History of England starts at 1700, says university

The various waves of Danish/Viking invasions after the Roman influence subsided were important to the development of unique English, and eventually, American traditions and precepts of law, while the rest of Europe developed primarily on Roman Maxims of law.

The Vikings/Danish were a tribal people and had a class of equal freemen. Much of their law was stated in terms of injury or trespass to body, mind and property. Punishment was generally in the form of fines. This formed the basis for tort law. These people met in local, area and regional assemblies where disputes were heard. The law was an oral tradition and “best men” of each area were selected to recite what the law was.

The law was considered “once given” (by god) and unchangeable. This evolved into the jury system and stare decisis. Precepts of common law can be traced today back to their roots in these early recitations of what the law is.

The “Rights of Englishmen” were established prior to 1700 - the Magna Carta, Provisions of Oxford, Provisions of Westminster, Mise of Lewes, Confirmation of Charters of 1297, Triennial Act, Grand Remonstrance, Nineteen Propositions, Militia Bill, declaration of Commonwealth, Bonham’s Case in 1610, Parliament’s “Apology” of 1604, the “Great Protestation” of 1621, “The Instrument of Government” and bill of rights - An attempt at a written constitution, the Levellers and the 1649 “Agreement of the People,” Declaration of Breda, Thomas v. Sorrel, Declaration of Rights” of 1689, and Act of Habeas Corpus.

The “Petition of Right” was the first major constitutional document since the Magna Carta, declaring the fundamental right of Englishmen as positive law. In four sections, the petition addressed limits on royal powers as established in long-standing custom: (1) No person should be required to pay a tax or benevolence without parliamentary approval; (2) No person should be imprisoned without cause being shown, with the royal command not to be sufficient cause; (3) No troops should be quartered in private homes without the consent of and compensation to their owners; and
(4) The crown should issue no commissions for proceedings by martial law.

The “Declaration of Rights” of 1689 claimed restoration of practices based on the constitution of 1641. The Declaration denied the “pretended” right of the king to suspend laws. It implemented a new coronation oath binding the sovereign to govern according to acts of Parliament. The Declaration also stated:

(1) All (kings) prerogative courts were declared illegal; (2) Levying taxes or enforced payments to the crown without parliamentary consent was declared illegal; (3) Everyone was recognized as having the right to petition the Crown; (4) The King was prohibited from maintaining a standing army without Parliamentary consent; (5) It was declared lawful to keep and bear arms; (6) The election of members of the Parliament was to be free of coercion by the government; (7) Freedom of debate in Parliament was guaranteed; (8) Excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment was prohibited; (9) Juries were to be empaneled and returned in every trial; (10) It was established that the Parliament must be frequently convened; (11) The judiciary became independent, not serving at the pleasure of the Crown but permanently on “good behavior”; (12) no one owed allegiance to a sovereign who was Catholic or married to one; and (13) it set forth the succession to the throne.

Most of the development of later law was land law. If they throw out all history prior to 1700, they throw out most of what established and secured England as a unique and free born people.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.