| 1279.005ss |
1279 |
Northumberland Eyre |
Naifty, Monstravit |
casus placitatus super brevi de nativo habendo
nota de naivitate
bref de nayvete
bref de monstravit
encoupement
Defens |
|
0 |
Edw. 1 |
Northumberland 1 |
122 SS 67-69 |
|
Lamplugh (N.) |
Ralph of (A. or W. de) |
|
|
|
Morton, Osbert of
Gilling, child of Osbert
Alan, son of Osbert
Bond, Adam (I), son of Gilling
Bond, Gerard, son of Gilling & father of defendant Thomas
William (I), son of Alan
Adam (II), son of Gilling
Rode, William, son of William (I)
Christine, daughter of William (I)
Alice, daughter of Adam (II)
Henry III, King of England |
|
|
| A. porta un bref de neyfte ver B. e amena sute de un home e deus femmes a prover qe il fust son neyf |
6 |
Dount dist la Justice: Femme ne deyt estre resceu en prove si en cas de matrimonye noun; E une voys est com nule
et duabus mulieribus, in probacione ex fragilitate non sunt admittende etc. et similiter masculus qui petitur dignior est muliere |
plaintiff brought suit consisting of one man and two women toprove that defendant was his villein; thus there remains as suit only a single man, and one voice is the same as no voice (french version of Latin maxim vox unius vox nullius)
the Justice said that no woman should be received in proof (as suit) except in a marriage case
two women ... are not admissible in proof because of their fragility, etc. and also ... the male (defendant) who is claimed (as villein) is more worthy than a female (version II)
The record had previously been printed in Three Early Assize Rolls for the County of Northumberland, ed. William Page (Surtees Society vol. 88, 1891), pp. 274-275; otheer versions of the enrollment are in CUL MS Ll. 4.18, at fols. 215v-216r, in BL MS Harley 493B, at fols. 31r-31v, and in BL MS Harley 2183, at fols. 15r-15v
Brand: The suit of kin produced by a lord in an action of Naifty consisted of two women and a man. The court held that the women were inadmissible, especially in a case where a male was being claimed, both because of their greater 'fragility' and because of the higher innate status enjoyed by males, and that a single male did not constitute adequate proof. The court dimissed [sic] the lord's claim and adjudged the defendant free in perpetuity.
(naifty) |
BL MS Lansdowne 467, fol. 118r
BL MS Harley 25, fol. 206r
HLS Library MS 24, fols. 14r-14v
HLS Library MS 33, fols. 284v-285r
BL MS Harley 1208, fols. 213r-214r
Worcester Cathedral Library MS Q. 36, fols. 169v-170r
Lambeth Palace Library MS 166, fols. 118v-119r |
|
version II had 10 lines; version III had 55 lines |
|
Paul A. Brand, The Earliest English Law Reports, vol. 3, 122 SS 63-65 (London 2005) (79 N' h' land. 1)
G.J. Turner and T.F.T. Plucknett, Brevia Placitata, 66 SS 214-216 |
| JUST 1/648, m. 7 |
0 |
|
|
2008-06-29 |
|
