* This article has its origins in a paper given to the Cambridge Historical Society on 20 October 1981. I am very grateful to Professor C. R. Cheney for his comments on both the original paper and the article in its present form.

¹ See Queller, D. E., The Office of Ambassador in the Middle Ages, Princeton 1967, chs. 1–4Google Scholar; idem, ‘Thirteenth-century diplomatic envoys: nuncii and procurators’, Speculum, xxxv (1960), 196–213Google Scholar; and Chaplais, P., ‘English diplomatic documents to the end of Edward ill’s reign’, in Bullough, D. A. and Storey, R. L. (eds.), The Study of Medieval Records: essays in honour of Kathleen Major, Oxford 1971, 22–56, at 39–46Google Scholar. On the position of procuratores in Roman and canon law see, in addition to Queller, Office of Ambassador, ch. 2, Kaser, M., Das römische Privatrecht, 2 vols., 2nd edn, Munich 1971–5, especially i. 263–7, 393, 587, ii. 100–7, 417Google Scholar; idem, Das römische Zivilprozessrecht, Munich 1966, 156–9, 450–3Google Scholar; Naz, R., s.v. ‘Procureur’, Dictionnaire de droit canonique, VII, Paris 1965, cols. 324–9Google Scholar; Post, G., Studies in Medieval Legal Thought, Princeton 1964, 39–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 61–70, 92–108; Heckel, R. von, ‘Das Auflcommen der ständigen Prokuratoren an der päpstlichen Kurie im 13. Jahrhundert’, in Miscellanea Francesco Ehrle, II, Vatican City 1924, 311–43Google Scholar; Stelzer, W., ‘Die Anfänge der Petentenvertretung an der päpstlichen Kurie unter Innocenz m.’, Annali delta Scuola Speciale per Archivisti e Bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma (henceforth cited as ASSAB), xii (1972), 130–9Google Scholar; and Herde, P., Beiträge zum päpstlichen Kanzlei- und Urkundenwesen in 13. Jahrhundert, 2nd edn, Kallmünz Opf. 1967, 125–9Google Scholar.

² A valuable brief account of the proctors at Avignon is, however, provided by Guillemain, B., La Cow pontificate d’Avignon, Paris 1962, 567–72Google Scholar.

³ See below, p. 21.

⁴ See Herde, Beiträge, 213–22; idem, ‘Ein Formelbuch Gerhards von Parma mit Urkunden des Auditor litterarum contradictarum aus dem Jahre 1277’, Archiv für Diplomatik, xiii (1967), 225–312Google Scholar, at 242–4; and idem, Audientia litterarum contradictarum, 2 vols., Tübingen 1970, i. 22–3, 26–30Google Scholar.

⁵ Die päpstlichen Kanzleiordnungen von 1200–1500, ed. Tangl, M., Innsbruck 1894, 113, § 13Google Scholar.

⁶ I have examined all such letters of the Avignon period that I have found in English archives and libraries as part of a project which has involved preparing a calendar, with a diplomatic description, of the original papal letters of the years 1305–1417 surviving in England. This calendar makes up part of my doctoral dissertation, ‘Original papal letters in England, 1305–1417: a study and a calendar’, Cambridge 1981Google Scholar, and is to be published by the Vatican Library in its series, the Index Actorum Romanorum Pontificum ab Innocentio in ad Martinum v electum. This publication will include a list of all the proctors whose endorsements appear on the letters calendared. By far the largest collection of original papal letters in England is that in the Public Record Office (henceforth cited as PRO). These letters are calendared in List of Diplomatic Documents, Scottish Documents and Papal Bulls preserved in the PRO. (PRO Lists and Indexes, xlix, reprinted with corrections 1963). I shall not make specific reference to this calendar when citing letters in the PRO.

⁷ Registrum Henrici Woodlock, Diocesis Wintoniensis, ed. Goodman, A. W. (Canterbury and York Society (henceforth cited as CYS), XUI–XLIV, 1940–1), ii. 700–1Google Scholar.

⁸ Littrae Canluarienses: the Letter-books of the Monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury, ed. Sheppard, J. B., 3 vols., Rolls Series 1887–9Google Scholar, ii. 328. no. 810 (here he appears as ‘de Tyderleye’). He endorses a letter of 19 January 1351 (Hertford, Hertfordshire Record Office, ASA 7/10; printed by Ritchie, C., ‘The Black Death at St Edmund’s Abbey’, Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology, xxvii (1955–7), 47–50, at 48–9Google Scholar) as a chancery proctor.

