^{Page No 197 Note 1} I would like to thank my former supervisor, Professor E. F. Jacob, for the help he gave me when I first became interested in the manuscript discussed below, and Professor H. S. Offler for a great deal of kindness in reading a draft of this paper.

^{Page No 197 Note 2} English background in Perroy, E., L’Angleterre et le grand Schisme sous Richard II, 1318-1399, Paris 1933 Google Scholar, with recent modifications by Palmer, J. J. N., ‘England and the Great Western Schism’ in EHR, LXXXIII (1968), 516-22CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Junghanns, H., Zur Geschichte der Englischen Kirchenpolitik von 1399-1413, Freiburg i Google Scholar. Br. 1915. The best discussions of the powers of councils are in Tierney, B., Foundations of the Conciliar Theory, Cambridge 1955 Google Scholar; and Moynihan, J., Papal Immunity and Liability in the Writings of the Medieval Canonists, Analecta Gregoriana, 120, Series Fac. Iuris Canonici, Sect. B, no. 9, Rome 1961 Google Scholar.

^{Page No 198 Note 1} The oath printed in Souchon, M., Die Paptswahlen in der Zeit des Grossen Schismas, Braunschweig 1898, 1, 285-95Google Scholar, chapters rv, v. Uguccione’s speech is printed in full in St Alban’s Chronicle 1406-1420, ed. Galbraith, V., Oxford 1937, 136-52Google Scholar.I hope soon to publish a full account of Henry IV’s letters of 1408, many of which are contained in MS BM Harley 431, especially ff. 14-14v, 15V-16, 47 V.

^{Page No 198 Note 2} For Ryssheton’s career the major sources are in A. Emden, B., Biographical Register of Oxford Graduates to 1500, Oxford 1959, 111 Google Scholar. The MS discussed here was not known to Emden. All references to Ryssheton’s career are from Emden unless otherwise stated.

^{Page No 198 Note 3} Lambeth Palace Library, Register of Courtenay (Canterbury), f. 61 v.

^{Page No 199 Note 1} I thank the Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Depot der Staatsbibliothek in Tübingen, for permission to use this manuscript and for help in reading it by ultra-violet lamp. The manuscript has now been transferred to Berlin.

^{Page No 199 Note 2} Vincke, J., ‘Acta Concila Pisani’ in Römischer Quartaischriƒt, XLVI (1938), 82 Google Scholar. Professor Vincke cites there MS Berlin 420, but this is a misprint for the manuscript cited in the text.

^{Page No 199 Note 3} Rose, V., Verzeichniss der Lateinischen Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin, Berlin 1903, 11, 2, 575 (no. 631)Google Scholar. The MS came into the Library in 1821. Its origin is unknown. Ryssheton’s work is at the end, ff. 108-11 v. It is in a smaller hand, in darker ink with many more lines to the page. Marginalia have sometimes been cut off to reduce the sheets to the right size. There is no water mark on these last sheets, in contrast to the earlier section. The hand is early fifteenth century and, contrary to what Rose suggests, Mr N. Ker considers that it is probably not English.

^{Page No 199 Note 4} J. Lelandi antiquarii de rebus Brittanicis Collectanea, ed. Hearne, T., Oxford 1715, 111, 49 Google Scholar.

^{Page No 199 Note 5} In the Berlin MS he refers to writings of his own which show that Gregory XII had been properly cited to Pisa, f. 109V: ‘legitime requisitus iuxta formam scripturarum mearum in convocacione facta in ecclesia sancti Pauli London nuper exhibitarum’. This probably refers to the Convocation of January 1409 when the delegation to Pisa was chosen, Cf. Junghanns, Kirchenpolitik, 35, 51; Wilkins, III, 312-13. Ryssheton delivered a major speech to Gregory at Rimini, but nothing remains of this except the report used in evidence at Pisa, Cf. Vincke, ‘ Acta ’, 281; idem, Briefe zum Pisaner Konzil, Beiträge zur Kirchen- und Rechtsgeschichte, 1, Bonn 1940, no. 95. This is probably the requisicio referred to above.

