^{page 93 note 1} see History, new ser., vol. xv (Oct. 1930), p. 208.

^{page 93 note 2} Suppt. no. 1 (June 1932), pp. 27–31.

^{page 93 note 3} R. Hist. S., 1920.

^{page 94 note 1} Report of the Royal Commission on Public Records (H. of C. Parl. Papers, Cmd. 369), vol. iii, pt. 2, p. 24.

^{page 94 note 2} ibid., p. 54.

^{page 94 note 3} cf. Baskerville, G., Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. xliv (1929), p. 4, n. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 94 note 4} The best guides are the old books of practice, especially Oughton, T., Ordo judiciorum, 2 vols. (1738)Google Scholar, and H. Conset, The practice of the spiritual courts, 2nd ed., 1700. Mr. Hockaday, F. S. compiled a valuable ‘Practice’ based upon the Gloucester records; see Trans. Bristol and Glouc, Archeol, Soc, vol, xlvi (1924), pp. 195–287.Google Scholar

^{page 95 note 1} see Nichols, J. G., Literary anecdotes, viii. 283–284.Google Scholar

^{page 95 note 2} vol xxi.

^{page 95 note 3} A useful index to the Essex cases in this volume is in Trans. Essex Archeol. Soc, vol. xix, pt. 4 (1929), pp. 305–10. 4 vol. xxii.

^{page 95 note 5} in Trials of a country parson; see esp. p. 210.

^{page 95 note 6} p. 131.

^{page 96 note 1} vol. lxiv.

^{page 96 note 2} new ser., vol. xlviii, pp. 1–95.

^{page 96 note 3} new ser., vol. xliv.

^{page 96 note 4} see esp. vol. i, chap. 10; and Usher's remarks on the value of ecclesiastical court records ‘ in the aggregate ’, vol. ii, p. 383.

^{page 96 note 5} see Trans. R. Hist. S., 4th ser., vol. iv (1921), pp. 103–39.

^{page 96 note 6} Somerset Record Society, vol. xliii.

^{page 96 note 7} vol. x.

^{page 97 note 1} vol. x.

^{page 97 note 2} esp. ‘The commission for ecclesiastical causes in the dioceses of Bristol and Gloucester, 1574’ Trans. Bristol and Gloucestershire Archeol. Soc, vol. lix (1938), pp. 61–181Google Scholar ‘Gloucester diocese under Bishop Hooper, 1551–53,’ ibid., vol. lx (1939), pp. 51–151; ‘The administration of the diocese of Gloucester, 1547–79’ a work which the author has kindly allowed me to see in typescript.

^{page 97 note 3} see H: E. Salter in V.C.H., Oxon., ii. 40–5; and J. C. Cox in V.C.H., Essex, ii. 41–7.