⁹ See Mollat, G., ‘Innocent vi et les tentatives de paix entre la France et l’Angleterre (1353–1355)’ Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique, x (1909), 729–43Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Grauert, H., Magister Heinrich der Poet in Würzburg unddie römische Kurie (Abhandlungen der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse, xxvii, 1912), especially 164–5Google Scholar.

¹¹ Liotta, F., ‘Appunti per una biografia del canonista Guido da Baisio, arcidiacono di Bologna’, Studi Senesi, lxxvi (1964), 7–52Google Scholar, at 47–8, §9. The edition of Guido de Baisio’s constitutions in this article supersedes that by Teige, J. in his Beiträge zur Geschichte der Audientia litterarum contradictarum, Prague 1897, i–viGoogle Scholar.

¹² Cf. Kanzleiordnungen, ed. Tangl, 112, §4.

¹³ Teige, Beiträge, x, § 14 (see also § 15).

¹⁴ Ibid., §13; Kanzleiordnungen, ed. Tangl, 112, §4; Novae constitutions audientiae contradictarum in curia Romana promulgatae A.D. 1375, ed. J. Förstemann, Leipzig 1897, 53–4, §54; 54–5. §55 (see also §56).

¹⁵ Liotta, ‘Appunti’, 47, §8; Teige, Beiträge, x, §16, xv (here one should presumably read ‘incuriam’ for ‘in curia’; cf. R. von Heckel’s silent emendation in Grauert, Magister Heinrich der Poet, 214). See also the proctor’s oaths in Kanzleiordnungen, ed. Tangl, 47, and in Novae constitutions, ed. Förstemann, 11, §2.

¹⁶ Bloom, J. Harvey, Liber ecclesiae Wigorniensis: a Utter book of the Priors of Worcester, Worcestershire Historical Society (henceforth cited as WHS) 1912, 48–9Google Scholar. It is not clear from this letter whether the abbot’s business was in the chancery.

¹⁷ Pantin, W. A., ‘The letters of John Mason: a fourteenth-century formulary from St Augustine’s, Canterbury’, in Sandquist, T. A. and Powicke, M. R. (eds.), Essays in Medieval History presented to Bertie Wilkinson, Toronto 1969, 192–219, at 199Google Scholar.

¹⁸ See the constitutions published in Liotta,’ Appunti’, 44, § 1, and in Novae constitutions, ed. Förstemann, 30–43, §§28–41, and the instances in Herde, ‘Formelbuch’, 259–61, and in Bund, J. W. Willis, Register of the Diocese of Worcester during the Vacancy of the See, WHS 1897, 41–2Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Langlois, Ch.-V., ‘Notices et documents relatifs a l’histoire du XIIIe et du XIVe siècle: Nova Curie’, Revue Historique, lxxxvii (1905), 55–79, at 76–7Google Scholar.

²⁰ Ibid., 77 n. 1.

²¹ A major exception is the correspondence between the civic authorities of Hamburg and their proctors published in Rat und Domkapitel von Hamburg urn die Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts, I: Die (Correspondent zwischen dem Hamburger Rat und seinen Vertretem an der Päpstlichen Kurie in Avignon 1337 bis 1339, ed. Salomon, R., Hamburg 1968Google Scholar. The wealth of material regarding relations between Hamburg and the court of Avignon has resulted in two other noteworthy publications: Die Rechnungsbücher der hamburgischen Gesandten in Avignon 1338 bis 1355, ed. Schrader, T., Hamburg 1907Google Scholar, and an edition of the formulary of Heinrich Bucglant (see below, n. 44).

²² Langlois, ‘Nova Curie’, 72–5. Robert endorses a letter of 7 April 1313 (PRO SC7/44/8; printed in Foedera, Conventions, Litterae et cujuscunque generis Ada Publica, ed. Rymer, T., 4 vols., Record Commission 1816–69, II- i. 208Google Scholar) as a chancery proctor; and he is appointed a chancery proctor in Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense; the Register of Richard de Kellawe, Bishop of Durham, ed. Hardy, T. D., 4 vols., Rolls Series 1873–8, i. 434Google Scholar.

