Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 11.djvu/304

2(M- examples; of MEDl.EVAL SEALS. Odoni gloriosissimo rege. Actii sco maximino monasterio " in di nomine feliciter amen. In respect to the date of tliis charter, some difficulty exists. ^labilloii reckoned the accession of Elides from the death of Charles le Gros, 12th January, 888, and assigns the document to a.d. 889. In Bouquet, the accession of Eudes, as well as the charter, is placed in the same year, A.D. 888, and the editors adopt the opinion of Vaissette, that two epochs of this reign nuist be admitted, one taken from 887, and the other from 888."^ De Wailly says, that Eudes was elected king after the deposition of Charles le Gros, which took place llth November, 887, but argues also in favor of the adoption of two epochs. But supposing this to be true, it is not very obvious how the second regnal year of Eudes can be included in an}^ part of 888 previous to November, unless the fraction of the year 887 is to be reckoned as the first of the reign, and the second and succeeding years calculated from the 1st of Januar3 The charters of Eudes, as printed in Bouquet, do not afford much assistance in clearing up the question, for there is great reason to doubt the accuracy of the transcripts, exclusive of the errors committed by the original scribes. Many of these charters have the year of the incarnation added, as well as the indiction, but these do not alva3's agree, and the Benedictines have not scrupled to correct the latter frequently. The scvcufli indiction, as expressed in the cliarter to llicbodo, points to the year 889, with which the second year of the reign of Eudes will well correspond ; but it must not be concealed that other cliarters of Eudes (Nos. 3 and 4 in Bouquet) are dated at St. ]resmin in June, 888, the srroud year of his reign and si.rtli indiction. Yet, on tliu other hand, Nos. 9 and 10 in Bouquet arc dated in Jul}-, 889, in the second year of his reign, and siaih indiction. It must therefore be left a matter of uncertainty, wlicther the " The moimHtcry of .St. Maximin nt coiniuifi'tl from Novi-niber, f!lt7, to No- Micy (otherwiMc culleil St. Mehiiiiii) near vcnilicr, lilifl. If a tJilile of the rei;i;ii of OrleaiiH. ImkIch wrre culciiliit«'il on iImh |>i-iiici|ilt) " .Sfn the Afonitnm prefixed to the to the <hitc of IiIh dcalh in .liiminrv, XUH, fliurt<TH of KiidcH, Itrrmil <lix J/isloiiciis it will hi- foiiiicl that the yiarn art) ten in »/« /'i /•'r«/(Cf, tfinn- ix., p. •I.'if*. niinilicr, ami two niontiiN ov<t, while tlio '■* A (locnnient iH refi'i-reil to in noii()uet, iiidiriions cxteiicl frmn .'> to !,") of one (lkt<>(l "All. HUH, indict. >i. hiiI» iiiiiio rcr hikI 1 of the e^ele foliowiiij; ; yot jirimo imperii odoniH, 12 kul. Maii ['_'() on t<slinf{ llu- charteiH hy Hueh a tnhle, Apr.] epju't. il," which would lead one il will he JnipoHHihle to n-coiieilu them, to infer that tin- (irt-t n-giial year waH wiihont i-niiHiih'rahle correctioiiB.