The most important surviving documentation concerning the succession case arising from the death of Duke John III of Brittany in 1341 consists of the arguments put forward in the names of John de Montfort and Charles de Blois (on behalf of his wife Joan de Penthièvre), the two chief contenders for the ducal title, and the procès-verbal of the interrogation of witnesses brought to testify about these arguments. Montfort's case, presenting reasons why Philip VI of France should allow him to do homage for Brittany, can be found in two contemporary copies, first, Archives départementales de la Loire-Atlantique, Nantes, E 6, which is the chief text edited here, and secondly, Archives Nationales, Paris, J 241, no. 44. There is also an abridged Latin version of Montfort's case in another contemporary copy, Archives Nationales J 241, no. 44bis. The arguments of Blois can now be found only in a late sixteenth-century copy, probably made by the celebrated Breton jurist, Bertrand d'Argentré (1519–90). Similarly a transcript or precis of the interrogation can be found only in d'Argentré's notes and in those of the antiquarian and genealogist, André Duchesne (1584–1640), these two manuscripts being respectively Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds français, nos. 18697 and 22338. Several copies exist of these documents, the chief amongst them being a copy of Archives Nationales J 241, no. 44 made following a commission issued in the Parlement of Paris on 15 January 1652 and now contained in Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. Nouvelles acquisitions françaises 7270, and another seventeenth-century copy of the same document, now British Museum, Additional Manuscript 30752.

A few years ago, I published an article describing the negotiations between England and France which took place at Oye, not far from Calais, in the summer of 1439. These had not been adequately studied before, so that the identification of a French protocol describing events during part of the period covered by the negotiations seemed to make a short study desirable and worthwhile.

MS. E.5.10 in Trinity College, Dublin, is a volume measuring approximately 8½ × 6 inches, consisting of 224 leaves of vellum and paper written in English and Latin.1 The greater part is in one clear, regular fifteenth-century cursive hand, but the volume also includes sections of thirteenth- and fourteenth-century date and has flyleaves of fragments of similar date. Throughout the volume additions have been made in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries by a dozen or more different hands. On fo. 2v an inscription in the hand of the greater part of the book reads: ‘Iste liber est Domini Johannis Benet de harlyngdon. Quisquis istum elongaverit de custodia sua absque suo consensu anathema sit maranatha’, and at not less than twelve other places throughout the volume Benet signs his name, usually in the form ‘quod Benet’2. Three of these are dated: on fo. 75v ‘Quod Benet apud Harlyngdon Anno Domini M1CCCColxjo DominicalilitteraC’; on fo. 12Ir ‘quod Benet apud Harlyngdon Anno Domini M1CCCC1XViijo littera dominicali B’; on fo. 189v ‘M1CCCClxxj 13 die Novembris quod Benet’. John Benet was vicar of Harlington in Bedfordshire throughout the period covered by these dates, during which he wrote and assembled his book. The paper he used shows a variety of watermarks of the mid-fifteenth century, such as might be expected of a compiler in the provinces buying paper in small packets or using what happened to be at hand. After it was bound several of the remaining blank leaves were used by others for additional notes. The volume was foliated by one of these later hands, and on ff. 191–2 a table of contents with the folio references was made in the late fifteenth century. All the items in the table are present in the book as it survives today.