We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The second chapter focuses on a key and highly contested figure of European legal modernity: Robert Joseph Pothier. A visionary whose legal creativity was wholly projected into the future for some, and a lucid and pragmatic seventeenth-century mind for others, Pothier, working with preexisting materials facilitated the conceptual leap from medieval divided dominium to modern property as unitary and robust dominium.
Holding land ‘in fee’ was an idea central to the Normans. A fee was land which was part of a relationship to which tenure was central. Land in ‘fee simple’ was ‘land held hereditarily, by service’. This chapter looks at how these feudal ideas played out in the English countryside. After the Conquest a link was being established between tenure and doing ‘homage’ for land. and there is an ongoing debate over whether this was expressed in the Oath of Salisbury, and whether there was a connection between the Oath and the Domesday survey. The second part of the chapter is an enquiry into the means by which peasant tenures too became ‘feudalised’. Courts, and what a court consisted of, were changing. Before the Conquest the hundred and the shire, were the proper forum in which to settle disputes but for Norman lords taking over English lands jurisdiction over one’s ‘men’ was a valuable part of what lordship entailed. The procedures and vocabulary of hallmoots and manor courts show that, while incorporating the ideas inherent in feudal tenure, they retained something of the early notions of dispute settlement.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.