Further Reading

This is not a comprehensive bibliography. It is a list of suggested reading reflecting the principal sources from which the relevant essay was drawn. Certain recent works not available when the essay was originally written have been noted or used.

A succinct overview of English legal history, very useful to supply broader con­text, is Sir John Baker's An Introduction to English Legal History, 4th ed. (London, 2002).

Glanvill

The best succinct commentary on Glanvill is G. D. G. Hall's introduction to his edition of Glanvill, the edition reprinted by the Legal Classics Library. The last word on Henry II must be W L. Warren's Henry II (Berkeley, 1973). Other, wider commentaries are T F. T Plucknett, Early English Legal Literature (Cambridge, 1958), and the two works by Raoul C. van Caenegem, his revolutionary introduc­tion to Royal Writs in Englandfrom the Conquest to Glanvill, 77 Selden Society (Lon­don, 1959) and a luminous series of lectures on The Birth of the English Common Law (Cambridge, 1973). S. F. C. Milsom, Historical Foundations of the Common Law (London, 1969), particularly the first two chapters, bears close reading. Most of the legislation of Henry II can be found in David C. Douglas's edited series volume, English Historical Documents, II: 1042-1189 (London, 1953). Two works by H. G. Richardson and G. O. Sayles, Law and Legislation from Aethelbert to Magna Carta (Edinburgh, 1966) and The Governance of Medieval England from the Conquest to Magna Carta (Edinburgh, 1963) are essential reading, as are Frank Barlow, The Feudal LFingdom of England (London, 1963), D. C. Douglas, William the Conqueror: The Norman Impact upon England (London, 1964), Frank Stenton, The First Century of English Feudalism (2d ed., Oxford, 1961), and Austin Lane Poole, From Domesday Book to Magna Carta (Oxford, 1951).

MAGNA CARTA

The literature on Magna Carta is vast. The texts of the various versions of the Char­ters have been reprinted on numerous occasions, in virtually every work of com­mentary on Magna Carta, quite aside from its appearance in collections of statutes. The first great commentary is, of course, that of Edward Coke, The Second Institutes (London, 1642). Modern scholarship is generally taken to have begun with William Blackstone’s The Great Charter and Charter of the Forest (Oxford, 1759). System­atic study of the Great Charter’s origins and subsequent history began with the twentieth century. W. S. McKechnie, Magna Carta (1905, amended 1914), however badly its history has dated, remains the fullest clause-by-clause exposition of the Charter.

The 700th anniversary of Runnymede produced Magna Carta Commemora­tion Essays, H. E. Malden, ed. (London, i9i7)-another casualty of the Great War, because it lacked the intended contributions of German scholars that had been planned for it, much of whose work was seminal. The essays by G. B. Adams, F. M. Powicke, and particularly H. D. Hazeltine and Paul Vinogradoff (this last on Clause 39) are still very useful. The 750th anniversary of Runnymde, under more auspicious circumstances, provided sparkling essays by S. E. Thorne, P. B. Kurland, W H. Dun­ham Jr., and Ivor Jennings published by the American Council of Learned Societ­ies, in The Great Charter (New York, 1966). The great English medievalist, Helen Maud Cam, gave a Selden Society lecture in 1965 entitled “Magna Carta-Event or Document,” which is brilliant in its insights and extraordinary in its sweep.

J. C. Holt, Magna Carta (Cambridge, 1965) is the sun in the firmament of the 750th anniversary, to be read with his The Northerners (Oxford, 1961), on the leading rebels against John. All subsequent Magna Carta research begins with Holt, who also pioneered the comparative study of the Great Charter from Continental coun­terparts.

The later history of Magna Carta is still dominated by Faith Thompson, whose The First Century of Magna Carta (Milwaukee, 1925) and Magna Carta: Its Role in the Making of the English Constitution, 1300-1629 (Milwaukee, 1948) have been superseded to the extent that the idea of an “English constitution” has been ques­tioned in J. G. A. Pocock, The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (Cambridge, 1957) and J. W. Gough, Fundamenta-I Law in English Constitutiona-I History (Oxford, 1961). Other useful works on the reception and history ofMagna Carta are The Roots of Liberty: Magna Carta, Ancient Constitution, and the Anglo-American Tradition of Rule of Law, Ellis Sandoz, ed. (Columbia, Missouri, 1993), which focuses on the ear­ly modern era, and Anthony Musson, Medieval Law in Context: The Growth ofLiberty from Magna Carta to the Peasants’ Revolt (Manchester, 2001). A useful introduction to the textual history of the Charter is offered by a British Library pamphlet, Magna Carta: Manuscripts and Myths, by Claire Breay (London, 2002).

