|
Volume 6, Number 2 (1982) reprinted by permission Legal Studies Forum LAWYERS IN CHAUCER'S TIME BETSY SEAMAN* cote, Chaucer's Man of Law appears to be a sober and venerable fellow. The Host describes him as discreet and "of great reverance - He seemed swich, his wordes weren so wise." (ll. 314-315)l We learn that he is possessed of myriad robes, exceptional memory and some social prominence. Our attention is directed at his ability to draft a deed so cleverly that "ther coude no wight pinchen at his writing." (1. 328) But beyond the business of professional credentials, the Man of Law invites speculation. Whether he boasts balding pate or sanguine complexion is not mentioned by the Host. Nor is a glimpse given of his personality, sense of humor, or lack thereof. Perhaps the Host's silence as to the Man of Law's character is a polite, if not altogether comfortable, way of cluing us in that he is a staid sort. Perhaps the Man of Law finds his enthusiasm pricked more by the prospect of memorizing statutes than playing cards. When contrasted with the flamboyant Wife of Bath, her scarlet stockings and her five husbands, he admittedly seems less engaging. And yet the Man of Law too is betrayed as humanly fallible when the Host notes, Nowher so bisy a man as he ther nas;This observation is no less accurate now than it was in the fourteenth century. Literature has portrayed lawyers as busy-bodies, talkers, and meddlers for centuries, and the Man of Law is no exception. Often such depiction reflects a popular sentiment that suspects professionals of insincerity for causes in which they are paid to take part. With lawyers this holds especially true. The very nature of legal work is hardly calculated to stir up feelings of affection. Nor can lay people be expected to relish paying an attorney to extricate them from their blunders. And if making money out of another person's quarrels and misfortunes is not condemnable enough, the lawyer's use of wits and ink to do so only makes matters more disagreeable. Manual toil for remuneration has always been deemed somehow more honest or respectable. It is not surprising then that Jack Cabe so crossly suggested, "The first thing we do, let's hang all the lawyers." Nor should we blink at Dr. Johnson's polite dictum that "he did not wish to speak ill of any man behind his back but he thought the gentleman was an attorney.2 How such public opinion came to be entrenched is beyond the scope of this paper. But an examination of the Man of Law as a typical fourteenth century attorney, his background and practice, can perhaps identify and put in order the origins of these unfriendly sentiments. Chaucer himself was a sometime student of the law, and it is fair to say his Man of Law accurately reflects the legal profession as it existed during the thirteen hundreds. In support of the contention that Chaucer studied law, Thomas Speght noted in a 1598 edition of Chaucer's work that, Yt semeth that these lerned manne (Chaucer and Gower)The Inner Temple referred to by Speght was one of the Inns of Court, medieval organizations established for the teaching and study of the common law. It is difficult to construct an account of the domestic history of the Inns prior to 1505. Whatever records existed concerning the occupation of the Temple by lawyers up to 1381 were destroyed by unruly peasant followers of Wat Tyler. Ascribing myriad ills to the chicanery of lawyers, the rabble burned their chambers together with their papers. What is clear, however, is that the Inns of Court were societies formed to regulate and protect a profession. And also, like their medieval counterpart, the guilds, they possessed a monopoly on the power to train and educate apprentices, to set fees, and to confer upon their members the right to practice their craft. By Chaucer's time England's main civil court, the Court of the Common Bench, had settled in London and taken up permanent chamber quarters in Westminster Hall. Other residents in the hall included the Courts of Chancery, the King's Bench, and the Exchequer. Nearby was St. Paul's Cathedral where Sergeants at Law interviewed clients on the great west porch. It was sensible and convenient, then, that professional pleaders and their apprentices took up living quarters in Inns or hospices located halfway between Westminster and St. Paul's. These boarding houses evolved into a complex legal university system: the Inns of Chancery where young barristers learned the rudiments of the legal craft, the Inns of Court which housed advocates and barristers not yet allowed to plead, and the Sargeants' Inns from which alone judges were selected. Approximately ten minor Inns comprised what was collectively called the Inns of Chancery. At any one time at least one hundred students, barristers, belonged to each of the ten Inns. After some time these students were taken into the major Inns known as the Inns of Court. Of these there were four, with roughly two hundred students attending each Inn.4 As a young barrister the Man of Law probably began his