The Laws of London? IV Æthelred in Context
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law
Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law Professor Paul Brand, FBA Emeritus Fellow All Souls College, Oxford Paper related to a presentation given for the High Court Public Lecture series, at the High Court of Australia, Canberra, Courtroom 1, 13 May 2015 Magna Carta and the Development of the Common Law I We are about to commemorate the eight hundredth anniversary of the granting by King John on 15 June 1215 of a ‘charter of liberties’ in favour of all the free men of his kingdom [of England] and their heirs. That charter was not initially called Magna Carta (or ‘the Great Charter’, in English). It only acquired that name after it had been revised and reissued twice and after the second reissue had been accompanied by the issuing of a separate, but related, Charter of the Forest. The revised version of 1217 was called ‘The Great Charter’ simply to distinguish it from the shorter, and therefore smaller, Forest Charter, but the name stuck. To call it a ‘charter of liberties’ granted by king John to ‘all the free men of his kingdom’ of England is, however, in certain respects misleading. The term ‘liberty’ or ‘liberties’, particularly in the context of a royal grant, did not in 1215 bear the modern meaning of a recognised human right or human rights. ‘Liberty’ in the singular could mean something closer to that, in the general sense of the ‘freedom’ or the ‘free status’ of a free man, as opposed to the ‘unfreedom’ of a villein. ‘Liberties’, though, were something different (otherwise known as ‘franchises’), generally specific privileges granted by the king, particular rights such as the right to hold a fair or a market or a particular kind of private court, the right to have a park or a rabbit warren which excluded others from hunting or an exemption such as freedom from tolls at markets or fairs. -
To Download Magna Carta FAQ Answers .PDF
Magna Carta FAQ: Answers Produced with the support of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX) Answers provided by: Professor Nigel Saul Magna Carta FAQ: Answers Q1) WHAT’S MAGNA CARTA DONE FOR ME? Quite simple - it’s because of Magna Carta that we well whatever he liked – and did. After the making of the live in a free country today. Magna Carta affirmed the Charter he was subject to the law like everyone else. In vital principle of freedom under the law. Clause 39 of the mid thirteenth century the lawyer Henry Bracton was the Charter said: ‘no free man shall be imprisoned or to write, ‘in England the king is below God and below the deprived of his lands except by judgement of his peers or law’. by the law of the land’. Clause 40 said: ‘To no one shall we sell, delay or deny right or justice’. Before the making of Magna Carta the king had been able to do pretty Q2) HOW MUCH OF MAGNA CARTA IS STILL ON THE STATUTE BOOK? Very little, in fact. To be precise, just four clauses of the matters? Most definitely not. All great documents are the original 1215 version of the Charter. These are: clause product of specific historical circumstances and lose their 1, guaranteeing the liberties of the Church; clause 13, immediate relevance over time. But that does not mean guaranteeing the liberties of the City of London; and that they can be forgotten or consigned to the historical the famous clauses 39 and 40, guaranteeing due legal waste paper bin. -
The Lincoln Charter of the Forest Conference
LINCOLN RECORD SOCIETY Bishop Grosseteste University, Woodland Trust, American Bar Association THE LINCOLN CHARTER OF THE FOREST CONFERENCE 22-24 September 2017 THE CHARTER OF THE FOREST: EVOLVING HUMAN RIGHTS IN NATURE Nicholas A. Robinson University Professor for the Environment Kerlin Distinguished Professor of Environmental Law Emeritus Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University, New York © Nicholas A. Robinson 3 September 2017– Author’s moral rights asserted. This conference is a singular event, long over due. It has been 258 years since William Blackstone celebrated “these two sacred charters,”1 Carta de Foresta and Magna Carta, with his celebrated publication of their authentic texts. In 2015, the Great Charter of Liberties enjoyed scholarly, political and popular focus. The companion Forest Charter was and is too much neglected.2 I salute the American Bar Association, and Dan Magraw, for the ABA’s educational focus of the Forest Charter, as well as Magna Carta. Today we restore some balance with this conference’s searching and insightful examination of the Forest Charter’s significance. I congratulate The Lincoln Record Society and thank the conference organizers. I am honored to be addressing you, although I must confess to being akin to Mark Twain’s Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court.3 As an American, I cannot claim the “liberties of the forest” that were ceded to the English. Nor am I a medievalist, but only a student of medieval historians, such as G.J. Turner, whose Select Pleas of the Forest4 inspired my own comparative law studies of Forest Law and the Charter of 1217, and also Professors J.C. -
CREATING an AMERICAN PROPERTY LAW: ALIENABILITY and ITS LIMITS in AMERICAN HISTORY Claire Priest
CREATING AN AMERICAN PROPERTY LAW: ALIENABILITY AND ITS LIMITS IN AMERICAN HISTORY Claire Priest Contact Information: Northwestern University School of Law 357 East Chicago Ave. Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (312) 503-4470 Email: [email protected] Acknowledgements: ∗Associate Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law. B.A., J.D., Ph.D. Yale University. I would like to thank James McMasters of Northwestern’s Law Library for his help in finding copies of many of the primary sources used to write this Article. For extremely valuable comments and suggestions, I would like to thank Bernard Bailyn, Stuart Banner, Kenworthey Bilz, Charlotte Crane, David Dana, Michele Landis Dauber, Christine Desan, Tony A. Freyer, Morton J. Horwitz, Daniel Hulsebosch, Stanley N. Katz, Daniel M. Klerman, Naomi Lamoreaux, Charles W. McCurdy, Edmund S. Morgan, Janice Nadler, Sarah Pearsall, Dylan Penningroth, George L. Priest, Richard J. Ross, Emma Rothschild, Dhananjai Shivakumar, Kenneth L. Sokoloff, Vicky Saker Woeste, Gavin Wright and the seminar participants at Northwestern University School of Law’s Faculty Workshop, Stanford Law School’s Faculty Workshop, UCLA’s Legal History Colloquium and Economic History Workshop, NYU’s Legal History Colloquium, the University of Florida Fredric G. Levin College of Law’s Faculty Workshop, the Chicago Legal History Seminar, the American Society for Legal History’s Annual Meeting, the University of Illinois College of Law’s Faculty Workshop, the Omohundro Institute of Early American History’s Annual Conference, and Harvard University’s Conference on Atlantic Legalities. The Julius Rosenthal Fund at Northwestern University School of Law provided generous research support. CREATING AN AMERICAN PROPERTY LAW: ALIENABILITY AND ITS LIMITS IN AMERICAN HISTORY This Article analyzes an issue central to the economic and political development of the early United States: laws protecting real property from the claims of creditors. -
MC Rochester Cathedral Speech 17.4
Rochester Cathedral Business Guild Dinner 17/4/13 Rochester’s pivotal role in the XII Century, and why it matters today Sir Robert Worcester1 The Dean of Rochester, Ladies and Gentlemen, I hope you will forgive me for diverting from the title of my talk at its very start, but given where we are, in the very crypt of this cathedral, in light of the news the Dean gave us last October about the HLF grant for the restoration and development of this wonderful crypt where we are meeting this evening, I thought some relevant earlier history would be appropriate. My talk starts in the VIIth Century around the time this Cathedral was built. As Chancellor of the University of Kent, with a campus in Medway, I have the honour to hold graduation ceremonies in the nave of this church – and we robe in this crypt, so I know it well. When the then Dean, Adrian Newman, told me about the Textus Roffensus, the XIIth Century book (written in the early 1120s), the ‘First Code of English Law’, the laws of King Aethelbert in around 600 AD, I promised him that I would do my best to make it famous. As I stand in my robes at the top of the nave above us to welcome the University of Kent graduands, as I will again in July, I say to those students whose hard work and diligence have earned them their degrees, and their parents and friends, in my welcome: “It is a great pleasure to welcome you to this historic Cathedral, Britain’s second oldest, consecrated in 603 AD, some 14 Centuries ago. -
Principles of Magna Carta, Lincoln Cathedral
Lincoln Cathedral: Magna Carta/USA Week Lecture 15 June 2005 The Principles of Magna Carta: Under threat after 790 years of evolution? By Sir Robert M. Worcester1 Magna Carta Trustee Today is the very anniversary of the sealing of the Magna Carta, that great charter which laid down the basis for English common law, now spread throughout the world. Magna Carta gave protection of law against despotism by kings and their cronies, which has been challenged by self-appointed and elective dictatorships over centuries, but (mostly) upheld by both public opinion and legal testing over centuries, and which survives even today, 790 years later. I take much pride and not a little pleasure being asked to attend this magnificent Cathedral this evening to deliver the inaugural Magna Carta/USA Week lecture. I do so for many reasons. One, historic. A short history compared to 790 years of English history since the barons met with King John at Runnymede, only 48 in my case. In 1957 I first visited the country of my ancestors, England. My first visit to any museum, gallery or library on that occasion was to the British Museum to gaze with awe at their copy of the Magna Carta, my reason for our visit. When I decided to come here to live in January 1969, my first weekend here with my family, we made a pilgrimage to Runnymede to visit the site of the signing of the Magna Carta. I am still an American, and take pride and not a little pleasure in still claiming citizenship of the country of my birth. -
