Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Custom, Memory and the Authority of Writing

  • Chapter
The Experience of Authority in Early Modern England

Part of the book series: Themes in Focus ((TIF))

Abstract

Writing is a source of power: it is both a symbol and an agent of authority. As a technology of communication, it has the ability to revolutionise the transmission of information; as a means to objectify ideas, it has the capacity to transform mental process; and as an act of record, it has the potential to assume iconic significance.

I should like to thank Andy Wood for sharing with me his knowledge of the role of central equity courts in disputes over local custom and for his valuable criticisms of an earlier draft of this chapter, as for those of Carolyn Fox, Paul Griffiths, Steve Hindle, Brian Outhwaite, Steve Pincus and Keith Wrightson.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. Among many works which discuss the implications of writing, see, in particular, J. Goody and I. Watt, ‘The Consequences of Literacy’, in J. Goody (ed.), Literacy in Traditional Societies (Cambridge, 1968), pp. 27–68;

    Google Scholar 

  2. W. J. Ong, Orality and Literacy: The Technologising of the Word (London, 1982);

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. B. V. Street, Literacy in Theory and Practice (Cambridge, 1984);

    Google Scholar 

  4. R. Finnegan, Literacy and Orality: Studies in the Technology of Communication (Oxford, 1988);

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Goody, The Logic of Writing and the Organisation of Society (Cambridge, 1986);

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. J. Goody, The Interface Between the Written and the Oral (Cambridge, 1987);

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. Thomas, Literacy and Orality in Ancient Greece (Cambridge, 1992).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. M. T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England, 1066–1307, 2nd edn (London, 1993), pp. 46–51. On the earlier use of writing, see

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Kelly, ‘Anglo-Saxon Lay Society and the Written Word’, in R. McKitterick (ed.), The Uses of Literacy in Early Medieval Europe (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 36–62. The wider European context is discussed in

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Reynolds, Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, 900–1300 (Oxford, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. W. Salmond, ‘The Superiority of Written Evidence’, Law Quarterly Review, vol. 6 (1890), pp. 75–85;

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. K. Weber, ‘The Power of Judicial Records’, Journal of Legal History, vol. 9 (1988), pp. 180–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. W. Lambarde, Eirenarcha: or, Of the Office of the Justice of Peace (London, 1581), p. 71; J. Norden, The Surveyor’s Dialogue (London, 1610), p. 22; J. Evelyn, The History of Religion, ed. R. M. Evanson, 2 vols (London, 1850), I, p. 425, quoted in

    Google Scholar 

  14. K. V. Thomas, ‘The Meaning of Literacy in Early Modern England’, in G. Baumann (ed.), The Written Word: Literacy in Transition (Oxford, 1986), p. 112.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Hall, The Olde Religion (London, 1628), p. 167; J. Tillotson, The Rule of Faith (London, 1666), pp. 38, 50; Anon., ‘A Calculation of the Credibility of Human Testimony’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, vol. 21 (1699), p. 363; D. Defoe, A Tour Thro’ the Whole Island of Great Britain, 2 vols (London, 1724–6), I, p. 257. Defoe also rejected tales about witchcraft on the grounds of ‘oral tradition’: A System of Magick: or, A History of the Black Art (London, 1727), p. 225. On the declining prestige of oral evidence in antiquarian scholarship, see D. R. Woolf, ‘The “Common Voice”: History, Folklore and Oral Tradition in Early Modern England’, Past and Present, vol. 120 (1988), pp. 26–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Thomas, ‘Meaning of Literacy’, p. 113; D. R. Woolf, ‘Speech, Text, and Time: The Sense of Hearing and the Sense of the Past in Renaissance England’, Albion, vol. 18 (1986), pp. 173–8;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. D. F. McKenzie, ‘Speech-Manuscript-Print’, The Library Chronicle, vol. 20 (1990), pp. 87–109.

    Google Scholar 

  18. For some recent discussions of the many and varied contexts in which customary tenures and laws governed social and economic relationships, see C. E. Searle, ‘Custom, Class Conflict and Agrarian Capitalism: The Cumbrian Customary Economy in the Eighteenth Century’, Past and Present, vol. 110 (1986), pp. 106–33;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. R. W. Hoyle, ‘An Ancient and Laudable Custom: The Definition and Development of Tenant Right in North-West-ern England in the Sixteenth Century’, Past and Present, vol. 116 (1987), pp. 24–55;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. L. A. Knafla, ‘Common Law and Custom in Tudor England: or, “The Best State of a Commonwealth”’, in G. J. Schochet (ed.), Law, Literature and the Settlement of Regimes (Washington, 1990), pp. 171–86;

    Google Scholar 

  21. E. P. Thompson, Customs in Common (London, 1991), ch. 3;

    Google Scholar 

  22. A. Wood, ‘Social Conflict and Change in the Mining Communities of North-West Derbyshire, c. 1600–1700’, International Review of Social History, vol. 38 (1993), pp. 31–58;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. T. Stretton, ‘Women, Custom and Equity in the Court of Requests’, in J. Kermode and G. Walker (eds), Women, Crime and the Courts in Early Modern England (London, 1994), pp. 170–89.

