Search Results

You searched for:
Label: Scharer 1982

Results: 1-1 of 1

Show all data

  • Metadata

    Scharer 1982. Scharer, A., Die angelsächsiche Königsurkunde im 7. und. 8. Jahrhundert (Vienna, Cologne, and Graz, 1982). 153 charters cited.

    • S 1. Comments, spurious, pp. 59-60
    • S 2. Comments, spurious, p. 59
    • S 3. Comments, spurious, p. 59
    • S 4. Comments, spurious, p. 59
    • S 5. Comments, spurious, p. 62
    • S 6. Comments, spurious, p. 59
    • S 7. Comments, spurious, pp. 63-5
    • S 8. Comments, original, pp. 65-8
    • S 9. Comments, fabrication with some genuine elements, pp. 68-70
    • S 10. Comments, spurious but with some genuine elements, pp. 77-83
    • S 11. Comments, not entirely genuine in present form, pp. 83-4
    • S 12. Comments, authentic, pp. 71-3
    • S 13. Comments, spurious, pp. 73-5
    • S 14. Comments, authenticity uncertain perhaps altered in transmission, pp. 75-7
    • S 15. Comments, spurious, forged at Winchcombe in early ninth century, pp. 86-9
    • S 16. Comments, authentic, pp. 89-90
    • S 17. Comments, spurious, pp. 90-1
    • S 18. Comments, spurious, pp. 91-2
    • S 19. Comments, original, pp. 93-7
    • S 20. Comments, authentic but MS 1 a later copy, pp. 97-100
    • S 21. Comments, interpolated version of S 19, pp. 94-7
    • S 22. Comments, spurious, pp. 100-2
    • S 23. Comments, authentic, pp. 106-10
    • S 24. Comments, original but should be dated 750, perhaps confirmation of transaction of 741, pp. 110-13
    • S 25. Comments, authentic, pp. 113-15
    • S 26. Comments, authentic basis but not genuine in present form, pp. 105-6, 115-16
    • S 27. Comments, authentic basis but not genuine in present form, pp. 116-19
    • S 28. Comments, spurious in present form, dating discussed, pp. 120-4
    • S 29. Comments, fundamentally authentic but may have been tampered with, pp. 210-11
    • S 30. Comments, authentic basis, pp. 125-6
    • S 31. Comments, contemporary, dates 762, pp. 126-8, 222
    • S 32. Comments, authentic, pp. 222-4
    • S 33. Comments, authentic, pp. 220-2
    • S 34. Comments, authenticity uncertain, pp. 223, 226
    • S 35. Comments, cited, p. 223 n. 44
    • S 36. Comments, cited, p. 223 n.
    • S 37. Comments, authentic, dates to 765 or shortly afterwards, bounds added later, pp. 223, 226
    • S 38. Comments, cited, p. 226
    • S 39. Comments, authentic, p. 264
    • S 40. Comments, cited, pp. 63 n. 9, 104 n. 9
    • S 50. Comments, on Offa's confirmation, p. 260
    • S 51. Comments, spurious, p. 76 n. 32
    • S 55. Comments, spurious, although possibly based on authentic material, pp. 213-14
    • S 56. Comments, authentic and contemporary, pp. 214-16
    • S 57. Comments, not genuine in present form, p. 257
    • S 58. Comments, authentic, pp. 255-6
    • S 59. Comments, p. 256
    • S 60. Comments, spurious, p. 256
    • S 61. Comments, spurious, dates 764 x 775., pp. 256-7
    • S 63. Comments, probably genuine, p. 257
    • S 67. Comments, spurious, pp. 145-6
    • S 68. Comments, spurious, pp. 143-4
    • S 69. Comments, spurious, based on S 420, pp. 144-5
    • S 70. Comments, fabricated, authentic material minimal, probably based on a charter of Osric founding Gloucester, pp. 146-8
    • S 71. Comments, dubious, some genuine elements, used for fabrication of S 73, pp. 148-50
    • S 73. Comments, spurious, based on S 71, pp. 149-50
    • S 74. Comments, spurious, p. 150
    • S 75. Comments, skilfully forged from 8th-century models, probably in 11th century, pp. 150-2
    • S 76. Comments, not genuine in present form, perhaps based on S 77, date is 697 x 699, pp. 152-4
    • S 77. Comments, not genuine in present form, date 691 x 693/9, pp. 152-3
    • S 78. Comments, spurious, pp. 155-6
    • S 79. Comments, spurious, p. 156
    • S 80. Comments, spurious, pp. 156-7
    • S 81. Comments, spurious, pp. 157-8
    • S 82. Comments, spurious, pp. 160-1
    • S 83. Comments, spurious, anachronistic formulas, p. 161
    • S 84. Comments, not genuine in present form, contamination from S 194, pp. 164-6
    • S 85. Comments, not genuine in present form, but largely based on authentic charter, pp. 172-4
    • S 86. Comments, authentic, pp. 198-200
    • S 87. Comments, spurious, pp. 200-1
    • S 88. Comments, authentic, pp. 196-8
    • S 89. Comments, genuine and contemporary, pp. 179-81
    • S 90. Comments, spurious, perhaps forged by Archbishop Wulfred, pp. 187-8
    • S 91. Comments, fundamentally authentic, pp. 119 n., 202-8
    • S 92. Comments, would be suspicious did it not occur in a MS of s. viii2, pp. 188-95
    • S 93. Comments, spurious, p. 186