LITTLETON

The fate of Thomas Littleton and his Tenures argues that admirers are more dangerous than detractors to an author's posthumous reputation. Coke did Little­ton scant favor in commending him to posterity, submerging both text and man. For Littleton's life we must still rely almost entirely on Eugene Wambaugh's intro­duction to his Littleton’s “Tenures” in English (Washington, 1903). Wambaugh's text likewise remains the most recent attempt at scholarly redaction. The serious student must begin (and end) with the twenty pages in Sir William Holdsworth, A History of English Law, III (London, 1909) pp. 571-591, along with Holdsworth's reflections in Some Makers of English Law (Cambridge, 1938) pp. 46-68. The Selden Society should take note: a new, critical edition of the Tenures would fill a genuine gap in English legal history.

FORTESCUE

One begins with the first volume of SirJohn Fortescue: His Life, Works, and Fam­ily History, compiled and edited by Thomas Fortescue, Lord Clermont and privately printed in 1869 in London. This contains the only edition of De Natura Legis Na­turae. The Governance of England was edited by Charles Plummer (Oxford, 1885), with a very scholarly though somewhat dated biography in the introduction. The most up-to-date edition and translation ofDe Laudibus is that of S. B. Chrimes, Sir John Fortescue, De Laudibus Legum Angliae (Cambridge, 1942). Chrimes's edition and collation of the various texts represented an enormous improvement, and his scholarly apparatus is essential to understanding the text. Shelley Lockwood's new edition of both De Laudibus and The Governance of England, in the Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought series, entitled Sir John Fortescue: On the Laws and Governance of England (Cambridge, 1997), provides the most convenient access to the texts and her introduction adds much to our sparse knowledge of the man.

Fortescue's works of political theory (as opposed to his work as a judge), have received much attention since Charles H.

HOOKER

There have been many editions of Hooker's Of the Laws OfEcclesiastical Polity. The gold standard today is the six-volume Folger Library Edition of the Works of Rich­ard Hooker (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1977-1981), for which W S. Hill was gen­eral editor. A thorough bibliography may be found in Studies in Richard Hooker: Essays Preliminary to an Edition of His Works, W. S. Hill, ed. (Cleveland, 1972).

Hooker's biography, published in 1665, was written by Izaak Walton, the author of The Compleat Angler—a charming piece, though not without considerable criti­cal edge. C. J. Sisson, TheJudicious Marriage of Mr. Hooker and the Birth of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1940) remains the most thor­oughgoing modern study of Hooker. The introductions to the Folger volumes, by Georges Edelen, W. S. Hill, P. G. Stanwood, J. E. Booty, and Laetitia Yeandle and Egil Grislis, are good and informative reading. Books I and VIII of Hooker's Laws were published among the Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (Cambridge, 1989), with a short, helpful introduction by A. S. McGrade. For Hooker's continuing influence see H. R. Trevor-Roper, Catholics, Anglicans, and Puritans (London, 1987). R. K. Faulkner, Richard Hooker and the Politics of a Chris­tian England (Berkeley, California, 1981) is a work of considerable exegesis.

Horton Davies, Worship and Theology in England: From Cranmer to Hooker, 1534­1603 (Princeton, 1970) and From Andrewes to Baxter and Fox, 1603-1690 (Princeton, 1975) provide brilliant insights. The best studies of Hooker's Puritan challengers are two books by Patrick Collinson, The Elizabethan Puritan Movement (London 1967) and The Religion of Protestants (Oxford, 1982).

JAMES VI & I

The Workes of James, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland (London, 1616), STC 14344, second issue with supplement STC 14345, provided the basis for C. H. McIlwain's The Political Works of James I Reprinted from the Edition of 1616 (Cam­bridge, Massachusetts, 1918). This was the edition returned to print by the Legal Classics Library. McIlwain provided the major political works but not all of the polemical pieces aimed at Roman Catholic apologists, and none of the writings on witchcraft. More recently, J. P. Sommerville has edited, for the series of Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought, King James VI and I: Political Writings (Cambridge, 1994).

