Gambar halaman

Committee on Bibliography, the Committee on Publications, the General Committee, the editor of the “Original Narratives of Early American History”, and the Committee of Eight on History in Elementary Schools, whose report is now in the hands of the printer. The Public Archives Commission reported that it had in hand manuscript reports on the archives of Maine, Missouri, the state of Washington and the older counties of Virginia, and expected soon to receive others, on California, Illinois and West Virginia. It had also nearly ready a list of the council-journals, assembly-journals and statutes of the thirteen colonies. An important new activity has been added to those already undertaken by the Association, through the appointment by the Council of a committee on the preparation of a bibliography of modern English history, in pursuance of the recommendation made, as above mentioned, by one of the conferences. This committee is to consist of Professors E. P. Cheyney, chairman, R. B. Merriman, A. L. Cross, Williston Walker (it is hoped) and E. C. Richardson.

Complimentary resolutions of the usual character were presented by a committee of which Dr. Charles L. Wells of New Orleans was chairman. The committee on nominations, Professors Andrews, Cross and Mace, proposed a list of officers, all of whom were chosen by the Association. Professor Albert Bushnell Hart was elected president for the ensuing year, Professors Frederick J. Turner and William M. Sloane vice-presidents. Mr. Waldo G. Leland was elected secretary, Professor Charles H. Haskins secretary of the council, Dr. Clarence W. Bowen treasurer, and Mr. A. Howard Clark curator. In the place of Professors Andrews and Robinson, who had served three terms in the Executive Council, Professors Evarts B. Greene and Charles II. Hull were chosen.




Professor Albert Bushnell Hart, Cam.

bridge. First Vice-president, Professor Frederick J. Turner, Madison. Second Vice-president, Professor William M. Sloane, New York. Secretary,

Waldo G. Leland, Esq., to be addressed

at the Smithsonian Institution, Wash

ington. Secretary of the Council, Professor Charles H. Haskins, 15 Pres

cott Hall, Cambridge, Mass.





Clarence W. Bowen, Esq., 130 Fulton

Street, New York. Curator,

d. Howard Clark, Esq., Smithsonian In

stitution, Washington.
E.recutive Council (in addition to the above-named officers):
Hon. Andrew D. White, 1 Professor John B. McMaster,
President James B. Angell,' Hon. Simeon E. Baldwin,
Henry Adams, Esq.,

J. Franklin Jameson, Esq.,
James Schouler, Esq.,

Professor George B. Adams,
Professor George P. Fisher, Worthington C. Ford, Esq.,
James Ford Rhodes, Esq.,' Professor William MacDonald,
Charles Francis Adams, Esq., Professor Max Farrand,
Rear-Adm. Alfred T. Vahan, Professor Frank H. Hodder,
Henry C. Lea, Esq.,'

Professor Evarts B. Greene,
Professor Goldwin Smith, Professor Charles II. Hull.
Committee on Programme for the Twenty-fifth Annual leeting:

Professor James T. Shotwell, Columbia University, chair-
man; Max Farrand, Charles II. Haskins, Thomas W. Page

and Frederic L. Paxson.
Local Committee of Arrangements for that Veeting: Professor

William M. Sloane, Columbia University, chairman; John
Bigelow, Clarence W. Bowen, Nicholas Murray Butler, Mrs.

Robert Abbe and Miss Ruth Putnam.
Editors of the American Historical Review: Professor George

B. Adams, Yale University, chairman; George L. Burr,
Albert Bushnell Hart, J. Franklin Jameson, Andrew C. Mc-

Laughlin and William M. Sloane.
Historical Manuscripts Commission: Worthington C. Ford,

Massachusetts Historical Society, chairman; Herbert D.
Foster, Gaillard Hunt, Thomas M. Owen, Ulrich B. Phillips

and James A. Woodburn.
Committee on the Justin Winsor Prize: Professor Charles H.

Hull, Cornell University, chairman; John II. Latané, Theo

dore C. Smith, Claude H. Van Tyne and Williston Walker. Public Archives Commission: Professor Ilerman V. Ames, Uni

versity of Pennsylvania, chairman ; Charles M. Andrews, Clarence S. Brigham, Carl P. Fish, Ilerbert L. Osgood,

Victor II. Paltsits and Dunbar Rowland. Committee on Bibliography: Professor Ernest C. Richardson, * Ex-presidents.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Princeton University, chairman; Appleton P. C. Griffin,

William C. Lane, James T. Shotwell and Wilbur H. Siebert. Comunittee on Publications: Professor William A. Dunning,

chairman; Herman V. Ames, George L. Burr, Worthington C. Ford, Charles H. Haskins, Charles H. Hull, J. Franklin Jameson, Waldo G. Leland and Ernest C. Richardson (all

er officio, except the chairman). Committee on the Herbert Baxter Adams Prise: Professor

George L. Burr, Cornell University, chairman; Guy S. Ford,

Charles Gross, James W. Thompson and John M. Vincent.
General Committee: Professor St. George L. Sioussat, Univer-

sity of the South, chairman; Julian A. C. Chandler, William
E. Dodd, Earle W. Dow, Walter L. Fleming, Miss Susan
M. Kingsbury, Waldo G. Leland, Orin G. Libby, William E.
Lingelbach, Franklin L. Riley, Miss Lucy M. Salmon,
George C. Sellery, Frank H. Severance, Benjamin F. Sham-

baugh and Frederick G. Young.
Committee on History in Secondary Schools: Professor Andrew

C. McLaughlin, University of Chicago, chairman; Charles
H. Haskins, Charles W. Vann, James H. Robinson and

James Sullivan.
Committee on a Bibliography of Modern English History:

Professor Edward P. Cheyney, University of Pennsylvania,
chairman; Arthur L. Cross, Roger B. Merriman, Ernest C.
Richardson and Williston Walker.


