Court Of King Research Articles

Lord Nottingham’s ,Manual of Chancery Practice’ and ,Prolegomena of Chancery and Equity‘. Edited with an introduction by D. E. C. Yale / Select Cases in the Court of King’s Bench under Edward III., vol. VI. Edited by G. O. Sayles / London Possessory Assizes. A Calendar, edited by Helena M. Chew / Francis West, The Justiciarship in England, 1066–1232 /

Lord Nottingham’s ,Manual of Chancery Practice’ and ,Prolegomena of Chancery and Equity‘. Edited with an introduction by D. E. C. Yale / Select Cases in the Court of King’s Bench under Edward III., vol. VI. Edited by G. O. Sayles / London Possessory Assizes. A Calendar, edited by Helena M. Chew / Francis West, The Justiciarship in England, 1066–1232 /

Select Cases in the Council of Henry VII. Edited by C. G. Bayne and completed by W. H. Dunham / Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward III., vol. V. Edited by G. 0. Sayles

Article Select Cases in the Council of Henry VII. Edited by C. G. Bayne and completed by W. H. Dunham / Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward III., vol. V. Edited by G. 0. Sayles was published on August 1, 1960 in the journal Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Germanistische Abteilung (volume 77, issue 1).

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench: Edward III (Vol. V)

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench: Edward III (Vol. V)

Lord Nottingham's Chancery Cases, vol. I. Edited, with an introduction by D. E. C. Yale. Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward II., vol. IV. Edited by G. 0. Sayles

Lord Nottingham's Chancery Cases, vol. I. Edited, with an introduction by D. E. C. Yale. Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward II., vol. IV. Edited by G. 0. Sayles

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward III

Journal Article Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench Under Edward III Get access Sayles G. O., editor. Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench Under Edward III. ( Publication of the Selden Society, vol. 76.) London, Bernard Quaritch, 1958. cliv, 154 p. American Journal of Legal History, Volume 3, Issue 3, July 1959, Pages 296–298, https://doi.org/10.2307/844007 Published: 01 July 1959

The Towns of León and Castille as Suitors before the King's Court in the Thirteenth Century

The Towns of León and Castille as Suitors before the King's Court in the Thirteenth Century Get access EVELYN S. PROCTER EVELYN S. PROCTER St. Hugh's CollegeOxford Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The English Historical Review, Volume LXXIV, Issue 290, January 1959, Pages 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/LXXIV.290.1 Published: 01 January 1959

Reviews of Books

Journal Article Reviews of Books Get access Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward II. Edited by G. O. SAYLES Vol. iv. ( Selden Society Publications lxxiv, London; Quaritch, for the Society, 1957.) E. L. G. STONES E. L. G. STONES University of Glasgow Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The English Historical Review, Volume LXXIV, Issue 292, July 1959, Pages 490–493, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/LXXIV.292.490 Published: 01 July 1959

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward II, Vol. IV

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench Under Edward II Get access Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench Under Edward II, Vol. IV. Edited with an introduction and translation by Professor Sayles G. O. (Publications of the Seiden Society, Vol. 74, for the year 1955.) London: Bernard Quaritch. 1957. Pp. cx., 193. Price to nonmembers, £3.13.6d. Warren M. Ballard Warren M. Ballard Professor of Law Temple University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar American Journal of Legal History, Volume 2, Issue 3, July 1958, Pages 272–282, https://doi.org/10.2307/844394 Published: 01 July 1958

The Irish courts of law, 1801–1914

At the beginning of the nineteenth century there were six superior courts in Ireland—chancery, the three common law courts (king’s bench, common pleas and exchequer), the admiralty court and the prerogative court (an ecclesiastical court with jurisdiction over testamentary matters).Four of these courts were of medieval origin. The exchequer was probably in existence before the close of the twelfth century, the Irish chancery was founded early in the thirteenth century, the first Irish chancellor being appointed in 1244, and the antecedents of the courts of king’s bench and common pleas are to be found in the thirteenth century. The other two courts were comparatively modern. The court of prerogative and faculties based its rights to exercise jurisdiction on two sixteenth century acts and two seventeenth century patents, one of James I and one of Charles I. And though admiralty jurisdiction had been exercised in Ireland from medieval times, the Irish court of admiralty had been created by statute in 1784. From the court of chancery and the three common law courts there was an appeal to the court of error (known as the court of exchequer chamber) composed of the judges of the three common law courts, and in 1857 it was enacted that the court of exchequer chamber when hearing an appeal should consist of the judges of the two courts from which the appeal did not arise. From the admiralty court and from the prerogative court there was an appeal to delegates in chancery.

