Abstract
In a number of historical accounts Sir Edward Coke and other lawyers claimed that the common law had been a bulwark against popish encroachment prior to the Reformation. Anxiety over a renewal of clerical usurpation and a desire to preserve royal authority continued to inform their attitudes to the reformed English church courts. Although the common lawyers who wrote these histories shared several underlying assumptions, they nonetheless reached very different conclusions. By exposing these divisions and explaining common law attitudes towards the church courts and the prerogative, this article challenges received views on the ‘common law mind’.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
