The greater number of the genuine charters of the eighth century are Mercian and Kentish. Of the West Saxon kings we hear little. This is what we should expect from the history of the period. The eighth century was the hey-day of the Mercian power. The kings of Mercia conquered Kent and other kingdoms, and in Offa they produced the greatest English king of the century. He and his predecessor Æthelbald occupied the Mercian throne for eighty years, with the exception of the few days of Beornred's reign. Æthelbald issued many diplomas, and Offa even more. Both kings are of importance in the history of the O.E. diploma. They introduce modifications in the forms of instruments and commence to use formulas that were, owing to the imitation of their instruments by the West Saxon kings, long represented in more or less modified form in the later O.E. royal diplomas. The changes involve the progressive disuse of the formulas derived from the late Roman private deed, although the spirit of these Roman formulas is present. It is in the Kentish charters of the seventh century that most of these Roman formulas occur, and it is the Kentish charter of the eighth century that best preserves them. So strong is the formalism that the Mercian king will use Kentish models when issuing charters relating to Kent, using different formulas in Mercia. The eighth-century charters may, indeed, be divided into the two classes, Mercian and Kent, so far as concerns their form.
We may first consider the Kentish, as it is the oldest and the smallest group. One of its characteristics was, it may be remembered, the use of the second person singular for the donee, a use derived from the Roman private deed, which was drawn up in epistolary form. Of twenty-three eighth-century charters drawn up in this way, twenty-one relate to Kent, the other two being Hwiccian. The most marked feature of the Kentish charters is the retention of the Roman formulas. They are fewer in number than in the preceding century. Some of the older formulas are, however represented by clauses that are inspired by the Roman clauses, although they do not agree verbally. The granting words are no longer Roman, and the formula is reduced to simple verbs such as dono, tribuo, confero, etc. The defining words of the Roman formula a praesenti die et tempore occur in an original charter of 732 [189] and in the Kentish charter of Cenwulf of Mercia and his wife in 799, [190] which we have previously cited for its retention of Roman formulas - a retention so remarkable that I have suggested that it is a repetition with modifications of a lost seventh-century charter. It contains the Roman formula 'propria manu pro ignorantia literarum signum sanctae crucis … expressi'. The reference to ignorance of letters does not occur elsewhere in the charters of the eighth century, and it fell into disuse about the end of the previous century, no doubt, as I have suggested, by reason of its inappropriateness. But with the excision of the reference to ignorance of letters, the clause was still used in Kent in the eighth century. Thus we have in a contemporary charter of Æthelberht of Kent in 732 'signum sanctae crucis expressi'. [191] The same words are used in a charter of Eadberht of Kent in 761 [192] and in Cenwulf's charter of 799. [193] King <Sigered> in 759 x 765 slightly varies the formula into 'hoc signaculo sanctae crucis expressi'. [194] A Kentish charter of Offa in 788 is noteworthy for using the words signum crucis impressi. [195] This is the verb used in three sixth-century Italian papyri. [196] In the eighth century in England this formula was varied by omitting first the words propter ignorantiam literarum, and then the reference to the sign of the cross and the substitution of verbs like munio, confirmo, corroboro for imprimere, a change that weakened the necessity for mentioning the sign of the cross. So that eventually the sole remnant of the late Roman formula is the expression propria manu. This was widely, though not universally, used in the eighth century, more especially in charters relating to Kent.
Roman formula granting powers to alienate the land conveyed by the deed occurs in its oldest and best form in Cenwulf's charter of 799 as 'quicquit exinde facere volueritis liberam [h]abeatis potestatem'. [197] In the eighth century this clause underwent modification, but we can still perceive the verbal resemblances. Thus in an original charter of Eardwulf of Kent in 765 we read 'ut quicquid de ea fieri volueritis, sive in donando, sive in accomodando, vel in commutando, liberam sempernaliter postestatem habeatis'. [198] In the charter of Sigered of Kent, <759> x 765, the clause appears as 'ut possidendi vel habendi sive vendendi etiam tradendi cuicunque voluerit, liberam per omnia habeat potestatem'. [199] The clause is here in course of development to the form it finally assumed in the O.E. diplomas.
