"Hanc autem ... affidavi manu mea propria in manu ipsius Comitis Gaufredi." This formula ("affidavi ... in manu") is deserving of careful study. It ought to be compared with a passage in the Chronicle of Abingdon (ii. 160), describing how, some quarter of a century before, in the assembled county court (comitatus) of Berkshire, the delegate of the abbey, "pro ecclesiâ affidavit fidem in manu ipsius vicecomitis, vidente toto comitatu." This was a case of "affidatio" by proxy; but in the above charter we find Geoffrey stipulating for "affidatio" in person ("propria manu") by the Empress, her husband, and her son. Accordingly, when the young Henry confirms his mother's charter to Aubrey de Vere (see p. 186), he does so "manu mea propria in manu Hugonis de Inga, sicut mater mea Imperatrix affidavit in manu Comitis Gaufredi." Thus Geoffrey allowed himself the privilege, which he refused to the other contracting party, of "affidatio" by proxy, and made Hugh de Ing his delegate for the purpose.

A curious allusion to this practice is found in the words of Ranulf Flambard some half a century earlier, when he promises the captor in whose power he was to grant him all that he can ask, "et ne discredas promissis, ecce manu affirmo quod polliceor."—Continuatio Historiæ Turgoti (Anglia Sacra, i. 707). The formula was probably of great antiquity. It occurs in the lifetime of Archbishop Oswald (died 992), who obtained a lease for life on behalf of a certain Wulfric, of the provisions in which we read: "Hoc totum idem Wlfricus, sub oculis multorum qui aderant, in manu viri Dei qui pro eo intercessor accesserat affidavit" (Chron. Ram., p. 81). It is found, however, as late as 1187, when at the foundation of Dodnash Priory the canons "juraverunt et fidem in manu nostra corporaliter ... firmaverunt," says the bishop (Ancient Charters, p. 88). Another late instance is found in the Burton Cartulary (fol. 33), where Robert fitz Walter, that his grant "inconcussum permaneat, in toto comitatu, multis cementibus qui se ipsos testes concesserunt, in manu Vicecomitis Serlonis manu meâ hoc tenendum et servandum affidavi." So also in the Pipe-Roll of 3 John we find recorded a lease, "et quod ipse Micael et Everardus frater suus affidaverunt in manu H. Cantuarensis Arch. hanc Conventionem fideliter tenendam" (Rot. 6 b). An instance, in 1159, may be quoted from the Cartulary of St. Michael on the Mount because of its curious legal bearing. Robert de Belvoir mortgages to the abbey lands which he had settled on his wife in dower, and, in order to bar her claim, she, by her brother, guarantees the transaction by "affidatio in manu" to the abbot's delegate.[1113] This arrangement should be compared with that which is discussed in my Ancient Charters, pp. 22, 23.[1114] Perhaps, however, the most singular case is one which I noted in the Cartulary (MS.) of Rievaulx, and which is also of the reign of Henry II. A widow grants lands to that abbey, "et illam donationem tenendam et fideliter observandam manu propria affidavit in manu Vicecomitissæ, vid. Bert[æ] uxoris vicecomitis Ranulfi de Glanvill[a]."[1115] The conjunction here of the two women, the presence of the great Glanville himself, and the part played by his wife, together with the title assigned her, all combine to render the transaction one of unusual interest.

It was by this formal and binding pledge that the leaders of the English host swore to one another to do or die on the field of the Battle of the Standard. Turning to William of Aumâle, and placing his hand in his, Walter Espec pledged his faith that he would conquer or be slain; and his fellow-commanders did the same."[1116] It was, again, by this solemn pledge, towards the close of Stephen's reign, that the Bishop of Winchester, before his brother prelates, covenanted to surrender Winchester to the duke at the king's death[1117]—even as the duke himself had covenanted (April 9, 1152) with the Bishop of Salisbury concerning Devizes Castle[1118]—in terms to be closely compared with those of his charter to Aubrey, and his mother's to Earl Geoffrey in 1142.

The practice is, I find, alluded to, incidentally, by Giraldus Cambrensis, who tells us that the Welsh "Adeo fidei fœdus, aliis inviolabile gentibus, parvipendere solent, ut non in seriis solum et necessariis, verum in ludicris, omnique fere verbo firmando, dextræ manus ut mos est porrectione, signo usuali dato, fidem gratis effundere consueverint." Here the point of the complaint is that they made light of this solemn practice, indulging in it freely on every occasion instead of reserving it for important matters. The existence of this archaic "fidei fœdus" as the formal confirmation of a contract is, of course, of the greatest interest. It still lingers on, not only with us, but abroad. In San Marino (Italy), for instance, "sales are conducted with much animation. Two sturdy proprietors stand back to back.... A third party stands between the two; ... he pulls one by the shoulder, the other by an elbow, and finally by an apparently acrobatic feat he unites their hands" ("A Political Survival," Macmillan's, January, 1891, p. 197). In the Lebanon, we are told by a well-informed writer: "A few months ago I had occasion to enter into a business contract with one of my Druse farmers. When we were about to draw up the agreement, the Druse suggested that, as he could neither read nor write, we should ratify the bargain in the manner customary among his people. This consists of a solemn grasping of hands together in the presence of two or three other Druses as witnesses, whilst the agreement is recited by both parties.... Accordingly, the farmer brought three of his neighbours to me; and the terms of our contract having been made known to them, one of them took the right hand of each of us and joined them together, whilst he dictated to us what to say after him" ("The Druses," Blackwood's, January, 1891, pp. 754, 755). With us, Gerald would be grieved to hear, the ancient form survives not only for the bargain but the bet, though it only continues in full vigour as the sign of the marriage contract, where "the minister ... shall cause the man with his right hand to take the woman by her right hand, and to say after him as followeth,"—even as the Druses, we have seen, make their contracts to-day, and as the Empress Maud sealed her own seven centuries ago.[1119]

The allusion by the Empress to the "Christianitas Angliæ" refers doubtless to the fact that the breach of such "affidatio" would constitute a "læsio fidei," and would thus become a matter for the jurisdiction of the courts Christian. It was indeed on this plea that these courts claimed to attract to themselves all cases of contract, a claim against which, it is necessary to explain, an article (No. 15) of the Constitutions of Clarendon (1164) was specially directed.[1120]