Manorial accounts have proven a rich area of research, especially for medieval England, where they have informed a wide range of debates on the economic, agricultural, and social history of the period. One largely under-researched area, however, has been into the materiality of the accounts themselves, a deficiency that Abigail Armstrong’s book does wonders in filling. By focusing on the two largest landowners in the north-east of England--the Percy family and the Bishops of Durham--she explores the materiality of their accounts. Most economic historians have been far more interested in what medieval accounts can reveal rather than how they were made, their form and production. Armstrong goes through this process, discussing their form and format, the material they were made from, their production, and the audit and later uses of the accounts. In so doing, this monograph provides an excellent study of the complex codicology that we often see in our accounts but tend to overlook or take for granted.
In the introduction and chapter 1, Armstrong charts the various ways that historians have approached these problems previously and provides an overview of her sources. Throughout, she pays due diligence and attention to previous pioneers of the field--such as the late Paul Harvey’s work on manorial records--whilst also pointing out the above ways in which historians have tended to work with these sources for the information they contain, rather than as an object of study themselves. The rationale behind the case study of the Percy family and the Bishops of Durham is explained well. Above all, there is a clarity of expression here that will greatly aid in introducing a student reader to the topic--for example, in the differences between exchequer and chancery style--and Armstrong borrows Nicholas Vincent’s memorable phrase of chancery rolls being “rather like a modern lavatory roll” (21).
Chapter 2 moves on to the form and format of the account rolls themselves, discussing the various types of documents that have survived in both administrations. Armstrong notes that the preference for rolls--as opposed to books or booklet--can “perhaps be attributed to the ease of construction and expansion” (104). Because this study goes into the sixteenth century, Armstrong considers the extent to which the book replaced the roll, arguing that, although booklets did come into use, they did not replace rolls because the latter continued to be seen as fit for purpose, and were customary.
Chapter 3 examines the often-touted idea that paper was used for drafts, parchment for neat copies. Although there is some value to this concept, Armstrong finds that paper accounts were carefully preserved and archived, belying the idea that they were ephemeral or disposable. Instead, she notes that different materials were employed depending on their use: neat copies of account rolls tended to be on parchment, whilst paper was used for booklets.
Chapter 4 explores the production of the accounts themselves. Anyone who has studied manorial accounts will recognise the use of standardised layouts and structures that this chapter examines, and Armstrong discusses the various reasons for this. The accounts were generally standardised because they were produced by a centralised group of clerks and scribes. Of particular interest in this chapter are some of the detailed moments where things went wrong, i.e., of how scribes erased information or tried to add more space when material overran its allotted space.
Chapter 5 analyses the culmination of the accounting year, the audit. Armstrong demonstrates the various ways in which auditors and clerks checked the accounts and the marks these have left. For example, the accounts contain many uses of dot diagram arithmetic, sometimes added by the original scribe as a guide for the auditor and sometimes added by the auditors themselves. Armstrong notes too that the wish to prevent fraud may explain some of the trends in the accounts, such as the preference for deletion over erasure.
Chapter 6 then studies the post-audit life of the accounts. Ultimately, what happened to them? This chapter discusses the various uses manorial accounts were put towards, some of which have left their marks, such as the inclusion of manicules--quite literally small hands with an extended finger pointing at something important or noteworthy. Armstrong notes that the survival of so many accounts--many at various stages of production--shows the way that documents, even drafts or duplicates, were retained “just in case” (286).
There are several areas that could have been developed further in this excellent study. Although Armstrong introduces the reader to many of the developments in this period early in the book, many of these do not appear later to explain changes in practices. For example, it would have been interesting to learn more about how far the context of the fifteenth-century recession or the Percy family’s political troubles directly affected the materiality of their accounts. Similarly, the book might have gone more into some issues, such as the clerks and scribes who created these accounts, or their storage and later usage in particular disputes. For example, Armstrong draws out the particularly illuminating examples of John Raket, Durham exchequer clerk, and William Raket, Durham chancery clerk and auditor, but what role did the Bishop’s chancery--within the broader remit of the Palatinate of Durham--play in the developments of documentary culture here?
Such minor quibbles aside, this is a much needed and excellent monograph examining the materiality of medieval accounting material. It will be especially useful for students to help them navigate the many peculiarities of medieval accounts, from the use of dot arithmetic through to manicules and other annotations. Throughout, the monograph is very generously illustrated, greatly helping the reader understand the examples being discussed. The Materiality of Medieval Administration is, therefore, a very welcome addition to the literature and greatly enhances our understanding of the documentary and material culture of late medieval administration.