Extract from a final concord made between Abbot Samson and Adam of Cockfield in the King's Court, Michaelmas, 1191

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Casus Placitorum and Reports of Cases in the King's Courts, 1272-1278

Casus Placitorum and Reports of Cases in the King's Courts, 1272-1278

Casus Placitorum and Reports of Cases in the King's Courts, 1272–1278. Edited with an Introduction by <italic>William Huse Dunham, Jr.</italic>, George Burton Adams Professor of History in Yale University. [Publications of the Seiden Society, Volume LXIX, for the Year 1950.] (London: Bernard Quaritch. 1952. Pp. xciv, 176. £3 13<italic>s</italic>.6<italic>d</italic>.)

Casus Placitorum and Reports of Cases in the King's Courts, 1272–1278. Edited with an Introduction by <italic>William Huse Dunham, Jr.</italic>, George Burton Adams Professor of History in Yale University. [Publications of the Seiden Society, Volume LXIX, for the Year 1950.] (London: Bernard Quaritch. 1952. Pp. xciv, 176. £3 13<italic>s</italic>.6<italic>d</italic>.)

Parliament in the Later Middle Ages

THE real problem in the history of parliament, it has been rightly said, is not so much to explain the beginnings of certain modern practices in the house of commons as to attempt to show why popular representation became an essential and inseparable feature of parliament.' Marked as the changes have been in the structure and complexion of parliament, the use of elected representatives has been a persistent feature of parliament since the thirteenth century. In the course of time, this feature has become a dominant and basic fact in modern political institutions. The problem is not to be clarified by any search into origins, no matter how ingenious or far-reaching.2 The house of commons, as we know it today, may be said to date mainly from the seventeenth century, most of its procedure from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The explanation is therefore to be found in tracing the increasing activities of the representatives in the later Middle Ages and the early modern period; it is to be found in tracing the new ideas consequent upon these activities, which resulted in the commons' coming to be considered an essential part of the machinery of parliament. It was the grafting of new ideas and practices onto the old institution which brought about the transformation of the medieval into the modern parliament. Parliament began in the thirteenth century as an expanded session of the king's council. Administrative expedience and financial needs had caused the king to summon before his council at Westminster not only the magnates and greater barons but also elected representatives of the counties and towns. Those representatives, however, appeared only by royal command, and they treated upon those matters in which the king was interested. Throughout the fourteenth and the greater part of the fifteenth centuries, parliament was in a very real sense the king's court. The magnates and representatives in the fourteenth century were scarcely more than the servants and petitioners of the prerogative, and their wishes and grievances were redressed

Some Pictorial Aspects of Early Mountebank Stages

The commedia dell'arte had no theatre of its own. When the commedia took form in the second half of the sixteenth century, the itinerant actors found themselves in the midst of intense theatrical activity, and readily appropriated available stages as a background for their buffoonery. In public squares, at fairs, festivals, and other gathering places, mountebanks attracted crowds to their platforms by songs interspersed with dialogue, trickery, and acrobatic stunts. In palatial halls of wealthy dukes, guests assembled to witness spectacular shows with expensive settings and intricate mechanical devices. With these opportunities before them, the comedians soon began to appear with the charlatans, and to come under the patronage of influential dukes. The players were invited to participate at wedding festivities, triumphal entries, sumptuous banquets, in the courts of kings, and in the splendor of royal palaces. Again the same troupe might also be found on a crude platform in the Square of San Marco, at a fiesta in Florence, or along a travelled roadside. The comic Arlecchino, dressed in patchwork, the pedantic Dottore, with his academic gown, the braggart Capitano, with his long rapier, and the foolish old Pantalone, with his long flowing gown, performed for king and artisan in London, Paris, Madrid, Brussels, or Ferrara.