The Roman clause precluding the heirs of the donor from contravening the gift occurs in the archaic charter of Cenwulf in 799 in the ancient form of 'numquam me [h]eredesque mei contra hanc cartulam descriptionis nostrae aliquando esse venturus (read venturos)', [200] but it is usually represented by an injunction upon the donor's successors, which is occasionally merged in the anathema. [201] This charter of 799 stands alone in the eighth century in retaining the Roman clause empowering the donee to claim and defend the land. It occurs in the reduced form of 'successoresque vestri defendant in perpetuum'. [202]
The strongest of these Roman survivals in the Kentish charters of century are the formulas representing the rogatio testium. The formula in the late Roman private deed was, it will be remembered, 'testes, ut subscriberent, conrogavi', and in my first lecture instances of the seventh-century English use of this formula, [203] in which the simple verb rogavi is substituted for the compound, were given. The form thus produced, 'testes, ut subscriberent, rogavi', appears in a Kentish charter of Offa in 759 x 764, [204] and in another Kentish charter of his in 764, [205] where it is followed by the clause 'quorum infra nomina asscripta tenentur'. This clause seems to be due to Mercian influence, for clauses in the same words or words of the same meaning are used in the Mercian charters, where they are preceded by such words as 'Hiis testibus consentientibus'. The formula thus produced eventually drove out the old Roman formula, even in Kent, and remained in use, with unessential changes, until the end of the Old English period. The Kentish charters of the eighth century have several variations of the Roman formula, such as the substitution of peto for rogo, the change to 'testes religiosos, ut id ipsum facerent, adhibui' or 'adhibeo', or to 'testes, ut id ipsum (consentientes) agerent, feci'. [206] The verbs adhibere and facere are used in this formula in the late Roman private deeds, but I have not been able to discover any seventh-century instances of their use in England.
The Kentish charters also retain the clause 'Manente hac chartula in sua firmitate', whose Italian origin we have previously shown. Out of fourteen instances in the eighth century, no less than twelve are Kentish, one being Mercian (Hwiccian), the other occurring in the somewhat suspicious charter of Swæbræd of Essex, A.D. 704. [207]
The occurrence of this Italian formula in a Hwiccian charter is supported by the original charter of three reguli of that kingdom, confirmed by Offa, the Mercian overlord, in 759. [208] Although this particular formula does not occur in this charter, the Roman origin of the charter is established by the presence of five Roman formulas. In the seventh century we have also met with traces of the Roman formulas in this district, which during the eighth century gave up the Roman formulas for those of Mercia.
The eighth-century charters of this great midland kingdom are, as we have said, of great importance in the history of the O.E. royal diploma. In them are discovered the germs of the formulas of the later O.E. charters, and even of the characteristic language of the latter. The Mercian charters of this period have no traces of the Roman formulas, except when they relate to Kent, beyond the occasional appearance of the words propria manu in the attesting clause. They are simple and direct in stile, and substitute concise paraphrases for such of the Roman clauses as they retain. Sometimes they are without proems; sometimes even without invocations, unless the latter was represented by a monogram. Offa sometimes prefixes a monogrammatic and a verbal invocation. Even in the form of the invocation the Mercian charters influenced the form of the later O.E. diplomas. The Mercian kings occasionally use the old invocation 'In nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi', [209] frequently with the added words 'salvatoris mundi'. But this form is varied by the substitution of the Trinity, or the invocation of the Deus summus. [210] In Offa's time the invocation is occasionally extended by the addition of a sentence expressing the power of the deity. These formed the starting point of the invocations of the later diplomas, which are characterised by the great length and highly rhetorical nature of their invocations. Sometimes these explanatory clauses are tacked on to the old form of invocation as in an original charter of Offa's in 774 [211] 'In nomine Jesu Christi, salvatoris mundi, Qui est et Qui erat et Qui venturus est, per quem reges regunt and dividunt regna terrarum'. [212] The characteristic invocation in the later O.E. diplomas begins with a present participle singular in the ablative case. This usage is derived from the Mercian charters. The record of the proceedings of the Mercian council of Clovesho in 742 commences with '+ Regnante in perpetuum Deo et domino nostro Jhesu Christo', [213] and the same invocation omitting 'Deo et' occurs in an original charter of Offa's in 779. [214]
The Mercian kings also afforded a model to later times in their proems, not only in the themes, but even in the phraseology. These Mercian proems are imitated in many of the eighth-century charters. [215] One of the favourite proems of this and later times was the one beginning 'Nihil intulimus in hunc mundum', derived from Paul's epistle to Timothy, [216] with the addition that worldly things should therefore be exchanged for heavenly. This text occurs as the commencement of private deeds in Marculf's formulary, [217] but the addition differs from the English model. Another favourite is a proem setting forth the desirability of committing events to writing to avoid future disputes, although they ought not to need any such support.