^{Page No 200 Note 1} There is a heading now only partly visible by ultra-violet light which reads: f. 108: ‘Presentetur pape ex parte N. Auditoris de Anglia super facto scismatis. Materia tradita Reverendissimis in Christo patribus et dominis utriusque collegii sancte Romane ecclesie Cardinalibus super facto scismatis... [illegible] scandi ex parte Nicolai de Ryssheton utriusque iuris doctoris minimi ac causarum palacii apostolici Auditoris eciam defensione processus facti in generali concilio contra g. et b. nuper contendentes.’ The first piece begins ‘Reverendissimi Patres et domini mei singularissimi’.

^{Page No 200 Note 2} f. 111v: ‘Ideo, pater sancte, sanctitas vestra, auctoritate generalis concilii, declaravit ex duabus obedientiis seu duobus collegiis Cardinalium unicum fuisse et esse collegium, et ita fuit obtenta in elecione quod due partes dominorum Cardinalium cuiuslibet obedientie concurrerent in elecione eadem sanctitatis vestre iuxta c. licet de vitanda ad tollendum omne dubium prout supra consului, quamvis alii contra et male. Cetera suppleat sanctitas vestra.’

^{Page No 200 Note 3} f. 108: ‘quicquid dixero illud dicam tanquam privata persona non tanquam ambassiator seu nuncius’.

^{Page No 200 Note 4} E.g. The passage in St Alban’s Chronicle, p. 149, from ‘Nam si lex’ to ‘c. consuetudo’ is word for word (though the order is altered) at f. 108 v. See below, p. 202, n. 2. Ryssheton was almost certainly borrowing from Uguccione and not vice-versa, because whereas Uguccione quoted in support the doctors of Bologna in their withdrawal of obedience (which happened 20 December 1407, Fliehe et Martin, , Histoire de l’Eglise, vol. xiv (1962), 137 Google Scholar), Ryssheton quoted both the Bolognese and the Florentines who had provisionally withdrawn on 26 January 1409 and finally on 25 March (Fliehe, p. 145). Cf. Berlin 251,f. 109; St Alban’s Chronicle, 147-8.

^{Page No 200 Note 5} ff. 108-9 v.

^{Page No 200 Note 6} See p. 198, n. 1 above.

^{Page No 201 Note 1} f. 108: ‘illud descendit a iure divino attestante sacra scriptura ibi dum dicitur: ‘vovete et reddite etc.’ (Ps. 75. 12), item alibi: ‘reddite domino iuramenta vestra’ (Mt. 5.33), et sic reddenda sunt deo cui magis obediendum quam hominibus (Acts 5. 29). Cum eciam papa in hoc casu non habet potestatem contra legem divinam nec contra ipsum deum, c. sunt quidam xxvi. q. i (sic c. xxv, q. 1.c.6) quia respicit statum universalis ecclesie propter unionem et probatur per dictum pauli ii ad. cor. ultimo (II Cor. 13. 10) ubi dicitur quod potestas pape est ad edificationem non ad destructionem quia par in parem etc.’ St Alban’s Chronicle, 147.

^{Page No 201 Note 2} Vincke, ‘Acta’, 283; Schmitz, L., ‘Die Quellen zur Geschichte des Konzils von Cividale’, Römischer Quartalschrift, viii (1894), 217-58Google Scholar; f. 108v: ‘quia hic agitur de titulo papatus inter duos contendentes et sic in causa propria non potest esse iudex et pars.. .dominus G. asseruit quod noluit habere scismaticos in concilio suo.. .et ipse vocat quoscumque scismaticos sibi non obedientes’, Cf. St Alban’s Chronicle, 150.

^{Page No 201 Note 3} f. 108v: ‘quantumcumque Cardinales utriusque collegii fuerint reputati excommunicati, privati seu alias inhabiles apud dominum G., tarnen quoad mixturam et unionem predictam et futuram elecionem pape eosdem Cardinales voluit dominus G. pro Cardinalibus habere et reputari ac super nihilitate eorum ex certa scientia sua et consensu a principio accomodato intellegi.’ Authorities are Digest 5, 1, 1 and 42, 1, 57; Codex, 3, 13.