legal career in one of the ten Inns of Chancery. There in the company of other aspirants he studied the original writs and basic elements of the common law. Both teaching and learning methods in the fourteenth century were adapted to a lack of written texts. Before the invention of the printing press and the ensuing widespread dissemination of printed material, books were scarce. Therefore a Reader was employed. Chosen frorn among members of the Inn, a Reader either read to the class from a book or delivered a lecture. Students had no individual casebooks and we can only imagine the feverish pace at which they must have scribbled notes. One moment's inattention meant one bit of irretrievably lost information since there existed no text for later consultation. Readings were generally followed by moots or debates designed to ferret out daydreamers, frustrate poor note takers, eradicate confusion, and ensure that everyone understood and memorized the same lesson.5 Since the academic bill of fare was monotonous repetition of material, the superior student was predictably possessed of the keener memory. It must have been desperately tedious business but the Man of Law seems to have endured, for In termes hadde he caas and doomes alleHaving made two or so years of satisfactory progress at the Inns of Chancery, the Man of Law would have been admitted into the Inns of Court. The Inns of Court were not like the law schools of today. Rather, they were medieval universities where gentlemen's sons received training for careers as public officials. To be sure, law was studied, but with equal vigor so too was dancing, history, music, and divinity. A well-known account of the Inns of Court comes down to us from John Fortescue, a Sergeant and later a Chief Justice from 1444-1445. Since Fortescue was born before Chaucer died in 1400, the Temple he described is most likely the Temple as Chaucer and his Man of Law knew it.6 Of the Inns he wrote: There is both in the Inns of Court, and the Inns ofWhether the Inns were in fact successful in preserving their inhabitants from "the contagion of vice" is thrown into doubt by sundry cases reporting mischief by apprentices and clerks. Even Chaucer once succumbed to beating a man of the cloth on Fleetstreet. But Fortescue remained firm in his opinion and concluded on an idealistic note: There is hardly ever a disturbance there or quarrel orIt is worth noting that the expense of procuring an education amidst such harmony was burdensome. To sons of men of modest means it was nigh impossible. The cost of a legal education paled, however, when compared to the later expense of achieving the degree of Sergeant at Law. The effect of this somewhat elitist arrangement was to limit enrollment to those of prominent or wealthy families. Again, Fortescue advanced an opinion. Endorsing this system he wrote: Hence it is only the sons of men of standing who learnModern readers are cautioned to temper any indignation with a reminder that Fortescue's society was not an egalitarian one. It was rigidly hierarchical: peasants slopped pigs, pardoners sold indulgences, and those fortunate enough to be born gentlemen jealously guarded their status. In addition, dress codes prescribed by the sumptuary laws guaranteed instant identification of a man's occupation and status. And since student financial aid was simply not a medieval concept, we can safely surmise that the Man of Law was a man of substantial means. Despite the costliness of study at the Inns, it appears that such positions were coveted. A good number of the Man of Law's colleagues were not seriously engaged in the discipline of law. They were preparing for careers as business administrators and government officials.10 The presence of non-lawyers at the Inns is attested to by Chaucer's description of the Manciple, a Temple cook. Describing the Manciple's superiors Chaucer observed: Of maistres hoode he mo than tenLength of stay at the Inns was determined by the profession studied. Perhaps many aspiring lawyers despaired and became civil servants when faced with the arduous path leading to the practice of law. According to most accounts it took at least sixteen years from matriculation to graduate optimo jure at the bar.11 These sixteen years were an apprenticeship period for the Man of Law. During it he attended daily lectures, took notes, perhaps served as a Reader, and honed his forensic skills in endless moots. But quite apart from needing to know writs and legal processes the Man of Law needed to be proficient in English, Latin, and Norman French. Prior to the thirteen hundreds, French was the official language of English government and polite society. And while it gradually fell into disuse as a spoken tongue, it retained vitality in the courts where words and phrases had acquired technical meanings defying easy translation into English. A statute in the year 1362 addressed the ensuing confusion by ordering courts to conduct all proceedings in English.12 Lawyers, however, continued to frame their pleas in French until