If it is taken for granted that the inventory of the chamber was produced as a result of the Regiment of the city, then we will have to recognize that this inventory would have been produced at a time immediately following the Regiment, and may probably be between them only a few months apart. The fact that the bailiff of the Court is in the city at the time of ordering the making of the Rules of Procedure and, implicitly, of the inventory, may mean that both documents were ordered with a short distance between them, during the same stay of the court in Évora.
The prologue to the chamber’s inventory, transcribed at the beginning of this section, is in fact, dated. However, on the date mentioned, only the era of one thousand and four hundred (Era of one thousand and IIIIo) is read, with the respective decade and year blank. In extemporaneous handwriting, in a marginal note higher than the text, the date of 1392 is mentioned, as the date of the document, a fact that has gathered the greatest consensus among historians who have been looking into its study or edition. Thus, at the end of the 19th century, Gabriel Pereira published excerpts from the inventory and, although debating the date, he ended up accepting it13; in 1906, Pedro de Azevedo, in a study on the Évora regiment and its archive, published in O Archeologo Portuguez adopts this same chronology14; later, in 1950, in the magazine A cidade de Évora15, Túlio Espanca when editing a substantial part of the inventory16 also mentions the year 1392; and, more recently, Cândida Fernanda Ribeiro, in her doctoral thesis, entitled Access to information in the archives, follows the previous scholars, attributing to the inventory of the Évora chamber the referred date, proposing it even as the earliest known inventory of a town hall17.
The evidence that led to the inventory of the archive in the year 1392 is the same as that used to locate, in the same year or a little earlier, the wording of the Évora City Regiment (whose only known testimony is not dated ), assuming that the Rules of Procedure would have promoted the subsequent elaboration of the archive’s inventory.
However, in a recent article, in which the Évora City Regiment is reissued and the Arraiolos Regiment is published (based on the previous one) 18, Hermínia Vilar, in an introductory study, questions the unanimously accepted date, proposing new arguments that seem to advance the date of elaboration of the Regiment, and consequently, of the inventory of the archive in some years. According to the author, the relational analysis of some data included in the Rules of Procedure allows us to conclude that, most likely, the Évora Regiment could not have been produced in the last years of the 14th century, or even in the year 1392, but in a period between the years 1414 or 1415 and the twenties. For this conclusion, mainly supported by documental sustained reflections on the content of some elements contained in the Rules, namely, the years for which the activity of the corregidor João Mendes de Góis, promoter of these documents, is witnessed, the names, functions and dates of performance of the aforementioned governors, the multiple references to Infante, son of King D. João I, at a time probably when he was already associated with power, and finally, the periods of stays of the king and the Court in Évora.