{page 41 note 2} Peckham, Kent.

^{page 41 note 3} Pierre Emerik received royal protection for a year, as he was going overseas with the treasurer, on 17 February 1297, and a further protection on 18 February, as a result of paying his fine for the clerical fifth (C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 235–6Google Scholar). See also no. 186.

^{page 42 note a} Sic in MS.

^{page 42 note b} MS. Drokenesfortd.

^{page 42 note c} MS. Dynnok.

^{page 43 note a} Followed by vidi, cancelled.

^{page 44 note 1} Clarendon, Wilts.

^{page 44 note 2} There is no surviving chancery enrolment of this writ; its authenticity is therefore somewhat suspect.

^{page 44 note 3} Probably Walter de Maidstone (no. 51; C.P.R. 1292–1301, p. 403Google Scholar). Orders for the seizure of his goods were issued on 14 March 1297 (E 368/68, m. 88).

^{page 46 note For} this document, see Cheney, C. R., Notaries Public in England (Oxford, 1972), p. 70.Google Scholar

^{page 46 note 2} John Bigod was granted royal protection on the testimony of Alan Plukenet on 4 April 1297 (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 273Google Scholar). On 7 April the sheriff of Lincolnshire was ordered to restore his lands to him (C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 25Google Scholar).

^{page 47 note 1} Presumably the memorandum of 20 February 1297 (no. 5). The instructions issued to the bannerets and sheriffs for the taking of clerical fines, on 1 March 1297, appear to have only been sent to the exchequer on 13 March (no. 16; C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 240).Google Scholar

^{page 47 note 2} Langford, Wilts.

^{page 48 note 1} For this incident of the seizure of Winchelsey's horses, see Reg. Winchelsey, pp. 216–17Google Scholar. The seizure of two horses belonging to the prior of Christ Church, Canterbury (no. 46), presumably took place at the same time.

^{page 48 note 2} Breamore, Hants.

^{page 50 note a} E 159/70 reads chagions.

^{page 50 note b} E 159/70 reads quil vienge tola.

^{page 50 note c} E 568/68 reads lautres.

^{page 50 note 1} Appointments of clerks were duly made on 12 March 1297, as follows:

E 159/70, m. 109.

Payment of expenses to Nicholas de Warwick, William de Pershore, Henry de Durham, Richard de Kerstan, John de Kirkeby and David le Graunt are recorded on the Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/10) between 12 and 15 March.

^{page 50 note 2} Bury St Edmunds, Suff.

^{page 51 note a} E368/68 reads qe la somme entiere ne la crus se facent.

^{page 51 note b} E 159/70 reads le.

^{page 51 note c} greignur omitted in E 368/68.

^{page 51 note 1} Plymouth, Devon.

^{page 51 note 2} Carlisle, Cumb.

^{page 52 note 1} Similar writs were issued to all the other bannerets and sheriffs appointed to take fines from the clergy.

^{page 52 note 2} See no. 22 for the summons of those who owed falconry service.

^{page 53 note a} MS. indigenciciam.

^{page 53 note 1} See no. 16 for the question of supplies for Gascony. The doubling of the quantities of grain and money mentioned there is presumably an error.

^{page 53 note 2} Ringwood, Hants.

^{page 54 note 1} Palm Sunday, 7 April.

^{page 54 note 1} Similar letters were issued to the other bannerets and sheriffs appointed to receive clerical fines (E 159/70, m. 109d).

^{page 54 note 3} Plymouth, Devon.

^{page 55 note 1} Similar writs were sent to the sheriffs of Oxon. & Berks., Surrey & Sussex, Hants., Som. & Dorset, Glos., Devon, Cornwall, Wilts. The prise of grain in question was that ordered on 29 November 1296, when a total of 27,000 qu. of wheat, 5,000 qu. of barley, 16,000 qu. of oats, 1,600 qu. of beans and 600 qu. of peas had been demanded from seventeen counties (E 159/70, m. 119).

^{page 55 note 2} Lonsdale.

^{page 55 note 3} 8 April.

^{page 55 note 4} Writs concerning similar services relating to hawks were issued on the same day to the sheriffs of Oxon. & Berks., Norf., Wilts, Kent, Cornwall, Notts. & Derbs., Lincs. (E 368/68, m. 90d). See also no. 19.

^{page 56 note a} There is no indication in the manuscript of an omission at this point.

^{page 56 note b} MS. die.

^{page 56 note 1} 24 March 1297.

^{page 56 note 2} Rochester.

^{page 56 note 3} St David's.

^{page 56 note 4} Wimborne Minster, Dorset.

^{page 56 note 5} Edward's letter of 20 March is calendared in C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 244.Google Scholar

^{page 58 note a} A sign like a large cursive y is inserted in the manuscript at this point.

^{page 58 note 1} Walter le Norreys was paid 13s. 4d. on 3 April for his work in writing this instrument. Alan of Kent and John de Borham, with two tabellars, received £6 for going to various bishoprics to make similar procurations (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos. 15v, 16v). Following this document, the manuscript continues with details of further procurations made on 1 September (no. 133).

^{page 58 note 2} Details of the cargo carried by the Rose of Sandwich and seven other ships from the Cinque Ports are given in a writ of allocate to the sheriff of Kent. They carried in all some 2,200 qu. of wheat, some of it ground, 1,166qu. of barley and 1,540 qu. of oats to Bourg and Blaye (C 62/74, wril of 14 December). The Rose had returned by September (no. 143).

^{page 58 note 3} The Cinque Ports and Yarmouth.

^{page 58 note 4} Bourg-sur-Gironde, dép. Gironde.

^{page 58 note 5} Blaye, dép. Gironde.

^{page 58 note 6} Bayonne, dép. Basses-Pyrénées.

^{page 59 note 1} Ringsbury, Herts.

^{page 59 note 2} Large numbers of protections under the great seal to clergy who paid, or promised to pay, fines to obtain royal protections are listed in C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 260–86Google Scholar, and in C. Var. Chanc. R., pp. 42–53Google Scholar. In addition, files of bills or receipts from the clergy survive in C 81/1660B, C and D. There are also exchequer receipt rolls, E 401/165 and E 401/1653, detailing a total of £23,174 received from the clergy. For the enrolment of Saher's protection, dated 8 April, see C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 278Google Scholar. For further examples, see nos. 36, 39, 41.

^{page 59 note 3} See in particular the letters of 13 and 15 March (nos. 16, 19).

^{page 60 note 1} For the implementation of the orders regarding the Carlisle clergy, see the letter of 6 April (no. 35).

^{page 60 note 2} Crewkerne, Som.

^{page 61 note a} MS. nec.

^{page 61 note 1} 4 April.

^{page 61 note 2} For this matter, see the letter of 30 March (no. 27), and that of 6 April (no. 36). The clergy of the York diocese were granted royal protection on 18 February, following their grant of a fifth (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 237).Google Scholar

^{page 62 note a} Marginal heading.