^{Page No 201 Note 4} St Alban’s Chronicle, 147.

^{Page No 201 Note 5} f. 109: ‘Nam causa finalis huiusmodi instrumenti est publica utilitas ecclesie universalis et omnium Christianorum que insurgit ex unione ecclesie. Forma eciam fuit communis et collegialis. Unde licet Collegium ut Collegium, cum sit res inanimata, non potest ligari pena periurii. 1. proponebatur ff. de iudiciis (Digest 5, 1, 76), singulares tarnen persone ipsius Collegii possunt ligari periurium (sic). Unde cum hoc iuramentum.. .sit actus collegialis sed in actibus collegialibus et capitularibus minor pars, et presertim unus prout dominus G., habet sequi majorem partem ex illa obligacione renovata, per titulum de hiis qui fiunt a majore parte capituli (Decretals, 111, tit. 11) et c. cum omnes, de constitutionals (Decretals, 1, tit. 2, c. 6) sed maior pars collegii Cardinalium conclusit de loco civitatis Pisarum, igitur dominus G. tenetur sequi conclusionem illorum quo ad locum Pisarum per eos electum.’

^{Page No 202 Note 1} D. xvii.

^{Page No 202 Note 2} f. 108v: ‘Respondetur quod convocacio concilii pertinet ad papam certum et indubitatum et non ad papam dubitatum etc. Et presupponendum quod pertinet ad papam tantum secundum illos canones, tamen debemus iudicare secundum mentem et racionem ipsorum canonum et non secundum verba et corticem verborum prout faciunt Iudei, quia si canon vel lex caret racione extirpanda est. 1. di. consuetudo (D.I.c. 5). Et si casus occurens non repperiatur in lege scriptus, racio ipsa habet vim legis.’ St Alban’s Chronicle, 149-50.

^{Page No 202 Note 3} St Alban’s Chronicle, 150-1. Hostiensis on Decretals, v, tit. 38 c. 14, quoted Tierney, Conciliar Theory. See Moynihan, Papal Immunity, 115-16.Hostiensis was an authority especially in favour of the Council to judge a case of papal heresy.

^{Page No 203 Note 1} On Sext, v, tit. 2, c. 5. Quoted in Moynihan, Papal Immunity, 120, n. 29, and see 119-22.

^{Page No 203 Note 2} f. 109: ‘Item propter pertinaciam et tolleranciam scismatis antiquati xxx annis et ultra, corrumpit ilium articulum principale fidei nostre videlicet “unam sanctam ecclesiam”.’

^{Page No 203 Note 3} D. xix, c. 9; C. xxiv, q. 1; and see Tierney, Conciliar Theory, 38, 62.

^{Page No 203 Note 4} f. 109V, quoting C. xxiv, q. 3, c. 26 and q. 1, c. 21 and gloss; C. xxv, q. I, c. 5. See St Alban’s Chronicle, 148, for the same argument.

^{Page No 203 Note 5} f. 110-110V.

^{Page No 204 Note 1} For all this see Register ofChichele (Canterbury), ed. E. F.Jacob, Canterbury and York Society, 1937 seq., 1, xxx; Hefele, C. J., Histoire des Conciles, trans H. Leclerca, Paris 1916, vii, pt. 1, 38-9Google Scholar; Lenfant, J., Histoire du Concile de Pise, Utrecht 1731, vol. I, bk. 111, p. 74 Google Scholar; Uilbein, P. (ed.), Acta Fac. Artium Universitatis Vindobonensis, 1385-1416, Publikation des Instituts fur Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, vi, pt. 2 (1968), 318 Google Scholar, for a letter from the Ambassador of the University at the Council, 7 May; Schmitz, L., art. cit., Römischer Quartalschrift viii, 372 Google Scholar, gives the outcome.

