Strange as it may seem, not only during the civil conflicts in the early
days of Guy's reign, but during the turmoil and warfare which succeeded
them, Bruges increased alike in prosperity, and comeliness, and might.
True, she lost her charters when the belfry was burned down in 1280.
Some said that the Count himself had fired it with a view to their
destruction, and the new law which Guy had promulgated on May 25, 1281,
as the burghers bitterly complained to the French King, was not worthy
of the name of law, 'seeing that amongst other errors it ordained that
criminals, in certain cases, should not be served with notice of trial
nor suffered to state their defence, and that all the ancient rights and
liberties of the city were either abrogated or curtailed.' Nevertheless,
when Guy was hard pressed by Philippe le Bel, in order to conciliate the
burghers he had re-established the ancient charter, and when in 1297
Philippe annexed Flanders, he, in his turn, confirmed it. Finally, after
the expulsion of the French in 1304, one of Guy's sons, Philip of
Thielt, who was at that time carrying on the government in the name of
his captive father, filled with gratitude at the part which Bruges had
taken, granted her a new and most liberal charter, in which all her old
liberties were confirmed and even extended. This charter was probably
drawn up by the sheriffs of Bruges themselves. When Robert of Bethune
ascended the throne, in 1305, he at once confirmed it. Every succeeding
Count, when he first entered the city, solemnly swore to maintain it
intact, and it remained the fundamental basis of the civil and criminal
law of Bruges until 1619.
The charter in question contains seventy articles, forty-eight of which
deal with criminal law, and the remainder with civil law. Many of them
express a breadth of view and liberality of spirit which, considering
the epoch at which they were drawn up, is not a little surprising.
Gheldorf in his _Ville de Bruges_ (p. 321, etc.) gives the whole
document in the original Flemish.
Note, amongst not a few prudent enactments, Article 33. It is so
interesting, and denotes so clearly what progress Bruges had now made in
the paths of law and order, that we cannot pass it over in silence. By
it the citizen of Bruges was entirely set free from the superstitious
and barbarous obligation of trial by battle. Henceforth, any man
convicted of sending a challenge to a burgher was liable to a fine of
sixty livres, in these days no small sum.
If such challenge had been accepted, half of the fine went to the Count,
and half to the town, and the challenged burgher was also mulcted in a
similar sum; if, however, he had refused the challenge he himself
received a quarter of the fine, and, in that case, the Count received
his full thirty livres, and the town only fifteen. Any man amenable to
the city magistrates, who had lived for a year and a day within the
limits of the city franchise and paid his taxes, was considered a
citizen.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account