²³ Diekamp, W., ‘Zum päpstlichen Urkundenwesen von Alexander iv. bis Johann XXII.’, Mittcilungcn des Instiluts für öslerreichische Geschichtsforschung (henceforth MIÖG), iv (1883), 497–540Google Scholar, at 525–8; Heckel, ‘Aufkommen dcr ständigen Prokuratoren’; Herde, Beiträge, 125–48; idem, ‘Formelbuch’; Stelzer, W., ‘Aus der päpstlichen Kanzlei des 13. Jahrhunderts: Magister Johannes de Sancto Germano, Kurienprokurator und päpstlicher Notar’, Römische hislorische Mittcilungen, xi (1969), 210–21Google Scholar; idem, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kurienprokuratoren im 13. Jahrhundert’, Archivum Historiae Pontificiae (henceforth cited as AHP), viii (1970), 113–38Google Scholar; idem, ‘Petentenvertretung’, Linehan, P., ‘Proctors representing Spanish interests at the papal court, 1216–1303’, AHP, xvii (1979), 69–123Google Scholar; idem, ‘Spanish litigants and their agents at the thirteenth-century papal curia’, in Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Vatican City 1980, 487–501Google Scholar. On proctors of English petitioners in this period see Brentano, R., Two Churches: England and Italy in the Thirteenth Century, Princeton 1968Google Scholar, ch. 1, and Cheney, C. R., ‘Some features of surviving original papal letters in England’, ASSAB, xii (1972), 1–25Google Scholar, at 13–19. Material on the Avignon period as well as on the thirteenth century is included in Savers, J. E., ‘Canterbury proctors at the court of Audientia litterarum contradictarum’, Traditio, xxii (1966), 311–45Google Scholar, and idem, ‘Proctors representing British interests at the papal court, 1198–1415’, in Proceedings of the Third International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Vatican City 1971Google Scholar.

²⁴ Cf. Herde, Beiträge, 129.

²⁵ Novae constitutions, ed. Förstemann, 13–16, §§9–10. Cf. the ruling by Eugenius iv in Teige, Beiträge, lxiv, §29.

²⁶ On the status of notaries public see Baumgarten, P. M., Von der apostolischen Kanzlei, die päpstlichen Notare, Cologne 1908Google Scholar, Teil, Erster, and Cheney, C. R., Notaries Public in England in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries, Oxford 1972, especially 78–81Google Scholar.

²⁷ E.g., John Cheyne endorses letters of 14 May 1369 (PRO, E328/6; incorrectly ascribed to Urban vi in Exchequer, Augmentation Office, Ancient Deeds Series BB: Calendar and Index (List and Index Society, cxxxvii, 1977), 4Google Scholar) and of 28 May 1371 (Oxford, New College Archives, 9837; in favour of William of Wykeham) as a chancery proctor; and he is appointed a notary public by Urban v in a letter of 25 April 1365 (Exeter, Devon Record Office, Diocesan Records, 1047).

²⁹ I. de Swcthop, who endorses a letter of 14 May 1369 (PRO, SC7/64/65) belongs to the former category; Adam de Murimuth, best known as a chronicler and appointed a proctor in the chancery by Sandale, John de in The Registers of John de Sandale and Rigaud de Asserio, Bishops of Winchester, ed. Baigent, F. J., Hampshire Record Society 1897, 7Google Scholar, belongs to the latter.

²⁹ E.g., Robert Fraunceys endorses a letter of 19 April 1361 (Oxford, Bodleian Library, MsCh. Yorks. 294b; in favour of William Donke, priest of the diocese of York) as a chancery proctor; and he appears as a proctor in the Rota in Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Letters (henceforth CPL), 14 vols., H.M.S.O. 1893–1960, iv. 45. The instructions to the proctor John Dyggs in Literae Cantuarienses, ed. Shcppard, ii. 449–50, state: ‘mittimus insuper vobis...duo procuratoria, unum pro audientia causarum [i.e., the Rota], aliud pro audientia contradictarum, in quibus venerabilem virum Thomam de Paxtone sacri palatii Auditorem, vos et Magistrum Petrum de Hakenesse...nostros constituimus procuratores, conjunctim et divisim’.

