>>> Item number 923, dated 94/11/27 16:43:31 -- ALL
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 16:43:31 -0600
Reply-To: "H-Net Legal History Discussion list,
affiliated with the" <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET>
Sender: "H-Net Legal History Discussion list,
affiliated with the" <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET>
From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu>
Subject: Law French
The following message was posted on H-Albion:
Dear all,
I am labouring on Sir Edward Coke's Reports. His law French is no French, not the French of his day anyway. It looks like Littleton's law French (15th century), which did not look like the French of his day...
I implore! IS there a historical glossary of law French? I have access to 17th century law dictionaries, explaining terms in plain English, but I can't find a book explaining the grammar, syntax and morphology of law French. If someone can access online STC, the search might be easier than on our paper copy. The address I tried was for subscribers only. My centre owns the reels of STC 1 only (not a complaint), so things later than 1640 wouldn't be of use until I get to Oxford next February or so.
Did lawyers take lessons of law French? Coke himself doesn't mention it in the preface to the 3rd Reports describing the training and careers of common lawyers. He explains that 'French' is used to prevent the vulgar from misconstruing the laws and claim ungrounded rights. Guess why Hobbes and the Levellers asked for a redaction of the law in English?...
If someone also subscribes to H-LAW, could my request be posted to them, with my e-mail address? I would be most grateful.
Yours,
Luc Borot <lb@alor.univ-montp3.fr>
*Luc Borot <lb@crit.univ-montp3.fr> * * <lb@alor.univ-montp3.fr> * *Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Elisabethaines * *Universite Paul Valery * *Montpellier (France) * *work ph. 33-67 14 24 49 fax 67 14 24 65 * * 33-67 14 24 48 * *personal 33-67 52 07 98 *
>>> Item number 925, dated 94/11/28 16:55:19 -- ALL
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 16:55:19 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: Law french
> The following message was posted on H-Albion:
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am labouring on Sir Edward Coke's Reports. His law French is no
> French, not the French of his day anyway. It looks like Littleton's law
> French (15th century), which did not look like the French of his day...
> I implore! IS there a historical glossary of law French? I have
> access to 17th century law dictionaries, explaining terms in plain English,
> but I can't find a book explaining the grammar, syntax and morphology of
> law French.
You might try any or all of the following:
All of these works, except for the Selden Society volume, are available through our bookshop.
All the best,
Joe Luttrell
There is a fine dictionary, with some helpful grammatical information too: John H. Baker, Manual of Law French, 2d ed. (Scolar Press 1990).
David Millon
School of Law
Washington and Lee University
Lexington Virginia 24450
phone: 703-463-8993 fax: 703-463-8488
internet: dkm@wlu.edu
J.H. Baker has compiled a manual of law-French, the second edition of which was published in 1990 by Scholar Press. (The first came out some time in the late 1970s.)
In my readings on the seventeenth-century inns of court, I've never come across any references to formal instruction in Law-French. It would seem reasonable that moderate familiarity with "real" French and a little self-instruction would be more than enough to convey the essentials.
Cook himself was aware of the problems encounted by Luc Barot--In the preface to his First Institutes, he ackowledged its corruptions, but defended its use by noting how "many ancient terms and words drawn from that legal French are grown to be vocabula artis, vocables of art, so apt and significant to express the true sense of the laws, and are so woven into the laws themselves, as it is in a manner impossible to change them, neither ought legal terms to be changed."
Many lawyers considered Law French an abomination and praised its short-lived abolition during the 1650s. A few conservatives, however, echoed Cook's views, using language to separate the profession (or parts of the profession) from laymen. Given the mid-century enthusiasm for reform, Law French potentially "insulated" the profession from its sharpest lay critics--including, of course, Lilburne.
If anyone has further thoughts on Law French, especially defenses of the language during the 1640s and '50, I would be very interested in hearing more.
Robert Tripp
Washington University, St. Louis
rktripp@artsci.wustl.edu
>>> Item number 928, dated 94/11/29 18:06:48 -- ALL
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 18:06:48 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: Law French
You may want to consult Frederic W. Maitland, _English Law and The Renaissance_"The Rede Lectures for 1901" Cambridge University Press, 1901 for some references and a famous example, a report telling how a successor of Sir Robert Rede was assaulted by a prisoner "que puis son condemnation ject un brickbat a le dit justice que narrowly mist." Bonne chance!
John Q. Stilwell, Doctoral Candidate ABD, UTD
stil9285
4808 Byron Avenue
Dallas, TX 75205
Phone/AnsMach/Fax: 214 520 8157
VoiceMail 214 969 4252
There is a very good guide to Law French by John Baker - "Manual of Law French" c. 1971, probably Cambridge University Press. Coke's French is basically very corrupted Norman French, which has to be stretched to and beyond its limits to accomodate his thoughts.