sometime in the seventeenth century. What resulted was an untidy and often bewildering muddle of languages: counsel commencing in French with a formal plea, switching to English to advance an argument and then breaking off again into French at unpredictable moments to express technicalities. Occasionally proceedings ground to a halt while someone ran to fetch a clerk able to decipher a Latin phrase on the court rolls. Under such circumstances it appears that a layman opting for self-representation would have been in trouble. In the unlikely event that he mastered the language barrier, the layman still had to hurdle cunning pleading procedures. A Year Book entry in the year 1310 records a case in which the technicalities of pleading confounded even an attorney: The attorney was acting in a claim for dower by a widowThe functions of pleader or counter, and attorney or apprentice, were separated as early as 1280 when it was decreed that "no counter be an attorney and no attorney a counter."14 A pleader or counter was a Sergeant who commanded an exclusive right of audience in the Court of Common Bench. As a master craftsman, his skill was studied by attorneys or apprentices. These apprentices had a right of audience in all courts other than the Common Bench. They were the medieval equivalent of modern barristers and it was from their ranks that Sergeants were recruited. In theory, then, lay persons with disputes in any court but the Common Bench could present their own claims. In practice, however, language and pleading complexities doomed them to failure without legal help. And while the profession must have enjoyed this as a convenient way of maintaining its exclusivity, popular resentment often ran high. Lines from an anonymous fourteenth-century song underscore the point: Attorneis in contre theih geten silver for noht:That attorneys were aware of their image appears clear in the following reprimand given to a client by his attorney: "Also I am enformyd that ye nosysed me saying that IWhat is less clear, however, is whether attorneys were distressed by public sentiment or took steps to dispell the criticism. The Man of Law certainly offers no opinion on the matter and we can only speculate as to his indifference or discomfort. In an effort to master the perplexing language and pleading procedures, the Man of Law spent a great deal of time monitoring activities in the Court of Common Bench. As an apprentice he had no privilege to appear before this court. Instead, he sat in a box or stand positioned to one side of the court. Known as the Crib, this stand allowed the Man of Law to study the tactics of Sergeants while taking notes on arguments, objections, rulings, and judgments.17 Carefully guarded and reread, this collection of notes served as a sort of legal textbook, an encyclopedia of practice containing solutions to a host of knotty problems. In addition, these hurriedly scribbled notes have been hailed as the precursors of the Year Books.18 No printed volumes of reporters existed. Apprentices simply took their notes home to decipher, amplify, and make legible. Copies of these notes were in turn given to scriptorium or writing rooms where they were dictated to scribes who followed along as best they could. Inevitably, blunders, ink blots, and cryptic abbreviations crept in. A hopeless mass of corruption often resulted and as Maitland commented, "Those who have attempted to read them (the Year Books) will know how bad, how incorrigibly bad they are."19 But whatever their shortcomings, the Year Books became an invaluable help to the medieval lawyer in preserving the common law. Without them the Man of Law undoubtedly could not have known by rote all the cases and decisions "that from the time of King William were falle." (l. 26) As the years of his apprenticeship lengthened into still more years, we can only wonder what gave the Man of Law stamina to go on. Again he gives no glimpse into his personal, sporting, or leisure time. But if we believe what the Year Books tell us, the Man of Law, like his medieval peers, probably imbibed generously. Beer drinking had become a favorite pastime long before the fourteenth century and the chronicles are filled with accounts of ale-related mischief. Even judges riding the circuit made beer a priority. They traveled in the company of four knights who visited all the taverns in assize towns to personally taste and approve the drink sold in each establishment.20 Perhaps this custom inspired Strethay, an attorney concerned with Gloucestershire cases in the Court of Common Pleas, to jot down the following song on one of the membranes of a Plea Roll in 1371: Twice two full quarts we lawyers need,In light of the academic rigors lawyers endured, their fondness for drink admittedly seems forgivable. Sixteen years of note- taking would drive many men to drink. Happily, the Man of Law survived both writer's cramp and ale, for we know he was eventually made a Sergeant. The occasion spelled the end of a sixteen-year apprenticeship and inspired a week of