{"title":"公元1200-1500年中世纪普通法中的妇女","authors":"Rebecca Mason","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2022.2096295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contradictions swirl around the existing scholarship devoted to the study of women and the law in medieval England. Some scholars stress women’s limited legal status in the medieval common law, with particular focus on the debilitating effects of the common law doctrine of coverture, which stripped women of their independent legal status on marriage. Others point to evidence of medieval women negotiating the boundaries of patriarchal legal structures in jurisdictions that did not necessarily follow common law, with courts that practiced equity, ecclesiastical and customary law allowing women to sue or be sued, regardless of their marital status. InWomen in the Medieval Common Law, c. 1200-1500, Gwen Seabourne takes a rather different view. Instead of focusing on definitive or authoritative statements on the legal position of women in the medieval common law, or uncovering exceptional women rebelling against the constraints imposed upon them by common law, Seabourne suggests that we should take a more measured approach and meet somewhere in the middle. In her new book, Seabourne argues that medieval lawyers and legal thinkers did not necessarily think of women’s legal actions based on definitive and authoritative statements of fixed rules, even in common law jurisdictions. When we consider the inherent complexities of common law thinking in medieval England, a more nuanced picture of women in the medieval common law emerges. This book addresses a major lacunae in present research by complicating our understanding of the treatment of women in the medieval common law in England and, in particular, the complex roots of the common law doctrine of coverture. In her introduction, Seabourne explains how she carefully gathered scattered statements about the treatment and position of women in common law sources including statutes and other legislative acts, records of the courts of common law, law reports and legal writings in order to stitch together a more nuanced, complete picture that challenges long-standing assumptions of","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"16 1","pages":"145 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Women in the Medieval Common Law c. 1200-1500\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca Mason\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17521483.2022.2096295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Contradictions swirl around the existing scholarship devoted to the study of women and the law in medieval England. Some scholars stress women’s limited legal status in the medieval common law, with particular focus on the debilitating effects of the common law doctrine of coverture, which stripped women of their independent legal status on marriage. Others point to evidence of medieval women negotiating the boundaries of patriarchal legal structures in jurisdictions that did not necessarily follow common law, with courts that practiced equity, ecclesiastical and customary law allowing women to sue or be sued, regardless of their marital status. InWomen in the Medieval Common Law, c. 1200-1500, Gwen Seabourne takes a rather different view. Instead of focusing on definitive or authoritative statements on the legal position of women in the medieval common law, or uncovering exceptional women rebelling against the constraints imposed upon them by common law, Seabourne suggests that we should take a more measured approach and meet somewhere in the middle. In her new book, Seabourne argues that medieval lawyers and legal thinkers did not necessarily think of women’s legal actions based on definitive and authoritative statements of fixed rules, even in common law jurisdictions. When we consider the inherent complexities of common law thinking in medieval England, a more nuanced picture of women in the medieval common law emerges. This book addresses a major lacunae in present research by complicating our understanding of the treatment of women in the medieval common law in England and, in particular, the complex roots of the common law doctrine of coverture. In her introduction, Seabourne explains how she carefully gathered scattered statements about the treatment and position of women in common law sources including statutes and other legislative acts, records of the courts of common law, law reports and legal writings in order to stitch together a more nuanced, complete picture that challenges long-standing assumptions of\",\"PeriodicalId\":42313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Humanities\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"145 - 148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2022.2096295\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2022.2096295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Contradictions swirl around the existing scholarship devoted to the study of women and the law in medieval England. Some scholars stress women’s limited legal status in the medieval common law, with particular focus on the debilitating effects of the common law doctrine of coverture, which stripped women of their independent legal status on marriage. Others point to evidence of medieval women negotiating the boundaries of patriarchal legal structures in jurisdictions that did not necessarily follow common law, with courts that practiced equity, ecclesiastical and customary law allowing women to sue or be sued, regardless of their marital status. InWomen in the Medieval Common Law, c. 1200-1500, Gwen Seabourne takes a rather different view. Instead of focusing on definitive or authoritative statements on the legal position of women in the medieval common law, or uncovering exceptional women rebelling against the constraints imposed upon them by common law, Seabourne suggests that we should take a more measured approach and meet somewhere in the middle. In her new book, Seabourne argues that medieval lawyers and legal thinkers did not necessarily think of women’s legal actions based on definitive and authoritative statements of fixed rules, even in common law jurisdictions. When we consider the inherent complexities of common law thinking in medieval England, a more nuanced picture of women in the medieval common law emerges. This book addresses a major lacunae in present research by complicating our understanding of the treatment of women in the medieval common law in England and, in particular, the complex roots of the common law doctrine of coverture. In her introduction, Seabourne explains how she carefully gathered scattered statements about the treatment and position of women in common law sources including statutes and other legislative acts, records of the courts of common law, law reports and legal writings in order to stitch together a more nuanced, complete picture that challenges long-standing assumptions of
期刊介绍:
Law and Humanities is a peer-reviewed journal, providing a forum for scholarly discourse within the arts and humanities around the subject of law. For this purpose, the arts and humanities disciplines are taken to include literature, history (including history of art), philosophy, theology, classics and the whole spectrum of performance and representational arts. The remit of the journal does not extend to consideration of the laws that regulate practical aspects of the arts and humanities (such as the law of intellectual property). Law and Humanities is principally concerned to engage with those aspects of human experience which are not empirically quantifiable or scientifically predictable. Each issue will carry four or five major articles of between 8,000 and 12,000 words each. The journal will also carry shorter papers (up to 4,000 words) sharing good practice in law and humanities education; reports of conferences; reviews of books, exhibitions, plays, concerts and other artistic publications.