There are many older biographies ofJames. Most of them are highly critical, and inevitably look back on James through the prism of the English Civil War. David Harris Willson's James VI and I (London, 1956), at best shows scant sympathy for its subject. Jenny Wormald, particularly in her Oxford DNB biography of James, treats much more positively and clearly the king's abilities and successes. Robert Ashton's collection, James I by His Contemporaries (London, 1969), is especially useful in see­ing James as others saw him, while Letters of King James VI & I, G. P. V Akrigg, ed. (Berkeley, 1984) shows James as the king presented himself. Two very useful collections of original essays on the king's career are The Reign of James VI and I, ed. A. G. R. Smith (London, 1973), and The Reign of James VI, Julian Goodare & Mi­chael Lynch, eds. (East Linton, Scotland, 2000). Conrad Russell revised the portrait of James and his era in The Crisis of Parliaments: English History 1509-1660 (Oxford, 1971) and James's parliamentary troubles in Parliaments and English Politics 1621-1629 (Oxford, 1979). Recent scholarship by Leeds Barroll, Helen Payne, and Clare Mc­Manus gives life and some importance to James's queen, Anne of Denmark.

BACON

Bacon's own writings, including much of his correspondence, are readily avail­able in the splendid edition devotedly overseen by James Spedding: The Works of Francis Bacon (London, 1857-1859); his The Life and Letters ofFrancis Bacon (London, 1861-1874)is still the place to begin biographical study. Catherine Drinker Bowen, Francis Bacon: The Temper of a Man (Boston, 1963) must be read judiciously; Dame Daphne Du Maurier, The Winding Stair: Francis Bacon, His Rise and Fall (Garden City, New York 1977) illustrates the “gothick” Bacon; Lisa Jardine & Alan Stewart, Hostage to Fortune: The Troubled Life ofFrancis Bacon (New York 1998) ties the nar­rative to the sources.

Recent excellent scholarly studies of Bacon as lawyer and politician are Dan­iel R. Coquillette, Francis Bacon (Stanford, 1992), Joel J. Epstein, Francis Bacon: A Political Biography (Athens, Ohio, 1977), and John T Noonan's Bribes (New York, i984)-the latter dashing Bacon's defense to the charges of corruption that brought him down.

Bacon the natural philosopher has excited continuous attention. A. R. Hall, The Scientific Revolution, 1500-1800: The Formation of the Modern Scientific Attitude (Boston, 1954) remains worthwhile. Julian Martin's Francis Bacon—The State and the Reform of Natural Philosophy (Cambridge, 1992) is now the place to start.

Legal maxims are discussed, in broad purview, in Peter Stein's luminous Regu­lae Iuris: From Juristic Rules to Legal Maxims (Edinburgh, 1966). Latin for Lawyers (London, 1960), a useful introductory grammar for Latin, provides over eleven hundred maxims with which a lawyer may dress almost any argument.

COKE

Sir Edward Coke has had no shortage of biographers. Short sketches by John Aubrey and Thomas Fuller were followed by Humphrey W Woolrych, The Life of the Right Honourable Sir Edward Coke Knt. (London, 1826) and Cuthbert W John­son, The Life of Sir Edward Coke (London, 1837). Catherine Drinker Bowen's The Lion and the Throne (Boston, 1956) caught Coke's personality and character, albeit marred by breathless admiration and her unfamiliarity with the law. Allen D. Boyer's Sir Edward Coke and the Elizabethan Age (Stanford, 2003), the first of two volumes that will cover Coke's career, is a brilliant work founded on painstaking research and a practicing lawyer's understanding of law, lawyers, and litigants.