    • S 94. Comments, authentic, date later rather than earlier within range, pp. 176-9
    • S 95. Comments, genuine apart from dating clause, correct date probably 723, pp. 166-8
    • S 96. Comments, authentic, pp. 182-4
    • S 97. Comments, spurious, probably forged on the basis of a late 8th-century model, pp. 172-3
    • S 98. Comments, authentic basis, but not genuine in present form, pp. 201-2
    • S 99. Comments, not genuine in present form, but authentic basis, pp. 169-72
    • S 100. Comments, late single-sheet copy, possibly authentic, dates to c. 730 x 745, pp. 184-6, 292
    • S 101. Comments, authentic, p. 169
    • S 102. Comments, probably authentic, pp. 162-3
    • S 103. Comments, spurious, bounds possibly forged for the 896 meeting but rest of charter probably fabricated later, pp. 174-6
    • S 103b. Comments, authentic, compare S 91, pp. 203-5, 207-8
    • S 104. Comments, forgery, pp. 175, 234-5
    • S 105. Comments, probably forged in 10th or 11th century on basis of genuine document of 760s, compare S 28, 33, pp. 217-22
    • S 106. Comments, genuine and contemporary, pp. 233-4
    • S 107. Comments, spurious, pp. 232-3
    • S 108. Comments, a fabrication perhaps based on some genuine material, p. 261
    • S 109. Comments, genuine, with reservations, subscription of Bishop Ealdberht of Hereford points to a date of 777, pp. 236-9
    • S 110. Comments, spurious, pp. 228-31
    • S 111. Comments, spurious, pp. 228-31
    • S 112. Comments, spurious, p. 240
    • S 113. Comments, agrees with Robinson's conclusion, pp. 240-3
    • S 114. Comments, original, pp. 245-6
    • S 115. Comments, spurious, pp. 246-7
    • S 116. Comments, probably spurious, pp. 247-9
    • S 117. Comments, spurious, pp. 249-50
    • S 118. Comments, spurious, pp. 250-1
    • S 119. Comments, spurious, some 10th-century formulation, pp. 252-3
    • S 120. Comments, not genuine in present form, pp. 251-2
    • S 121. Comments, spurious, p. 252
    • S 122. Comments, spurious, p. 253
    • S 123. Comments, possibly original, pp. 262-3
    • S 124. Comments, spurious, pp. 269-70
    • S 125. Comments, fabricated from S 123 and 39, pp. 263-4
    • S 126. Comments, agrees with Finberg, dates 779, pp. 271-2
    • S 127. Comments, fabrication perhaps based on a genuine charter of Offa, pp. 270-1
    • S 128. Comments, authentic, pp. 265-6
    • S 129. Comments, probably authentic, p. 266
    • S 130. Comments, p. 266
    • S 131. Comments, authentic, pp. 233 n. 43, 266
    • S 132. Comments, spurious, p. 267
    • S 133. Comments, spurious, p. 272
    • S 134. Comments, authentic, p. 267
    • S 135. Comments, spurious, pp. 273-4
    • S 136. Comments, spurious, pp. 272-3
    • S 137. Comments, not a royal charter, p. 278
    • S 138. Comments, spurious, pp. 272-3
    • S 139. Comments, contemporary, pp. 274-7
    • S 140. Comments, spurious, pp. 264-5
    • S 141. Comments, not genuine in present form but based on authentic material, dates 777 x 779, pp. 243-4
    • S 142. Comments, forgery, pp. 235-6
    • S 143. Comments, spurious, pp. 201 n. 180, 211 n. 229, 212 n. 7, 216 n. 32
    • S 144. Comments, dubious, p. 274
    • S 145. Comments, spurious, dates 777 from subscription of Bishop Ealdberht of Hereford, pp. 239-40
    • S 146. Comments, dubious, pp. 277-8
    • S 147. Comments, spurious, pp. 244-5
    • S 156. Comments, probably forged in early ninth century, discusses relationship with S 15, 160, pp. 87-9
    • S 194. Comments, on diplomatic connection with S 84, which covers the same property, p. 165
    • S 233. Comments, fabrication, pp. 84-5
    • S 235. Comments, based on genuine charter, but corrupt and fabricated, pp. 138-40
    • S 265. Comments, doubtful, p. 214
    • S 267. Comments, dubious, p. 47 n. 142
    • S 752. Comments, spurious, p. 137
    • S 1164. Comments, on details of formulation, expresses reservations, pp. 23 n. 3, 30 n. 46, 76 n. 36, 93 n. 47, 167 n. 38, 189 n. 139
    • S 1165. Comments, forgery based on a genuine charter granting 5 hides at Thorpe, pp. 133-6
    • S 1167. Comments, authentic , p. 34 n. 73, 214 n. 19
    • S 1168. Comments, forged under the influence of S 1167, p. 34 n. 73
    • S 1169. Comments, dubious, p. 93 n. 47
    • S 1170. Comments, dubious, p. 93 n. 47
    • S 1171. Comments, pp. 26-7, 129-41
    • S 1174. Comments, spurious, p. 247
    • S 1180. Comments, unlikely to be authentic in its entirety, pp. 103-6
    • S 1181. Comments, spurious, pp. 137-8
    • S 1182. Comments, p. 224 n. 50
    • S 1183. Comments, p. 260
    • S 1184. Comments, pp. 260-1
    • S 1244. Comments, spurious, p. 59
    • S 17. Printed, ex MS 2, p. 91 n. 26