Notes on the Textus Roffensis.*
Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 23 1898 NOTES ON THE TEXTUS ROFFENSIS.* BY DR. P. LIEBERMANN, BERLIN. Section 1. Former descriptions of the Textus Roffensis.—2. Date of the joining of the different parts.—3. Two works contained in it.—4. Till when separate.—5. Traces of separate existence.—6. The first work A formed out of two volumes.'—>7. The inscription covers, most likely, all the three volumes.— 8. In what sense was Ernulf considered to be the author?—9. Not Ernulf's autograph.—10. Age of the handwriting.—11. Ernulf is the father of the Textus.—12. I am concerned only with the Leges.—12A. Authors of Collections who have used the Textus itself.—13. The Chartulary of different hands.— 14. The oldest one, of about 1145, perhaps identical with the writer of the Leges.—14A. Value of the Chartulary. —15. Every piece of the part A (Leges) is but a copy.—16. But some pieces are only preserved to us in this Textus Roffen- sis.—17. Roffensis used a few large compilations; he did not collect State Papers.—18. One of his sources was a Christ Church (Canterbury) volume.— 19. There existed a common source used by Roffensis and Corpus Cambridge 383.—20. One of Roffensis' sources was a composition of about A.D. 1000.— 21. Distinct groups in Roffensis A.—22. Kentish Law.—23. Alfred and Edmund groups.—24 jEthelstan group.—25. Instituta Cnuti.—26. The Canonical Tract.—26A. The Mass.—27. The Successions.—28. The History of Textus Roffensis since the sixteenth century.—29. Concordance between Textus Roffensis and the best prints. -
Notes on the Textus Roffensis.* by Dr
http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/ Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382 © 2017 Kent Archaeological Society ( ioi ) NOTES ON THE TEXTUS ROFFENSIS.* BY DR. E. LIEBERMANN, BERLIN. Section 1. Former descriptions of the Textus Roffensis.—2. Date of the joining of the different parts.—3. Two works contained in it.—4. Till when separate.—5. Traces of separate existence.—0. The first work A formed out of two volumes.—7. The inscription covers, most likely, all the three volumes.— 8. In what sense was Ernulf considered to be the author?—9. Not Ernulf's autograph.—10. Age of the handwriting.—11. Ernulf is the father of the Textus.—12. I am concerned only with the Leges.—12A. Authors of Collections who have used the Textus itself.—13. The Chartulary of different hands.— 14. The oldest one, of about 1145, perhaps identical with the writer of the Leges.—14A. Value of the Chartulary.—15. Every piece of the part A (Leges) is but a copy.—16. But some pieces are only preserved to us in this Textus Roffen- sis.—17. Boffensis used a few large compilations; he did not collect State Papers.—18. One of his sources was a Christ Church (Canterbury) volume.— 19. There existed a common source used by Boffensis and Corpus Cambridge 383.—20. One of Boffensis' sources was a composition of about A.D. 1000.— 21. Distinct groups in Boffensis A.—22. Kentish Law.—23. Alfred and Edmund groups.—24. jEthelstan group.—25. Instituta Cnuti.—26. The Canonical Tract.—26A. The Mass.—27. -
Rochester Bridge Chapel We Know That the First Bridge at Rochester Was Built by the Romans Soon After the Conquest in AD43 and I
Rochester Bridge Chapel We know that the first bridge at Rochester was built by the Romans soon after the conquest in AD43 and it is reasonable to conclude that Rochester Bridge was the first major bridge to be completed by the Roman Army in Britain. Perhaps there was a temporary timber campaign bridge initially, although there is no evidence for this, and the engineering would have been extremely challenging. Fairly promptly a more permanent bridge with stone piers and a flat timber deck was completed on this vital military and trade route (Watling Street), which linked Dover to London. The bridge and the river needed to be defended and hence a defensive fort with associated trading post developed. Named Durobrivae, or “the fort by the bridges”, this settlement evolved into the city of Rochester where the second English Cathedral was established by Justus in AD604 and from 1087 a Norman castle was constructed by Bishop Gundulph. In the early decades following the military invasion, the bridge was maintained by the state, initially the Army, but later the leading landowners of the civitas-territory around Rochester. From the early eighth century we begin to see written evidence of how the continuing maintenance of Rochester Bridge was being organised. Kentish charters began to record the obligations of landowners to undertake the maintenance of bridges, known as “bridgework”. The earliest surviving copy of the specific arrangements is known as the Rochester Bridgeworks List and is bound into a book dated 1120 belonging to Rochester Cathedral, called Textus Roffensis. This allocated the responsibility to the common people of a very large area approximating to about a quarter of the County of Kent for the maintenance of the bridge. -
Resource 1.4