^{page 62 note 1} Exchequer writs ordering the sale of clerical goods were duly issued on 8 April (no. 38).

^{page 62 note 2} Cullompton, Devon.

^{page 62 note 3} Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Northumb.

^{page 62 note 4} Hull, Yorks.

^{page 62 note 5} Boston, Lincs.

^{page 62 note 6} Yarmouth, Norf.

^{page 62 note 7} Ipswich, Suff.

^{page 62 note 8} Sandwich, Kent.

^{page 62 note 9} Southampton, Hants.

^{page 63 note 1} A chancery protection was issued to the abbot of Tavistock on 4 April 1297, on the testimony of Gilbert de Knovill (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 271Google Scholar). A similar incident of double payment of the fine for protection occurred in the case of the prior of Plympton. A letter on his behalf was sent to the exchequer on 15 April (E 159/70, m. 23d). Two further cases, one detailed, ibid., m. 25d.

^{page 63 note 2} 22 April.

^{page 63 note 3} The following day writs in almost identical terms were issued, the date for the returns being extended to 29 April (E 159/70, m. 96d).

^{page 64 note a} de ceo repeated in MS.

^{page 64 note 1} Lincoln.

^{page 64 note 2} Rutland.

^{page 64 note 3} York.

^{page 64 note 4} For this purveyance, see no. 51.

^{page 64 note 5} Bourg-sur-Gironde, dép. Gironde.

^{page 64 note 6} Blaye, dép. Gironde.

^{page 64 note 7} Bayonne, dép. Basses-Pyrénées.

^{page 66 note a} eos repeated in MS.

^{page 66 note 1} For the affair of the Carlisle clergy, see Edward I's letter of 30 March to the exchequer (no. 27) and Alexander le Convers' credence to the exchequer (no. 29).

^{page 66 note 2} It appears that the Prior of Bromfield had already received royal protection on 23 March (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 270Google Scholar). For other examples of clergy requesting royal protection, see nos. 39, 41. A large number of these documents survive: see no. 25, n. i.

^{page 66 note 3} Chepstow, Mon.

^{page 66 note 4} Cardiff, Glam.

^{page 66 note 5} Brecon.

^{page 67 note 1} A privy seal letter to the exchequer was issued on 8 April, ordering the distraint on Joan to be relaxed if the letters of Aymer de Valence giving security for the debts could be found at the exchequer (E 159/70, m. 23).

^{page 67 note 2} Walwynscastle. For the background to this complaint see Phillips, J. R. S., Aymer de Valence (Oxford, 1972), pp. 251–2.Google Scholar

^{page 67 note 3} Ilsingston, Devon.

^{page 69 note a} Note added in a different hand.

^{page 69 note 1} During his stay at Plympton, the king underwent a blood-letting operation, the discomfort of which was eased by the playing of a harpist (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 54v).

^{page 69 note 2} Oakham, Rutland.

^{page 71 note 1} Letters implementing these instructions were issued on 22 April by the exchequer (E 368/68, m. 92).

^{page 71 note 2} Lincoln.

^{page 71 note 3} According to Guisborough, p. 288Google Scholar, the bishop of Lincoln's friends, without his authorization, arranged for the sheriff to raise the fine from his estates. Receipts of £150 from the sale of the bishop's goods are recorded on the receipt roll (E 401/1653).

^{page 71 note 4} Instructions in these terms were duly issued to the bannerets and sheriffs responsible for collecting the fines (E 159/70, m. 96).

^{page 72 note a} Marginal heading.

^{page 72 note 1} Odiham, Hants.

^{page 72 note 2} These two horses were presumably taken at the same time as those of the archbishop: see no. 13.

^{page 73 note 1} 3O May.

^{page 74 note a} … a passage interlined, written over as barons struck out.

^{page 74 note b} e especiales interlined.

^{page 74 note 1} 23 May.

^{page 75 note a} …a Passage interlined, written over eez prest et apparaille struck out.

^{page 75 note b} …b passage interlined.

^{page 75 note c} adunke struck out, subsequently marked stet.

^{page 75 note d} E ce struck out.

^{page 75 note e} salu struck out.

^{page 75 note f} e especiales struck out.

^{page 75 note g} des nefs struck out.

^{page 75 note h} daler struck out, then repeated.

^{page 75 note i} les a struck out.

^{page 75 note 1} 25 June 1297.

^{page 75 note 2} The summons of service from the Cinque Ports, and the order to Pencester to see to the matter, were issued formally in letters close under the great seal on 27 April 1297 (C.C.R., 1236–1302, pp. 99–100Google Scholar). For a reference to the performance of the service, see the letter of 5 August (no. 105). The period of service lasted from 26 July to 9 August (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 103).

^{page 76 note a} MS. reads du ble, but pris, as in m. 119, is clearly intended.

^{page 76 note 1} Further instructions were issued later, for a third of the wheat to be ground and bolted, and put into tuns, the rest to be put in sacks. The manuscript is unfortunately badly damaged. The same membrane, 120, gives details of the quantities to be purveyed, and of the clerks appointed to assist the sheriffs, as follows:

The Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/11) shows that on 2 May these clerks received payment of 40s. each to cover their expenses. On 25 May further instructions were issued for the grain to be taken to London, by land or sea (E 159/70, m. 120d).

^{page 77 note a} bullarum repeated in MS.

^{page 77 note 1} For details of a case brought against Walter de Maidstone involving the alleged possession of coinage dies and the counterfeiting of coin while he was controller of the silver mines in Devon, see E 368/69, m. 47. He was probably the man referred to in the writ of 4 March 1297 (no. 8). In March 1299 he was pardoned (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 403Google Scholar). He had been released from the Tower on 20 August 1297 and handed over to the bishop of London in accordance with clerical privilege (C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 56Google Scholar). His innocence on the coinage charge seems fairly clear from the verdict of local jurors, but he was fined £200, presumably over the issue of the papal bulls (E 368/69, mm. 47, 115).

^{page 78 note 1} A similar case is referred to in the Liberate Roll (C 62/74, m. 4), in which the sheriff of Lancashire received an allocate for 9s. spent on the case of Robet le Bel, chaplain, Walter de Mundham and Edmund his brother. They were arrested at Lancaster by John Russel, who had come from London for the purpose, and who returned south with them.

^{page 78 note 2} Newton Ferrers, Dorset.

^{page 80 note a} …a Omitted in E368/68, m. 38d.

^{page 80 note b} Followed by qe in MS.

^{page 80 note 1} A writ in pursuance of this order, issued to the sheriff of Yorkshire in June, is in E 159/70, m. 122.

^{page 80 note 2} For the English articles of the treaty, see the facsimile in Chaplais, P., English Medieval Diplomatic Practice, Part II (London, 1975)Google Scholar, plate 6. Edward's ratification of the treaty is in Treaty Rolls, i, 98–100.Google Scholar

^{page 80 note 3} In Plymouth.

