Canonist Evidence in the Case of St William of YorkAuthor(s): Adrian MoreySource: Cambridge Historical Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3 (1952), pp. 352-353Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3021118 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 13:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to CambridgeHistorical Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.194 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:25:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NOTES AND COMMUNICATIONS

1. CANONIST EVIDENCE IN THE CASE OF ST WILLIAM OF YORK

BY ADRIAN MOREY

The trial of Osbert of York for the alleged poisoning of the archbishop ended with an appeal to Rome, and the most complete study of the case concludes with the opinion that no formal judgement was ever given, either at Rome or in the court of a judge delegate.1 Part of the missing evidence is, however, supplied by a decretal of Alexander III, found in some of the English canonist collections, which shows that Osbert not only appeared before Alexander but claimed to have been acquitted by Adrian IV.2 Four main points may be cited from the decretal which also gives a lively account of the supposed proceedings' of a York synod.

(i) The judges delegate appointed by Alexander III were the abbots of Ford, Evesham and St Albans, but in the absence of the names the dating must be con- jectural. A reference to Roger of York as papal legate makes I I64 the terminus a quo, and the most likely abbots are Baldwin of Ford (c. 1175-80), Adam of Evesham (ii60/i-9i), and Simon of St Albans (II66-83). The decretal may therefore fall between the years c. 1175-80, and the Becket troubles might explain the delay in settling a case which had been opened before Adrian IV in I159. An additional point lends strength to the conjecture that we are dealing with a decretal issued in the last years of Alexander III: the use of the quite uncommon phrase apud nos vel apud successorem nostrum, with its hint of the possibility of the Pope's death before the case could be settled.

(2) The decretal adds some new details to the biography of archdeacon Osbert and explains the circumstances in which he lost his archdeaconry. The charge that Roger of York broke a promise to confer the income of the precentorship on Osbert's son shows that he was married before his retirement.3 Osbert claimed that Henry II's

1 The Case of St William of York, by Prof. M. D. Knowles, ante vol. v, no. 2, p. 176. 2 The decretal Cum essent in presentia nostra occurs in the following collections: Collectio

Cheltenhamensis, B. M. Egerton MS. 28i9 f. 88v with an incomplete text; Coll. Wigorniensis, B.M. Royal MS. io A II f. 47, analysed by H. Lohmann in Zeitschrift d. Savigny Stiftung, Kanon. Abteilung 22, LIII (1933), p. 127; Coil. Claustroneoburgensis, no. 206 printed with a faulty text by F. Schonsteiner in Jahrbuch des Stiftes Klosterneuburg, II (Io909), p. 94. The address occurs in the Coll. Wigorniensis. The fragment Porro testes to the end has been printed by Friedberg from the Coll. Brugensis in Die Canonessammlungen von Gratian bis Bernhard von Pavia, p. 158, and is included in the CoIl. Sangermanensis and the CoIl. Abrin- censis, both calendered by H. Singer in his Neue Beitrage zu den Dekretalensammlungen in Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie, phil. hist. Klasse, CLXXI (1913), p. 265. The last two collections give an inscription to the bishop of Chichester and the abbot of Ford. For the literature of the decretal collections see Prof. W. Holtzmann, 'tber eine Ausgabe der papstlichen Dekretalen des 2 Jahrhunderts' in Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, phil. hist. Kl. (I945), p. 15 and S. Kuttner, 'Notes on a projected Corpus of 12th century Decretals' in Traditio, vi (1948), p. 345. I have to thank Prof. Holtzmann for kindly reading this note and expressing his agreement with the dating of the decretal.

3 Cf. Early Yorkshire Charters, VI, p. 158, ed. C. T. Clay, and also his 'Notes on the Early Archdeacons in the Church of York', in Yorkshire Arch. Yournal, xxxIv, p. 9.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.194 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:25:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CANONIST EVIDENCE: ST WILLIAM OF YORK CASE 353 intervention had secured his temporary release from a sentence of excommunication, but in view of his successful demand for trial in the ecclesiastical courts this seems unlikely, and it may be doubted if the account given to Alexander III was wholly true.

(3) The reference to Osbert's purgation in John of Salisbury's letter to Alexander III must refer to the trial before Adrian IV and not, as hitherto supposed, to that held by archbishop Theobald.4

(4) Finally, this new evidence strengthens the criticism of William of Newburgh's historical skill made by Prof. Knowles.5 Thirty years after the event William attempted to ascertain the truth from such survivors as might have known the inner history.6 It is indeed a reflexion on his ability that he should have failed to obtain evidence of the canonical process, or even for the alleged bargain over the precentorship, a tale which could not have failed to provide gossip for the cathedral circle at York.

4 John of Salisbury, ep. xo8, ed. Giles, i, p. 158. ' Art. cit. p. 276. " William of Newburgh, Historia Regum, ed. Howlett, Rolls Series, vol. 1.

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.194 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 13:25:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions