the present, but rather to consider and seek to understand the past on its own terms. Memoranda de Parliamento In 1889, Maitland was invited by Henry Maxwell Lyte, the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, to examine and edit the petitions presented to Edward I's parliament. Maitland quickly determined that the task was too large to be completed by one man. However, by chance he discovered a hitherto unpublished parliament roll from 1305, which he edited and published in 1893 as part of the Rolls Series. This formed the basis of what Elton described as his "most explosive contribution to English history". At the time, it was generally believed that early English parliaments were, from the beginning, an assembly of the estates of the realm who met to discuss affairs of state. This view had been laid down by Stubbs, who had based his view on the 1295 "Model Parliament". In his introduction to the 1305 roll, Maitland instead proposed that early English parliaments were judicial bodies which met mainly to receive petitions to address grievances. Though the revolutionary nature of Maitland's suggestion was realised only later, most historians have come to accept Maitland's view. "Why the history of English Law is not written?" On 13 October 1888, Maitland gave his inaugural lecture as Downing Professor of the Laws of England. Pointing out that "no attempt has ever been made to write the history of English law as a whole", he proposed two causes: the insularity of English law and the conflicting logics of the lawyer and of the historian. Assessment Maitland was held in high regard by his contemporaries. Lord Acton called him the ablest historian in England. Maitland's reputation has stood high since his death. Speaking in 1980, S. F. C. Milsom said that Maitland is "not just revered but loved" by historians, while in 1985, Sir Geoffrey Elton wrote of Maitland as the "patron saint" of historians. Beginning in the 1960s, scholars such as S. F. C. Milsom and Patrick Wormald began to point out shortcomings in Maitland's views, which had by then become the orthodoxy, although the criticisms were inevitably coupled with sincere admiration for Maitland. The highly technical nature of Maitland's work, as well as the relative decline of legal history, made Maitland's views "lasting orthodoxies", as few historians had either the technical knowledge or the inclination to challenge them. Speaking on the centenary of