^{page 97 note 4} Redstone, V. B., ‘Sudbury archdeaconry records’, Proc. Suffolk Institute of Archeology, vol. xi, pt. 2 (1902), pp 252–265Google Scholar, pt. 3 (1903), pp. 267–300 [deals only with parish register transcripts, terriers and surveys]; Moore, A. P., ‘Proceedings in the ecclesiastical courts in the archdeaconry of Leicester, 1516–35’, Associated Architectural Societies Reports and Papers, vol. xxviii, pt. 1 (1965–1966), pp. 115–220 and 593–662Google Scholar; Woodruff, C. E., ‘Extracts from original documents illustrating the progress of the reformation in Kent’, Archeol. Cantiana, vol. xxi (1915), pp. 92–120Google Scholar; Hockaday, F. S., ‘Withington peculiar’, Trans. Bristol and Glouc. Archeol. Soc, vol. xl (1917), pp. 89–113Google Scholar; Ragg, F. W., ‘Fragment of a folio MS. of the archdeaconry court of Bucks, 1491–95’, Bucks. Records, vol. xi, nos. 1– (1919–1922), pp. 27–47, 59–76, 145–56, 199–207Google Scholar; Fletcher, J. M. J., ‘A century of Dorset documents’, Proc. Dorset Natural Hist, and Antiquarian Field Club, vol. xlvii (1926), pp. 25–50Google Scholar [on the court records of the peculiar of Wimborne Minster]; Beeton, E. G., ‘17th Century Church Discipline, illustrated from a Liber actorum of Hadleigh, 1637–41’, Hist. Teachers' Miscellany, vol. iv, no. 2 (1926), pp. 27–30Google Scholar; Pressey, W. J., ‘Seating experiences in Essex churches (Elizabethan and Stuart times)’, Essex Review,. vol. xxxv (Jan. 1926)Google Scholar; Hodgkinson, R. E. B., ‘Extracts from the act books of the archdeacons of Nottingham’, Trans, of the Thoroton Soc, vol. xxxi (1927), pp. 108–153)Google Scholar; Emmison, F. G., ‘Abstract. of an act book of the archdeacon of Huntingdon's court’, Trans. East Herts. Archeol. Soc, vol. viii (1928–1933), pp. 26–42, 187–94Google Scholar; Woodruff, C. E., ‘Notes from a 14th-century act book of the consistory court of Canterbury’, Archeol. Cantiana, vol. xl (1928), pp. 53–64Google Scholar; ‘ The records of the courts of the archdeaconry and consistory of Canterbury ’, ibid., vol. xli (1929), pp. 89–105; Pressey, W. J., ‘The records of the archdeaconries of Essex and Colchester’, Trans. Essex Archeol. Soc, new ser., vol. xix, pt. 1 (1930), pp. 1–21Google Scholar; Auden, J. E., ‘The local peculiar courts of Shropshire’, Trans. Shropshire Archeol. and Natural Hist. Soc, 4th ser., vol. xii, pt. 2 (1930), pp. 273–325Google Scholar [an historical account of these courts, referring particularly to their jurisdiction in testamentary matters]; Hodge, C. E., ‘Cases from a 15th century archdeacon's court’, Law Quarterly Rev., vol. xliv (1933), pp. 268–274Google ScholarPressey, W. J., ‘The surplice in Essex during Elizabethan and Stuart times’, Essex Review, vol. xlv (Jan. 1936), pp. 36–45Google Scholar; Browne, A. L., ‘The peculiar jurisdiction of Bibury’, Trans. Bristol and Gloucester Archeol. Soc, vol. lviii (1936), pp. 171–194.Google Scholar

^{page 98 note 1} Typescript copies of MSS. of the collegiate church of St. Mary, Southwell, nos. 21, 22, 23, pts. I–iii, consisting of act books, 1537–95, are in Reading University Library : 942.52 stack.

^{page 98 note 2} For a comprehensive classified list of causes, see Hockaday, F. S., Trans. Bristol and Glouc. Archeol. Soc, vol. xlvi (1924), pp. 198–200.Google Scholar

^{page 98 note 3} Quarter sessions records of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries have rarely survived. The records of ecclesiastical courts, which had to a large extent a concurrent jurisdiction, thus supply a great deal of evidence which would otherwise have been lost. Mr. F. G. Emmison kindly tells me that for Essex there is a long parallel series of quarter sessions and archdeaconry court records which provide complementary and often even duplicate evidence. See also Peyton, S. A., ‘The Religious Census of 1678’, Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. xlviii (1933), pp. 99–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar, in which he shows how the minute books of quarter sessons of the parts of Kesteven within the county of Lincoln and the court act books of the archdeaconry of Lincoln supply complementary statistics of catholics and nonconformists.

^{page 98 note 4} see above, p. 94, n. 4.