^{page 81 note a} Above the first line is the word Flaundr', struck out.

^{page 81 note 1} On 14 May exchequer writs were issued to the customs collectors at Hull, Boston, Ipswich, Yarmouth, Sandwich, Southampton, Bristol, London and Newcastle, ordering them to elect, together with the urban authorities, a man experienced in the business of wool and hides, to be responsible for exporting the wool to Brabant, and ordering them to have the wool shipped as soon as possible (E 159/70, m. 101).

^{page 82 note 1} Adam de Bray had charge of a number of royal horses, at one time totalling 53, at Hertford between 22 February and 28 May 1297 (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 27). As clerk of the marshalsea he was again to be in trouble for taking prises illegally in 1311 (Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I and Edward II, ed. W. Stubbs, Rolls Series, 1882–1883, i 200).Google Scholar

^{page 82 note 2} The king had forbidden the taking of corn from the Hospitallers on 7 March (C.C.R., 1236–1302, p. 19).Google Scholar

^{page 83 note 1} Chudleigh, Devon.

^{page 83 note 2} The Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/11, m. 5) reveals that the purpose of these loans was to pay 10,000 livres tournois to John, count of Holland. The entry records repayment at the exchequer of £10 to Thomas Holpit on 2 July 1297.

^{page 83 note 3} Antwerp, Belgium.

^{page 83 note 4} For an example of a similar receipt, made out by John Botetourt, William de Carleton and John de Hustwayt for £20 borrowed from Roger de Seaford, see E 159/70, m. 98. For a discussion of loans made by English merchants in the Low Countries, see Fryde, , ‘Financial Resources of Edward I in the Netherlands’, 1176–7Google Scholar. To the references given there should be added the Jornalia Rolls (E 405/1/10 and E 405/1/11).

^{page 84 note a} MS. imienere.

^{page 84 note 1} For another method of payment, see the case of John Schirle of Hampshire, who lent William de Carleton and John de Hustwayt £40 in Brabant, which was then credited to him in accounting for a sum of £56 which he owed at the exchequer. The writ was dated 23 May 1297 (E 368/68, m. 96).

^{page 85 note a} MS. pernez.

^{page 85 note 1} This prise was authorized by the king on 5 April (no. 34), and duly organized by the exchequer (no. 50).

^{page 85 note 2} 31 June.

^{page 85 note 3} Loders, Dorset.

^{page 86 note a} MS. reads Coloni eum.

^{page 86 note 1} Alexander le Convers and Peter of Chichester were duly appointed to act with the sheriff of Kent in this matter (no. 62).

^{page 86 note 2} For this matter, see the letter of 7 May (no. 55). The agreement with the archbishop is printed in Treaty Rolls, i, 105.Google Scholar

^{page 87 note 1} This writ was issued as a result of the instructions contained in the privy seal writ of 15 May (no. 60). See no. 121 for a financial agreement between Alexander le Convers and Peter of Chichester.

^{page 87 note 2} Four similar writs on behalf of other merchants follow in the roll. A general ordinance dealing with this problem was issued on 28 May (no. 64).

^{page 88 note 1} On 31 May exchequer writs were sent to all sheriffs, instructing them to release all those held in prison for concealing wool and hides, by mainprise of four lawful men (E 159/70, m. 43d).

^{page 89 note a} MS. veniez.

^{page 89 note 1} For the ordinance appointing guardians of the ports, made on 1 March 1297, see C.C.R., 1236–1302, p. 86Google Scholar. Another version, with slight changes, is enrolled on E 159/70, m. 98. For the unlicensed departure from the realm of two other Italian merchants, see E 159/70, m. 61d.

^{page 90 note 1} Pandulf and James de Sabello received protections for three years on 3 June 1297 (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 250).Google Scholar

^{page 91 note 1} A writ in pursuance of these instructions was issued on the same date to the sheriff of Yorkshire, and similar writs to the bishop of Carlisle and the sheriff of Cumberland (E 159/70, m. 114d). On 3 June Dymmock received 40s. as expenses at the exchequer (Jornalia Roll, E 405/1/11).

^{page 91 note 2} Exchequer writs to the sheriffs were issued on 4 June, requesting that fines for service should be paid by 7 July (E 159/70, m. 42d). The original summons had been issued on 15 May (Parl. Writs, i, 282).Google Scholar

^{page 92 note 1} Similar writs were issued to the following counties, specifying the quantities of victuals and the supervisors of the prise as follows:

Writs were also issued on 5 June 1297 ordering the victuals to be taken to the same ports as the grain ordered earlier, in the case of the counties where clerks were appointed to supervise the prise. In the case of the other counties, the supplies were to be taken to Winchelsea (E 159/70, m. 121). On 23 June writs were issued hastening the process under threat of imprisonment (E 159/70, m. 107d). Payments to messengers taking these writs of 5 June are recorded under 6 June in the wardrobe book (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 112).

^{page 93 note 1} The mainprise is duly recorded in E 159/70, m. 60d.

^{page 93 note 2} On the previous day fourteen minstrels had played before the image of the Virgin Mary in the cathedral crypt, in the presence of the king (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 55v).

^{page 94 note 1} Stanley, Glos.

^{page 95 note a} E 368/68 has avauntdit.

^{page 95 note 1} Nympsfield, Glos.

^{page 95 note 2} Northleach, Glos.

^{page 96 note 1} An exchequer writ implementing these instructions was issued on 14 June (E 159/70, m. 104).

^{page 96 note 2} John of Clavering was son of Robert FitzRoger, who was one of those who accompanied Bigod and Bohun in their protest at the exchequer on 22 August (no. 126).

^{page 96 note 3} 8 July.

^{page 97 note 1} Appointments of clerks were duly made on 14 June 1297, according to E 159/70, m. 108, as follows:

On the same day, according to E 368/68, m. 47, writs were issued to the sheriffs of twenty-four counties, asking them to assist various clerks. In the majority of cases, the names are the same as those above, with the addition of Yorks., William de St Quintino & Robert Beaufey; Northumb., Adam of York. In six instances, however, different clerks are named to those in the E 159/70 list: Lines., Ralph Paynel; Norf. & Suff., Richard de Kerstan; Essex, Henry de Dunholm; Northants, John de St Ivone; Warw. & Leics., John de Gildon'; Oxon. & Berks., John de Batlesford. The Jornalia Roll (£405/1/11), recording payment of 20s. to each of these clerks on 18 June, is in agreement with E 159/70 in eleven cases, but no mention is made of Richard de Hetherington, Thomas de Boyvill, William de Aulton, John de St Ivone or John de London.

^{page 98 note 1} On 20 July instructions were sent to the customs ports ordering the export of the king's wool: the ships were to be organized in convoys for fear of enemy attack (E 159/70, m. 122d).

^{page 98 note 2} Robert of Basings' instructions to take the priory into his hands are enrolled in E 368/68, m. 4d.