Works on various aspects of Coke's political career and thought are numerous. Jean Beaute, Un GrandJuriste Anglais: Sir Edward Coke, 1552-1634, ses Idees Politiques et Constitutionelles (Paris, 1975) sees Coke from a position outside the English histor­ical tradition and its monochromatic Whiggish tint. William J. Jones's introductory monograph, Politics and the Bench: TheJudges and the Origins of the English Civil War (London, 1971), is a careful study of Coke and the other early Stuart judges con­fronting the falling-out between King and Parliament. Coke figures large—perhaps too large—in J. W Gough, Fundamental Law in English Constitutional History (Ox­ford, 1961). On Coke's historical perspective and political theory, much useful work has been done by George L. Mosse, J. G. A. Pocock, J. P. Somerville, and Glenn Burgess. Scholarship on Parliament in the 1620's has not failed to give Coke his due. The serious student of Coke as parliamentarian must consult D. H. Willson, The Privy Councillors in the House of Commons, 1604-1629 (Minneapolis, 1940); Mar­garet Judson, The Crisis of the Constitution (New Brunswick, 1949); Robert Zaller, The Parliament of 1621: A Study in Constitutional Conflict (Berkeley, 1971); Robert E. Ruigh, The Parliament of 1624: Politics and Foreign Policy (Cambridge, Massa­chusetts, 1971); Conrad Russell, Parliaments and English Politics, 1621-1629 (Oxford, 1979); and Stephen D. White, Sir Edward Coke and the “Grievances of the Common­wealth,” 1621-1628 (Chapel Hill, 1979). Much good new work is being done by Chris Kyle, and the History of Parliament Trust has pushed through nearly to publication with its biographies and essays on the Parliaments of the 1620's.

American preoccupation with Dr. Bonham^,s Case as a putative source for judicial review produced a spate of articles on Coke as jurist. Over eight decades, these have included law-review pieces by T F. T Plucknett, L. B. Boudin, Samuel Thorne, Raoul Berger, Charles M. Gray, Allen D. Boyer, Richard Helmholz, and Mary Sarah Bilder. Coke's contribution to the development of contract is limned in A. W. B. Simpson, A History of the Common Law of Contract: The Rise of the Action of.Assumpsit (Oxford, 1975). Other essential reading includes J. U. Lewis, “Coke's Theory of Arti­ficial Reason,” Law Quarterly Review 84 (1968) pp. 330-342 and a set of articles by Sir John H. Baker, “New Light on Slade^,s Case” Cambridge Law Journal 29 (1971) pp. 51-67 and 213-236 and “Coke's Note-Books and the Sources of his Reports,” Cam­bridge LawJournal 30 (1972) pp. 59-86. These latter pieces are collected in Baker's The Legal Profession and the Common Law (London, 1986). W S. Holdsworth de­voted much attention to Coke, and on many points what he said remains the only word: see A History of English Law, vol. 5 (London, 1924) pp. 423-493, and Some Makers of English Law (Cambridge, 1938) pp. 111-132. The Liberty Foundation of Indianapolis has published two useful new works on the Lord Chief Justice: the three-volume Selected Writings of Sir Edward Coke, edited by Steve Sheppard (2003), which makes accessible much important material from the Reports, the Institutes, and Coke's parliamentary speeches, as well as providing a very full bibliography; and Law, Liberty, and Parliament: Selected Essays on Sir Edward Coke, edited by Allen Boyer (2004).

DALTON

Modern scholarship on Tudor-Stuart local government, particularly magistracy, began with William B. Willcox, Gloucestershire: A Study in Local Government, 1590­1640 (New Haven, 1940) and expanded with Thomas G. Barnes's Somerset 1625-1640: A County’s Government during the “PersonalRule” (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1961). An explosion of excellent monographs followed, all fitting local developments into a national context and inevitably taking account of the mid-seventeenth-century English revolution. These include J. H. Betley on Dorset, Peter Clark and Alan Everitt on Kent, Anthony Fletcher on Sussex; Clive Holmes on East Anglia and R. W Ketton-Cremer and A. Hassell Smith on Norfolk; John Morrill on Cheshire, and David Underdown on Somerset post-1640. John H. Gleason's evocative TheJustices of the Peace in England 1559 to 1640 (Oxford, 1969) studies the JPs of six counties, and Norma Landau, TheJustices of the Peace, 1679-1760 (Berkeley, 1984) opens up the sub­sequent history of magistracy. J. S. Cockburn, A History of English Assizes, 1558-1714 (Cambridge, 1972) provides a useful overview of that institution so critical to the functioning of magistracy. John H. Langbein's Prosecuting Crime in the Renaissance: England, Germany, France (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974) is a provocative com­parative essay that serves to illustrate how closely Tudor absolutism paralleled (if it did not imitate) continental absolutism. John P. Dawson's A History of Lay Judges (Cambridge, Massachusetts, i960) provides the bond between customary and com­munal justice and royal justice confided to lay elites. Keith Wrightson and Steve Hindle have done valuable work on self-government by the “middling men” and vestries of England in this same period.

HUDSON

Considering its importance both to law and politics in the sixteenth and sev­enteenth centuries, it is remarkable that the historiography of Star Chamber is so underdeveloped. Older narrative histories accorded attention to it, less to under­stand it than to condemn it. Compilations of Star Chamber cases, including three volumes in the Selden Society, have added to the printed primary sources on the court. These constitute only a fraction of more than a thousand cases reported in manuscript.

The early history of the court is treated in the splendid monograph of John A. Guy, The Cardinal’s Court: The Impact of Thomas Wolsey in Star Chamber (Hassocks, Sussex, 1977). An excellent introduction to the procedure of Star Chamber to the mid-sixteenth century is Dr. Guy's The Court of Star Chamber and its Records to the Reign of Elizabeth I, Public Record Office Handbooks No. 21 (HMSO, London, 1985). For the work of the later Star Chamber, the reader may consult the following works by the author: “Star Chamber Mythology,” AmericanJournal of Legal History 5 (1961) pp. 1-11; “Due Process and Slow Process in the Late Elizabethan-Early Stuart Star Chamber,” American Journal of Legal History 6 (1962) pp. 221- 249 and 315-356; “Star Chamber and the Sophistication of the Criminal Law,” Criminal Law Review (London, June, 1977) pp. 316-326; “The Archives and Archival Problems of the Elizabethan and Early Stuart Star Chamber,” Prisca Munimenta: Studies in Ar­chival and Administrative History Presented to Dr. A. E. J. Hollaender, Felicity Ranger, ed. (London, 1973) pp. 130-149; “The Prerogative and Environmental Control of London Building in the Early Seventeenth Century: The Lost Opportunity,” 58 California Law Renew (1970) pp. 1332-1363. The late sixteenth-century court of Chancery, Star Chamber's twin, has been thoroughly and authoritatively studied by William J. Jones, The Elizabethan Court of Chancery (Oxford, 1967).

SELDEN

John Selden's works were published in three volumes by David Wilkins (Lon­don, 1726). A critical modern edition is in order. Table Talk has received the bulk of modern scholars' attention, being published by the Selden Society (London, 1927) from the Lincoln's Inn manuscript by Sir Frederick Pollock, Bt., which falls short of the best of present-day editorial work.

Despite the destruction of his notes by fire and a long and painful battle against cancer, David Sandler Berkowitz completed the bulk of his large undertaking on Selden, published posthumously as John Selden^,s Formative Years: Politics and Society in Early Seventeenth-Century England (London, 1989). Equally useful and informa­tive are Paul Christianson's Discourse on History, Law and Governance in the Later Career of John Selden (Toronto, 1996), and Reid Barbour's John Selden: Measures of the Holy Commonwealth in Seventeenth Century England (Toronto, 2003). George W Johnson's Memoirs of John Selden (London, 1835) still offers useful information.

MILTON

Milton scholarship is industrial-grade. The most distinguished biography of Milton may be William Riley Parker's Milton: A Biography (Oxford, 1968). Two out­standing studies by C. A. Patrides,Milton and the Christian Tradition (Oxford, 1966) and The Grand Design of God: The Literary Form of the Christian View of History (Lon­don, 1972), establish the theological foundations (in patristic roots) of Milton, and serve as a counterpoise to more secularist views of him as a political radical. Chris­topher Hill's two books, Milton and the English Revolution (New York, 1978) and The Experience of Defeat: Milton and Some Contemporaries (London, 1984), advance the latter perspective, although the Methodist-turned-Marxist may have undervalued the Christological orthodoxy of Milton's ideas. An essay by H. R. Trevor-Roper, “Milton in Politics,” Catholics, Anglicans and Puritans (Chicago, 1988) sees Milton as both political animal and troubled orthodox believer. On the border between liter­ary criticism and political theory are Keith W Stavely, The Politics of Milton^,s Prose Style (New Haven, 1975) and Charles R. Geisst, The Political Thought of John Milton (London, 1984). Both overemphasize the social consciousness of Milton and his age. Andrew Milner, John Milton and the English Revolution: A Study in the Sociology of Literature (London, 1981)treats Milton's development as a social observer and political theorist. Michael Wilding's article, “Milton's Areopagitica: Liberty for the Sects,” in Prose Studies 9 (1986) pp. 7-38, suggests the connection between Milton's concern with licensing and the notable victims of its practice in the “Personal Rule,” Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton, while missing some of its larger ramifications. For the historiographical dimension of Milton, so important to understanding both polemical and poetic works, see Mary Ann Radzinowicz, Toward Samson Agonistes: The Growth of Milton’s Mind (Princeton, 1978), and the splendid study by David Loewenstein, Milton and the Drama of History: Historical Vision, Iconoclasm, and the Literary Imagination (Cambridge, 1990).

