|
THE GROWTH OF INSTITUTIONS (PIPE ROLL 31
HENRY I)
|
(All of these texts are in the Mats., starting on p. III–45,
but it may be easier to follow them here.)
|
1.
|
Coinage and units used
in the Pipe Roll of 31 Henry I
|
|
|
a.
|
pound
|
=
|
20 shillings = 240 pence (pennies)
|
|
|
b.
|
shilling
|
=
|
12 pence
|
|
|
c.
|
mark
|
=
|
13 shillings 4 pence (notionally 2/3 of a pound = 160 pence)
|
Warwickshire. Geoffrey de Clinton renders account of 44s. 8d.
[12d. to the shilling, 20s. to the pound] blanch from the old farm. He has
paid it into the treasury. And he is quit.
And the same man renders
account of the new farm. In the treasury £100 4s. 4d. by weight. And he owes
£32 9s. 4d. blanch.
And the same Geoffrey renders
account of 310m. [unit of account worth 13s. 4d.,
hence this office cost Geoffrey £204 12s.] of silver
for an office in the treasury at Winchester.
In the treasury 100m. of silver. And he owes 210m. of silver.
Osbert of Arden renders
account of £10 for the pleas of William Hubold. In the treasury 40s. And he
owes £8.
And the same sheriff renders
account of 100s. from old pleas and murders. In
pardon by the king’s writ to the earl of Warwick 100s. And he is quit.
William Fitz-Ralph renders
account of 113s. 4d. and one war-horse that he may have the land of his
father. In the treasury 30s. And he
owes £4 3s. 4d. and one war-horse.
Robert Fitz-Ralph renders
account of £4 for his portion of his father’s land. In the treasury 20s. And he owes 60s.
Benjamin renders account of £4
5s that he may keep the pleas that belong to the king’s crown. In the
treasury 56s 8d. And he owes 28s 4d; and [guarantees] to make a profit of
500m for the king. ...
Roger de Flamenvilla renders
account of 20m silver from pleas of G[eoffrey] de Clinton and his companion
at Blyth.
And the same sheriff [of Yorkshire, Bertrand de Bulemer] renders
account of 31m silver from 9 “judicators” (judicatoribus) of the county from the same pleas.
And the same sheriff renders
account of 335m silver, 5s 6d from the lesser judges and jurors of the county
(de minutis judicibus et juratoribus
comitatus) from the same pleas.
William fitz Rannulf, sheriff,
renders account of 20m silver from the same pleas.
William de Albamara renders
account of 154m silver from the same pleas from his land of Holderness.
Robert Fossard renders account
of 10m silver from the same pleas and of 40m silver that he be reseised of
his land.
Godereda, daughter of Gospatric
son of Aldret, owes 10m silver for right of the land of her father. ...
Walter Espec renders account
of 200m silver from pleas of the stag. In the treasury 50m silver. And he
owes £100 pounds. ...
And the same renders account
of one gold ring of 5–penny weight from a certain finding. He has paid to the
treasury. And he is quit.
Grento of York renders account
of 10m silver for a plea of the land of his wife.
Pleas of W. Espec and Eustace fitz John
The judges and jurors [judices et juratores] of Yorkshire owe £100 that they may no longer be judges
and jurors. ...
|
2.
|
Summary of the Pipe
Roll of 31 Henry I
|
|
|
|
|
a.
|
sheriff’s farm
|
=
|
sheriff
|
|
|
b.
|
profits of justice from justiciarii (eyre and local),
judices, minuti homines, juratores
|
=
|
itinerant justices, local royal courts, ?presenting bodies
|
|
|
c.
|
payment for writs by individuals
|
=
|
civil cases
|
|
3.
|
One way to look at
the history of English institutions—courts of law:
|
|
|
a.
|
Anglo-Saxon survivals: shire, hundred, borough (ancient
public)
|
|
|
b.
|
More recent lordly: palatinate, franchisal, communal in
private hands, “feudal” (leet, baron, manorial) (private jurisdiction)
|
|
|
c.
|
Royal justices in the country: local, tocius Anglie
(= eyre (Lat. iter) = itinerant justices}
|
|
|
d.
|
Central royal: the bench (bancum commune), before the
king (bancum coram rege): derived from the exchequer
|
|
|
e.
|
The church courts
|
|
4.
|
In order to get some idea of why, we must have some idea of when. No one
ascribes the crucial developments to the reigns of Stephen and Matilda, but
there are respectable scholars who argue both for Henry I and Henry
II. Whatever the date it seems
reasonably clear that the Exchequer came before the central courts and that
the central courts of justice in some sense developed out of it. Now:
|
|
|
a.
|
If Henry I then the purposes must be making money and
keeping order
|
|
|
b.
|
If Henry II then the possible purposes expand
|
|
5.
|
What we have just looked at suggests, although it certainly does not
prove, that the answer to the question when did these institutions begin is
the reign of Henry I. What we do not
have yet is any regularization at least on the civil side. What happened during the reign of Henry
II was:
|
|
|
a.
|
Restoration of a system that had probably fallen down under Stephen.
|
|
|
b.
|
Regularization on the civil side of the writs. What had been of grace
became of course and this means you don’t have to pay as much for it.
|
|
|
c.
|
Identification of various types of actions and development of pleading.
|
|
|
d.
|
The returnable writ — the administrative order becomes an invitation to
a judicial proceeding in the central royal courts
|
|
6.
|
Let us close with some even broader questions:
|
|
|
a.
|
Do institutions have to come before law?
Well at least in this case they did.
|
|
|
b.
|
Do we know what Henry II was trying to do? No, but the fact that he was
putting content into already existing institutions rather than creating new
ones suggests that the simple stealing jurisdiction answer won’t do. Our
next classes will be devoted to finding substitutes for that answer.
|
|
|
c.
|
What was Henry I all about? (A-S Chronicle for 1135): “He was a good
man, and people were in great awe of him. No one dared injure another in
his time. He made peace for man and beast. Whoever carried his burden of
gold and silver, nobody dared say anything but good
to him.”
|
|