| | |
|
MattConroyFirstPaper 2 - 29 Nov 2017 - Main.MattConroy
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| |
<
< | | | |
Paper Title | | | What is the Englishry of English Law? | |
<
< | What exactly is it that Maitland calls the Englishry of English Law? It seems to mean that by the end of the 13th century the English recognized their own law as distinct and "were proud of it" | >
> | What exactly is it that Maitland calls the Englishry of English Law? It seems to mean that by the end of the 13th century the English recognized their own law as distinct and "were proud of it". (Maitland, 188) The major piece of this Englishry is a refusal to adopt French law if it is clearly French. ("Foreign novelties from Poitou or Savoy.").
Defined By Origins
What if we tried analyzing the system using linear algebra. Let's represent any given legal system as a n dimensional vector x for some countable n. Each element of this vector would represent some qualitative weighting of how important some fact, or probably more accurately string of words, weighs into a decision. The social and political background as a whole would operate on the vector as a matrix _C_. Then through repeated application of the social transformation, the legal system develops over time. For a system to be precisely defined by origins, then the origins would need to completely define both C and x0 where x0 is the legal system at origin. For England this would probably be either be 1066 when William becomes King or maybe by 1072 when he has consolidated power and can leave for Normandy.
Linear Algebra Informing Societal Change | | | | |
<
< | Section II | >
> | In the vector model of a legal system, there are two possible ways to effectuate change. The first is to change the matrix on the left hand side by changing the sociopolitcal reality of the realm. The second way to change it is to simply change it, ie add a vector to the legal system arbitrarily to produce a new one. What happened is that the Englishry of the English Law meant that society was fine with changing the matrix, but not okay with direct substitution of legal system. | | | | |
<
< | Subsection A | >
> | Quia Emptores | | | | |
<
< | Subsection B | >
> | One of the most important statutes of early medieval England is Quia Emptores of1290. (Baker and Milsom, 9). What this statute did was forbid tenants from subinfuedating when selling a portion of their tenement and they could only substitute. This was a massive change to the social, political and economic structure and English society was completely fine with it because it only changes the matrix and not the legal vector itself. | | | | |
>
> | On the other hand, at roughly the same time the legal system is against clever lawyers trying too hard to change the law from within the courts. In 1285, Hengham CJ states "Do not gloss the statute, for we understand better than you; we made it." (Baker, 209). | | |
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. |
|
|
MattConroyFirstPaper 1 - 28 Nov 2017 - Main.MattConroy
|
|
>
> |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
Paper Title
-- By MattConroy - 28 Nov 2017
As an analytical framework arguing that the diversity of origins formed the unique character of English Law does not seem very useful. Were the origins diverse? Yes. Was the law distinct? Also yes. But many legal systems have diverse origins and yet do not seem to produce such a distinct legal system. There is no precisely here at all. What matters is that the origins were diverse and then the system was allowed to develop without significant outside influence for several hundred years.
What is the Englishry of English Law?
What exactly is it that Maitland calls the Englishry of English Law? It seems to mean that by the end of the 13th century the English recognized their own law as distinct and "were proud of it"
Section II
Subsection A
Subsection B
You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable.
To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list. |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |