Search Results

You searched for:
Label: Chaplais 1965

Results: 1-1 of 1

Show all data

  • Metadata

    Chaplais 1965. Chaplais, P., 'The Origin and Authenticity of the Royal Anglo-Saxon Diploma', Journal of the Society of Archivists 3 (1965), 48–61. 49 charters cited.

    • S 8. Comments, original (= 1973, pp. 29, 32, 33-4), pp. 49, 51-2, 53-4
    • S 9. Comments, (= 1973 p. 37), p. 56+C1121
    • S 15. Comments, on formulation (= 1973, pp. 30-1), p. 50
    • S 22. Comments, compares script of MS 1 with that of S 950 (= 1973, p. 42 n. 105), p. 60 n. 105
    • S 67. Comments, typical forgery (= 1973, p. 31 n. 24), p. 50 n.
    • S 89. Comments, on script; on provenance (= 1973, pp. 34-5), pp. 53-4
    • S 230. Comments, typical forgery (= 1973, p. 31 n. 24), p. 50 n.
    • S 239. Comments, undoubtedly spurious (= 1973, p. 37), p. 56
    • S 243. Comments, cited (= 1973, p. 37), p. 56
    • S 293. Comments, Canterbury scribe of main text and witnesses also wrote B 310, cf. formulation of S 1269 (= 1973, pp. 37-8), pp. 56-7
    • S 298. Comments, the script reappears in Bodleian, Bodley 426, and in two versions of S 1438, probably drafted by the bishop of Winchester or bishop of Sherborne, endorsed by John Chase of Winchester (cf. endorsements of S 416, 636, 649, 1008) (= 1973, pp. 33, 38-9), pp. 57-8
    • S 416. Comments, on endorsement; original, probably written by Winchester scribe (= 1973, p. 38 n. 81, pp. 41-2), pp. 57 n. 81, 59-60
    • S 425. Comments, written by Winchester scribe, also responsible for S 416 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 447. Comments, probably written by a Winchester scribe, also responsible for S 464, 512 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 464. Comments, Winchester scribe, also responsible for S 447, 512 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 470. Comments, original, probably written by Winchester scribe (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 497. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 510, 528, 535, 552 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 510. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 497, 528, 535, 552 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 512. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 447, 464 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 528. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe also repsonsible for S 497, 510, 535, 552 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 535. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe, also responsible for S 497, 510, 528, 552 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 552. Comments, MS 1 original, written by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 497, 510, 528, 535 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 624. Comments, original, written by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 646 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 636. Comments, original, Winchester scribe (= 1973, pp. 38 n. 81, 41-2), pp. 57 n. 81, 59-60
    • S 646. Comments, original, witten by Winchester scribe also responsible for S 624 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 649. Comments, on endorsement; original, written by Winchester scribe (= 1973, pp. 38 n. 81, 41-2), pp. 57 n. 81, 59-60
    • S 687. Comments, MS 1 original, perhaps written by Abingdon scribe, scribe also wrote S 690, 703, 706, 717 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 690. Comments, MS 1 original, scribe of main text possibly from Abingdon, also responsible for S 687, 703, 706, 717 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 703. Comments, MS 1 original, scribe perhaps from Abingdon, also responsible for S 687, 690, 706, 717 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 706. Comments, original, scribe perhaps from Abingdon, also responsible for S 687, 690, 703, 717 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 717. Comments, original, perhaps written by Abingdon scribe, scribe also wrote S 687, 690, 703, 706 (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60
    • S 820. Comments, corrupt in places (= 1973, p. 38), p. 57
    • S 890. Comments, scribe also wrote S 1492, the bishop's will (= 1973, p. 42), p. 60
    • S 950. Comments, MS 1 written by Canterbury scribe (= 1973, p. 42 n. 105), p. 60 n. 105
    • S 963. Comments, compares with script of S 971 (= 1973, p. 42 n. 105), p. 60 n. 105
    • S 971. Comments, script of MS 1 compared with that of S 963, p. 60 n. 105
    • S 985. Comments, pp. 54-5 (= 1973, p. 35)
    • S 994. Comments, compares script of MS 1 with that of S 1008 (= 1973, p. 42 n. 105), p. 60 n. 105
    • S 1008. Comments, compares script with that of S 994 (= 1973, pp. 38 n. 81, 42 n. 105), pp. 57 n. 81, 60 n. 105
    • S 1058. Comments, dubious (= 1973, p. 38), p. 57
    • S 1164. Comments, dubious (= 1973, pp. 36-7), pp. 55-6
    • S 1169. Comments, on a formula (= 1973, p. 37 n. 70), p. 56 n. 70
    • S 1182. Comments, on formulation (= 1973, p. 37), p. 56
    • S 1256. Comments, on diplomatic implications (= 1973, pp. 36-7), pp. 55-6
    • S 1269. Comments, formulation strikingly similar to that of S 293 (= 1973, pp. 37-8), p. 57 n.
    • S 1431a. Comments, scribe of MS 1 also wrote S 293 (= 1973, p. 38 n. 78), pp. 56-7
    • S 1438. Comments, MSS 1 and 3 are in part in the same hand as S 298 (= 1973, pp. 38-9), p. 57
    • S 1492. Comments, scribe also wrote S 890 (= 1973, p. 42), p. 60
    • S 1533. Comments, script of MS 1 likened to that of a passage in Parker Chronicle (= 1973, pp. 41-2), pp. 59-60