    Google Scholar 

  24. C. Calthorpe, The Relation beteene the Lord of the Mannor and a Coppy-Holder his Tenant (London, 1635), pp. 21–3; Sir E. Coke, The Compleate Copy-Holder (London, 1641), pp. 68–75; Sir W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 vols (London, 1765–9), I, pp. 76–8; C. Watkins, Treatise on Copyholds (London, 1797), p. 15. For a recent discussion, see J. W. Wellwood, ‘Custom and Usage’, in Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th edn (London, 1975), XII, pp. 1–60.

    Google Scholar 

  25. For this definition, see, e.g., J. Cowell, The Interpreter: or Booke Containing the Signification of Words (Cambridge, 1607), sig. V4r; Coke, Compleate Copy-Holder, p. 68; R. Gough, The History of Myddle, ed. D. Hey (Harmonds-worth, 1981), p. 64; R. B. Fisher, A Practical Treatise on Copyhold Tenure (London, 1794), p. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  26. S. Carter, Lex Customaria: or, A Treatise of Copy-hold Estates, 2nd edn (London, 1701), pp. 24–5; J. G. A. Pocock, The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (Cambridge, 1957), pp. 32–3.

    Google Scholar 

  27. On the failure of written evidences to record the more complex reality of customary practice, especially concerning customs of common right, see J. Birrell, ‘Common Rights in the Medieval Forest: Disputes and Conflicts in the Thirteenth Century’, Past and Present, vol. 117 (1987), pp. 24–5;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. E. P. Thompson, ‘The Grid of Inheritance: A Comment’, in J. Goody et al. (eds), Family and Inheritance: Rural Society in Western Europe, 1200–1800 (Cambridge, 1976), pp. 337, 342–3, 352;

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. M. Neeson, Commoners: Common Right, Enclosure and Social Change in England, 1700–1820 (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 77–80.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. [P]ublic [R]ecord [O]ffice SP12/283A/80. On the parlous state of records relating to the royal estates, see D. Thomas, ‘The Elizabethan Crown Lands: Their Purposes and Problems’, in R. W. Hoyle (ed.), The Estates of the English Crown, 1558–1640 (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 64–5; and on the poor condition of the public records in general, see

    Google Scholar 

  31. R. B. Wernham, ‘The Public Records in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, in L. Fox (ed.), English Historical Scholarship in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London, 1956), pp. 11–30.

    Google Scholar 

  32. PRO SP12/283A/80. On each of these courts, see W. H. Bryson, The Equity Side of the Exchequer (Cambridge, 1975);

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. W.J. Jones, The Elizabethan Court of Chancery (Oxford, 1967);

    Google Scholar 

  34. L. M. Hill (ed.), The Ancient State, Auth-oritie and Proceedings of the Court of Requests, by Sir Julius Caesar (Cambridge, 1975);

    Google Scholar 

  35. R. Somerville, History of the Duchy of Lancaster (London, 1953). On the way in which the common law had come to assume jurisdiction in copyhold cases during the sixteenth century, see

    Google Scholar 

  36. C. M. Gray, Copyhold, Equity and the Common Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), chs 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  37. The English Reports, 176 vols (Edinburgh, 1900–30), XXI, p. 13, quoted in W.J. Jones, ‘A Note on the Demise of Manorial Jurisdiction: The Impact of Chancery’, American Journal of Legal History, vol. 10 (1966), pp. 306; Cowell, Interpreter, sig. V4r, quoted in

    Google Scholar 

  38. D. R. Kelley, ‘“Second Nature”: The Idea of Custom in European Law, Society and Culture’, in A. Grafton and A. Blair (eds), The Transmission of Culture in Early Modem Europe (Philadelphia, 1990), p. 138.

    Google Scholar 

  39. PRO E134/6 Chas 1/Trin 9; PRO E134/4 Chas 1/East 26. On the general importance of elders in societies with strong oral traditions, see Goody, Interface Between the Written and the Oral, pp. 150, 164; and in this context, see K. V. Thomas, ‘Age and Authority in Early Modern England’, Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. 62 (1976), pp. 233–4. It is testimony, no doubt, not only to the tardiness of legal process but also to the seniority of most witnesses in disputes over custom that the Exchequer Barons, in their not infrequent rulings to refer cases to the common law, would allow the depositions taken in their court to be used again at a future trial for the benefit of ‘all such witnesses as shall be dead or not able to travel’ by that time: see, e.g., PRO E126/5, fols. 48v, 54r, 60r, 162r, 207r, 262r.

