#Manuscript:# Harleian Charter 111 B. 49, British Museum. The upper half
contains a version in Latin, excepting the passage ‘sacha . . . frimþa,’
which is in English; the names of six witnesses are appended. On the
lower half is the present text; on the back, ‘carta reḡ. H. ii de sacha
& socne.’ The document is in a French record hand, and the writer was
evidently little versed in the insular script. He uses both þ and th, ƿ
and w.
#Facsimile:# Keller, plate xiii.
#Editions:# Hickes, G., Linguarum Vett. Septentrionalium Thesaurus,
i. p. xvi; Dugdale, W., Monasticon, i. 111; Birch, W. de Gray,
Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, New Series, xi. 312;
Stratmann, F. H., Anglia, vii. 220; Earle, J., A Handbook to the Land
Charters, 346 (with the Latin); Kluge, F., Mittelenglisches Lesebuch, 5.
#Phonology:# The language is not contemporary, for the drafter, who was
not the scribe, used as a model a charter (H^2) in the same terms,
granted to William of Corbeil (see 6/28) and the monks of Christ Church
by Henry the First in 1123 A.D., a copy of which exists in Campbell
Charter, xxi. 6, B.M., reproduced in Facsimiles of Royal and other
Charters in the British Museum, i. no. 6, and printed in Lye’s
Dictionary, ii. appendix. H^2 differs from our text in its dialect,
which is mainly Southern, with some Kentish forms, in greater regularity
of grammar, in details of names and relationships, but in little else.
It was derived from a charter (H^1) granted to S. Anselm and Christ
Church by Henry the First, _c._ 1107 A.D., extant in Campbell Charter,
xxix. 5, and Cotton Charter, vii. 1, printed in the Journal of the
British Archaeological Association, xxix. 242, also imperfectly in
Hickes and in Dugdale, i. 109, 111. It also shows traces of its Kentish
origin. But it was ultimately based on the Charter (E) granted by Edward
the Confessor to Archbishop Stigand, _c._ 1052 A.D., Campbell Charter,
xxi. 5, reproduced in Facsimiles of Ancient Charters in the British
Museum, part iv, no. 38, and printed in Transactions of the Royal
Society of Literature, i., New Series; and the chain extended back to
the first extant example of the formula, the charter (C) of Cnut to
Æthelnoth, A.D. 1020, preserved by a copy in a Canterbury book, the
MacDurnan Gospels (now at Lambeth), and printed in Earle, 232.
There is another copy of the present document, but fragmentary and
decayed, in the muniment room of Canterbury Cathedral.
H^1, H^2, and the Harley Charter (H^3) here printed, have been accepted
by Dölle in his book, Zur Sprache Londons vor Chaucer (Morsbach’s
Studien, xxxii), as specimens of the English of the London Chancellery.
As the editors of the Facsimiles of Royal and other Charters point out,
H^1, H^2 are in a book hand, not that of an official court scribe; they
are without witnesses or place of execution. Their seals do not prove
them to be the original grant, for both H^1 and its duplicate Cotton
Charter, vii. 1, have seals, and a note on the back of the latter
appears to indicate that it is one of four copies. The duplicate of H^3
also has its seal, attached, like the others, in an unusual way to the
left side of the document, as if to show that both documents and seals
are replicas of the original. They are, in fact, copies, and the natural
assumption is that they were made at Canterbury to provide against risk
of loss or damage to the actual grant.
H^3 is on a different footing: it is properly attested, its place of
origin is given, and its seal is attached in the usual way at the foot.
But it is not in a charter hand, and its language shows that it was
prepared by a Canterbury scribe to be placed before the king for his
acceptance.
It should be noted that the English words from saca to frimtha also
appear in the Latin version with the following variants: Sacha, Wude,
felde, tolnes, grithbreches, thiofes, flemene.
The charter is then a patchwork of old and new; its phonological
position may be defined by an attempt at a version in Late West-Saxon.
Ic Henric · þurh Godes gife Englalandes cyng · grēte ealle mīne
bisceopas ⁊ ealle mīne scīrgerēfan ⁊ ealle mīne þegnas frencisce ⁊
englisce · on þām scīrum þe Þeobald ærcebisceop ⁊ se hīrēd æt xpīstes
cyrican on Cantwarabyrig habbað land inne frēondlice · ⁊ ic cȳðe ēow þæt
ic hæbbe heom geunnen ꝥ hi bēon ǣlc þāra landa wurðe þe hi hæfdon in
Ēadweardes cynges dæge · ⁊ on Willhelmes cynges mīnes furðor ealdefæder
· ⁊ on Henrices cynges mīnes ealdefæder · ⁊ sace ⁊ sōcne · on strande ⁊
on streame · on wudum ⁊ on feldum · tolles ⁊ tēames · griðbryces · ⁊
hāmsōcne · ⁊ fōrstealles · ⁊ infangeneþēofes · ⁊ flȳmena fyrmðe · ofer
heora āgene menn · binnan burgum ⁊ butan · swā ful ⁊ swā forð swā mīne
āgene wīcneras hit sēcan sceoldon · ⁊ ofer swā fela þegnas swā ic heom
tolǣten hæbbe · And ic nelle ꝥ ǣnig mann ǣnig þing þǣrof tēo · butan hī
⁊ heora wīcneras þām þe hi hit betǣcan willað · ne frencisce ne englisce
· for þām þingum þe ic hæbbe Crīste þās gerihta forgifen minre sāwle to
ēcere ālȳsednesse · ⁊ ic nelle geþafian ꝥ ǣnig mann þis ābrece be mīnum
fullan frēondscipe. God ēow gehealde.
It will be seen that the OE. phonetic position is largely maintained;
noteworthy divergences are: #æ# as _e_ in hebbe, ercebisceop; as _a_ in
habbe (occasionally in OE.), ealdefader; as _ea_ (= #e#) in eafdon, #æ#
+ #g# in deȝe. ænglelandes (also in H^1, H^2) shows a survival of
primitive #æ#, characteristic of the south-east. en 12/6 for #on# is
due to loss of stress; Layamon 8059 has æn; #e# + #g# is _ei_ in þeinas.
#y# is _e_ in grithbreces of the Latin text and H^1, H^2 (but
grithbrices is OE. #griðbrice#); _i_ in Cantuarabirȝ. #ǣ# is _e_ in
bitechan, enig, eni, echere, toleten, þer; #ȳ#, _e_ in keþe. #ea# before
#l# + cons. is _a_ in forstalles; frimtha is descended from #fiermð#
with metathesis of _r_: the others have fermþe and H^1 also feormþe,
forms without umlaut: #giefu# appears as ȝefu, but #giefan#, forgifan.
#heora# is heara (early Kentish hiara) beside heore; scolden answers to
a non-diphthonged OE. form. #flīema# gives flemene in the Latin text (so
E, H^1, H^2, the latter also flæmene) and fleamene: alisendnesse is OE.
#ālīesednesse# (but once #ālȝsendnesse#), the others have alysednesse.
#ēo# is _e_ in frenscipan: _io_ in thiofes of the Lat. text, _ia_ in
thiafes; #ā# + #w# is _au_ in saule; #ēo# + #w# appears as geau (ȝeu,
Poema Morale, Digby MS.) with ȝ borrowed from the _nom._, helped, no
doubt, by the general tendency exemplified in gearfoþe, ungeaþe of the
MK. gospels.
#w# is written _u_ in Cantuarabirȝ; an inorganic _n_ is inserted in
alisendnesse; #f# is _u_ in geþauian, scirereuan. The dentals are
confused: _þ_ for #t#, _t_ for #þ#, _t_ for #d#, _d_ for #þ# appear in
theames, theo, teobalt, hiret, habbad, ford; #d# is omitted in
frenscipan, as in stan, halen, &c., of the MK. gospels; #č# is written
_ch_ in chyrchen, bitechan, echere, ich, grithbriches; the scribe
apparently uses _ch_ for [k] in Sacha of the Latin text; #h# is omitted
in eafdon; _cht_ for #ht# in gerichtan is an attempt to indicate the
guttural sound.
The inflections of OE. are largely preserved, but levelling of #a# to
_e_ is shown in fele, fleamene, fullen, heore, lande (_pl. g._), þare,
Wicneres, while _a_ is written for older #e# in frimtha, saca, wurþa,
and _o_ for #e# in geunnon. OE. #um# is _an_ in burgan, feldan, minan,
sciran, þingan, wudan; #þām# appears as þan. Weak forms are gerichtan,
frenscipan; ȝefu is nom. form for accusative.
#Dialect:# The levelling of #y#, #ȳ#, #æ#, #ǣ# to _e_; #ea# as _a_, the
old Kentish #io#, #ia# in thiofes, thiafes, heara point to Kent. The
absence of _v_, _z_ for #f#, #s# initial, the retention of #a# in lande,
strande, and of #n# final either mark an early stage in the dialect, or
show the conservative influence of the older documents.
#Introduction:# King Henry the Second grants, or rather confirms, to
Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the monks of Christ Church their
lands and privileges of jurisdiction. The date is February, 1155 (Eyton,
Itinerary of Henry II. 5) and the place York. For alisendnessee 12/15,
read alisendnesse.
1. #gret . . . mine#, verb of the third person, pronoun of the first: so
CE; it is formal, and not a scribe’s error as Stratmann thinks; H^1, H^2
have grete. #bissceopas#, &c.: in Latin, ‘Ep{iscop}is · Com{itibus} ·
Bar{onibus} · Justic{iariis} · Vi{c}e{comitibus} · Cet{er}isq{ue} suis
fidelib{us}.’