unparalleled feasting and merriment. The Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas commenced the procedure of graduating apprentices into the ranks of Sergeants. Upon the advice and consent of the other Judges, he selected three to seven of the "discreeter persons" who had demonstrated the greatest proficiency in their legal studies and who were of high moral character. These names were put into writing and given to the Lord High Chancellor of England. The Chancellor in turn ordered by royal writ that each "discreeter person" present himself before the King on a given day. Under a heavy penalty stated in the writ, the candidate then took upon himself the estate and degree of Sergeant at Law. This was accompanied by a swearing on the Holy Gospels to appear at a later appointed time to receive the rank of Sergeant and grant gold rings according to established custom.22 According to Fortescue, the appointments were at once a solemn and joyous occasion. The newly chosen Sergeants were expected to host sumptuous feasts which continued for seven days. Likened to a coronation, no expense was to be spared in the celebration. Presents of gold rings were given to an endless list of princes, dukes, clergy, petty officials, lords, knights, and men of social prominence. Each ring was of a different value in proportion to the rank and quality of the recipient. Indeed, it seems as if every remote acquaintance heralded the event with an outstretched hand. Fortescue noted that rings were so generously distributed that there will not be the meanest clerk, especially inRings were generally inscribed with a motto of some sort. Without question their giving was a costly custom. But we can only wonder whether the recipients greeted the prospect of yet another gold ring with enthusiasm or resignation. The Sergeant's feast was another expensive and extravagant undertaking. A glimpse of its sumptuous character is given by Sir William Dugdale who recorded the pecuniary and gastronomic details of a Sergeant's feast hosted in 1555. Slaughtered birds and beasts included twenty-five beeves, one hundred fat muttons, fifty-one great veals, thirty-four porks, ninety-one pigs, nineteen and a half capons, twenty-one dozen and nine cocks, an uncounted number of pullets, thirty-seven dozen pigeons, fourteen dozen swans, and three hundred and forty larks. The astonishing quantity of food consumed can be better appreciated after a look at the menu. Each table of four was served the following: a shield of brawn, two capons boiled in white broth, one roasted swan, one roasted bustard, two chewet pies, two pikes, two roasted capons, two large baked venison pasties, two herns and bitterns, two roasted pheasants, and two custards. The same four men then consumed an enormous second course. it consisted of one dozen jellies, one crane, six partridges, two pasties of red deer, a large jowl of sturgeon, twelve woodcocks and plovers, four baked quince pies, six young rabbits, six snipes, one and one-half dozen larks and one marchane. A wax sculp- ture of the Court of Common Pleas graced the table and the tab came to 667p.7s.7d. or about $60,000.24 Presiding over his hearty eaters, the Man of Law would have sported a newly acquired coif. Conferred upon him as a visible trapping of status, the coif came in time to be an emblem of the entire profession. It was a tight-fitting cap of white silk or linen which covered a Sergeant's hair and ears and fastened under his chin. The following passage indicates both the importance of the coif and the prestige accompanying it: Each wears a white silk coif which is the first andThe rest of the Man of Law's dress was strictly regulated by the medieval sumptuary laws. Chaucer notes that of "robes hadde he many oon."(l. 319) For ordinary occasions the Man of Law probably wore a long priest-like woolen gown, a cape furred with squirrel or lambskin, a hood with two labels or tippets, and his ever-present white coif. In court he donned a parti-colored robe of green and blue. Striped or rayed either vertically or horizontally, the division of colors separated straight down the front and back of the robe.26 Since the privilege of wearing court robes was also conferred upon other courtroom figures, a medieval trial must have been a colorful drama. Attorneys robed themselves in parti-colored blue and brown, Judges turned out in white coifs and scarlet robes, and thus nobody could boast a good excuse for confusing the participants. While medieval people were an unruly and litigous lot, the practicing bar of Sergeants remained small. The Year Books for 1389-1390 provide a yardstick by which to measure their numbers. They record the names of only nine Sergeants who appeared frequently, led by Hankford, who appeared no less than twenty times, followed by his brethren Markham with seventeen appearances and Goscoyen with fifteen.27 Because the number of Sergeants was few and their fraternity tight, professional misbehavior was subject primarily to peer rebuke. Medieval lawyers did not practice