Yours
Gwen Seabourne
Lecturer, Law Department, University of Bristol.
Dear All,
On the subject of Law French in the mid 17th C, it is hard to get away from the suspicion that the archaic language was kept up in order to exclude various people from a proper understanding of legal matters: the public, for instance, but also perhaps to keep the lower legal orders - attorneys and "mere solicitors" as opposed to utter barristers - at a disadvantage in the central courts at Westmister. I think also that twentieth century legal historians do tend - almost inevitably - to assume that law French was more important than it probably was in actual fact: it is by no means certain when it stopped being used in court, as opposed to in law reporting (the two things are not the same, and it is clear that law reports were not always in the language in which court proceedings actually occurred). Also, law French was only really important at Westminster, not in the country.
On a completely different subject, I have a few enquiries on Mediaeval French Law:
I am currently researching the enforcement of the usury laws in England 1200 - 1500, and, to give the study some European context, I have been looking at some French statutes on the subject of usury.
Yours historically,
Gwen Seabourne
Lecturer in Law, University of Bristol
G.C.Seabourne@bristol.ac.uk
Law Department, Wills Memorial Building, Queen's Road, Bristol.
BS8 1RJ. Great Britain.
>>> Item number 935, dated 94/11/30 19:59:34 -- ALL
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 19:59:34 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: Law French
Since we're talking law French, how about the nuisance case where the
court found that "la utility del chose excusera la noisomeness del
stink."
Prof. Louise Halper
Washington & Lee University
School of Law
(703)463-8962
lah@wlu.edu
Gwen Seabourne was right to mention Baker's work on Law French, but there is second edition available, J.H. Baker _Manual of Law French_ (2d ed. Scolar Press, 1990). Its introduction and bibliographical notes are a useful starting point.
I question Seabourne's assertion that modern legal historians assume "that law French was more important than it probably was in actual fact". It seems to me that it was as important as the year-books, early named reports, abridgments, and learning exercises and readings in the Inns of Court.
Matthew C. Mirow
Saint Louis University Law School
mirow@sluvca.slu.edu
>>> Item number 941, dated 94/12/03 18:39:30 -- ALL
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 1994 18:39:30 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: French
Dear All,
In connection with my recent posting on law French, obviously I am not saying that it was not important, merely that we twentieth century scholars are in danger of over emphasising its importance because many legal sources are written in French, even though that clearly was not the language in which cases were argued or people spoke when discussing legal matters: witness the strained translations of English into French in cases from the fifteenth century onwards. Readings at the inns of court might be in French, but I believe that these were only given a few times a year, and almost always on one of a limited number of accepted statutes. They were as much a rite of passage for the reader - necessary for his promotion within the inn - as a method of educating bar students. It was a matter of tradition that they should be in French, perhaps borrowing from the lectures of lawyers from earlier times, as many of the statutes on which readings were made were from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.
We should, of course, remember that Latin was also in use in legal practice many centuries after it died everywhere but in the Church and associated institutions - particularly in writs and Chancery records.
To return to the original question that somebody posted concerning the survival of law French in the mid seventeenth C, I had another couple of ideas. First of all, this could have been a device, conscious or not, to exclude or show independence from the universities: scholars at universities were concerned with Latin and Greek whilst the common lawyers maintained their own exclusive language. Perhaps it would not be going too far to say that the use of law French could be seen to have kept out concepts of civil law. Secondly, the use of law French in seventeenth century legal writings could in fact suggest a decreasing familiarity with the language, and an inability to translate it properly, as well as a desire to keep the common law for lawyers.
Gwen Seabourne
Lecturer in Law
University of Bristol
In Texas, the penalty for usury can be worse than death: you can lose your entire principal - even for "inadvertent" usuorious transactions.
John Q. Stilwell, Ph.D, UTD
stil9285
4808 Byron Avenue
Dallas, TX 75205
Phone/AnsMach/Fax: 214 520 8157
VoiceMail 214 969 4252
>>> Item number 1025, dated 95/01/17 16:22:17 -- ALL
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 16:22:17 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: Law French bibliography
From: mwidener@mail.law.utexas.edu (Mike Widener)
Luc Borot (not an h-law subscriber) asked me to post the following to H-LAW, and I'm happy to oblige.