³⁰ John More endorses a letter of 31 January 1357 (Preston, Lancashire Record Office, DDSt, no press-mark; printed in Oliver, G., Monasticon Dioecesis Exoniensis, Exeter 1846, 248–9Google Scholar) as a chancery proctor and a letter of William Bragose, cardinal deacon of S. Georgio in Velabro, issued ‘auctoritate domini pape, cuius penitentiarie curam gerimus’ and dated 17 March 1362 (Exeter, Dean and Chapter Archives, 2246; in favour of the dean and others beneficed in the church of Exeter), as a proctor in the penitentiary. On proctors in the penitentiary see Goller, E., Die päpstliche Pönitentiarie, 2 vols., Rome 1907–11, I, especially 1. 183ndash;4Google Scholar.

³¹ E.g., Matheus de Prato endorses letters of 8 June 1328 (PRO, SC7/56/19), of 14 March 1331 (Dias, O. J., Bolle pontificie dell’Archivio generate O.S.M., 2nd edn, Archivum Generale Ordinis Servorum 1972, 44, no. 18Google Scholar) and of 28 November 1339 (Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, ed. Denifle, H. and Chatelain, E., 4 vols., Paris 1889–97, ii. 493, no. 1030Google Scholar) as a chancery proctor; and he undertakes to pay, or pays, service taxes in Schröder, H., ‘Die Protokollbiicher der päpstlichen Kammerkleriker 1329–1347’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, xxvii (1937), 121–286Google Scholar, at 237, no. 89d; in Die Einnahmen der apostolischen Kammer unter Johann XXII., ed. Goller, E. (Vatikanische Quellen zur Geschichte der päpstlichen Hof- und Finanzverwaltung (henceforth cited as VQ), 1, 1910), 601Google Scholar; and in Die Einnahmen der apostolischen Kammer unter Klemens VI., ed. Mohler, L. (VQ, 5, 1931), 702Google Scholar (index). See also Lunt, W. E., Financial Relations of the Papacy with England to 1327, Cambridge, Mass. 1939, 470, 484–6Google Scholar, and idem, Financial Relations of the Papacy with England, 1327–1534, Cambridge, Mass. 1962, 178–81, 195–7, 721–60Google Scholar.

³² See the references given above, n. 23.

³³ On English proctors of the Avignon period see Sayers,’ Canterbury proctors’, 329–30. Some English proctors of this period and of the period of the Schism are listed in Sayers, ‘Proctors representing British interests’, 153. The ‘Galfridus Burgens’ and ‘Willelmus de Zimersse’ who appear as foreigners, ibid., n. 100 (with reference to the endorsements on PRO, SC7/13/11 and SC7/48/1 respectively), are in fact Englishmen, Galfridus Burgeys and Willelmus de Amersford. The former also endorses a letter of 9 January 1343 (Durham, Dean and Chapter Muniments, 1.2, Pap. 25; in favour of Robert de Kildesby, master of the hospital of St Thomas, Bolton) as a chancery proctor; and he is appointed a chancery proctor in Registrum Johannis de Trillek, Episcopi Herefordensis, ed. Parry, J. H. (CYS, 8, 1912), 100–1Google Scholar. The latter also endorses letters of 22 October 1371 (Largiader, A., Die Papsturkunden der Schweiz von Innozenz III. bis Martin V., 2 vols., Zurich 1968–70, ii. 95, no. 854Google Scholar) and 15 March 1372 (Lettres de Grégoire XI, ed. Tihon, C., ii (Analecta Vaticano-Belgica, Premiere Serie xx, 1961), 48, no. 1486Google Scholar) as a chancery proctor.

³⁴ Windsor Castle, St George’s Chapel, Muniments, Papal Bulls 11. The other letters are Papal Bulls 4 and 7.

³⁵ He is appointed a notary public in CPL, iii. 307, provided to a canonry, ibid., 364, and to the other benefices, ibid., 390 (cf. 459), 446, and receives his indult, ibid., 370. Someone with the same name is provided to another canonry, ibid., 344.

³⁶ See Cheney, Notaries Public, 89–90. On the connection between notaries public and proctors see above pp. 20–1. On the meaning of the title in a university context see Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to 1500, 3 vols., 1957–9, i. xv–xviGoogle Scholar. An example of a magister is Adam de Kirkeby, who endorses a letter of 2 May 1308 (Cambridge, King’s College, Muniments, B116/3; in favour of the monastery of Great Bricett) as a chancery proctor and appears as a magister by 1306 in Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500, Cambridge 1963, 338Google Scholar.