Magna Carta: Charter of Liberties Resource 1.4 Translation: Magna Carta (Great Charter) JOHN, by the grace of God King of England, Lord of Ireland, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, and Count of Anjou, to his archbishops, bishops, abbots, earls, barons, justices, foresters, sheriffs, stewards, servants, and to all his officials and loyal subjects, Greeting. KNOW THAT BEFORE GOD, for the health of our soul and those of our ancestors and heirs, to the honour of God, the exaltation of the holy Church, and the better ordering of our kingdom, at the advice of our reverend fathers Stephen, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and cardinal of the holy Roman Church, Henry archbishop of Dublin, William bishop of London, Peter bishop of Winchester, Jocelin bishop of Bath and Glastonbury, Hugh bishop of Lincoln, Walter Bishop of Worcester, William bishop of Coventry, Benedict bishop of Rochester, Master Pandulf subdeacon and member of the papal household, Brother Aymeric master of the knighthood of the Temple in England, William Marshal earl of Pembroke, William earl of Salisbury, William earl of Warren, William earl of Arundel, Alan de Galloway constable of Scotland, Warin Fitz Gerald, Peter Fitz Herbert, Hubert de Burgh seneschal of Poitou, Hugh de Neville, Matthew Fitz Herbert, Thomas Basset, Alan Basset, Philip Daubeny, Robert de Roppeley, John Marshal, John Fitz Hugh, and other loyal subjects: (1) FIRST, THAT WE HAVE GRANTED TO GOD, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired. -
New Dorp High School Social Studies Department AP Global Mr. Hubbs William the Conqueror and England
New Dorp High School Social Studies Department AP Global Mr. Hubbs William the Conqueror and England Alfred the Great Since the 790s, the Vikings had been using fast mobile armies to raid the coasts of England for goods and plunder. Such raids were evolving into permanent Danish settlements; in 867, the Vikings seized York and established their own kingdom. Finally, in 870 the Danes attacked the only remaining independent Anglo-Saxon kingdom, Wessex. They were able to hold the Vikings off, at least for a while. As King of Wessex Alfred (reigned 871-99) was a strong-minded battle veteran at the head of the resistance to the Vikings in southern England. Realizing that he could not drive the Danes out of the rest of England, Alfred concluded peace with them. Alfred spent a period of time building the English defenses against the Vikings. Together with a navy of new fast ships, southern England now had a defense in depth against the Vikings. Alfred soon established a legal code; he assembled the laws of his predecessors, adding his own administrative regulations to form a definitive body of Anglo-Saxon law. He also focused on an increase in education focused mostly of Latin, philosophy, and religion. By the 890s, Alfred's charters and coinage referred to him as 'king of the English.’ Alfred died in 899, aged 50. By stopping the Viking advance and consolidating his territorial gains, Alfred had started the process by which his successors eventually extended their power over the other Anglo-Saxon kings. It is for his valiant defense of his kingdom, for securing peace with the Vikings and for his reforms in the reconstruction of England, that Alfred is known as 'the Great'. -
King Aethelbert of Kent
Æthelberht of Kent Æthelberht (also Æthelbert, Aethelberht, Aethelbert, or Ethelbert) (c. 560 – 24 February 616) was King of Kent from about 558 or 560 (the earlier date according to Sprott, the latter according to William of Malmesbury Book 1.9 ) until his death. The eighth-century monk Bede, in his Ecclesiastical History of the English Peo- ple, lists Aethelberht as the third king to hold imperium over other Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. In the late ninth cen- tury Anglo-Saxon Chronicle Æthelberht is referred to as a bretwalda, or “Britain-ruler”. He was the first English king to convert to Christianity. Æthelberht was the son of Eormenric, succeeding him as king, according to the Chronicle. He married Bertha, the Christian daughter of Charibert, king of the Franks, thus building an alliance with the most powerful state in con- temporary Western Europe; the marriage probably took place before Æthelberht came to the throne. The influ- ence of Bertha may have led to the decision by Pope Gre- gory I to send Augustine as a missionary from Rome. Au- gustine landed on the Isle of Thanet in east Kent in 597. Shortly thereafter, Æthelberht converted to Christianity, churches were established, and wider-scale conversion to Christianity began in the kingdom. Æthelberht provided The state of Anglo-Saxon England at the time Æthelberht came the new mission with land in Canterbury not only for what to the throne of Kent came to be known as Canterbury Cathedral but also for the eventual St Augustine’s Abbey. Æthelberht’s law for Kent, the earliest written code in ginning about 550, however, the British began to lose any Germanic language, instituted a complex system of ground once more, and within twenty-five years it appears fines.