English King was an empire, not by virtue of English law (which had its own 
classifications), but by virtue of the custom common to all western Europe. It 
was, in short, a feudal empire, 4 composed of divers honors of which England 
was but one. 6 In each of these, whether acquired by conquest or by descent, 
the King had lordship, and this was variously and locally defined by ancient 
usage, by what came to be bargained away, and by the incidence of those pressures 
which everywhere were bearing down upon feudal pretensions. The 
English King's medieval empire lacked the one element which characterized 
and gave unity to the New World empire—the homogeneity of the private 
law. In so far as the medieval structure was sustained by any legal base, this 
must be sought in the premises of feudal law, in its rules and practices, on 
which there was a certain degree of concurrence in the various lands of Europe. 
Although England was initially not what a feudist would call caput honoris, 
it becomes so because the royal title is the one of most dignity, because its 
geographical position makes it the very keep for military operations, 6 and because 
in the end it is mostly by English blood and treasure that this empire is 
held together. But there are reasons for the ascendancy of the realm weightier 
than those of diplomacy and war, for they derive from the prosaic world of 
administration. It is in the King's Council that decisions concerning components 
of this empire will be made; it is from the King's Chancery that mandates 
will go forth; it is at the King's Exchequer that lieutenants from overseas 
will account. Matters concerning the realm and places outside the realm alike 
are transacted here, because this is King's business, and these are instrumentalities 
of the King. 7 These agencies are initially as footloose as their principal. But 
a pied a terre becomes an administrative necessity; and it is in the realm that 
4 The notion that an empire may be composed 
of various lordships appears as early as 1279 in 
a plea of Llewellyn, Prince of Wales (cf. 
Davies, The Welsh Assize Roll 12.77-12.84 
[1940], 266) and as late as 1471-76 {cf. 
Fortescue, The Governance of England Plummer 
ed., 1885] c. xvi: "Nowe the lordeshippes 
of the emperour bith not so gret as be the 
lordeshippes off some kynge"). 
For traces of similar ideas in medieval German 
law cf. Schulte, hehrbuch ier Deutschen 
Reichs — und Rechtsgeschichte (5 ed.), 207 n. 
10, 209 n. 11. 
5 See the county and hundred ordinance of 
Henry I, § 3 (1 Liebermann Gesetze der 
Angelsachsen [1903], 524; Jolliffe, Constitutional 
History of Medieval England [i937]> 
174)- 
8 It is so thought of in the Middle Ages (cf. 3 
Rot. Pari. 36b [1378]). In trying to cozen the 
Parliament, Gascony and the other fortz of the 
King are described as "barbicans al roialme 
d'Engleterre." 
7 Cf. Tout, France and England (1922), 70-71, 
regarding Chancery temp. Henry 11. With the 
establishment of dominion offices, e.g., a Chancery 
in Ireland and later in Gascony, elements, 
if not of hierarchy, at least of a partition of 
authority enter into the picture. The boundaries 
of this have not been adequately studied, 
but apparently the range of acts of the central 
authority superseding acts by local agencies in 
the King's name was very great. This has a 
bearing upon the rule to which Coke adverts 
(Calvin's Case, 7 Co. Rep. 20a) respecting the 
currency of brevia mandatoria et non remedialia. 
A similar problem existed with respect to the 
American royal colonies, and this too awaits a 
thorough investigation.