³⁷ Emden, Biographical Register of the University of Oxford, ii. 1339. William endorses a letter of 19 October 1327 (PRO, SC7/56/20) as a chancery proctor.

³⁸ This applies to Andreas Sapiti: see Davidsohn, R., Sloria di Firenze, translated by Klein, G. B., 8 vols., Florence 1956–68, vi. 240Google Scholar.

³⁹ E.g., Taverninus Novariensis served English and German clients: PRO, SC7/11/22 (printed in Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 110); The Register of William Greenfield, Lord Archbishop of York, ed. Brown, William and Thompson, A. Hamilton, 5 vols., Surtees Society 1931–40, ii. 67–8Google Scholar, no. 843; v. 41, no. 2465; 166, no. 2621; Karl Gustav Schmidt and Kehr, P., Päpstliche Urkunden und Regesten die Gebiete der heutigen Proving Sachsen...betreffend, 2 vols., Halle 1886–9, i. 73, nos. 14–16Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ Cf. Stelzer, ‘Beiträge’, 132–3.

⁴¹ E.g., Petrus Ascibilis (or Astibilis) was a scribe (see Barbiche, B., ‘Les Scriptores de la chancellerie apostolique sous le pontifical de Boniface viii’, Bibliothèque de l’École des Charles, cxxviii (1970), 115–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 159–60, no. 70, and Nüske, G., ‘Untersuchungen über das Personal der päpstlichen Kanzlei, 1254–1304, Zweiter Teil’, Archiv für Diplomatik, xxi (1975), 249–431Google Scholar, at 340–1, no. 232); and he endorses letters of 26 March 1317 (PRO, SC7/56/10; printed but incorrectly dated in Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 322) and of 19 March 1318 (PRO, SC7/56/9) as a chancery proctor.

⁴² See, for Innocent in, Hcckel, ‘Aufkommen der ständigen Prokuratoren’, 300–13, and Stelzer, ‘Petentenvertretung’, and, for the position after the Fourth Lateran Council, Nüske, ’Untcrsuchungen’, 419–20, and Stelzer, MIÖG, lxxxii (1974), 460Google Scholar. The prohibition under Urban VI is in Kanzleiordnungen, ed. Tangl, 131, §1.

⁴³ On the Sapiti family, see Davidsohn, Storia di Firenze, vi. 240.

⁴⁴ Barb. lat. 2126 (olim XXXI 11). On the register see Kirsch, J. P., ‘Andreas Sapiti, englischer Prokurator an der Kurie im 14. Jahrhundert’, Historisches Jahrbuch, xiv (1898), 582–603Google Scholar. Referring to a marginal note in the register, ‘Alibi scripta est in libro novo supplicationum factarum coram d. Benedicto papa XII’, Kirsch states that Sapiti kept a further register (ibid., 589–90); but the note could equally well refer to a papal register of petitions, since the systematic registration of petitions probably started under Benedict xii. The formulary of another proctor at Avignon was edited by Schwalm, J., Das Formelbuch des Heinrich Bucglant, Hamburg 1910Google Scholar, and this formulary refers to one or two further registers of proctors (ibid., xli; Göller, E., Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für. Rechlsgeschichte, Kanonistische Abteilung i (1911), 388Google Scholar). John Lydford’s Book, ed. Owen, D. M., H.M.S.O. 1974Google Scholar, includes material on Lydford’s activity as a proctor.

⁴⁵ Sayers,’ Proctors representing British interests’, 160, says that he always appears with Gualterus, but two exceptions to this are PRO, SC7/44/15 (printed in Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 149), where he appears with Phylippus Forzoli, and Largiader, Papsturkunden der Schweiz, ii. 6, no. 712. Dr Sayers suggests that Gualterus was Sapiti’s son, but this seems an unnecessary suggestion, since the names of several of Sapiti’s sons are known and none of them is called-Gualterus: see Wright, J. R., The Church and the English Crown, 1305–1334, Toronto 1980, 112–13Google Scholar. On Gualterus, see also ibid., 118.

⁴⁸ PRO, SC7/25/7; SC7/25/13 (printed in Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 527); SC7/24/5 (printed ibid., ii. 714–15); British Library, Cotton Charter VI 6.