^{Page No 204 Note 2} f. 110: ‘ Unde dicit textus eiusdem capituli (?) si primates (C. v, q. 2, c. 4) si bene videatur, quod si primas, qui non est iudex, vocavit concilium et huiusmodi concilium actu tenetur, si sunt aliqui vocandi vel citandi ad concilium, citabit primas non concilium, sed si tales vocati fuerint contumaces, concilium excommunicabit non primas. Ergo sub pari forma Cardinales qui non sunt iudices, possunt ad concilium sic citare et convocare citandos et convocandos et presertim dictos contendentes, et non possunt excommunicare non venientes contumaces.’

^{Page No 204 Note 3} f. 110v: ‘sicut primates habent iurisdictionem ordinariam ad convocandum concilium provinciale, sic Cardinales habent potestatem et iurisdictionem ad convocandum concilum generale inter duos contendentes super papatu, lxxix di. si duo forte (D. LXXIX, c. 8) per Hug(uccionem)’. For the gloss of Huguccio, see Tierney, Conciliar Theory, 76-7. For Huguccio’s views see also Moynihan, Papal Immunity, 75-82.

^{Page No 204 Note 4} f. 110v.

^{Page No 205 Note 1} Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, 12 and 18 seq.; Martène, E. and Durand, U., Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum Amplissima Collectio, Paris 1733, vii, col. 1049 seqGoogle Scholar.

^{Page No 205 Note 2} ‘Crederem quod non, absque argumentis.’

^{Page No 205 Note 3} Decretals, 111, tit. 5, c. 21; and 111, tit. 14, c. 2 and the Glossa Ordinaria to it were among the authorities cited to prove this.

^{Page No 205 Note 4} Decretals, 111, tit. 5, c. 8, which is a ruling of the Council of Tours, 1163.

^{Page No 205 Note 5} f. iii-iiiv.

^{Page No 205 Note 6} Martène, Veterum Scriptorum, col. 1098 and 1103.

^{Page No 205 Note 7} Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, 49-51; Souchon, Die Papstwahlen, 11, 41 seq. and esp. 52 seq.

^{Page No 205 Note 8} He quotes the definitive sentence of 13 June: (f. iiiv) ‘ilia pretensa privacio dominorum Cardinalium facta post tercium diem mensem maii anni ultimi elapsi est declarata nulla per sententiam diffinitivam latam a generali concilio’. For this sentence see Vincke, ‘Acta’, 304.

^{Page No 206 Note 1} Licet de Vitanda is Decretals, 1, tit. 6, c. 6, from Lateran Council 1179 ordering a two-thirds majority of cardinals for the election of the Pope. Also quoted were Sext., 1, tit. 6, c. 3; Clementines, 1, tit. 3, c. 2.

^{Page No 206 Note 2} See p. 204, n. 3 above.

^{Page No 206 Note 3} f. 111: ‘cum sit lex civilis prout patet ex eiusdem subscriptione quamvis canonizara, quia canonizacio non probat earn servandam in foro ecclesiastico, cum in canonibus repperiatur contrarium.. .Ideo Gracianus canonizando legem non poterat nobis inponere neccesitatem observandi eam in foro ecclesiastico, sed servabitur in foro suo, quamvis conpilacio Gratiani est approbata. Idem est in libro sententiarum, quod notat Archidiaconus ix di. siquis nesciat.’ Si duo forte was a letter of the Emperor Honorius. For Guido’s theory, see Baysio, G. de, Rosarium seu in Decretorum Volumen Commentarla, Venice 1601, at D. ix, c. 8, f. 11v Google Scholar.

^{Page No 206 Note 4} f. 111 v: ‘eligatur (papa) a duabus partibus Cardinalium utriusque obedientie cum auctoritate generalis concilii per viam comissionis seu concessionis vel compromissi, in dominos Cardinales universaliter vel particulariter, ad cautelam et ex superhabundanti prout melius et honestius et facilius poterit obtineri a concilio.’

^{Page No 206 Note 5} See p. 200, n. 2 above.