^{page 98 note 5} cf. MissMajor, Kathleen, ‘The Lincoln diocesan records’, Trans. R. Hist. Soc, 4th ser., vol. xxii (1940), p. 53.Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 1} cf. Price, F. D., ‘An Elizabethan church official, Thomas Powell’, Church Quarterly Rev., vol. cxxviii (1939), pp. 94–112Google Scholar; and see Browne, A. L., ‘The medieval officials principal of Rochester’, Archeot. Cantiana, vol. liii (1940), pp. 29–61.Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 2} For the history of the courts, see Bishop Stubbs' historical appendix to the report of the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Courts,, 1883, and Holdsworth, W. S., Hist, of English law, vol. i, pp. 580–634.Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 3} cf. Wilson, F. P., ‘Shakespeare and the diction of common life’.Annual Shakespeare Lecture, Proc. of the British Academy, vol. xxvii (1941).Google Scholar

^{page 99 note 4} H. Jenkinson, The later court hands in England; see, for some remarks on the palaeography of ecclesiastical records, a review of this work by Thompson, A. Hamilton, The Antiquaries Journal, vol. ix (1929), p. 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 99 note 5} For the accession of these records, see Summary catalogue of Western MSS. in the Bodleian Library, vol. v, p. 157; Craster, H. H. E., Bodleian Quarterly Record, vol. iii (1922), pp. 223–224Google Scholar; and for some account of their contents, Turner, W.H., Proc. Oxford Architect, and Hist. Soc., newser., vol. iii, pp. 130–138.Google Scholar

^{page 100 note 1} Bodleian Library, MS. Archdeaconry Papers, Oxon. b. 1; c, 2–27. (Hereafter A.P. = MS. Archdeaconry Papers.)

^{page 100 note 2} ibid., c. 172–5

^{page 100 note 3} ibid., c. 118–20.

^{page 100 note 4} ibid., c. 31–3.

^{page 100 note 5} ibid., c. 116, 117.

^{page 100 note 6} ibid., c. 128–31.

^{page 100 note 7} ibid., c. 121.

^{page 100 note 8} ibid., b. 2–3; c. 1, 122–4 d. 1–3; e. 1–2.

^{page 100 note 9} ibid., e. 3.

^{page 100 note 10} ibid., c. 35–44; 46–115.

^{page 100 note 11} ibid., b. 22–7.

^{page 100 note 12} ibid., c. 18–19.

^{page 100 note 13} Bodleian Library, MS. Oxford Diocesan Papers d. 1, 4–6, 10.

^{page 100 note 14} ibid., c. 59–60; 106–11.

^{page 100 note 15} ibid., c. 1, 22.

^{page 100 note 16} ibid., c. 101.

^{page 100 note 17} A.P., Oxon. c. 115 (Banbury), c. 158 (Dorchester), c. 162, 163 (Thame).

^{page 100 note 18} see Peyton, S. A., Churchwardens' presentments in the Oxfordshire peculiars, Oxfordshire Record Society, vol. x (1928).Google Scholar

^{page 100 note 19} A.P., Oxon. misc. c. 2. Extracts from this are printed, with introduction, by Browne, A. L., Trans. Bristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc., vol. lviii (1936), PP.Google Scholar

^{page 101 note 1} cf. Hall, Hubert, ‘Some Elizabethan penances in the diocese of Ely’, Trans. R. Hist. Soc., 3rd ser., vol. i (1907), pp. 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 102 note 1} A.P., Berks, c. 3–92, covering the years 1535 to 1795.

^{page 102 note 2} cf. Frere, W. H., The English Church in the reigns of Elizabeth and James I, p. 100.Google Scholar

^{page 102 note 3} W. P. M. Kennedy, Elizabethan episcopal administration (Alcuin Club Collections, xxv–xxvii), i. xxxii.

^{page 102 note 4} W. H. Frere and W. P. M. Kennedy, Visitation articles and injunctions of the period of the Reformation (Alcuin Club Collections, xiv–xvi), and W. P. M. Kennedy, op. cit. And see W. P. M. Kennedy's list of visitation articles and injunctions for 1604 to 1715 in Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. xl (1925), pp. 586–92; Vol. xli (1926), pp. 577–9.

