| Leges Henrici Primi | |
|---|---|
| Laws of Henry I Leges Henrici | |
| Author(s) | unknown |
| Dedicated to | KingHenry I of England |
| Language | medieval Latin |
| Date | c. 1115 |
| Manuscript(s) | 6 extant manuscripts plus 3 known lost manuscripts |
| Rylands lat.155 c. 1201 (Rs) | |
| Red Book of the Exchequer c. 1225 (Sc) | |
| Hargrave MS 313 c. 1255 (Hg) | |
| Cotton MS Claudius D.II c. 1310 (K) | |
| Corpus Christi College 70 c. 1320 (Co) | |
| Oriel College 46 c. 1330 (Or) | |
| Principal manuscript(s) | K, Rs |
| First printed edition | 1644 |
| Genre | Legal text |
| Subject | English laws and legal procedures |
TheLeges Henrici Primi orLaws of Henry I is alegal treatise, written in about 1115, that records the legal customs of medieval England in the reign of KingHenry I of England. Although it is not an official document, it was written by someone apparently associated with the royal administration. It lists and explains the laws, and includes explanations of how to conduct legal proceedings. Although its title implies that these laws were issued by King Henry, it lists laws issued by earlier monarchs that were still in force in Henry's reign; the only law of Henry that is included is the coronation charter he issued at the start of his reign. It covers a diverse range of subjects, including ecclesiastical cases, treason, murder, theft, feuds, assessment ofdanegeld, and the amounts of judicial fines.
The work survives in six manuscripts that range in date from about 1200 to around 1330, belonging to two different manuscript traditions. Besides the six surviving manuscripts, three others were known to scholars in the 17th and 18th centuries, but have not survived to the present day. Two other separate copies may also have existed. The complete work itself was first printed in 1644, but an earlier partial edition appeared in 1628. TheLeges is the first legal treatise in English history and has been credited with having a greater effect on the views of English law before the reign of KingHenry II than any other work of its kind.
TheLeges Henrici Primi orLaws of Henry I is not merely a compilation of laws but an integrated legal treatise, the first such in the history of England, written in theLatin language about 1115. It records the legal customs of medieval England.[1][2] It was part of a small group of similar writings devoted to legal procedures that were written for royal administrators. Besides theLeges, other works of this type produced at this time were theQuadripartitus, parts of theLeges Edwardi Regis, theInstituta Cnuti, and theConsiliatio Cnuti. It is possible theLeges Willhelmi was also written during this time period.[3] It is the longest of the legal tracts from its time and made some effort to be comprehensive.[4]
The provisions set forth in theLeges can be traced to laws ofCnut and various Anglo-Saxon codes.[5] Some of the Anglo-Saxon codes used may have been subsequently lost. Also, certain legal terms used in theLeges, whether in their original English language or rendered into Latin, cannot be found in any extant legal code and may be another example of preserving now-lost legal codes or provisions.[6] It also draws upon non-English sources, includingIsidore of Seville andIvo of Chartres, as well as legal codes such as Frankish andcanon law.[4] Other sources include theVulgate edition of theBible andRoman law codes, although the debt to those sources is small.[7]
TheLeges was written between 1114 and 1118 by an unknown Norman, who is very likely to be the author of another legal work, theQuadripartitus,[8] although some historians, including H. G. Richardson and G. O. Sayles, argue that the two works were by different authors.[9] TheLeges was probably part of a project including theQuadripartitus, the two works being part of a planned work in four volumes to cover not only the laws of the writer's own time but previous laws of the Anglo-Saxon monarchs, as well as how to handle legal cases.[10] As part of both works, the author has included theCharter of Liberties,[8] which was KingHenry's coronation charter promising not to follow the administrative and legal policies of his predecessor, KingWilliam II.[11] About a third of the material in theLeges is also in theQuadripartitus.[12] There is evidence that the author of the two works had been a member of the household ofGerard, who had beenchancellor under KingsWilliam I and William II before becomingArchbishop of York under Henry I.[13] The work was likely composed atWinchester.[14]
