[1070]. This phrase occurs in the 49th (and last) of the Articles of the Barons as the title of a clause which is separated from the others by a blank on the parchment of the width of several lines of writing: “Haec est forma securitatis,” etc. The words are not used as a heading in the present chapter itself, but c. [52] refers to c. [61] as the clause “in securitate pacis,” and c. [62] refers to the same as “super securitate ista.”
[1071]. Cf. S. R. Gardiner, Short History of England, 183: “a permanent organization for making war against the king.”
[1072]. R. Wendover, from whom Paris borrows so freely, gives no list.
[1073]. The list is taken from Matthew Paris, Chron. Maj., II. 604-5, as corrected by Blackstone, Great Charter, p. xx., after collation with a marginal note on the Harleian MS. of the charter (cf. supra, 198, n). Paris gives “Boys” in place of “Ros,” and “Roger de Munbrai” in place of “Roger of Mumbezon.” This list should be contrasted with (a) that of the moderate party named in the preamble to Magna Carta, and (b) that of John’s foreign favourites named in c. [50]. For biographical information, see Thomson, Magna Charta, 270–312.
[1074]. These three were Earl Aumâle (a title apparently sometimes exchanged for that of Earl of York, see Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, 157, n.), William of Albini, and, possibly, Geoffrey de Say (see Stubbs, Const. Hist., I. 583).
[1075]. An alternative explanation is also possible, namely, that the function of intermediary might be exercised by any four members of the twenty-five. In that view, an aggrieved individual might have pressure placed upon the king if he persuaded any four to act together in support of his claim. This would imply a second quorum, this time of four, for a special purpose, in addition to the quorum of varying numbers already discussed. In either view, the road to redress would be easier for the great man than for his obscure neighbour.
[1077]. See Appendix.
[1078]. It was only fourteen years since London (in 1191), probably following the lead of Rouen, had extorted its “sworn commune” from Prince John as the price of its support (cf. supra, c. [13]). It might be dangerous, however, to push so tempting an analogy too far.