Notes Introduction 1. Thomas Ertman, Birth of the Leviathon. Building States and Regimes in Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, 1997). The seventh and last volume to appear in the European Science Foundation Series was War and Competition between States, ed. Philippe Contamine (Ox- ford, 2000). It lists earlier works in the series. 2. Resistance, Representation, and Community, ed. Peter Blickle (Oxford, 1997). 3. Discontent with taxation is well illustrated in J. R. Maddicott, The En- glish Peasantry and the Demands of the Crown. Past & Present Supple- ment, no. 1 (Oxford, 1975). 4. Kathryn L. Reyerson, “Commerce and Communications” in The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. David Abulafia (Cambridge, 1999), vol. 5, c.1198-c.1300, pp. 50–70; Peter Spufford, Power and Profit. The Merchant in Medieval Europe (London, 2002); John Langdon and James Masschaele, “Commercial Activity and Population Growth in Medieval England,” Past & Present 190 (2006): 35–81; James Mass- chaele, “Economic Takeoff and the Rise of Markets,” in Blackwell Com- panion to the Middle Ages, ed. Edward D. English and Carol L. Lansing (Oxford, forthcoming 2008). 5. Michael Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1993); Pragmatic Literacy East and West, 1200–1330, ed. Richard Britnell (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1997). 6. James Scott, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven, 1987). 7. Susan Reynolds, Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, 900–1300 (Oxford, 1984); Alan Harding, Medieval Law and the Foun- dations of the State (Oxford, 2002). 8. Alfred B.White, Self-Government at the King’s Command (Minneapolis, 1933). 9. Thomas Andrew Green, Verdict According to Conscience: Perspectives on the Criminal Trial Jury 1200–1800 (Chicago, 1985). 10. Some of Green’s arguments were anticipated in Naomi Hurnard’s analysis of the role juries played in the system of royal pardoning for ex- cusable homicide. See Hurnard, The King’s Pardon for Homicide before AD 1307 (Oxford, 1969), particularly chap. 10. 11. Edward Powell, Kingship, Law, and Society: Criminal Justice in the 212 Notes Reign of Henry V (Oxford, 1989); J. G. Bellamy, The Criminal Trial in Later Medieval England (Toronto, 1998); Anthony Musson, Public Order and Law Enforcement: The Local Administration of Criminal Jus- tice, 1294–1350 (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1996); idem, Medieval Law in Context: The Growth of Legal Consciousness from Magna Carta to the Peasants’ Revolt (Manchester, 2001). 12. W. L. Warren, Henry II (Berkeley, 1973), chap. 9; Robert Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings 1075–1225 (Oxford, 2000); David Carpenter, The Struggle for Mastery: The Penguin His- tory of Britain 1066–1284 (London, 2004). 13. Reynolds, Kingdoms and Communities (Oxford, 1984). 14. Peter Coss, The Origins of the English Gentry (Cambridge, 2003); Christine Carpenter, Locality and Polity: A Study of Warwickshire Landed Society, 1401–1499 (Cambridge, 1992). 15. John Marshall Mitnick, “From Neighbor-Witness to Judge of Proofs: The Transformation of the English Civil Juror,” American Journal of Legal History 32 (1988): 201–35; Daniel Klerman, “Was the Jury Ever Self-Informing?” in The Trial in History, vol. 1, Judicial Tribunals in England and Europe, 1200–1700, ed. Maureen Mulholland, Brian Pul- lan, and Anne Pullan (Manchester, 2003), pp. 58–80. 16. Morris S. Arnold, “Law and Fact in the Medieval Jury Trial: Out of Sight, Out of Mind,” American Journal of Legal History 18 (1974): 267–80; Anthony Musson, “The Role of Amateur and Professional Judges in the Royal Courts of Late Medieval England,” in The Trial in History, vol. 1, Judicial Tribunals in England and Europe, ed. Mulhol- land, Pullan, and Pullan, pp. 37–57. 17. Thomas Lindkvist, “Law and the Making of the State in Medieval Swe- den,” in Legislation and Justice, ed. Antonio Padoa-Schioppa (Oxford, 1997), pp. 224–25; Joseph Strayer, “The Writ of Novel Disseisin in Normandy at the End of the Thirteenth Century,” in Medieval State- craft and the Perspectives of History (Princeton, 1971), pp. 3–13; R. C. Van Caenegem, The Birth of the English Common Law, 2nd ed. (Cam- bridge, 1988), p. 71. 18. Ian Douglas Willock, The Origins and Development of the Jury in Scot- land, Stair Society, vol. 23 (Edinburgh, 1966). Chapter 1 1. Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery) Preserved in the Pub- lic Record Office, (London, 1937), vol. 3, no. 425, pp. 154–55. 2. Ibid. 3. Francis Palgrave, The Rise and Progress of the English Commonwealth, 2 vols. (London, 1832), vol. 1, pp. 239–77. 4. Heinrich Brunner, Die entstehung der schwurgerichte (Berlin, 1871). 5. Frederick Pollock and Frederic William Maitland, The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1898), vol. Notes 213 1, pp. 138–44; William Stubbs, The Constitutional History of England, 3rd ed., 3 vols. (Oxford, 1880), vol. 1, pp. 608–22. 