Usually the work has been known as theLeges Henrici Primi, orLaws of Henry the First. It gained that name from the inscription "De libertate ecclesie et totius Anglie obseruanda leges Henrici primi" which occurs on five of the six extant manuscripts. The sixth manuscript adds "filii conquestoris" at the end of the inscription.[15][a] The historianFelix Libermann called the workLeges Henrici, but the fuller title ofLeges Henrici Primi is generally used to help differentiate which Henry is being referred to.[15]
The work is not a law code issued by King Henry but a compilation of already extant legislation that was still current during his reign. It is not a comprehensive listing of all laws in force during the early 11th century. It begins with Henry'sCharter of Liberties, which he issued after his coronation, and this is the only actual legal document reproduced in theLeges. Some discussions of juridical matters then follow, then a long treatment of ecclesiastical issues. The rest of the treatise is concerned with non-ecclesiastical subjects, including cases of injury, theft, murder, and feuds. Procedural topics include how court summonses should be formed, what notices need to be made before judicial procedures, how adjournments should be handled, and other such concerns. There is no strong organizational framework to the entirety of theLeges, which leads the author to repeat subjects as well as treating some subjects less than adequately.[16]
The law code recognised the difference between the laws of theDanelaw, the oldKingdom of Mercia, and the lands of theKingdom of Wessex.[1] It also set out a list of legal proceedings that could only be tried before the king or his officials, the cases of which were known as "royal pleas" or "pleas of the crown";[2] they included serious crimes such as treason, murder, rape, robbery, arson, and some types of theft.Treasure trove and salvage from wrecks were also matters of interest to the crown.[2] Other royal cases involved counterfeiters or false judgement,[17] or violent acts against the king himself or his household and servants.[18] The king also reserved the right to hear appeals from other courts conducted by local authorities or by his nobles. The tract also set out who should attend theshire court, ruling that the local bishop and earl, as well as the sheriff and local barons, among others, should attend.[2]
The work assumes that the royal legal system would still address some issues that later would have been dealt with by ecclesiastical courts. Clergy are not only to take part in the shire court, but could be summoned to answer charges in the court.[19] It also sets out the established courts and their jurisdiction.[10] It takes for granted that the Anglo-Saxon laws of England are still in effect.[20] It also addresses the administration offorest law under Henry I.[21] Another new concern in theLeges is law covering the roadways and highways.[22]
Another area covered by the work is royal finance, with theLeges setting out the rate ofDanegeld, at a rate of one shilling per hide.[23] It also covers judicial fines, setting forth a fine of 46marks as the penalty for committing murder.[17] The author of the work criticised the royal justices, calling them greedy.[24] It sets out elaborate procedures for the conduct of murder cases, ormurdum.[25]
TheLeges also devoted some effort to the theory of the law and attempted to make generalisations about legal procedures and practices. It also contains a number ofdicta which became cliches, such as "who unknowingly offends will knowingly amend" and "witness is not needed as to what did not occur, but as to what an accused claims did occur".[26]
The work comes down to the present day in two manuscript traditions, neither one of which contains many manuscripts.[27] There are six surviving manuscripts between the two traditions – that of the manuscript Sc and its copies, and the "London group". The Sc group is composed of the Sc manuscript itself, which probably dates from about 1225, and its copy, Hg, which was written about 1250. Sc is currently part of theRed Book of the Exchequer held byThe National Archives. Hg is held by theBritish Library and is catalogued as Hargrave MS 313.[28] It consists of folios 5 through 14a of the manuscript.[29]