    Google Scholar 

  40. PRO E134/7 Eliz/East 1; PRO E134/16 Eliz/East 6. In the later nineteenth century, Lord Hobhouse heard a dispute over common rights and concluded that ‘the oral evidence’, based upon ‘what the old witnesses say of their own knowledge, and what in their boyhood have heard their grandfathers say, must go back for at least 100 years’: G.J. Shaw-Lefevre, Lord Eversley, Commons, Forests and Footpaths (London, 1910), p. 107.

    Google Scholar 

  41. PRO E134/1 Jas I/East 3, m. 10; PRO E134/7 Jas I/Mich 12, m. 4. On popular memories of the days before the Reformation, see E. V. Thomas, The Perception of the Past in Early Modern England, Creighton Trust Lecture (London, 1984), pp. 11–23.

    Google Scholar 

  42. PRO E134/27 Chas II/Mich 29. Another case, eight years later, revealed more old men with these memories of Kingswood before ‘the late troubles’: PRO E134/35 Chas II/Mich 48, m. 3. For similar examples from elsewhere, see PRO E134/26 Chas II/Mich 23, m. 11; PRO E134/28 Chas II/East 20. Such reminiscences echo the memories of life ‘before the civill warres’ which John Aubrey repeatedly committed to paper: see, e.g., The Remaines of Gentilisme and Judaisme, ed. J. Britten, Folklore Society (London, 1881).

    Google Scholar 

  43. For various examples of the unreliability of oral transmission beyond first-hand experience, see J. Vansina, Oral Tradition: A Study in Historical Methodology, trans. H. M. Wright (London, 1965), pp. 101–2;

    Google Scholar 

  44. M. T. Clanchy, ‘Remembering the Past and the Good Old Law’, History, vol. 55 (1970), pp. 166–7;

    Google Scholar 

  45. D. P. Henige, The Chronology of Oral Tradition (Oxford, 1974), ch. 1;

    Google Scholar 

  46. R. Thomas, Oral Tradition and Written Record in Classical Athens (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 125, 180, 283.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  47. For some of these developments, see R. H. Tawney, The Agrarian Problem in the Sixteenth Century (London, 1912), pt ii;

    Google Scholar 

  48. J. Thirsk (ed.), The Agrarian History of England and Wales, vol. TV: 1500–1640 (Cambridge, 1967);

    Google Scholar 

  49. E. Kerridge, Agrarian Problems in the Sixteenth Century and After (London, 1969), pp. 54–7;

    Google Scholar 

  50. A. B. Appleby, ‘Agrarian Capitalism or Seigneurial Reaction? The Northwest of England, 1500–1700’, American Historical Review, vol. 80 (1975), pp. 574–94;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. R. B. Manning, Village Revolts: Sodal Protest and Popular Disturbances in England, 1509–1640 (Oxford, 1988), ch. 6. Similar conditions were experienced in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries: Reynolds, Kingdoms and Communities, p. 137; Birrell, ‘Common Rights’, pp. 22–3.

    Google Scholar 

  52. R. W. Hoyle, ‘“Vain Projects”: The Crown and Its Copyholders in the Reign of James I’, in J. Chartres and D. Hey (eds), English Rural Sodety, 1500–1800 (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 73–104; Hoyle, ‘“Shearing the Hog”: Reforming the Estates, c. 1598–1640’, in Hoyle (ed.), Estates of the English Crown, pp. 204–62.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Kerridge, Agrarian Problems, p. 56. PRO E134/26 Chas II/Mich 48; PRO E134/18 & 19 Chas II/Hil 13. For similar examples of the appropriation and corruption of written records, see PRO E126/1. fol. 46r; PRO E126/2, fol. 9r; PRO E126/5. fol. 206v; PRO E126/6, fols. 155v-56r, 204v-9r; Manning, Village Revolts, p. 137; E. P. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act (London, 1975), p. 179;

    Google Scholar 

  54. J. Martin, ‘Private Enterprise versus Manorial Rights: Mineral Property Disputes in Eighteenth-Century Glamorgan’, Welsh History Review, vol. 9 (1978), p. 171;

    Google Scholar 

  55. G. E. Hart, The Free Miners of the Forest of Dean and the Hundred of St Briavels (Gloucester, 1953), pp. 137, 303–4. On the increasing number of parish chests from the sixteenth century, see

    Google Scholar 

  56. W. E. Tate, The Parish Chest: A Study of the Records of Parochial Administration in England, 3rd edn. (Cambridge, 1969), pp. 37, 44–51.

    Google Scholar 

  57. PRO E134/34 Eliz/Hil 23, and quoted in C. E. Hart, The Commoners of Dean Forest (Gloucester, 1951), p. 14; [C]ambridgeshire [R]ecord [O]ffice P109/28/4; PRO E134/4 Jas I/Hil 14, m. 6 and PRO E126/1, fol. 46r; PRO DL4/94/46.

