The Continental Monthly, Vol. 4, No. 5, November, 1863Various
History
The Continental Monthly, Vol. 4, No. 5, November, 1863
Various
Literature, Modern -- 19th century -- Periodicals; United States -- Politics and government -- 19th century -- Periodicals
The same William of Tyre tells us of a diet held at Neapolis in Samaria,
in the year 1120, 'at which, in order to banish from the land the
immoralities and crying abuses which had crept into it, there were
issued comprehensive regulations, embraced in twenty-five chapters; and
it seems from the form of the oath of the later kings that Amalrick I
and his son Baldwin IV had undertaken a formal revision of the
legislation.' It is therefore probable that we retain very little of the
system established _immediately_ upon the conquest. If we had no
evidence of revisions and changes, the sad and unquiet times through
which Godfrey had to pass would fully justify this conjecture.
But let us hear what tradition says in regard to the external condition
of these laws:
'These assizes (vide chap. iv) were written each by itself in large
Gothic letters. The first letter at the beginning was illuminated
with gold, and all the rubrics and titles were written separately
in red, as well all the other assizes as those of the higher and
those of the burghers' court. Each sheet had the signature and seal
of the king, the patriarch, and the viscount of Jerusalem, and
these sheets were called 'Letters of the Sepulchre,'[9] because
they were kept in a great chest in the Holy Sepulchre. Whenever a
question arose in court in regard to an assize, making it necessary
to consult these writings, the chest was opened in the presence of
nine persons. The king must either be there personally or be
represented by a crown official, and then two vassals of the king,
the patriarch of Jerusalem, or in his place the prior of the Holy
Sepulchre, two canons, the viscount of Jerusalem, and two sworn
citizens. So the assizes were made--so they were kept.'
These statements have proceeded upon the supposition that this law book
was for the whole kingdom; but history has preserved facts which look to
the conclusion that this was law only for the principality of Syria. But
when we consider that these assizes actually procured for themselves a
recognition beyond the bounds of the kingdom, and that no special law
for the other three grand divisions has ever been found, we shall be
constrained to regard this system of law as that of all the provinces.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account