Bracton and His Relation to the Roman Law

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: CHAPTER II. CHARACTER OF BRACTON'S WORK?SYSTEM?METHOD. The character of Bracton's work is placed in a very clear light, if we compare it with the legal treatise Ginnvuie ana known as Glanville's, which was written some Bracton. seventy years earlier. Ranulph de Glanville was the well-known Great Justiciary...
More Description

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: CHAPTER II. CHARACTER OF BRACTON'S WORK?SYSTEM?METHOD. The character of Bracton's work is placed in a very clear light, if we compare it with the legal treatise Ginnvuie ana known as Glanville's, which was written some Bracton. seventy years earlier. Ranulph de Glanville was the well-known Great Justiciary and general of Henry II. He is usually regarded / J. Glanville's work. as the author of the treatise, which has come down to us with the following title: Tractatus de legibus et consuetudinibus regni Anglice tem- pore regis Henrici secundi compositus, justitise guber- nacula tenente illustro viro Ranulpho de Glanvilla. The date of Glanville's work is shortly anterior to the year 1190 (a). The title, like Bracton's, is: De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliaa; a phraseology which seems to indicate it to be a view of the whole Anglo-Norman law. The author, however, confesses in his preface that it was out of the power of any one in that age to embody the whole law and customs of the land in the shape of a general view in writing. From the outset he confines himself to matters relating to the (a) Concerning Glanville, v. Reeves I. 221-227. Phillips, Englische Rechts- geschichte I. 231-242; Biener, Inq. Pr. 218-220 and in Savigny IV. 580-583; Spenoe I. 119. Besides the editions mentioned by Biener, there is one in the Kcenigsberg library printed in London by Richard Tottel without date. I cannot decide whether or not, it is the same as Sir William Staunford's edition of 1554. It is well known that Glanville's authorship is disputed, but there are preponderating reasons in favor of it, especially in the mention made of him in different forms given as examples. See also Beames's introductory remarks to his translation of Glanville, and Foss, Judges of England, I...