LAWS AND LIBERTIES

The first editor of the early laws of Massachusetts, William H. Whitmore in The Colonial Laws of Massachusetts (Boston, 1889) despaired at the loss of the Laws and Liberties. The 1929 publication (with introduction by Max Farrand) of the Hun­tington’s unique copy spurred observation of its 300th anniversary by two sterling essays: Thorp L. Wolford, “The Laws and Liberties of 1648,” Boston University Law Review 28 (1948) pp. 426-463 (reprinted in Essays in the History of Early American Law, D. H. Flaherty, ed., Chapel Hill, 1969) and Stefan A. Riesenfeld, “Law-Mak­ing and Legislative Precedent in American Legal History,” Minnesota Law Review 33 (1949) pp. 103-134. Subsequent pieces include George L. Haskins, “Codification of the Law in Colonial Massachusetts: A Study in Comparative Law,” Indiana Law Journal 30 (1954) pp. 1-17, and G. L. Haskins and S. E. Ewing, “The Spread of Mas­sachusetts Law in the Seventeenth Century,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 106 (1958) pp. 413-418.

A remarkable increase of interest in early Massachusetts legal history began with the pathfinding George L. Haskins’s Law and Authority in Early Massachusetts: A Study in Tradition and Design (New York, 1960). Colonial Justice in Western Mas­sachusetts, 1639-1702: The Pynchon Court Record, Joseph H. Smith, ed. (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1961); David T Konig, Law and Society in Puritan Massachusetts: Essex County, 1629-1692 (Chapel Hill, 1979); and David Grayson Allen, In English Ways: The Movement of Societies and the Transferal of English Local Law and Custom to Massachusetts Bay in the Seventeenth Century (Chapel Hill, 1981) followed. See also M. D. Howe, “The Sources of Law in Colonial Massachusetts,” in Law and Authority in ColonialAmerica, G. A. Billias, ed. (Barre, Massachusetts, 1965). In 1981, Daniel Coquillette edited for publication a collection of conference papers, pub­lished as Law in Colonial Massachusetts, 1630-1800 (published by the University Press ofVirginia for the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, 1984). The Laws and Liberties figures prominently in Thomas G. Barnes, “Law and Liberty (and Order) in Early Massachusetts,” in The English Legal System: Carryover to the Colonies (Clark Library, Los Angeles, 1975) pp. 63-89. More recent explorations include Mark D. Cahn, “Punishment, Discretion, and the Codification of Prescribed Penalties in Colonial Massachusetts,” American Journal of Legal History 33 (1989) pp. 107-136; G. B. War­den, “Law Reform in England and New England, 1620 to 1660,” William and Mary Quarterly 35 (1978) pp. 668-690; and Daniel R. Coquillette, “Radical Lawmakers in Colonial Massachusetts: The ‘Countenance of Authoritie' and the Lawes and Liber- tyes” New England Quarterly 67 (1994) pp. 179-211. Continuing the tradition is An­gela Fernandez, “Record-Keeping and Other Trouble-Making: Thomas Lechford and Law Reform in Colonial Massachusetts,” Law and History Review 23 (2005) pp. 235-278.

A new photo-facsimile edition ofLawes andLibertyes was published by the Hun­tington Library (San Marino, 1975) with introduction and table of sources for the laws by Thomas G. Barnes.

TRIAL OF CHARLES I

The best account of the trial of Charles I is that of Cicely Veronica Wedgwood, The Trial of Charles I (London, 1964). A summation of it is to be found in The Eng­lish Civil War and After, 1642-1658, R. H. Parry, ed. (Berkeley, 1970), pp. 41-58. To see Charles I in the larger context of the critical decade 1637-1647, start with Dame Veronica’s two admirable narratives, The King’s Peace, 1637-1641 (London, 1955) and The King’s War, 1641-1647 (London, 1958). Among the numerous studies of Charles’s nemesis is Lady Antonia Fraser’s Cromwell, The Lord Protector (New York, 1973). Her account of Cromwell’s role in the King’s “trial” is authoritative. For the Parliament (so-called) that tried Charles, see Blair Worden, The Rump Parliament (Oxford, 1974). Richard Ollard, This War without an Enemy :A History of the English Civil Wars (New York, 1976) is both succinct and comprehensive. Conrad Russell’s The Fall of the British Monarchies, 1637-1642 (Oxford, 1991) has returned the search for the immediate causes for revolution—and responsibility for the failure of the re- gime—to Charles and his ministers. Samuel Rawson Gardiner’s two classics, History of England from the Accession of James I to the Outbreak of the Civil War, 1603-1642, 10 vol. (London, 1883-1884), and History of the Great Civil War, 4 vol. (London, 1893), remain valuable.

Perhaps the best biography of Charles I is Pauline Gregg, King Charles I (Berke­ley & Los Angeles, 1984), although the customary thoughtfulness ofRichard Ollard, in the Image of the King: Charles I and Charles II (London, 1979) may be remarked. Charles Carlton, Charles I, The Personal Monarch (London, 1983) is psychobiog­raphy John Bowie, Charles the First (Boston, 1975) is reliable. L. J. Reeve, Charles I and the Road to Personal Rule (Cambridge, 1989) and Brian Quintrell, Charles I, 1625-1640 (London, 1993) are useful.

MATTHEW HALE

Besides Hale’s juristic, scientific, and religious works, referenced in the essay above, three extensive pieces by the Lord Chief Justice, published by that inde­fatigable legal antiquarian of the eighteenth century, Francis Hargrave, are worth study: “A Treatise in Three Parts on Rivers, Ports, and Concerning the Custom of Goods Imported and Exported”; “Considerations Touching the Amendment or Alteration of Laws”; and “Discourse Concerning the Courts of King’s Bench and Common Pleas.” These are included in the first volume ofA Collection of Tracts Relating to the Law of England, F. Hargrave, ed. (London, 1787). Hale’s brilliant historical and analytical essay on the legal jurisdiction of the House of Lords, ad­dressing a long-running controversy between the two Houses of Parliament follow­ing Skinner’s Case (1657), was also edited by Hargrave, The Jurisdiction of the Lords’ House, or Parliament Considered according to Ancient Records (London, 1796). Later editions of Coke’s First Institutes were published with Hale’s commentary on Coke’s commentary on Littleton. Finally, Sollom Emlyn edited two volumes of Hale's His­tory of Pleas of the Crown (London, 1736).

Alan Cromartie has contributed a provocative assessment ofHale in SirMatthew Hale: Law, Religion and Natural Philosophy, in the Cambridge Studies in Early Mod­ern British History series (Cambridge, 1995). The best prior assessment of Hale's legal and constitutional thought and The History of the Common Law is the introduc­tion to that work by Charles M. Gray in the University of Chicago Press Classics of British Historical Literature (Chicago, 1971). David E. C. Yale's Selden Society Lecture, Hale as Legal Historian (London, 1976) is erudite. Hale's interaction with the scientific enterprise of the late seventeenth century is weighed by Barbara J. Shapiro in Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England: A Study of the Relations between Natural Science, Religion, History, Law, and Literature (Princeton, 1983). Edmund Heward, Matthew Hale (London, 1972) supplies biographical detail and describes Hale's juristic works, but is short on historical context. An Instance of the Fingerpost, a remarkable novel by Iain Pears (London, 1997), draws its title from Francis Bacon, and conveys unforgettably the political nastiness of the era in which Hale worked. See Gilbert Burnet's Life of Sir Matthew Hale (1682) for contemporary testimony as to Hale's remarkable qualities.