^{page 99 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 99 note 1} 20 June 1297. A further reference to this parliament, dated as taking place in the quindene of the nativity of St John the Baptist (24 June), is in E 159/71, m. 6. See also no. 93.

^{page 100 note 1} Exchequer writs instructing the sheriffs to take this action were issued on the same day, 22 June (E 159/70, m. 121d).

^{page 100 note 2} Payment of £2,000 to Hugh Cressingham was authorized by means of a liberate writ on 10 June (Documents illustrative of the History of Scotland, ii, 174Google Scholar). The payment on 25 June is recorded in the Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/11). Cressingham's reply to Philip de Willoughby is given below (no. 86). The £2,000 was taken north with an escort of ten horse and sixteen footsoldiers, at a cost of £19 19s. 0d. (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 22v).

^{page 101 note 1} Similar writs were issued to the sheriffs of Sussex, Essex and Norfolk. It is unlikely that much money was received by the crown from this source (Lunt, W. E., Financial Relations of England with the Papacy to 1327 (Cambridge, Mass., 1939), pp. 456–7).Google Scholar

^{page 102 note a} Face repeated in MS.

^{page 102 note 1} Appointments were duly made on 4 July 1297 as follows:

E 159/70, m. 108d.

Payments to cover expenses were made by the exchequer on 8 July, and the record of these adds the name of John de Sheffield, appointed to Yorkshire (Jornalia Roll, £ 405/1/11, m. 5).

^{page 103 note 1} This writ is entered on Fermbaud's particulars of account, which state that the knight in question was Ralph de Monthermer, earl of Gloucester. He was imprisoned in Bristol from 10 July to 22 July, as a result of the king's displeasure at his marriage without licence to Joan of Acre, countess of Gloucester. The king's anger was soon remitted, and Ralph, with his wife, did fealty on 2 August. All the estates were restored, save Tonbridge and the Isle of Portland, which were presumably retained for reasons of security. By September Ralph and his wife were allowed to stay in the outer bailey of Windsor castle, which the king lent to them (Altschul, M., A Baronial Family in Medieval England: the Clares, 1217–1314, pp. 157–8Google Scholar; C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 63).Google Scholar

^{page 104 note 1} On 30 July William Milksop was appointed one of the taxers and collectors of the eighth (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 298).Google Scholar

^{page 105 note 1} Bolton, Northumb.

^{page 105 note 2} Written in reply to no. 82.

^{page 103 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 103 note b} Followed by reponendi struck out.

^{page 103 note c} Irrot' added in a different hand.

^{page 103 note 1} For the earl of Hereford's response, see Calendar of Ancient Correspondence concerning Wales, p. 101Google Scholar. Two of his officials summoned the tenants of Brecon, and gave them a charter granting them all the laws and usages of their ancestors. This is dated by Edwards as 1321–2, but the mention of Morgan ap Maredudd supports a date of 1297. See also Davies, , Lordship and Society in the March of Wales, 1282–1400, pp. 269, 290.Google Scholar

^{page 107 note a} de repeated in MS.

^{page 107 note 1} 14 July, 1297.

^{page 107 note 2} Llandaff.

^{page 108 note 1} For this parliament, see also no. 80.

^{page 109 note 1} St Albans, Herts.

^{page 109 note 2} Miles Pichard was a knight of the king's household. He had received payment for his summer robes at Sandwich on 7 June, and his horses were valued for the Flemish campaign on 14 August. He was accompanied by two squires (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos. 66v, 122v).

^{page 109 note 3} The account for the non-household contingents in the royal army in Flanders fully supports the evidence of these replies to the summons. A section listing squires with their county of origin reveals only one from these three counties, Roger Freman from Hereford, and he was only taken on the pay roll on 1 October 1297 (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos. 73–4).

^{page 110 note 1} Similar writs for all other counties were issued, together with writs to the sheriffs, on the same date (E 159/70, m. 123d). These writs are calendared from the Patent Roll in C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 297–9.Google Scholar

^{page 111 note a} Words underlined are so treated in the text, these being the sections of the form of taxation for the eighth that were ta be cancelled and replaced by the interlined words and passages so as to adapt the text to the needs of the ninth.

^{page 111 note b} Word interlined.

^{page 111 note c} …c Passage interlined.

^{page 112 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 112 note b} e sil supplied from ‘Part. Writs’, i, 54–5, 62–3.

^{page 112 note c} The words ne a sil namountenent are interlined at this point.

^{page 112 note d} Word interlined.

^{page 112 note e} The words ne a sil namountenent are interlined at this point.

^{page 113 note 1} The form for the taxation of the eighth and fifth is printed in Parl. Writs, i, 54–5, from the Patent Roll. It is translated in E.H.D., iii, 473–4Google Scholar. That for the ninth is printed in Parl. Writs, i, 62–3Google Scholar, again from the Patent Roll. This version, however, has been printed in order to show the way in which the clerk attempted by means of interlinings and cancellations to transform the form for the eighth into that for the later ninth.

^{page 113 note 2} This is the one reference to this obligation, which was not recorded in the formal agreements made with Adolf.

^{page 113 note 3} This sum was presumably a calculation of the balance owing to the duke. In February 1297 the king acknowledged a debt of 40,000 livres toumois owed to him, and in addition he was assigned £25,000 out of the custom as a loan (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 134Google Scholar). He received liberate writs early in February totalling £14,000. For details of payments made to him, see Lyon, B. D., ‘Un compte de l'échiquier relatif aux relations d'Edouard I d'Angleterre avec le due Jean II de Brabant’, Bull. de la commission royale d'histoire, cxx (1955), 67–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 114 note 1} There is an erasure at this point in E 159/70.

^{page 115 note a} Other versions include abbes, priours at this point (Edwards, ‘Confirmatio Cartarum and Baronial Grievances in 1297’, 170–), where a text based on the three main chronicle versions, by Cotton, Guisborough, and Knighton is provided. The best version of the Guisborough text is, however, that given by Rothwell in his edition of the chronicle (‘Guisborough’, pp. 292–3Google Scholar), and this has been used in providing variant readings from this chronicler. Only significant differences are noted.

^{page 115 note b} Other versions have com a seignur, qe cestes choses voille redrescer e amender al honur de lui

^{page 115 note c} e de la terre only in this MS.

^{page 115 note d} chef only in this MS.

^{page 115 note 1} Walter Langton, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, was frequently styled bishop of Chester. See no. 205.

^{page 115 note 2} Letters patent appointing men to conduct this prise were issued on 30 July 1297. The quantities requested from various counties were as follows, according to E 159/70, m. 115:

The appointment of merchants is also given in C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 299–300.Google Scholar

^{page 116 note a} …a de venir … la outre only in this MS.

^{page 116 note b} nul certayn lu in other versions.

^{page 116 note c} Knighton reads aviser; two MSS. of Guisborough have aversne and aversue respectively.

^{page 116 note d} ausi byen des clers com de lays only in this MS.; Cotton has de la terre.