^{page 102 note 5} Kennedy, W. P. M., Eliz. epis. Admin., i. xxvii.Google Scholar

^{page 103 note 1} F. W. Maitland, ‘ The Anglican settlement’, Camb. Mod. Hist., ii. 589. 2 cf. F. M. Powicke, The Reformation in England, pp. 122–3; and W. H. Frere, op. cit., i. 168–9.

^{page 104 note 1} Especially when we have materials for comparison, as for Oxfordshire in H. E. Salter, ‘ An episcopal visitation of Oxon. Churches in 1520 ’, Report ofOxon. Archeol. Soc, no. 70 (1925), analysed by G. G. Coulton in Mediaeval panorama, p. 176; printed also by A. Hamilton Thompson in Visitations in the diocese of Lincoln, 1517–1531, Lincoln Rec. Soc., vol. xxxiii (1940), vol. i, pp. 119–40. See also Salter, H. E., ‘A visitation of Oxfordshire, 1540’, Report of Oxon. Archeol. Soc, no. 75 (1930), pp. 289–307.Google Scholar

^{page 105 note 1} ‘ The observance of Sunday ’ in Englishmen at rest and play, ed. R, Lennard, p. 81.

^{page 106 note 1} See, on cases of usury in ecclesiastical courts, Tawney, R. H., Religion and the rise of capitalism (1926), pp. 50–55, 159–63,Google Scholar

^{page 107 note 1} cf. W. P. M. Kennedy, op. dt., pp. cxxvi–cxxix.

^{page 107 note 2} see A. Peel, The secoride parte of a register, i. 179, 207, 268; ii. 3, 11; et passim.

^{page 107 note 3} The fees in the Oxon. books correspond closely with those set forth in Whitgift's Table of 1584, repeated in 1597 and confirmed by the 135th canon of 1604. For this table see J. Ayliffe, Parergon, p. 551; also in R. Burn, Eccl. Law, 5th ed.(ii. 236–41.

^{page 107 note 4} cf. Price, F. D., ‘The abuses of excommunication and the decline of ecclesiastical discipline under Elizabeth’, Eng. Hist. Rev., vol. lvii (1942), pp. 106–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 107 note 8} The phrase is Prof. G. M. Trevelyan's, in another connexion.

^{page 108 note 1} A.P., Oxon. c. 5.

^{page 108 note 2} cf. Frere and Kennedy, Visitation articles and injunctions, vol. iii, pp. 2, 4, 16, passim; Kennedy, Elizabethan episcopal administration, passim.

^{page 102 note 3} A.P., Oxon. c. 5, fo. 64.

^{page 102 note 4} ibid.

^{page 102 note 5} ibid.

^{page 102 note 6} ibid., fo. 64b.

^{page 102 note 7} ibid.

^{page 103 note 1} ibid.

^{page 103 note 2} ibid., to. 69b (for poor box cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 3, 16, passim; for bible, ibid., p. 10, passim).

^{page 103 note 3} ibid., fo. 96. Official orders for the good keeping of churches were Constant throughout the reign, and the archdeacon's court at Oxford was zealous in enforcing them. cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., esp. iii. 285.

^{page 109 note 4} see Churchwardens' accounts of Pyrton, Marston and Spelsbury. ed. Weaver, F. W. and Clark, G. N., Oxfordshire Rec. Soc, vol. vi (1925), p. 75.Google Scholar

^{page 110 note 1} A.P., fo. 54.

^{page 110 note 2} pp. 322, 323. 3 A.P., Oxon. c. 7.

^{page 110 note 3} ibid., fo. 66. (For clerical participation in games, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 2, 11, passim).

^{page 110 note 5} ibid., fo. 69b. (For railing against ministers, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 4, passim).

^{page 110 note 6} ibid.

^{page 111 note 1} ibid., fo. 87. (For ringing of bells on the Queen's Day, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 257.)

^{page 111 note 2} ibid., fo. 15b. (For laying violent hands on a clergyman, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 380.)