Four other extant manuscripts belong to the "London" tradition, and three other now-lost manuscripts are also known to have belonged to this grouping. The surviving manuscripts are known as K, Co, Or, and Rs. The three lost manuscripts have been assigned the names of Gi, Sl, and Tw. K is a manuscript currently in the British Library and was part of theCotton Library before becoming part of the British Museum, then the British Library. Given the catalogue name of Cotton Claudius D II, it is the onlyilluminated manuscript of theLeges and dates to around 1310. Co is currently in theCorpus Christi College, Cambridge Library and was part of theParker Library in the 16th century before being bequeathed to Corpus Christi onParker's death. This manuscript dates to around 1320 and is catalogued as Corpus Christi College 70.[30] TheLeges occupies folios 108 through 170.[31] The manuscript Or was originally part of theOriel College, Oxford Library but is now part of theBodleian Library. It dates from around 1330 and is catalogued as Oriel College 46. The last extant manuscript is Rs, which is currently in theJohn Rylands Library in Manchester. It was written about 1201 and is catalogued as Rylands lat.155.[30]
The three known but now-lost manuscripts included Gi, which was known in 1721 and was owned by theLondon Guildhall. It was used byDavid Wilkins to compile his 1721 workLeges Anglo-Saxonicae as well byHenry Spelman to correct manuscripts used in theEpistola Eleutherii. The Sl manuscript belonged toJohn Selden in the 17th century, but it is unclear when it was created. It was used byRoger Twysden in his edition of theLeges Henrici Primi. The last securely known lost manuscript is the Tw manuscript, and was used by Twysden in his edition of theLeges, and was perhaps owned by him also.[30]
Possibly two other manuscripts existed, but little is known about them. One is often designated Sp, and was used by Spelman for his 1625Glossarium Archaiollogicum, for which he used three manuscripts of theLeges – Sc, K and one that he does not name but has subsequently been designated as Sp. It appears to have belonged to the London grouping, and may have been Gi rather than a separate manuscript, although Spelman's description and usage is unclear as to which possibility is most likely. The other possible manuscript was one that Wilkins referred to as "quod iudetur fuisse Archiepiscopi aut Monachorum Cantuar", but it has not been found in searches ofLambeth Palace Library or the various Canterbury repositories.[32]
Besides the medieval manuscripts, there are three early modern transcriptions of the work – one from the 16th century now at theCambridge University Library as manuscript Dd.VI 38, the second atTrinity College, Cambridge from the 17th century, catalogued as Cambridge O.10,20, and the last in the British Library as Harley MS 785, also dating from the 17th century.[32]
The first complete printed edition of theLeges was in 1644, as an appendix to a new edition of theArcaionomia prepared byAbraham Wheelock. The actual text of theLeges was edited by Twysden. Prior to this, two other scholars,William Lambarde and Spelman, had intended to produce printed editions of theLeges, but were unable to follow through on the project. A portion of theLeges had earlier appeared inEdward Coke'sInstitutes of the Laws of England in 1628. Another edition appeared in 1721, with Wilkins' publication of theLeges Anglo-Saxonicae, which built on the work ofWilliam Somner between 1645 and 1652. In 1776,David Hoüard reprinted Wilkins' text of theLeges in theTraites sur les coutumes anglo-normandes, and in 1789 another reproduction of Wilkins' text appeared inPaulus Canciani'sBarbarorum Legs Antiquae.[33]
What is considered the first scholarly discussion of theLeges appeared in 1827 byGeorge Phillips, who did not reproduce the entire text in hisEnglische Reichsund Rechtsgeschichte, but did provide a couple of extracts along with a discussion of the sources of the work and a description of the work. In 1840, theRecord Commission published an edition of the text that had been edited byRichard Price andBenjamin Thorpe. The next major production of theLeges wasFelix Liebermann who produced three volumes ofGesetze der Angelsachsen between 1903 and 1916, with theLeges being one of the legal treatises being reproduced in theGesetze.[33] A modern translation, with the original Latin text on pages facing the translation, was published in 1972 by theClarendon Press and edited by L. J. Downer,[34] and includes updated commentary and manuscript information.[35]
The work is an important historical source for the study of the Middle Ages. An edition was published along with other 12th-century legal treatises, in theDie Gesetze der Angelsachsen, and more recently, it has been studied by the historian L. J. Downer.[10] The historianPatrick Wormald says of theLeges that it "has had more effect on views of English law before Henry II than any other".[36] It was cited in the 2022United States Supreme Court caseDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization by JusticeSamuel Alito.[37]