^{page 116 note e} il issint qils dussent in other versions.

^{page 116 note f} Cotton has diverses talliages et diverses prises.

^{page 116 note g} Cotton has sustenir ne lur terres gaynger; the best version is Guisborough, with sustenir e multz en sunt qe nount pas lur sustenaunce, ne lur terres gayner.

^{page 116 note h} Guisborough has se sentent durement grevez.

^{page 116 note i} Cotton has auncestres avaunt eus.

^{page 116 note j} user e only in this MS.

^{page 116 note k} …k e graunt … gardir omitted in Cotton.

^{page 116 note l} Other versions have par quoi ils prient a nostre seignur le roy qil voille qe cestes choses soient redresses al honur de lui e a salvacioun du people.

^{page 116 note m} honur only in this MS.; other versions read ceo.

^{page 117 note a} ses genz des Flaundreisses in other versions.

^{page 117 note b} …b qe il … uncore omitted in Guisborough.

^{page 117 note c} Guisborough has si ils fussent seure.

^{page 117 note d} The preceding paragraph forms the last clause in all other versions.

^{page 117 note e} Other versions have Estre ceo tote la communaute de la terre se sentent durement grevez.

^{page 117 note f} e grevos rancons omitted in Cotton.

^{page 117 note g} In all other versions this paragraph is placed before the preceding one.

^{page 117 note h} The final paragraph is unique to this MS.

^{page 117 note 1} William de Luton had been appointed together with John de Malplash, Thomas Tylly and John le Chanu to collect wool in Somerset and Dorset on 30 July 1297 (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 300).Google Scholar

^{page 119 note 1} Lewisham, Kent.

^{page 120 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 120 note 1} Orpington, Kent.

^{page 120 note 2} Sevenoaks, Kent.

^{page 120 note 3} See no. 107 for the exchequer's reply to this letter.

^{page 121 note a} …a Words interlined.

^{page 123 note 1} 7 August.

^{page 123 note 2} This letter was written in reply to the king's letter of 4 August (no. 104).

^{page 124 note 1} Udimore, Sussex.

^{page 124 note 2} An exchequer writ setting out arrangements for the collection of money from clerical fines in Hastings' lordship was duly issued on 14 August (E 159/70, m. 103d). The initial order to take all the lay fees of the clergy there into the king's hands had been issued on 22 June, along with similar instructions for other marcher lordships (C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 41).Google Scholar

^{page 125 note 1} Udimore, Sussex.

^{page 127 note 1} 26 July.

^{page 127 note 2} 28 July.

^{page 128 note a} Sic in MS., corrected by Bémont to se.

^{page 128 note b} Sic in MS., corrected by Bémont to sien. page 128 note c Sic in MS., corrected by Bémont to jeskes.

^{page 129 note 1} Udimore, Sussex.

^{page 129 note 2} Payment for messengers taking this document to various Midland counties is recorded for 14 August in the Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/11), and for 17 August to Surrey, Sussex and Kent in the wardrobe book (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 113).

^{page 129 note 3} John de Cobham paid 200 marks for the marriage of Roger de Bavent, and the grant was formally made on 13 August 1297 (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 302Google Scholar). Cobham also received custody of some of Bavent's lands, in payment for a loan of 500 marks he made to the crown, on 3 November 1297 (Ibid., p. 314).

^{page 130 note a} …a Words interlined.

^{page 130 note 1} 14 August. The king's letter, written on 12 August, is in E 159/70, m. 36d.

^{page 130 note 2} The exchequer Jornalia Roll (E 405/1/11) has payments to Richard de Clare, sent to various counties, and Roger de Southcote to Beds. & Bucks., and also to John de Droxford, keeper of the wardrobe, for payments to various messengers taking the king's letter of 12 August 1297 (no. 111), justifying his actions against the earls, to Hunts., Cambs., Northants, Rutland, Leics., Warw., Notts. & Derbs.

^{page 130 note 3} 19 August.

^{page 132 note 1} This letter was evidently written in reply to one similar to that sent on 14 August to the deputy treasurer and barons of the exchequer (no. 114).

^{page 133 note a} quorum in E 368/68 and E 159/70.

^{page 133 note 1} Edward had made his will at Acre on 18 June 1272 (Testamenta Vetusta, ed. Nicolas, N. H. (London, 1826), i, 7–10).Google Scholar

^{page 133 note 2} In addition to grain purveyed in London and Midd., supplies from Beds., Bucks., Warw., Leics., Oxon. and Berks, were all assembled at London (E 159/70, m. god).

^{page 134 note a} sur omitted in E 363/68.

^{page 134 note b} vout in E 368/68; lount in Parl. Writs.

^{page 134 note c} qui y in Parl. Writs.

^{page 134 note d} rebotier omitted in Parl. Writs.

^{page 134 note e} ne omitted in E 368/68.

^{page 134 note f} necessaire in Parl. Writs.

^{page 135 note 1} A similar letter on behalf of Gascon merchants, written on the same day, is in E 159/70, m. 37.

^{page 137 note 1} Taldo Janiani was one of the members of the Florentine firm of the Frescobaldi.

^{page 137 note 2} The following letters of 22–25 August (nos. 127–131) are entered consecutively in the manuscript.

^{page 138 note 1} Payment of 5s. to Robert Dyvelin is recorded on 23 August, to cover his expenses in going from London to Winchelsea. He then received a further 5s. on 26 August, after his return (E 405/1/11).

^{page 140 note a} defendre a trestouz qe, in E 368/68.

^{page 140 note b} eious, in E 368/68.

^{page 141 note 1} For the text of a proclamation to this effect allegedly made in London on 26 August, see Monumenta Gildhallae Londoniensis; Liber Albus, Liber Custumarum, et Liber Horn, ed. H. T. Riley (Rolls Series, 1860), ii, pt. i, 71–2Google Scholar. The list of persons present on that occasion, notably the chancellor, Reginald de Grey and Alan Plukenet, does not tally with the fact that they were at Tonbridge on 27 August (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 306Google Scholar). See also Rothwell, , ‘The Confirmation of the Charters, 1297’, 177Google Scholar, n. 3.

^{page 141 note 2} Robertsbridge, Sussex.

^{page 142 note 1} On 9 July 1297 the earl of Arundel was given licence to let out land at farm for ten years, to a value of £100 p.a. (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 289).Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 2} This text is preceded by a royal notification dated 31 August to the archbishop of Canterbury, his suffragans and others, of the appointment of Hugh of Yarmouth as king's proctor, which is calendared in C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 307–8Google Scholar. That follows in the manuscript immediately on the procurations ot 24 March (no. 23).

^{page 143 note 1} 1 September.

^{page 143 note The} notification of 31 August, in C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 307–8.Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 3} The procuration of 24 March (no. 23).