Frequently, however the Mercian charter has no proem, but in Offa's time it had generally a movent clause, setting out that he has deemed it fitting that he should bestow upon God something however small for the absolution of his sins, etc. This movent clause generally appears even when a proem is used. The clause empowering the recipient to alienate, bequeath, etc. the land, instead of appearing in the Roman form after the tenendum clause, which is usually omitted, follows as an ut clause immediately after the description and name of the land conveyed. This is the position it held until the end of the O.E. period. Already in the charters of Æthelbald [218] and Offa [219] we meet with a form of this clause that became the favourite one in later times and that continued in use until the eve of the Norman Conquest. In a charter of the former king issued between <716> and 737 this clause is expressed by 'ut et ipse quamdiu vita comite voluerit prospere possideat, et cuicumque <placuerit> vel se vivente vel obeunte ea conditione qua sibi traditum acceperit licenter omnino nobis concedentibus libens tradat'. [220] This formula, with the omission of the conditional clause and with modifications, but with the retention of the phrase <'vita comit'>, that is during life, may be found in numerous tenth- and eleventh-century charters. In the later charters, it is generally provided with a different termination, which is, however, a modification of a formula that originated in the Mercian chancery. This is the clause 'vel cuicunque ei placuerit derelinquendum' or 'ut derelinquat'. [221]
Another feature derived from the Mercian chancery is the use of the 'devotional formula', [222] that is to say the introduction of such phrases as 'by the grace of God' between the king's name and title. Æthelbald uses 'divina dispensante gratia', and Offa, besides using short devotional formulas, anticipates, the later use of long clauses in this position.
But the most remarkable feature of the Mercian charters is the use of the future tense in the operative words. From Mercia this use spread to Kent, Wessex, and other districts, and it is found, with gradually decreasing frequency, throughout the ninth century and, apparently, in the reign of Edward the Elder and in that of Edgar. It occurs also in private deeds. The present was, however, also used in Mercia, and sometimes two verbs will be used, one in the present and the other in the future tense. The Mercian kings were fond of accompanying the verb in this clause with a synonimous present participle, such as perdonans attribuo, donans concedo, and the like, a custom that is paralleled by the later French diplomas and by the twelfth-century English royal charters. [223]
Professor Brunner has attempted to explain this singular use of the future in the operative words by the theory that the transaction represented by the charter was not technically completed until the charter was handed over to the person in whose favour it was drawn. [224] This delivery (traditio) of the instrument was on the continent a necessary legal step for completion of private deeds, and it was recorded in the deed - a custom that induced the use of datum, whence our date, in place of the actum of the Roman deed. But this supposition attributes to the Old English a rigid legal refinement that was alien to their loosely-knit legal system. Moreover, the future is also used in the attesting clauses. There are numerous instances of its use in both positions, but some of the examples in later copies of charters are probably to be ascribed to ignorant alterations of such eighth-century forms as donabi for donavi.
Another Mercian innovation was the substitution of scriptum or a synonym for the actum of the earlier deeds, but the later charters reverted to the latter.
The eighth-century charters afford numerous instances of a marked feature of the English diplomas - that is the description of the boundaries of the land conveyed. On the continent such information is given very rarely, with the exception of Italy, where there are several instances in the Farfa charters and an instance even occurs in the papyri. The seventh-century English charters do not usually specify the boundaries. They are, however, given in the original charter of Hlothhere of Kent, A.D. 692-3, [225] and in the original charter of Wihtred of Kent, A.D. 697. [226] In both these cases they are given very briefly. They evidently consist merely of the mention of a boundary on the north, south, east and west. In the eighth century they are given at greater length, although they do not usually supply anything like the minute detail of later times. [227] They are still mostly given briefly with reference to all or some of the four cardinal points of the compass. [228] But very lengthy boundaries appear in the original charter of Cynewulf of Wessex, A.D. 814. [229] Many charters do not give any details of the boundaries. In two cases the texts say that the boundaries are omitted because they are so well known. [230] The boundaries are given invariably in Latin in the original charters and in those that are free from doubt. There are several examples in English in the collections, but these are clearly from their position in the texts subsequent additions in the chartularies, or they are contained in texts that are spurious or suspicious. [231]
There is one charter of this period in English. It bears the name of Æthelbald of Mercia, between 743 and 745. [232] But if genuine its language has been modernised, and some of the phrases strongly suggest that it is merely a translation of a Latin original.
