An Episcopal register (Latin: , or Bishop's Register) in the English Medieval Ages was a document, often consisting of several volumes, in which a bishop's or archbishop's activity was recorded.
A bishop's (or archbishop's) register was a legal record of his correspondence and instructions to the outside world, and its legal position was that of a notarial record writ large. It was the bishop's main archive. Hill describes it as comprising three main elements: "as formulae, as records of things which had been done, and as records of things which had been acquired". But Hill also advises against treating it as a mere document of events, seeing it as "a record of the use of a bishop's authority, and as such it was his greatest safeguard if that authority was challenged".
The register was mostly composed as a book, often comprising several volumes, although in some instances they were recorded as roll, and handwritten by the Registrar, occasionally using both sides of the page. Ecclesiastical scholar Rosalind Hill suggests that the reason the book form became more popular among their creators was their increased tractability over a roll, which she describes as "most inconvenient". For example, in 1290, the Bishop of Lincoln's registrar, John de Scalleby, wrote himself an aide-memoire to the effect that, should he need to return to a specific item, it "must be sought in various places in the roll of 1288 about the middle of the roll." De Scallesby seem to have been an innovator, and introduced a form of index calendar, particularly for letters dimissory, dispensations, indulgences, and new installations. The cross-referencing was elaborate.
Registrars appear to have occasionally had a staff of scribes. They began being created in the late 13th century; until then, there appears to have been little written down regarding the bishop's activities. Matters investigated and recorded included his visitations to monasteries and abbeys under his jurisdiction, often reporting on their chapter meetings and how the rule was enforced, The discipline of monks, nuns and priests was recorded, as were ordination lists recalling an individual's progress through the ranks of the church, and as to the inhabitancy of the institutionâÂÂon occasion, the admission of children was recorded. They also recorded elections in religious houses and, conversely, the quashing of elections when the bishop deemed it necessary, as well as staffing matters. This included complaints of the "dumping" of nuns into often already impoverished abbeys, that is, placing unwanted daughters into religion. Fines handed out by the bishop's court are recorded as are licenses dispensed, such as those to beg. The most powerful tool in a bishop's armoury was excommunication; such instances of its imposition are also recorded. The register also contained instructions received by the bishop. The Pope might send dispensations, the archbishop his own instructions, and communications with the King, and while some of these might merely need storing in a safe place, others required frequent reference made to them. Benefices were important to record accurately as they were not only legal documents but conveyed rights of patronage to the receiver.
At the time, it was common for monasteries to act as secure storage for wealthy local families, and these contracts were often recorded into the registers for a small fee, including original charters and the inspeximi. Diocesan protection was considered stronger than that of a parish church or other house, as these were occasionally broken into and robbed. Registers were also used by contemporaries who sought evidence of past events in their pages and bishops had ready access to the registers of their predecessors.
Historian Eileen Power has demonstrated that "much information about the conduct of abbesses and prioresses" can be garnered from the registers and particularly the leadership's attempts to control a house's superior "can be multiplied" from the register mentions. She also warns, however, that often only the formulaic pro forma was recorded in the registry itself and that individual cases and their specific evidence was omitted. However, they may, on occasion, record the responses of individuals in whatever their chosen language (so, for example, illustrating cases of literacy among laymen). They occasionally contain or mention material from other bishop's registers which is yet now lost. Hill notes that, albeit unknown to us today, there may have been more than one copy of a register written, and also notes their bulk: Bishop Sutton's, for example, spread over eight volumes and comprised around two million words. In the 13th century, William de Wickwane, Archbishop of York, caused his registers to be written in duplicate.
Episcopal registers generally focussed on issues that were brought to diocesan attention as being problematic. As a result, they may not reflect an accurate picture of the state of religion in the area. Similarly to court records, they record the complaints but not the positives. They were often heavily condensed versions of what had taken place; for example, an ordinationâÂÂa multi-layered procedureâÂÂmight only be recorded with a single line. As a result they often record the result of a process rather than the details of how the result was reached. Therefore, says Robert Swanson, "much is committed and falls beneath their radar. All of the original paperwork has generally to be imagined."
A problem faced by historians using registers, suggests Hill, is that certain items were considered more important than others and so preserved more efficiently. Visitations, for example, were "of strictly temporary value" compared with the bishop's letters and instructions, which were, in turn, better preserved. Relatively few have survived, and those that do come mainly from England. There are very few Welsh registers extant, and none whatsoever from Scotland.