^{page 144 note 1} The manuscript continues at this point with the notarial certification by Walter le Norreys, in exactly the same form as after the procuration of 24 March (no. 23), with the addition at the end of the following: ‘et abrasi superius de manu mei hoc verbum procurationem’. There then follows a much shorter public notification, in very similar terms, by Alan of Kent, appointed by the king to go to the bishoprics of Rochester, Chichester, Winchester, Exeter, Bath and Wells, Salisbury, Hereford, Llan-daff and St David's. He was accompanied by Walter le Norreys, and they were each paid £1 10s. on 16 September (E 405/1/11, m. 11).

^{page 145 note 1} The government had tried to put an end to the feud between the Cinque Ports and Yarmouth as early as 14 April 1297, when instructions to that effect were sent to Stephen de Pencester, warden of the Ports and constable of Dover. Steps were taken by the government in England on 6 September to prevent further conflict, and arrangements for the communities to seal letters of submission were made on 11 September. The actual form was sent to Yarmouth for sealing on 12 October (C.C.R., 1296–1302, pp. 59, 62, 67Google Scholar). One estimate of damage was seventeen ships burnt, twelve more looted, and 165 men killed (Brooks, F. W., ‘The Cinque Ports Feud with Yarmouth’, Mariner's Mirror, xix (1953), 44Google Scholar), but the wardrobe book refers to twenty-one ships from Yarmouth being burnt (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 84v).

^{page 145 note 2} Aardenburg, Netherlands, prov. Zeeland.

^{page 146 note 1} Walter de Burnham was granted rents and lands in Lincolnshire to a value of£10 15s. for life by Roger de Mowbray, presumably as his fee of retainer (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 297).Google Scholar

^{page 143 note 2} Ghent, Belgium.

^{page 147 note 1} Ghent, Belgium.

^{page 147 note 2} Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, prince of Gwynedd and Wales (d. 1282).

^{page 149 note a} Word interlined.

^{page 149 note 1} The Rose of Sandwich, commanded by John Furnivall, returned to Sandwich with a crew of one constable and thirty-two sailors on 8 September. She was then in port with a skeleton crew of six sailors until 16 September, and subsequently a full crew of one constable and thirty-four sailors were paid up to 18 October (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 103v).

^{page 150 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 150 note 1} Sluys, Netherlands, prov. Zeeland.

^{page 150 note 2} Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln.

^{page 150 note 3} See no. 16.

^{page 151 note 1} 3 November.

^{page 151 note 2} In the roll this entry immediately follows the letters of 13 February 1297 (no. 2).

^{page 152 note 1} On 5 November the escheator was instructed to restore to Henry de Leburn the lands which had been taken into the king's hands following Leyburn's marriage to Elizabeth de Sharstede, whose marriage had been granted to William Latimer. Leyburn found sufficient security to satisfy Latimer. Similar orders were again issued on 7 March 1298 (C.C.R., 1292–1302, pp. 70, 152Google Scholar). It would appear, therefore, that on 8 October Leyburn's lands were in fact in the king's hands. Leyburn had only recently acquired Byfleet, for on 30 July Geoffrey de Lucy received a licence to alienate it to him (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 300).Google Scholar

^{page 152 note 2} 8 October.

^{page 152 note 3} Aardenburg, Netherlands, prov. Zeeland.

^{page 152 note 4} Damme, Belgium, prov. W. Flanders.

^{page 153 note a} éthune, dép. Pas-de-Calais.

^{page 153 note 2} 12 October.

^{page 153 note 3} The great majority of the ships in Flanders were paid by the crown until 18 October, when they presumably returned to their home ports (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos, 103–5).

^{page 155 note 1} For discussion of this text, which is closely related to De Tallagio, see Denton, ‘The Crisis of 1297 from the Evesham Chronicle’, 565–7. The actual pardon which the earls received followed closely on the form set out in the prince's letters patent of 10 October, and was issued at the same time as the Confirmation of the Charters, at Ghent on 5 November (Reg. Winchelsey, pp. 207–8).Google Scholar

^{page 157 note a} MS. unclear at this point: Staunton is conjectural.

^{page 158 note a} Both the original issued on 5 November 1297 (Bémont, ‘Chartes des libertés anglaises’, p. 96), and the copies on the statute roll (‘Statutes of the Realm’, i, 123), Winchelsey's register (‘Reg. Winchelsey’, pp. 201, 207) and Guisborough's chronicle (‘Guisborough’, p. 309), have the more conventional Dengleterre and Dirland or Dyrlaund. This suggests that possibly this manuscript is not the work of a royal scribe.

^{page 158 note b} Other versions have the normal de la foreste.

^{page 158 note c} The following section to en tuz leur poinz was accidentally omitted in the Guisborough version (‘Guisborough’, p. 309Google Scholar).

^{page 158 note d} The other versions have en pledz, save for Guisborough, which has en pledaunt.

^{page 158 note e} The other versions have al amendement.

^{page 158 note 1} Another list, dating from 1294–5, of the earl of Norfolk's retinue and household survives; the only names common with this one are Thomas de Akeny, Peter de Tatington, Magister Thomas de Sudington, John de Boseham and Walter de Metingham (C 47/2/10, no. 8).

^{page 159 note a} Only Guisborough has ou (‘Guisborough’, p. 310Google Scholar); other versions have e.

^{page 159 note b} Other versions have memes celes, save Guisborough, which has memes les.

^{page 159 note c} Guisborough adds at this point the phrase en la forme avauntdite.

^{page 159 note d} Other versions read qui pur.

^{page 159 note e} Other versions read soient repris.

^{page 159 note f} The original (Bémont, , ‘Chartes des libertés anglaises’, p. 98Google Scholar) has qe fez soient.

^{page 159 note g} Other versions all have e a lur heirs.

^{page 159 note h} Guisborough agrees with memes celes (‘Guisborough’, p. 310Google Scholar), other versions read mes teles.

^{page 159 note i} The original (Bémont, , ‘Charles des libertés anglaises’, p. 98Google Scholar) has busoignie tieu manere des aydes, and is followed by the other versions, although Guisborough (‘Guisborough’, p. 310Google Scholar) has teus maners, not tieu manere.

^{page 159 note j} MS. raume.

^{page 159 note k} Other versions all have e nous unt prie.

^{page 160 note a} Other versions all have saunz leur.

^{page 160 note b} The Statute Roll version (‘Statutes of the Realm’, i, 123Google Scholar) continues at this point: E fet a remembrer qe meisme ceste charte, suth meismes les paroles, de mot en mot, fust sele en Flaundres de suth le grant seal le rey, cest asaver a Gaunt, le quint jour de Novembre, lan del regne lavauntdit seignur le rey vintisme quint, e envee en Engleterre. The final clause of the version issued in Ghent accordingly reads: En tesmoinaunce des quieux choses nous avuns fait faire cestes nos lettres overtes. Donees a Gaunt le quint jour de Novembre Ian de nostre regne vintisme quint. (Bémont, , ‘Chartes des libertés anglaises’, p. 98.)Google Scholar

^{page 160 note c} essc struck out at this point and ne interlined.