MIKE WIDENER
Archivist/Rare Books Librarian
Tarlton Law Library, University of Texas at Austin
Internet: MWIDENER@MAIL.LAW.UTEXAS.EDU
--------------------ORIGINAL MESSAGE FOLLOWS--------------------------- Dear colleagues,
Some of you sent me references of law French, before the Christmas break. I promised I would send a recapitulation of the bibliography received. I hope I have not left too much aside, as I read my e-mail from 2 machines, and also store it in the two places... Anyway, it proved very helpful, and I am sure that others will also benefit from these references. I have left some of the details which you were kind enough to provide; this explains why the references are not always presented in the same way.
Enjoy,
Luc Borot
Bouvier, John, A law dictionary, adapted to the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and of the several states of the American union; with references to the civil and other systems of foreign law. Philadelphia, T. and J. W. Johnson, 1839 NOTE: "Appendix. A dictionary of the Norman of Old French language. By Robert Kelham ..."
Ronald Cantlie, "The French Language and the Common Law", 18 Manitoba L.J. 341 (1989)
Peter Goodrich, "Literacy and the Languages of the Early Common Law", 14 J.L. & Soc'y 422 (1987)
Kelham, Robert, A dictionary of the Norman or Old French language; collected from such acts of Parliament, Parliament rolls, journals, acts of state, records, law books, antient historians, and manuscripts as related to this nation. To which are added the laws of William, the Conqueror, with notes and references. By Robert Kelham. London, E. Brooke, 1779 NOTE: The part containing the laws of William the Conqueror has special t.-p. and separate paging, and includes the text in Norman and the Latin translation of Dr. Wilkins together with the English translation of Kelham
The law-French dictionary alphabetically digested : very useful for all young students in the common laws of England. To which is added , The law-Latin dictionary: being an alphabetical collection of such law-Latin words as are found in several authentic manuscripts, and printed books of precedents. London, D. Brown, J. Walthoe [etc.], 1718 NOTE: "The law-Latin dictionary" has special t.-p. Caption title for Law-Latin dictionary reads: The Pleader's dictionary
Anglo-Norman dictionary / Modern Humanities Research Association in conjunction with the Anglo-Norman Text Society ; under the general editorship of Louise W. Stone and William Rothwell; prepared for the press by T.B.W. Reid. London : Modern Humanities Research Association, 1977-Publications of the Modern Humanities Research Association. NB: for this reference, I have lost the number of volumes. Sorry.
Percy Winfield's "The Chief Sources of English Legal History" (1925)
*Universite Paul-Valery, Montpellier (France) * *phone: 33-67142448 - 33-67142449 - fax 33-67142465 *
>>> Item number 1058, dated 95/01/26 18:26:37 -- ALL
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 18:26:37 -0600 Reply-To: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> Sender: H-Net and ASLH Legal History Discussion list <H-LAW@UICVM.BITNET> From: Chris Waldrep <cfcrw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> Subject: Re: Law French bibliography
From: "Jordan D. Luttrell" <luttrell@netcom.com>
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > Some of you sent me references of law French, before the Christmas
> > break. I promised I would send a recapitulation of the bibliography
> > received. I hope I have not left too much aside, as I read my e-mail from 2
> > machines, and also store it in the two places... Anyway, it proved very
> > helpful, and I am sure that others will also benefit from these references.
> > I have left some of the details which you were kind enough to provide; this
> > explains why the references are not always presented in the same way.
> >
> > Enjoy,
> >
> > Luc Borot
Of the works Professor Borot listed, it may be worth noting the following:
> > Baker, J. H., Manual of Law French, Aldershot, Hampshire: Gower Publishing > > Group, Scolar Press, second edition 1990; ISBN 0-85967-745-1. It is quite > > expensive (about $75 US).
This work is still in print, and Professor Borot has got the price just about right.
> > Bouvier, John, A law dictionary, adapted to the Constitution and laws of > > the United States of America, and of the several states of the American > > union; with references to the civil and other systems of foreign law. > > Philadelphia, T. and J. W. Johnson, 1839 > > NOTE: "Appendix. A dictionary of the Norman of Old French language. By > > Robert Kelham ..."
This work has recently been reprinted, at, I believe $95.
> > Anglo-Norman dictionary / Modern Humanities Research Association in > > conjunction with the Anglo-Norman Text Society ; under the general > > editorship of Louise W. Stone and William Rothwell; prepared for the press > > by T.B.W. Reid. London : Modern Humanities Research Association, > > 1977-Publications of the Modern Humanities Research Association. > > NB: for this reference, I have lost the number of volumes. Sorry.
This work was originally printed in seven fascicles; it is still in print, and available either as originally published or in one bound volume. As originally published, it is about $550, and bound it is $600. Dr. Baker, in his Manual, views it quite favorably, particularly for the Year Book period.
Joe Luttrell
Meyer Boswell Books, Inc.