^{page 111 note 3} ibid., fo. 23. (For brawling in church, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. cit., iii. 2, 5.)

^{page 111 note 4} ibid., fo. 121. Dr. Floyd (or Lloyd) was one of the guardians of the spiritualities for the diocese of Oxford and sat as judge in the episcopal court. (For keeping of interludes and plays in churches, cf. Frere and Kennedy, op. eit., iii. 209, 271.)

^{page 112 note 1} A.P., Oxon. fo. 121.

^{page 112 note 2} ibid., c. 12.

^{page 112 note 3} ibid., fo. 35.

^{page 112 note 4} ibid., fo. 54.

^{page 113 note 1} ibid., to. 69b.

^{page 113 note 2} ibid., fp. 86.

^{page 113 note 3} ibid.

^{page 113 note 4} ibid., fo. 363b.

^{page 114 note 1} A.P., Oxon. fo. 344.

^{page 114 note 2} ibid., fo. 344b.

^{page 114 note 3} ibid., fo. 360. For Richard Sybbs and John Preston, see D.N.B. Both were well-known Puritan divines who published volumes of sermons.

^{page 114 note 4} cf. Holdsworth, W. S., ‘Defamation in the 16th and 17th centuries’, Law Quarterly Rev., vol. xl, nos. 1, 2Google Scholar; vol. xli, no. 1 (1924, 1925).

^{page 115 note 1} cf. MissJames, Margaret, ‘The political importance of the tithes controversy in the English Revolution’, History, new ser., vol. xxvi (1941), pp. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 115 note 2} cf. Chapman, J. H., ‘Tithe surveys as a source of agrarian history’, Cambr. Hist. Jour., vol. i (1924), pp. 201–208.Google Scholar

^{page 115 note 3} A.P., Oxon. c. 173, fos. 258–72.

^{page 115 note 4} ibid., fo. 259.

^{page 115 note 5} pp. 18–21.

^{page 115 note 6} A.P., Oxon. c. 26, fo. 640.

^{page 115 note 7} ibid., fo. 641.

^{page 115 note 8} ibid., fo. 643.

^{page 116 note 1} A.P., Oxon. c. 174, fos. 196–225.

^{page 116 note 2} see above, p. 100, n. 11.

^{page 116 note 3} A.P., Oxon. b. 22, fo. 268.

^{page 116 note 4} ibid., fo. 370.

^{page 116 note 5} ibid., fo. 373 is the vicar's (George Bell's) letter containing the account; fo. 374 is the plan.

^{page 117 note 1} see above, p. 93, n. 2.

^{page 117 note 2} Bulletin of the Inst. of Hist. Research, Suppl., no. 1 (June 1932), pp. 1, 2.

^{page 117 note 3} A note by Dr. R. L. Poole, Keeper of the University Archives, inserted at A.P., Oxon. c. 173, fo. 196, states t h a t ‘ John French was a proctor in this suit, and it may be presumed that, when he was made Registrar of the University in 1629, the file passed into his office through inadvertence’.

^{page 118 note 1} Rept. of the Royal Commission on Public Records, (H. of C, Parl. Papers, Cmd. 369), pp. 19, 20.

^{page 118 note 2} ibid., p. 8.

^{page 118 note 3} see The Antiquaries' Journal, vol. vi (1926), p. 243.

^{page 119 note 1} In recent years the records of the archdeaconries of Bedford, St. Albans and Huntingdon, and the three archdeaconries of Essex have been deposited in the county record offices of Bedford, Hertford, and Essex respectively. For the Essex records, see Bulletin of the Inst. of Hist. Research, vol. xviii (1940), pp. 88–89Google Scholar. See also Trans. Essex Archaeol. Soc, vol. xxiii.pt. i (1942), pp. 185–6, for a useful list (by F. G. Emmison) of papers which have appeared in previous volumes of these Transactions, and in the Essex Review, based upon the Essex archdeaconry records.