An innovation of world-wide importance was introduced into the English deeds in the eighth century. This was the use of [the] era of the Incarnation in place of the dating by the king's regnal years. The oldest undoubted instance of the use of this era is in an original charter of Æthelbald of Mercia in 736, written in uncials. [233] The adoption of this system of dating seems to have occurred about this year, for Æthelberht of Kent dates by regnal year and indiction in 732 [234] and Æthelbald of Mercia expresses the date in the same way in 732 and 733, [235] the latter a ninth-century copy. In 742 the era was used in the account of the proceedings of the Mercian council of Clovesho. [236] After this date its use became fairly regular in the royal diplomas. In 816 the council of Chelsea prescribes that the year of the Lord shall be given in the accounts of council proceedings, [237] but this is not, as sometimes understood, an innovation. [238]
The first writer to compute from the Incarnation was the early third-century Sextus Julius Africanus, but, although this computation was used by other ecclesiastical writers, it was not until the eighth century that it acquired the character of an era. In the early part of that century the Roman Dionysius Exiguus substituted it for the Diocletian era in his Easter tables, which were eventually to end the interminable conflicts regarding the observance of Easter in the west. The English church was one of the earliest and strongest upholders of the Dionysian system of computing Easter, [239] and used his later tables and their continuation until 721 by an unknown abbot Felix Cyrillitanus. [240] The era made little progress in the seventh century. No instances are known of its use for dating legal or historical documents, and the very few instances of its use in the sixth and seventh century shew that it was not employed for this purpose. The Easter tables were continued by Beda, from 721 until 1063, and the cycle of 532 years thus introduced by him rendered the continuation of his tables a very simple matter, for after the lapse of the cycle one had only to revert to the first year of the cycle. Beda's Easter-cycle was, in the language of Professor Rühl, 'the basis of all the medieval Easter computations; all later computists are dependent upon it; all the details concerning the year- characteristics, the age of the moon, etc. are taken from it'. [241] Beda was in addition to this the author of a work on chronology that remained the standard work on the subject throughout the middle ages. This was the work 'De Temporum Ratione', written in 725. The chronicle 'De sex aetatibus mundi' appended to this work had an enormous circulation throughout Europe. In it Beda occasionally dates events by the era of the Incarnation. In 731 he wrote his great 'Historia Ecclesiastica', the first historical work in which the era is regularly used. The fact that our great Northumbrian scholar was the real introducer of the modern era is now generally admitted.
The use of the era soon spread from England. In 742 and 744 it appears in the account of the Frankish councils, and its use there had been ascribed by Mabillon and Jan, the learned historian of the era, to the influence of the English St. Boniface, who presided over these councils. [242] In 801 it appears in the Frankish diplomas, gradually displacing the dating by regnal years. It was not until the eleventh century that it found admission into the papal chancery, and it was even then long before it became generally used. [243]
Professor Sickel formulated the rule that dates by the era of the Incarnation in copies of Frankish charters before 801 are proof of forgery or are to be regarded as additions of the later copyists. [244] Similarly we may formulate the rule that the occurrence of a date by this era in an English charter prior [to] 736 or so must be treated either as proof that the text is spurious or that the date has been added by the copyist, much in the same way as Beda explains the date of a papal letter by the equivalent year of the Incarnation. We possess texts of numerous charter bearing dates by this era older than 736. By far the greater number of these must be branded as spurious on other grounds, such as the use of later formulas, even twelfth-century ones, the mention of impossible witnesses, etc. The two Canterbury charters of 605 are obvious forgeries, because they mention the Frankish referendarius and graphio amongst the members of the court, whilst the second one begins with the Anglo-Norman 'Notum sit omnibus'. [245] The charter of Eadbald, A.D. 618, contains tenth-century formulas. [246] Wulfhere's charter of 664 we have already examined and found wanting. [247] The charter of <Cenwalh>, 670, has the tenth-century term basilleos, and comes from the Glastonbury chartulary, which swarms with forgeries. [248] Cynewalh of Wessex, circ. 672, is made to use tenth-century formulas, [249] and the charter is witnessed by bishops and others who were active a century and a quarter after his time. The charter of Wulfhere of Mercia, dated 624, assumed to be an error for 674, is derived from a tenth-century copy, to which the date is, apparently, added in another hand. [250] Several of its witnesses are mentioned in charters of Æthelbald of Mercia about the year 740. Time will not allow me to analyze the other charters that conflict with the rule laid down. Most of them come from poisoned sources, such as the Evesham, Malmesbury, and Glastonbury chartularies, and at most it is only in the case of two or three charters that we need consider the question of insertion of dates by the era of the Incarnation. One of these is the charter of Swæbred of Essex, A.D. 704, the text of which has come down to us in an early ninth-century hand. [251] Another is the record of the confirmation at Cloveshoh in 716 of Wihtred's grant at the council of Bapchild, c. 700. [252] The oldest copy of this is a twelfth-century one, and it is attested by some witnesses who could not have subscribed in 716. The council of Bapchild is involved in suspicion, and the later references to it are not free from doubt.