Biology and the Origins of the English Jury

Law and History Review

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 591-596

  Donahue, Charles ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 72649100574     PISSN: 07382480     EISSN: 19399022     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/744382     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Cf. Jean Gaudemet, “Histoire du droit et histoire des institutions: Bilan et perspectives,” in Bronnen voorde geschiedenis van de instellingen en Belgie, ed. Hugo de Schepper (Brussels: Algemeen Rijksarchief, 1977), 81.
2. E.g., “the jury is not a direct descendant of lay collective judgment” (588).
3. Mary Cheney, “The Litigation Between John Marshal and Archbishop Thomas Becket in 1164: A Pointer to the Origin of Novel Disseisin,” in Law and Social Change in British History, ed. J. A. Guy and H. G. Beale (London: Royal Historical Society, 1984), 9-26.
4. My summary of this provision, like Macnair's (582-83), passes over some important ambiguities with regard to the role of the archdeacon and as to precisely what the sheriff is supposed to do with the twelve men.
5. Constitutions of Clarendon (1164), c. 9.
6. For different views of the story, see Paul R. Hyams, “Trial by Ordeal: The Key to Proof in the Early Common Law,” in On the Laws and Customs of England: Essays in Honor of Samuel E. Thome, ed. Morris S. Arnold et al. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1981), 90-126; Robert Bartlett, Trial by Fire and Water: The Medieval Judicial Ordeal (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986).
7. The Treatise on the Laws and Customs of England Commonly Called Glanvill, ed. G. D. G. Hall (London: Nelson, 1965), 2.7, at p. 28 (regale quoddam beneficium).
8. “Justice… is seldom arrived at by battle.” The Treatise on the Laws and Customs of England Commonly Called Glanvill.
9. Recourse to fama in the case was necessitated by the fact that the woman had challenged as fraudulent the notarized instrument of marriage that the man had produced.
10. See Charles Donahue, “The Dating of Alexander the Third's Marriage Decretals: Dauvillier Revisited after Fifty Years,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fiir Rechtsgeschichte 99 (Kanonistische Abteilung 68) (1982): 100 (dating the decretal [= WH 1033] to the years 1174x 1181).
11. Charles Donahue, “Proof by Witnesses in the Church Courts of Medieval England: An Imperfect Reception of the Learned Law,” in Essays Thome, 136-37.
12. “Proof by Witnesses in the Church Courts of Medieval England: An Imperfect Reception of the Learned Law,”., 135-36, 140-41.
13. “Proof by Witnesses in the Church Courts of Medieval England: An Imperfect Reception of the Learned Law,”., 139-40, 148-50.