⁴⁷ Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 543.

⁴⁸ Ibid., 66.

⁴⁹ Ibid., 131, 294.

⁵⁰ Calendar of Patent Rolls (henceforth CPR), H.M.S.O. 1891ff., 1317–1321, 249, 250.

⁵¹ Foedera, cd. Rymcr, II. i. 443.

⁵² CPR, 1334–1338, 7, 316, 330.

⁵³ Wright, Church and English Crown, 111 and n. 17.

⁵⁴ Cerchiari, E., Sacra Romana Rota, 4 vols., Rome 1921, ii. 26Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ Fam. xxiv. 1 (Francesco Pctrarca: Le Familiari, ed. V. Rossi (Edizionc nazionale delle opcre di Francesco Petrarca, x-xiii, 1933–42), iv. 213). Petrarch’s only letter addressed to Subirani is Fam. i. 3 (Francesco Petrarca: Le Familiari, cd. Rossi, i. 21–4). Subirani is mentioned in Sen. xvi. 1 (part of which has been re-edited by Nolhac, P. dc, Pétrarque et l’humanisme, 2nd edn, 2 vols., Paris 1907, i. 260–1, ii. 20Google Scholar). Nolhac believed that a manuscript of Livy which belonged to Petrarch (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationalc, Lat. 5690) was annotated by Subirani (Pétrarque et l’humanisme, ii. 14–25), but this view has been rejected by Foresti, A., Aneddoti delta vita di Francesco Petrarca, 2nd edn, Padua 1977, 80–2Google Scholar, and by Billanovich, G., ‘Petrarch and the textual tradition of Livy’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xiv (1951), 137–208, especially 158–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁶ See the letter printed by Langlois, ‘Nova Curie’, 77, and again, with a facsimile, by Billanovich, G., ‘Tra Dante e Petrarca’, Italia medioevale e umanistica, viii (1965), 1–44, at 8 and plate 1Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense, ed. Hardy, iv. 391–3. For Sapiti’s work with Subirani see also Wright, Church and English Crown, 111 and n. 19.

⁵⁸ For Sapiti’s foreign clients see Formelbuch des Heinrich Bucglant, ed. Schwalm, xxxiv, and Largiader, Papsturkunden der Schweiz, ii. 6, no. 712 (this letter, in favour of the priory of Payerne in the diocese of Lausanne, was issued at the request of Otto de Grandson, who, like Sapiti, was much employed in Anglo-papal diplomacy and even resided at the curia: see Clifford, E. R., A Knight of Great Renown: the Life and Times of Othon de Grandson, Chicago 1961, 208–12 and ch. 9)Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ PRO, SC 1/39/62 is a draft in which the names of the sender and of the addressee and the date are not given. The addressee is apparently requested to ask the king to obtain Sapiti’s help in securing the appropriation by the pope of a church to the monastery of Sibton. SC 1/33/10 is a letter of 7 November (1319) from Bartholomew de Badlesmere (who is not named) to the king, putting forward the candidature of Bartholomew’s nephew, Henry de Burghashe, for the vacant see of Winchester. The king is requested to write to the pope and to certain others, and to order the bishop of Hereford and Sapiti to present the letters and to pursue the business.

⁶⁰ Wright, Church and English Crown, 100 and n. 9 (with numerous references). Sapiti impetrated the following letters for a newly provided archbishop and two newly provided bishops: PRO, SC7/44/15 (printed in Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 149); SC7/56/17 (printed ibid., 525); and SC7/56/25. Walter Reynolds, archbishop of Canterbury, requested from Edward 11 a benefice for one of Sapiti’s sons: CPR, 1313–1317, 117. There is also a letter which Sapiti obtained for the dean and chapter of Hereford (Hereford, Dean and Chapter Muniments, 1858; printed in Charters and Records of Hereford Cathedral, ed. Capes, W. W., Cantilupe Society 1908, 184–6)Google Scholar.

⁶¹ PRO, SC7/56/17 (see previous note).

⁶² See Wright, Church and English Crown, 110 n. 10.

⁶³ Kirsch, ‘Sapiti’, 590.