^{page 161 note a} Word interlined.

^{page 161 note b} …b Words interlined.

^{page 161 note 1} 1 October.

^{page 161 note 2} 14 October.

^{page 161 note 3} 16 October.

^{page 162 note 1} Sinzig, Germany.

^{page 162 note 2} 6 January 1298.

^{page 162 note 3} 7 December 1297.

^{page 162 note 4} 9 October 1297.

^{page 163 note 1} The agreement was for £20,000 to be paid to Adolf: see no. 97.

^{page 163 note 2} On 2 February 1297 the duke of Brabant had been granted £25,000 out of the custom to be paid by Brabantine merchants (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 232Google Scholar). A liberate writ for £4,000 to be paid out of such duties had been issued on 3 February (C 62/73). £779 15s. 5d. was paid to the duke out of the Yarmouth customs (E 372/145).

^{page 163 note 3} By agreement made with the justiciar of Ireland, they were to receive higher rates of pay than was normal: 2s. 9d. for a knight, and 1s. 4d. for a squire. Instructions were issued on 23 October that the earl of Ulster, Richard Fitz Thomas, and the other Irish should remain at home, but Fitz Thomas was already in Flanders in receipt of royal pay at the high rate (Lewis, , ‘The English Forces in Flanders’, p. 313Google Scholar, n. 1; C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 69Google Scholar; B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 68v).

^{page 164 note a} Word interlined.

^{page 164 note b} hayr struck out.

^{page 164 note 1} Edward I's favour to John de Renesse, one of the murderers of Florence, count of Holland, is demonstrated by his gift to him of a horse worth £40 (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 57v). Earlier in the year Count John had not taken any exception to John de Renesse, who was present with him at Ipswich (Treaty Rolls, i, 176).Google Scholar

^{page 165 note 1} Walcheren.

^{page 165 note 2} On the same day the count wrote to the inhabitants of s'Hertogenbosch, warning them against his father's murderers. The letter was intercepted by the duke of Brabant, and sent to Edward I (Acta Imperii, nos. 131, 132).

^{page 165 note 3} The fleet was paid wages up to 18 October (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos. 103v–105).

^{page 165 note 4} Berwick-on-Tweed.

^{page 166 note 1} Zwin.

^{page 166 note 2} 1 November 1297.

^{page 167 note a} …b Words interlined.

^{page 167 note 1} Thomas of Lancaster was in fact knighted by the king at Ghent on 1 November 1297 (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 57v).

^{page 167 note 2} St Truiden.

^{page 168 note 1} C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 147Google Scholar, has an acquittance, dated 20 February 1298, for £259 demanded from Thomas de la Roche of the arrears of his account when he was sheriff of Cork, in view of his good service.

^{page 169 note a} E 159/71 has per consilium predictum est.

^{page 169 note 1} A further letter on behalf of Hugh de St Philibert, ordering an action of novel disseisin brought against him by Roger de la Hide to be held over until Hugh's return to England, also issued on 12 November, is in SC 1/45/96. It seems likely that these letters are those referred to in the prince's letter to the chancellor of 10 January 1298 (no. 187). St Philibert's wife acquired some land while her husband was in Flanders without proper licence, but they were later pardoned as result of his service in Scotland, Flanders and elsewhere (C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 390–1).Google Scholar

^{page 169 note 2} These appointments had been made on 30 July 1297 (no. 97, n. 3).

^{page 170 note a} E 159/71 has quibus for penes.

^{page 170 note c} No sign is given in E 159/71, but in E 368/69 a drawing of a hand holding a small bell is placed at this point.

^{page 170 note 1} The writs to the sheriffs are enrolled in E 368/69, m. 107, and were issued on 15 November.

^{page 170 note 2} For a similar letter to the Cinque Ports, see SC 1/45/99. Letters close ordering the proclamation to be made were issued on 28 November 1297 (C.C.R., 1296–1302, P. 139).Google Scholar

^{page 171 note 1} Letters close were issued on 21 November, ordering the keeper of the royal park at Banstead, Surrey, to allow John Fitz Thomas to have four does and two leafless tree stumps, by information of the bishops of London and Ely (C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 138).Google Scholar

^{page 172 note 1} Similar writs were issued as follows:

Hampshire. The sheriff and Peter de Aulton, 1,500 qu. oats, to be taken to Southampton.

Essex & Herts. The sheriff and Thurstan de Hamslape, 1,000 qu. wheat, 1,000 qu. oats, to be taken to London and Colchester.

Norfolk & Suffolk. The sheriff and John de St Ivone, 1,500 qu. wheat, 1, 000 qu. oats, to be taken to Yarmouth and Ipswich.

Sussex. The sheriff and Thomas de Warberge, 1,000 qu. oats, to be taken to Shoreham.

^{page 173 note 1} Calendared in C.C.R., 1296–1302, p. 187Google Scholar, version addressed to the sheriff of York, and dated 24 November.

^{page 173 note 2} Similar writs were issued on the same date to the customs collectors at Hull, Boston, Yarmouth, Ipswich, London, Sandwich, Southampton and Bristol.

^{page 174 note a} Word interlined.

^{page 174 note 1} 7 December 1297.

^{page 174 note 2} 19 February 1298.

^{page 174 note 3} Oudenarde, Belgium.

^{page 176 note a} …a Passage interlined.

^{page 176 note b} in manibus eorem repeated in MS.

^{page 176 note 1} See no. 168.

^{page 177 note 1} 14 December 1297.

^{page 177 note 2} On 15 November 1297 settlement was made at the exchequer, with Cecily being allowed £29 3s. 9¼d. against the customs duties she owed (E 368/69, m. 20). A writ in pursuance was issued to the collectors of customs at London on 17 November 1297 (E 159/71, m. 108).

^{page 178 note 1} A similar memorandum records an identical arrangement made by the Prior and brothers of the Hospital. It is printed in Rothwell, , ‘The Confirmation of the Charters, 1297’, 190–1.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 2} 2 February 1298.

^{page 178 note 3} Letters patent appointing the constables of the castles of Bristol and St Briavels, with the sheriff of Gloucestershire, to select fifty miners to go to London were issued on 14 December 1297 (E 368/69, m. 6d; E 159/71, m. 64d).

^{page 179 note a} … a Passage interlined.

^{page 179 note b} Word interlined.

^{page 179 note 1} This may relate to the letter of 8 September (no. 135) or, more probably, to the grant Mowbray made of lands and rent to John de Creppinges, which received royal confirmation on 22 December, by which time Mowbray had died (C.P.R., 1291–1301, p. 325).Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 2} King's Langley, Herts.

^{page 180 note 1} Pierre Emerik had been granted the church of Peckham on 27 January 1295. In 1296 he was described as being ‘attendant constantly on the king's service’, and on 24 August 1299 he was granted a canonry at Beverley (C.P.R., 1292–1301, pp. 129, 208, 436). See also no. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 2} For the king's letters on behalf of Hugh, see no. 167.