under a model code of professional responsibility. The Statute of Westminster 1275 did, however, address their conduct: If any Sergeant, Pleader, or other, do any manner ofEvidence indicates that Judges dealt strictly with errant attorneys when instances of neglect or pure chicanery came to their attention. In one case an attorney failed to comply with required formalities and caused a woman to be delayed in her dower. He was told,"You will go to gaol until you are well chastized.",29 Little evidence exists, however, as to how less egregious behavior was punished. Thus it appears that the administration of disciplinary action was at best a haphazard business. Among themselves the Man of Law's colleagues rarely became embroiled in "any manner of deceit." Records show that in 1293 a Sergeant "swore by his hood" in Court, an awful profanity but excusable in light of opposing counsel's unreasonable conduct.30 Judges and counsel alike were fond of swearing by God, St. James, St. Nicholas, and St. Ivanius, the patron saint of lawyers and "the only advocate ever to be canonized."31 And the Year Books tell us that Bereford J. about 1300 "swore" frequently. But despite their mild oaths it appears that Sergeants and Justices were neither over-courteous nor over-respectful to each other. Sergeant Grene told Kelleshul J. that what he said was not law,32 and Bereford J. belittled the Sergeants in attendance at Court by remarking, "There are forty fools here who think nonsense."33 These exchanges occurred in Westminster Hall, a noisy and not over-restful place. In addition to housing the Court of Common Pleas, Chancery, King's Bench, and Exchequer, Westminster contained dozens of stalls of merchandise. Selling refreshments, ink, parchment, and pens, these stalls contributed to an atmosphere of clamor and disorder. The following account captures something of the flavor of the Hall as the Man of Law knew it: The fact I want to bring home to you is this. WestminsterWhen not consulting clients on the parvis of St. Pauls or elbowing through the throng at Westminster, the Man of Law rode the circuit: Justice he was ful often in assiseSergeants often were appointed by patent and commission to serve in the itinerant courts for short periods of time. Assize duty entailed traveling to counties in England and Wales for the periodic trial of both civil and criminal cases. A patent was an appointment to serve as a judge and a commission spelled out the range of his jurisdiction.35 This system did obviate the necessity of litigants coming all the way to London to air their disputes. Unfortunately for the Man of Law, it required him to spend a good deal of time on foot or on horseback. Medieval travelers were at the mercy of inclement weather as well as poor or nonexistent roads. And with mud, floods and dust the rule rather than the exception, it is no wonder that Judges sent ahead a band of knights to test the local taverns. Juries as well as Sergeants found assize duty frequently unpleasant. Unlike their modern counterparts, medieval juries which were hopelessly split in opinion were locked up indefinitely without food or drink. "Good people," said Stanton J. to such a jury, "you cannot agree? Go, put them in a house till Monday, and let them not eat or drink."36 This had the desired effect, for on the same day "about vesper time" they came to a consensus. Judges promptly left a village once their own legal business was concluded. Thus a divided jury might be dragged from assize-town to assize-town until they could make up their minds.37 But the discomfort of assize duty lessens when the issue of compensation arises. Fortescue bluntly stated that, "Neither does it happen, that in any other country, an Advocate enriches himself so much by his practice as a Sergeant at Law."38 It is unprofitable to attempt reducing the Man of Law's earnings into some modern-day equivalent. The difference in the value of money and the level of income then and now is so great as to render any figures meaningless. The most useful assessment of his financial status can be obtained from the poll tax of 1379. Among lawyers, Judges headed the list at 100 s. Next came Sergeants at 40 s., followed by apprentices at 20 s. Last of all came "all the other apprentices of the lesser estate and attorneys" at 6 s. 8 d. Other community members on the same tax basis were esquires, merchants and Franklins.39 Appointment ceremonies clearly required a substantial income or the expectation of one. So too did sixteen years of Temple education. Indeed money is a constant theme running through the history of the legal profession. It seems that no sooner had lawyers required payment for their services than there were complaints about their avarice. John Gower was one of the more eloquent and acerbic critics of lawyers. A former Temple student himself, Gower wrote with some authority on the subject of fees and greed: It is the custom at Westminster Some money, in order to mount up high. The "great return" mentioned by Gower came to the Man of Law in the form of a retainer and an annual gift of a robe. Retainer fees were set somewhere around the value of one mark. Later they were set at an angel, a gold coin ranging in value from six to ten shillings. That counsel expected to be paid before rendering legal service is suggested by an old riddle, "Why is a Sergeant like Balaam's ass? Because he won't speak until he has seen an angel."41 The annual robe was not merely a single garment. Rather, it was an entire suit of clothes of a certain value for life or for a term of years. The records are silent as to which party selected the outfit and we can only wonder if the Sergeant suffered with a wardrobe unsuited to his tastes. But robes and fees alone probably would not have made a Sergeant a wealthy man. The Man of Law seems to have made his money as a real estate investor. Chaucer describes him as a speculator in land: So greet a purchasour was nowher noon;Contemporary criticism and envy notwithstanding, the Man of Law had some reason to be concerned with money. The cost of his legal training, feast, and ring-giving has already been mentioned. In addition, upon becoming a Sergeant, the Man of Law was under a duty to give legal advice to any of the King's subjects, regardless of their ability to pay. No documentation exists as to whether such pro bono work was considered in the line of duty or an unwelcome nuisance. Nevertheless, he was bound by the following oath: Well and truly ye shall serve the Kings people as one ofThe Man of Law admittedly took a keen interest in pecuniary matters. It is his most disagreeable characteristic and he exposes it fully in his prologue. For thirty-five lines he deplores the evils of poverty, the bad lot of poor men, and advances the opinion that "Bet is to dyen than have indigence." (l. 114) In sharp contrast to his disapproval of indigence, he showers happy praise upon "riche marchauntz." Three different arguments have been advanced in explanation of the Man of Law's passionate aversion to poverty. One line of reasoning holds that he deplores poverty because it makes men wicked and tempts them to break the law: "Margree thyn heed, thou most forA second and less flattering theory attributes his distaste to the fact that as a Sergeant he was enjoined from refusing to give counsel to the empty-handed.43 And still a third explanation comes from John M. Manly. Manly suggests that Chaucer modelled the Man of Law after a contemporary named Thomas Pynchbek.44 When this Pynchbek began his career in the mid- fourteenth century his family was landless. Records show that he was involved in numerous land transactions and that his industry in acquiring property made him a wealthy landowner. He was made a Sergeant around 1376 and must have had a large income to pay for his rings and feast. It would be characteristic of such a man to feel that "alle the dayes of poore men been wikke./Be war therfore er thou come to that prikke!" (ll. 118-119) It is curious to note that the surname Pynchbek became a common term for thrift. It is later recorded as meaning "miserly," "close-fisted," and "a dry fellow of whom nothing may be gotten."45 Whichever line of reasoning is correct, the later meanings of Pynchbek have come to be recognized as proverbial lawyer's traits. Nothing points to direct evidence of close-fistedness on the Man of Law's part. Thrift is concededly one of his cherished values. But being a "dry fellow," a man with a fondness for sonorous speech is not so disagreeable as to justify labeling him a rascal or a cheat - words often muttered in the same breath as lawyer. Popular resentment against men like the Man of Law ran high in the thirteen hundreds, much as it does today. It is hard to discern whether this sentiment was in fact the result of the legal profession's greed, or merely human envy. But surely a keen interest in finances is no more indigenous to lawyers than to others who work for a living. What we have, then, is neither a rogue nor a miser. Rather we have a Man of Law who dedicated his energy and intellect to putting order and dignity into the confusion called human life. Learned, perhaps tedious at times, he was part of a medieval tradition that fashioned "wise restraints to make men free."46 And when we reflect how far he came and through what rigors, with what remarkable enthusiasm for learning, it seems impertinent of us to greet him with any other attitude than affection. * Cardozo Law School, Yeshiva University Donaldson's edition, Chaucer's Poetry, Second edition (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1975). 2. A short anthology of similar quotations appears in The Law Times, Vol. 104 (1897) at pp. 204-205. 3. Edith Rickert advanced this piece of evidence. (Rickert, Edith. "Was Chaucer a Student at the Inner Temple?" in The Manly Anniversary Studies in Language and Literature, pp. 20-31. From the records of the inner Temple it appears that Master Buckley, or "Bulkeley," was the chief butler and librarian of the House in 1564. 4. Herman Cohen, History of the English Bar (London: Sweet & Maxwell Ltd., 1929), p. 500 5. The scarcity of books prompted the following admonition n 1345: Again, it is only decent that we scholars, when we return Edith Rickert, Chaucer's World (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948), pp. 119-120. 6. Cohen, p. 492. 7. John M. Manly, Some New Light on Chaucer (Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1959), p. 16. 8. Cohen, p. 501. 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid. 11. Manly, pp. 33-38. 12. Michael Birks, Gentlemen of the Law (London: Stevens Sons Ltd., 1960), p. 42. 13. Birks, p. 47. 14. Birks, p. 48. 15. Henry Kirk, Portrait of a Profession (London: Oyez Publishing, 1976), p. 11. 16. Anonymous, unpublished letter from a fifteenth- century attorney to his client. 17. William Craddock Bolland, Manual of Year Book Studies (London: Cambridge at the University Press, 1925), p. 31. 18. Bolland, p. 10. 19. Bolland, p. 39. 20. Bolland, p. 56. 21. Rickert, P. 239. 22. Cohen, p. 52. 23. Manly, pp. 137-40. 24. Manly, pp. 142-43. 25. Cohen, p. 368. 26. Manly, p. 148. 27. Kirk, p. 8. 28. Cohen, pp. 189-90. 29. Broke v. Tayland, Kirk, p. 163. 30. Cohen, p. 220. 31. Cohen, p. 221. 32. Year Books (Rolls Series), 19 Edward III, p. 137. 33. Bolland, p. 35. 34. Bolland, pp. 36-37. 35. Manly, P. 152. 36. Bolland, p. 97. 37. Selden Society, Year Book Series, IV, p. 188. 38. Manly, pp. 137-40. 39. Kirk, p. 11. 40. John Gower, Mirour de I'Homme. 41. Bolland, p. 76. 42. Cohen, P. 518. 43. Walter Scheps, "Chaucer's Man of Law and the Tale of Constance," PMLA, 89, 1974, p. 288. 44. Manly, pp. 137-57. 45. Manly, p. 154. 46. Commencement remarks by Justice Blackmun at the University of Minnesota, May 14, 1982. BIBLIOGRAPHY England." PMLA, XCII, 1977, 941-951. Baum, Paul. "The Man of Law's Tale." Modern Language Notes, 64, 1949, pp. 12-14. Bellot, Hugh H. L. The Inner and Middle Temple London: Methuen & Company, 1902. Birks, Michael. Gentlemen of the Law. London: Stevens & Sons Limited, 1960. Bloch, Edward. "Originality, Controlling Purpose and Craftsmanship in Chaucer's Man of Law Tale." PMLA, 68, 1953, pp. 572-616. Bloomfield, Morton. "The Man of Law's Tale: A Tragedy of Victimization and a Christian Comedy." PMLA, 87, 1972, pp. 384-390. Bolland, William Craddock. Manual of Year Book Studies. London: Cambridge at the University Press, 1925. Bronson, Bertrand. In Search of Chaucer. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1960. Brown, Carleton. "The Man of Law's Head-Link and the Prologue of the Man of Law's Tale." Studies In Philology 34, 1937, pp. 8-35. Chaucer's Poetry. Ed. E. T. Donaldson. New York: The Ronald Press, 1975. Chaucer's World. Ed. Edith Rickert. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948. Cohen, Herman. History of the English Bar. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Ltd., 1929. Coulton, G. G. Chaucer and His England. New York: Russell & Russell, 1957. Frost, William. The Age of Chaucer. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1961. Hammond, Elizabeth P. Chaucer: A Bibliographical Manual. New York, 1908. Holmes, George. The Later Middle Ages 1272-1485. New York: Norton & Company, Inc., 1966. Howard, Donald R. "Chaucer the man." PMLA, 80 (1965), 337-343. Huppe, Bernard. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1964. Inns Ancient and Modern. The Selden Society Lecture for 1971 by Hon. Mr. Justice Megarry. London: Selden Society, 1972. Kirk, Henry. Portrait of a Profession. London: Oyez Publishing, 1976. Kittredge, G. L. Chaucer and His Poetry. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. Knowlton, E. C. "Chaucer's Man of Law." Journal of English and German Philology, 23, 1924, p. 85. Lawlor, John. Chaucer. New York: Harper, 1968. Lewis, Robert Enzer. "Chaucer's Artistic Use of Pope Innocent's De Miseria Humane Conditionis in the Man of Law's Prologue and Tale." PMLA, 81, 1966, pp. 485-492. Literary History of England. A. Ed. Albert C. Baugh. New York, 1948. Lumiansky, R. M. Of Sondry Folk. Austin, University of Texas, 1955, pp. 61-71. Malone, Kemp. Chapters on Chaucer. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1951. Manly, John M. Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. New York, 1928. Manly, John M. Some New Light on Chaucer. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1959. Poole, Austin L. Medieval England. Revised edition, 2 vols., Oxford, England, 1958. Reinhard, J. R. "Setting Adrift in Medieval Law and Literature". PMLA, LVI, 1, 1941, 33-68. Ruggiers, Paul G. The Art of the Canterbury Tales. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 19T7. Scheps, Walter. "Chaucer's Man of Law and the Tale of Constance." PMLA, 89, 1974, pp. 285-295. Southern, R. W. The Making of the Middle Ages. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953. Warren, Edward H. "Sergeants-at-Law: The Order of the Coif." Virginia Law Review 28, 1942. Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, The. Ed. F. N. Robinson. Second edition. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1957. |