6. Charles Homer Haskins, Norman Institutions (Cambridge, MA, 1918), chap. 6. 7. R. C. Van Caenegem, Royal Writs in England from the Conquest to Glanvill, Selden Society, vol. 77 (London, 1959). 8. Doris M. Stenton, English Justice between the Norman Conquest and the Great Charter, 1066–1215. The Jayne Lectures for 1963 (London, 1965), pp. 13–21. 9. E.g., W. L. Warren, “The Myth of Norman Administrative Efficiency,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 34 (1984): 123–32; James Campbell, The Anglo-Saxon State (London, 2000). 10. Mike Macnair “Vicinage and the Antecedents of the Jury,” Law and History Review 17 (1999): 537–90. 11. David Roffe, Domesday. The Inquest and the Book (Oxford, 2000), pp. 64–66, 251. 12. Patrick Wormald, The Making of English Law: King Alfred to the Twelfth Century (Oxford, 1999). 13. On Anglo-Saxon influences on later Common Law forms, see Wormald, Making of English Law, and Paul R. Hyams, Rancor and Rec- onciliation in Medieval England (Ithaca, 2003). On early Anglo- Norman influences, see John Hudson, Land, Law, and Lordship in Anglo-Norman England (Oxford, 1994). Bloch’s admonition is in The Historian’s Craft, trans. Peter Putnam (Manchester, 1992), pt. 1, sec. 4. 14. C. P. Lewis, “The Domesday Jurors,” Haskins Society Journal 5 (1993): 17–44; Robin Fleming, Domesday Book and the Law: Society and Legal Custom in Early Medieval England (Cambridge, 1998); Roffe, Domes- day, chap. 3. 15. Jurors are documented more consistently in the Domesday satellites than in Domesday Book itself. Lewis, “Domesday Jurors,” pp. 18–19; Roffe, Domesday, pp. 122–23, 186–87. 16. The close association between juries and royal power is discussed in Paul Brand, “The Formation of the English Legal System, 1150–1400,” in Legislation and Justice, ed. Antonio Padoa-Schioppa (Oxford, 1997), p. 107. 17. C.A.F. Meekings, The 1235 Surrey Eyre, 2 vols., Surrey Record Society, vols. 31–32 (Guildford, 1979–83), vol. 1, p. 33. 18. Curia Regis Rolls, ed. C. T. Flower and Paul Brand, 19 vols. (London, 1922- ), vol. 13, no. 237. A similar procedure can be found in ibid., vol. 7, p. 245. 19. On litigation related to dower rights, see Janet Senderowitz Loengard, “ ‘Of the Gift of Her Husband’: English Dower and Its Consequences in the Year 1200,” in Women of the Medieval World. Essays in Honor of John H. Mundy, ed. Julius Kirshner and Suzanne F. Wemple (Oxford, 1985): 215–55; Joseph Biancalana, “Widows at Common Law: The 214 Notes Development of Common Law Dower,” Irish Jurist, n.s., 23 (1988): 255–329. Also enlightening are the essays by Loengard and Sue Sheridan Walker in Wife and Widow in Medieval England, ed. Sue Sheridan Walker (Ann Arbor, 1993). 20. Examples include Curia Regis Rolls, ed. Flower and Brand, vol. 2, pp. 265, 278; vol. 13, no. 1081; vol. 15, no. 1352. This became such a com- mon procedure that scribes often used an “etc.” to refer to it in later rolls. 21. Curia Regis Rolls, ed. Flower and Brand, vol. 6, pp. 242–43. 22. Ibid., vol. 1, p. 18. 23. For other examples of inquests settling land disputes, see Curia Regis Rolls, ed. Flower and Brand, vol. 1, pp. 375–76; ibid., vol. 16, no. 2484. 24. E.g., Curia Regis Rolls, ed. Flower and Brand, vol. 15, no. 1291. Van Caenegem, Royal Writs, p. 77, discusses the antiquity of these forest perambulations and their connection to other forms of jury procedure. Mike Macnair has made the cogent argument that inquest procedure was particularly common in disputes involving ongoing boundaries and customs: Macnair “Vicinage,” pp. 560–71. 25. Curia Regis Rolls, ed. Flower and Brand, vol. 15, nos. 1888, 1972B, and 1981. 26. Ibid., vol. 15, no. 1180. 27. Naomi Hurnard, The King’s Pardon for Homicide before AD 1307 (Oxford, 1969), chap. 3. 28. Ibid., pp. 78–79. 29. Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, vol. 1, no. 2101, p. 563. 30. Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258–1266, p. 11. 31. Hurnard, King’s Pardon for Homicide, pp. 339–74; Roger D. Groot, “Teaching Each Other: Judges, Clerks, Jurors and Malefactors Define the Guilt/Innocence Jury,” in Learning the Law. Teaching and the Transmission of English Law, 1150–1900, ed. Jonathan A. Bush and Alain Wijffels (London, 1999), pp. 17–32; Hyams, Rancor and Recon- ciliation, pp. 175–84; Susanne Jenks, “Das writ und die exceptio de odio et atia,” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 68 (2000): 455–77. 32. National Archives, Public Record Office, C144/16, no. 46. 33. National Archives, Public Record Office, C144/17, no. 38. 34. National Archives, Public Record Office, C144/29, no. 15. 35. Hurnard, King’s Pardon for Homicide, p. 364. 36. Ibid., pp. 342–43. 37. Year Books of the Reign of Edward II, vol. 12, 5 Edward 11, ed. William C. Bolland, Selden Society, vol.