^{page 181 note 1} Writs had been issued on 4 October 1297 assigning the customs revenue from Boston and Hull to the merchants of the Frescobaldi, saving the revenue already assigned to the duke of Brabant (E 159/71, m. 107; E 368/69, m. 24d). For full details of the repayments to the Frescobaldi of the forced loans of 1294–5, see Kaeuper, ‘The Frescobaldi of Florence and the English Crown’, 48–52.

^{page 182 note 1} The continuation of the truce was agreed at Tournai on 28 January 1298 (Treaty Rolls, i, 143–4).Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 1} Immediately preceding this writ, on m. 59, is a writ giving similar instructions to Henry Newark, archbishop-elect of York; and following it is a writ to the sheriff of Yorks., ordering him to assist Henry Newark and John de Lisle.

^{page 184 note 1} For the payment of the Burgundians, see de Sturler, J., ‘Le paiement a Bruxelles des alliés Franc-comtois d'Edouard I^er, roi d'Angleterre (Mai 1297)’, Cahiers Bruxellois, v (1960), 18–37.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 2} Commissions had already been issued for ships to be collected in Norfolk and Suffolk, to be ready at Sluys by 23 February for the king's passage to England (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 328Google Scholar). On 15 February the men of Portsmouth were instructed to send ships to Sluys by the first favourable wind, by view of Richard de Kerstan sent to those parts to collect ships. (E 159/71, m. 114).

^{page 184 note 3} Details follow of the agreement reached at Tournai on 28 and 31 January: see Treaty Rolls, i, 143–5Google Scholar; Foedera, I, ii, 885–6.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note a} Word interlined.

^{page 185 note b} MS. Castre enordiales.

^{page 185 note 1} 17 February.

^{page 185 note 2} Castro Urdiales, Spain, prov. Santander.

^{page 186 note 1} Morgannwg, Glam.

^{page 186 note 2} Similar letters were sent on behalf of the men of North Wales and West Wales (SC 1/45/114, 115). The strength of this particular contingent was nine constables and 900 foot (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fo. 83).

^{page 186 note 3} John de St John appointed Thomas Paynel his attorney on 5 October 1296 (E 159/70, m. 75d).

^{page 188 note a} MS. seon.

^{page 188 note 1} For an earlier report of alleged non-payment of customs, after Easter 1297, see E 159/70, m. 28.

^{page 188 note 2} The detailed complaints of the merchants follow in the memoranda roll.

^{page 190 note 1} 24 June 1298.

^{page 190 note 2} 1 September 1298.

^{page 191 note a} … a Passage interlined.

^{page 191 note b} Word interlined.

^{page 192 note a} Words printed in italics are cancelled in the manuscript.

^{page 192 note b} … b Passage interlined.

^{page 193 note a} Words printed in italics are cancelled in the manuscript.

^{page 193 note b} Followed by esse, struck out.

^{page 193 note 1} Commissions in accordance with this memorandum were issued on 4 April 1298 (C.P.R., 1292–1301, p. 338Google Scholar). In these William Inge and John de Cokefield replaced John de Lisle and Thomas de Snetterton, although in the letters sent to the bishops the latter were specified (C.C.R., 1296–1302, pp. 204–5Google Scholar). See also C.P.R. 1292–1301, p. 354Google Scholar, where on 17 June Cokefield was replaced by Richard de Walsingham. For further details of these proceedings, and an edition of the record of the inquest for Lincolnshire, see A Lincolnshire Assize Roll for 1298. Appendix 1, p. 136, contains a transcript of the ordinance-from the Patent Roll. The clause defining those who are to make the enquiry is omitted, and there are in addition several minor changes.

^{page 193 note 2} Details follow (E 368/69, m. 76) of the account of William Trussel, sheriff of Kent, who was charged with £400 profits from the archbishop's manors, and with prises of grain and timber totalling £547 5s. 2d. Some of the grain had been taken before the lands had been taken into the king's hands, however, and payment of £80 in alms was allowed in the account, leaving £447 10s. 2d. to be credited against Winchelsey's debts.

^{page 194 note a} proficissendum in E 368/69.

^{page 194 note 1} Although his proper title was bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, Walter Langton was frequently also styled bishop of Chester. See no. 97.

^{page 194 note 2} Culford, Suffolk.

^{page 194 note 3} For a letter of obligation by the abbot of St Peter's, Gloucester, see C 47/13/94. Orders to the houses to pay the money to six Italian companies were issued in 1306. The full list of monasteries was: Evesham, 500 marks; Glastonbury, 1,000 marks; Gloucester, 300 marks; Peterborough, 500 marks; Westminster, £500; Reading, 500 marks; St Mary's, York, 500 marks; Selby, 300 marks; Whitby, 400 marks; Bridlington, £100; Guisborough, £100; Kirkham, 200 marks; Newburgh, £100; Nostell, 100 marks (E 159/79, mm. 35, 35d). For financial assistance for the release of hostages provided by alien houses, see E 159/71, mm. 34, 34d, where in return for guarantees of 3,000 and 1,000 livres tournois respectively, Meremoutier and Holy Trinity, Caen, were restored their confiscated English lands.

^{page 196 note a} MS. Rogero.

^{page 197 note 1} The initial negotiations for this loan were carried out by Hugh Bush, and the sum actually borrowed was 4,000 livres tournois, which was brought by the merchants from Liège to Brussels (B.L., Add. MS. 7965, fos. 22v, 31). Repayment by the Frescobaldi on Edward I's behalf was 5,140 livres tournois, or approximately £1,290 (E 101/126/13, 15; C 47/13/1/28). The rate of interest works out at 28·5 per cent, or approximately 42 per cent p.a. Letters patent of the duke of Brabant are in Exchequer Warrants for Issue, E 404/481/2, no. 12. See Fryde, , ‘Financial Resources of Edward I in the Netherlands’, 1178.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 2} This petition was sent to the king at Fulham, and was forwarded by him to the treasurer on 5 May 1298. It was discovered that at Easter 1297 wool had been seized at Cardigan to a total value of £9 19s. 10d., and hides to a value of £15 2s. od. Orders were issued to the keepers of the customs at Haverford to allow the men of Cardigan to have their wool and hides returned to them in full (E 159/71, m. 37d).

^{page 198 note 1} This petition was dated by Haskins (‘Three Early Petitions of the Commonalty’, 318) as 1297, for he assumed that it formed the basis for the pardons from the forfeiture of wool which were issued in May and June 1297 (C.C.R., 1296–1302, pp. 33, 35Google Scholar). These, however, were issued on an individual basis, and it seems unlikely that they were inspired by this document. T. H. Lloyd has argued more plausibly that the petition was presented in 1307, and that the pardon and promise of payment issued on 20 June 1307 resulted from it (Lloyd, , English Wool Trade, pp. 95, 325Google Scholar; C.C.R., 1302–07, pp. 504–5).Google Scholar