    Google Scholar 

  58. PRO E134/1649/Mich 11. On the iconic status of the Mowbray charter, see K. Lindley, Fenland Riots and the English Revolution (London, 1982), pp. 26–7;

    Google Scholar 

  59. C. Holmes, ‘Drainers and Fenmen: The Problem of Popular Political Consciousness in the Seventeenth Century’, in A. Fletcher and J. Stevenson (eds), Order and Disorder in Early Modern England (Cambridge, 1985), p. 192.

    Google Scholar 

  60. PRO E134/30 Chas II/East 21; see also PRO E134/30 Chas II/Mich 12. For the use of other perambulations from the reign of Edward I in Exchequer decisions, see PRO E126/1, fol. 184r; PRO E126/4, fol. 48v. The perambulation taken of Waltham Forest in 29 Edward I (1301) is printed in W. R. Fisher The Forest of Essex: Its History, Laws, Administration and Ancient Customs (London, 1887), pp. 393–9; and those of the Forest of Mendip for 1219, 1279, 1298 and 1300 are printed in

    Google Scholar 

  61. J. W. Gough (ed.), Mendip Mining Laws and Forest Bounds, Somerset Record Society, vol. 45 (Frome, 1931), pp. 164–92. References to further thirteenth-century perambulations can be found in

    Google Scholar 

  62. J. C. Cox, The Royal Forests of England (London, 1905), pp. 99, 125, 148, 151, 204, 229, 234–5, 247, 276, 284, 290–1, 336, 341.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Batho, ‘Landlords in England’, p. 304; and see M. Campbell, The English Yeomen under Elizabeth and the Early Stuarts (London, 1960), pp. 106–7;

    Google Scholar 

  64. C. W. Brooks, Pettyfoggers and Vipers of the Commonwealth: The Lower Branch’ of the Legal Profession in Early Modern England (Cambridge, 1986), p. 200.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  65. CRO 258/M22; P. A. J. Pettit, The Royal Forests of Northamptonshire: A Study in Their Economy, 1558–1714, Northamptonshire Record Society (Gateshead, 1968), pp. 153–4; PRO E134/4 Jas I/Mich 1, m. 3. On the failure of other surveyors to establish certain customs in the face of conflicting oral evidence and ever changing practice, see PRO E134/28 Chas II/Trin 7, mm. 4–5; Campbell, English Yeomen, pp. 123–4. On the growing number of surveyors at this time and the documents that they produced, see Kerridge, Agrarian Problems, pp. 26–31;

    Google Scholar 

  66. V. Morgan, ‘The Cartographic Image of “The Country” in Early Modern England’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, vol. 29 (1979), p. 134; Brooks, Pettyfoggers and Vipers, pp. 198–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Tawney, Agrarian Problem, pp. 126–8; R. W. Bushaway, ‘“Grovely, Grovely, Grovely, and All Grovely”: Custom, Crime and Conflict in the English Woodland’, History Today, vol. 38 (May 1981), pp. 39, 42; and

    Google Scholar 

  68. Bushaway, By Rite: Custom, Ceremony and Community in England, 1700–1880 (London, 1982), pp. 209–11. On the conflicts within communities over who was entitled to customary rights, see

    Google Scholar 

  69. B. Sharp, ‘Common Rights, Charities and the Disorderly Poor’, in G. Eley and W. Hunt (eds), Reviving the English Revolution (London, 1988), pp. 107–37.

    Google Scholar 

  70. On the ‘growing authority accorded to decisions of the central courts’ in such cases, see Jones, Elizabethan Court of Chancery, pp. 487–8; and Jones, ‘Demise of Manorial Jurisdiction’, pp. 315–18. For an example of the practice of keeping these decrees in the form of ‘a customary book’, see P. Large, ‘Rural Society and Agricultural Change: Ombersley, 1580–1700’, in Chartres and Hey (eds), English Rural Sodety, p. 123. There is also evidence that leading tenants might have such decrees or other judgments put into print in order to create multiple and accessible copies for the community: R. W. Bushaway, ‘Rite, Legitimation and Community in Southern England, 1700–1850: The Ideology of Custom’, in B. Stapleton (ed.), Conflict and Community in Southern England (Stroud, 1992), p. 113; and see the examples in chapter 8 below.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Adam Fox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Paul Griffiths Adam Fox Steve Hindle

Copyright information

© 1996 Adam Fox

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fox, A. (1996). Custom, Memory and the Authority of Writing. In: Griffiths, P., Fox, A., Hindle, S. (eds) The Experience of Authority in Early Modern England. Themes in Focus. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24834-6_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24834-6_4

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-333-59884-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-24834-6

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation