Page:English Historical Review Volume 35.djvu/478

470 SHORT NOTICES July thought lies precisely in this striving after practical compromise. The pope had not studied at Paris and Bologna in vain, and he was, we believe, more interested in overcoming the difficulties of applying the theory of papal sovereignty than in emphasizing the theory itself. Dr. Meyer, on the contrary, is at pains to bring out the various forms and implications of the theory. This method does not carry us very far. The collection of phrases, torn from their context in the pope's letters, are in fact mainly helpful as references. Sometimes Dr. Meyer makes Innocent guilty of extravagances which certainly cannot be read into his words. In one letter the pope explains why papal authority over bishops is an expression, not of human, but of divine power (' non homo, quia non vicarius hominis, sed Deus, quia Dei vicarius, separat '). Dr. Meyer translates ' The Pope is not man, but a God '. Again, the Roman pontiff exercises supreme authority in temporal matters, ' quia illius agit vices in terris, qui est rex regum '. In the text this appears ' The pope for him is king of kings and lord of lords '. The author's limitations are most marked in his treatment of the important letter to Philip of France (October 1203), which was later known as the decretal ' Novit ' {Decretale ii. 1, 13). In this letter Innocent defines the sense in which papal authority rightly takes cognizance of the relations between secular rulers. Dr. Meyer (pp. 28-9) disregards the significant passages about feudal law, and in another place (p. 47) makes nonsense of Innocent's claim to deal with breaches of treaties which both parties have sworn to observe. Dr. Meyer makes Innocent claim the right to supervise and, if he thinks fit, dispense from all ' political oaths ' {alle 'politischen Side). The error is due only in part to the use of a bad text. F. M. P. In Sir Robert Parvyng, Knight of the Shire for Cumberland and Chancellor of England (reprinted from Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian Society's Transactions, New Series, vol. xix. Kendal : Wilson, 1919) Dr. Magrath, Provost of Queen's College, Oxford, has made a useful contribution to our scanty knowledge of the history of one of the first lay lawyers who terminated his career as chancellor. The most valuable part of the provost's paper works out exhaustively the Cimiberland con- nexions and clients of this prosperous and successful advocate, and shows how he had his reward in grants of considerable portions of the lands of those whose interests he defended. The more general aspects of Parvyng's career are less completely treated, and it is a pity that the unhistorical assumption of Coke that a fourteenth-century chancellor was essentially a judge ' in equity ' should be taken as authoritative on pp. 64-5. But certainly it was a career like Parvyng's that prepared the way for the judicial chancellors of later ages. There are a few minor slips. Thus on p. 45 ' the Friday before St. Thomas the Apostle ' is given as ' 14 Dec' instead of 19 Dec. On p. 74 ' 1241 ' is a printer's error for * 1341 ', and on p. 76, instead of the * Close Roll of 17 Edw. Ill,' one entry on that roll should have been stated as ' given in full '. But such things can be easily corrected and do little to diminish the service we owe to Dr. Magrath in penning the fullest biography ever attempted of this interesting Cumberland worthy. T. F. T.