⁶⁴ Mattingly, G., ‘The first resident embassies: medieval Italian origins of modern diplomacy’, Speculum, xii (1937), 423–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, Renaissance Diplomacy, London 1955, ch. 6Google Scholar; Queller, Office of Ambassador, 76–84. For earlier views see Ada Aragonensia, ed. Finke, H., 3 vols., Berlin 1908–22, i. pp. exxiii–exxviGoogle Scholar, cxxxix–cxl; Andreas, W., Staatskunst und Diplomatic der Venezianer, Leipzig 1943, 19–23Google Scholar; and Cuttino, G. P., English Diplomatic Administration 1239–1339, Oxford 1940Google Scholar (I cite the second edition of 1971), especially 141–4 (here English royal proctors both at the curia and at the Parlement de Paris are seen as diplomatic agents).

⁶⁵ E.g., above p. 24.

⁶⁶ PRO, SC7/24/5 (see above, n. 46).

⁶⁷ Circumstances must have been different in the fifteenth century, when the office of English resident ambassador at the curia apparently evolved from that of resident royal proctor; see Behrens, B., ‘Origins of the office of English resident ambassador in Rome’, EHR, xlix (1934), 640–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁸ In [311 he appears as ‘alter procuratorum Regis in curia Romana’, the other proctor being Sapiti (Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 131).

⁶⁹ CPR, 1338–1340, 197; Tout, T. F., Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England, 6 vols., Manchester 1920–33, v. 17Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ Ibid., iii. 160 n. 2.

⁷¹ CPP, i. 4 (cf. 16–17), 10.

⁷² Ibid., 263–4, 322- In 1360 he is described as late proctor of the king, but there is no indication of when he relinquished the position: CPR, 1360–1364, 50.

⁷³ CPP, i. 219.

⁷⁴ See above, p. 22.

⁷⁵ He died at the curia before 14 April 1366, but is not known to have been there on royal business: CPP, i. 525.

⁷⁶ See Ada Aragonensia, ed. Finke, especially i. pp. cxxiii-cxl, and Die Berichte dtr Generalprokuraloren des Deutschen Ordens an der Kurie, i: Die Geschichte der Generalprokuratoren von den Anfängen bis 1403, ed. Forstreuter, K., Göttingen 1961, especially 76–130Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ E.g., by Queller, Office of Ambassador, ch. 4.

⁷⁸ Langlois, Ch.-V., ‘Le Fonds de V Ancient Correspondence au Public Record Office de Londres’, Journal des Savants, N.S. ii (1904), 380–93, 446–53, at 450–1Google Scholar. Another section of this letter is referred to above, p. 19 and n. 20. For a report on the conclave at Perugia where Clement v was elected see Bund, J. W. Willis, The Register of William de Geynesburgh, Bishop of Worcester, WHS 1929, 16–17Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ PRO, SC1/50/30, an original letter close from William dated 12 September with no year, and unfortunately in poor condition and therefore partly illegible.

⁸⁰ Cf. Langlois, ‘Le Fonds de l’Ancient Correspondence’, 385.

⁸¹ Langlois, ‘Nova Curie’, 69.

⁸² On attempts in the early fourteenth century, see Wright, Church and English Crown, 125–8. On the attempt to secure the promotion of John de Lenham, a letter written shortly before the council of Vienne, PRO, SC1/37/91, may be added to the references given there. The name of the sender is not given, and the name of the addressee is not given, or is illegible. The letter states that the pope should be requested to promote John to the cardinalate because of the need for an English cardinal to further royal business at the curia. On the attempt to secure the promotion of Roger of Northburgh, see also Chaplais, ‘English diplomatic documents’, 47–8.

⁸³ Wright, Church and English Crown, 309–12. Highfield, J. R. L., ‘The promotion of William of Wickham to the see of Winchester’, in this Journal, iv (1953), 37–54Google Scholar, at 41, 44, 50–1, shows that Edward ill’s envoy to the curia, John de Cobham, in 1366 took with him 48 letters, excluding safe conducts, from the king and others, most of which were addressed to cardinals.

⁸⁴ E.g., Edward 11 repeatedly called on the assistance of Petrus Fabri, a papal notary: Foedera, ed. Rymer, II. i. 374, 375, 379, 384. Fabri was a clerk and a pensioner of the king and a member of his council beyond the seas: CPR, 1317–1321, 25, 53, 266–7.

⁸⁵ There is much material on this subject in Wright, Church and English Crown, 101–8, 119–24, 129–35, 285–308, 313–17.