The Virginia Washingtons and the Manor of Newton Bomswold

The following document preserved at the London Public Record Office, and which has hitherto been unknown to all writers on the Washington pedigree, reveals the remarkable fact that one of the Virginia Washingtons had actually succeeded jure uxoris to part of a manorial estate in Northamptonshire-the county whence the Washingtons originated-some forty years after the date of the family's settlement in America: [Translation] Final Concord made in the King's Court at Westminster within three weeks of Michaelmas, 9 William III. [1697], before the King's Justices there, between Geoffrey Jefferyes, Esq., plaintiff, and Francis Dade, Gent., and Frances his wife and Washington the younger, Gent., and Mary his wife, deforciants, of the moiety of two messuages, two gardens, two orchards, a hundred and twentysix acres of land, fourteen acres of meadow, and thirteen acres of pasture, with common of pasture for all beasts, in Newton Bromswold and Rushden, Northants.; whereof a plea of covenant was summoned between them in this Court, viz., that the said Francis, Frances, John, and Mary acknowledge the aforesaid lands to be the right of the said Geoffrey, as of their gift, and have remitted and quitclaimed the same to him and his heirs forever. Furthermore, on behalf of the heirs of Frances (Dade) and Mary (Washington), they have warranted him and his heirs in perpetuity against themselves and the heirs of the said Frances and Mary: and, in consideration of this grant and warranty, etc., the said Geoffrey has given them the sum of ?160.1 The identity of the and Mary Washington, named in the above final concord, immediately becomes evident both from the mention of Francis Dade and the reference to Newton Bromswold. For it is well established that Capt. Washington of Stafford County, Virginiathe only son of the emigrant Lawrence Washington (1635-1677) by his second wife Joyce-married in 1693 Mary, the and co-heiress of a Virginia neighbor, Col. Robert Townshend, whose elder daughter, Frances, became the wife of Francis Dade of Stafford County circa 1686.2 Moreover, Col. Robert Townshend's tombstone, which still exists at Albion, formerly in Stafford, now in King George County, states that he himself had espoused Mary, daughter to Mr. Needham Langhorne of Newton Brownshall [i. e. Bromswold], Northamptonsheire. Accordingly, there can be no doubt that the John Washington the younger and Mary, his wife, who in 1697 appeared in the King's Court at Westminster to record a sale of property at Newton Bromswold, were identical with Capt. and Mary (Townshend) Washington of Virginia:3 and such an identification has an added interest from the fact that Capt. is known to have acted as guardian of George Washington's father, Augustine, during the latter's minority. This is, of course, the first intimation we have had that Capt. Washington was ever in England; for, although his half-sister, Mary

Reviews of Books

Journal Article Reviews of Books Get access Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward I. Vol. iii. Edited by G. O. SAYLES. (Selden Society, vol. Iviii.) (London: Quaritch, 1939.) T. F. T. PLUCKNETT T. F. T. PLUCKNETT Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The English Historical Review, Volume LVII, Issue CCXXV, January 1942, Pages 135–137, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/LVII.CCXXV.135 Published: 01 January 1942

II. The Court of King Æthelberht of Kent

One of the most interesting features of modern historical work on the Anglo-Saxon settlements in recent years has been the tendency to admit a possible connexion between the Jutes and the Franks; or even to stress the possible associations, either of race or culture, between the Germanic conquerors of Kent and the mixed Germanic races of the middle Rhine and northern Gaul. That the language of the Cantware, or whatever they called themselves, was not very different from that of the subjects of the kings of Paris is suggested by the sending of Frankish interpreters along with the Italians of Augustine's mission. Linguists admit this, and they have been delighted to find remnants of the Frankish gau embedded in Kentish placenames. Archaeologists tell us that the early Kentish kings minted no coins of their own, but used Frankish ones, or else used their own rings and bracelets for money; when they did begin to have mints of their own, they copied Merovingian coins in weight, though not in design. Frankish coins, for that matter, were used farther afield than Kent: the coins found at Sutton Hoo were all Merovingian. It is in this pleasantly pro-Frankish context that the subject of the court officers of king Æthelberht of Kent is here offered for consideration. Someone may say: Æthelberht I know, and queen Bertha I know, and Augustine I know, and, in fact, all that Bede tells us about Æthelberht I know: but who are these officers of the court of Æthelberht that you are speaking of? We know, they say, that Æthelberht's law speaks of eorlcund men who had a wergeld of 300 shillings, and ceorls, who had a wergeld of 100 shillings: but we cannot remember that the individual officers of Æthelberht's court are mentioned by anybody; or at least, by any source that is reliable.

The Minstrels at the Court of Edward III

Although by the fourteenth century, minstrelsy had passed the time of its greatest glory, which had been the period of the troubadours, the courts of kings and nobles were still the centers of activity for the better class of musicians and entertainers. While the lower orders of the profession roamed the highways, picking up a living wherever and however they could, their more skilful brethren were usually attached to the households of the wealthy and powerful, where they not only received superior compensation, but frequently were able to practise their art on a higher plane than could the wanderers of the road. This was often due as much to their superior ability as to the more cultivated taste of their audiences. Edward III of England, as one of the greatest monarchs of the fourteenth century, and perhaps partly because of the influence of Queen Philippa, maintained a group of minstrels appropriate to the splendor of his court. Though we have no complete record of the personnel of his band of musicians during the half century of his reign, some facts as to their number, names, compensation, and activities have survived which enable us to visualize certain aspects of their life and work.

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward I. Volume III

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward I. Volume III

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward I. Volume III

Select Cases in the Court of King's Bench under Edward I. Volume III