The Anglo-Norman state of the twelfth century is one of the most interesting phenomena in the history of European institutions. Whether in the extent and cohesion of its territory, in the centralized authority of its rulers, or in the precocity and vigor of its administrative system, whose many-sided activity can still be traced in writ and roll and exchequer record, the Anglo-Norman kingdom finds no parallel in the western Europe of its time. Moreover, on its institutional side at least, it was no local or temporary affair. Themselves the product of a variety of elements-Anglo-Saxon, Danish, Frankish, not to mention the more immediate Norman and Angevin—the contemporary influence of Anglo-Norman institutions extended from Scotland to Sicily, while their later outgrowths are to be seen in the imitation of Norman practices by the kings of France, as well as in the whole fabric of English government.

Of the two sets of institutions which were suddenly brought together in 1066 and continued side by side under the same rulers for a century and a half, those of Normandy are much the more obscure. It is not, of course, implied that investigation of the Anglo-Saxon period has reached its limits: within a dozen years the labors of Maitland and Liebermann, of Round and Vinogradoff-to mention no others have shown what can be done, and what remains to be done, by a more scientific study of the Domesday survey and the legal sources and by a wider view of the relations of England to the Continent, and the next few years are likely to see considerable additions to our knowledge in these directions. Still the mere mention of these scholars and the sources which are at their disposal shows the great advantage of England over Normandy, both before and after the Conquest. It is only natural that the history of Normandy should generally have been approached, as in the classic researches of M. Léopold Delisle, from the point of view of France rather than of England, and although it is forty years since Professor Brunner first showed the way to a broader study of Anglo-Norman legal history, little has been done to apply his method to new materials and other problems. The paucity of


"A summary of this article was read before the International Congress of the Historical Sciences at Berlin in August, 1908, and before the American Historical Association in December, 1908.

( 453 )

[ocr errors]

sources is, of course, the great obstacle. Normandy has no Domesday and no dooms. Its earliest law-book, the older part of the Très-Ancien Coutumier, dates from the very end of the twelfth century, and while there are indications of the existence of a distinctly Norman body of custom before 1066, the only formulation of the law of the Conqueror's day is a brief statement of certain of the ducal rights drawn up four years after his death by order of his sons." There is almost no contemporary evidence for the tenth century, and although Dudo of St. Quentin is useful so far as he reflects the conditions of his own age, for the greater part of the eleventh century we have only narratives put together two or three generations later. Our main reliance must be upon the charters, and even here, such has been the destruction of Norman records, the body of materials is less than for contemporary England or for such adjacent regions as Anjou and Flanders, and is especially small for the earlier part of the Conqueror's reign. A large part of this documentary material is still unprinted and unsifted, but the systematic study of the diplomatic sources of AngloNorman history is now being attacked from three sides-by M. Ferdinand Lot for the early dukes, by Mr. H. W. C. Davis for the English charters from the Conquest to 1154, and by the author of this paper, with the assistance of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, for the Norman charters from the accession of William I. to the point where M. Delisle's great work on the acts of Henry II. is to begin.

?" Donavi apud Argentias leuvam iuxta morem patriae nostrae." Charters of Robert I. for Fécamp, preserved in the original in the Musée de la Bénédictine at Fécamp, nos. 3 bis, 4 bis. Consuetudines quoque et servicia omnia que de terra exeunt secundum morem Normannie." Charter of William I. for Mont St. Michel, 1054, in Delisle, Histoire du Château et des Sires de Saint Sauveur-le-Vicomte (Valognes, 1867), pièces, no. 24. In 1074 Roger, earl of Hereford, is tried “ secundum leges Normannorum”. Ordericus Vitalis, ed. Le Prévost, II. 264.

3“ Hee sunt consuetudines et iusticie quas habet dux Normannie in eadem provincia.” Printed as part of the acts of council of Lillebonne by Martène and Durand, Thesaurus Anecdotorum (Paris, 1717), IV. 117, and reprinted in Mansi, Concilia, XX. 575, and Migne, Patrologia, CXLIX. 1329. I have given a critical edition in the English Historical Review (1908), XXIII. 502-508.

* The Gesta Guillelmi of William of Poitiers is of course an exception, as is also the first redaction of the work of William of Jumièges, when a critical edition shall have restored it to us.

• The Bibliothèque Nationale possesses (MS. Lat. n. a. 1243) a collection of copies of William's charters made by the late Achille Deville, which, though far from complete, is of considerable convenience. Round's Calendar of Documents preserved in France is serviceable, so far as it goes.

Where manuscripts are cited below without the mention of any library, they are in the Bibliothèque Nationale.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »