The criminal underworld of Medieval England

Abstract

In contrast to views put forward by Marjorie Blatcher, it is argued here that the impact of Bills of Custody on business in the court of King's Bench in the late fifteenth century can only be judged if all custodial bills are counted and only if special attention is given to those bills dealing with matters which would otherwise have been outside the court's normal jurisdiction. It is shown that the increase in the numbers of such cases is too modest to support Blatcher's claims of a massive increase in business since the 1450s, that the extension of the notion ‘in custody’ to people on bail did not happen in 1452, as she stated, but 20 years earlier, that it was extended to people on mainprise as well, at least for some time, and finally that fictitious Bills of Middlesex and writs latitat were not as important in connection with custodial bills as Blatcher thought.