Chichester, 1215-1253 /
edited by Philippa M. Hoskin.
Oxford : Published for the British Academy by The Oxford University Press, 2001.
lxxxii, 160 p., 8 p. of plates ; 24 cm.
More Details
added author
added author
Oxford : Published for the British Academy by The Oxford University Press, 2001.
catalogue key
A Look Inside
Review Quotes
A useful addition to the corpus of printed medieval documentary sources for ecclesiastical historians.
Masterful introduction.
The editor, an old acta hand, has done her work well ... The technical standard of the editing is high and the subject index is a model of its kind ... Philippa Hoskin's edition ensures that we are now as familiar with this diocese, at the time of its greatest distinction, as we are ever likely to be.
To find out how to look for other reviews, please see our guides to finding book reviews in the Sciences or Social Sciences and Humanities.
Main Description
The first of two volumes on the Acta of the diocese of Chichester, presenting Latin texts 1 to 188. Bishops Richard Poore, Ranulf of Wareham, Ralph Neville and Richard Wich are all represented. The introduction, which serves for both volumes, examines the nature of the diocese, its bishops and staff, the content of the Acta, the palaeography, dates and the editorial method. The second volume, Volume 23, is also available.
Bowker Data Service Summary
The diocese of Chichester was both poor and small but its bishops between 1215 and 1253 were regarded as eminent men. The documents in this volume compare the episcopates and households of the bishops through their daily administration.
Long Description
Although the diocese of Chichester was both small and poor, its bishops between 1215 and 1253 were eminent men. They included Ralph Neville, who combined his role as Chancellor of the Exchequer with government of the see, and Richard Wich, who was canonized within ten years of his death. This volume offers a unique opportunity to compare the episcopates and households of these extraordinary bishops.

This information is provided by a service that aggregates data from review sources and other sources that are often consulted by libraries, and readers. The University does not edit this information and merely includes it as a convenience for users. It does not warrant that reviews are accurate. As with any review users should approach reviews critically and where deemed necessary should consult multiple review sources. Any concerns or questions about particular reviews should be directed to the reviewer and/or publisher.

  link to old catalogue

Report a problem