328
The Green Bag
Foss tells us that he died about 1267, as in that year his judicial duties evi dently terminated. He will always be known by the name of Bracton, but his true name was Bratton, or perhaps Bretton, as is shown by entries of his name on various rolls. The claim that he studied at Oxford, where he took his degree of Doctor of Laws, and where he lectured on the canon law, is apparently unfounded. We do find that in 1245 he was an itinerant judge and from 1248 until his death he was a judge of assize for the southwestern counties, during a part of which time he heard pleas before the King, but there is nothing to show that he ever became chief justiciary of England. "DELEGIBUS ETCONSUETUDINIBUS ANGLIM" His fame rests on his treatise, the "De Legibus," so-called, which has been characterized by one writer as "the crown and flower of English mediaeval jurisprudence," and by another as the "great ornament of the reign of Henry III." This treatise was written at some time between 1240 and 1256, after which date he apparently did no seri ous work on it, though he may have added an occasional note or case. As a judge of assize he was undoubtedly very busy traveling from place to place in his jurisdiction as occasion required. He must have done a vast deal of pre liminary work. The manuscript discov ered in 1884, which has since been edited and published as Bracton's Note Book, must have been a part of that preliminary work. The actual work must have been done during the inter vals when he was not holding court. The progress must have been slow and much time must have been spent in examining rolls and writs and consult ing such treatises as were at his com mand. The exact date is immaterial.
Bracton never saw his work in print. He left it in manuscript, which was copied again and again, with the result that there are many differences in the text of the various copies. Just which one is the original cannot be stated con clusively, though the Digby MS. in the Bodleian Library seems to come nearer to Bracton's own autograph than any other. The first edition was printed as a folio by Tottell in 1569, and is said to be full of gross errors. The second edition was printed in 1640, in quarto. In printing this some pains, the preface states, were taken to correct and improve the text, by col lating it with various manuscripts. This was apparently not carefully done, as at that time several manuscripts were accessible that were more correct than the printed second edition. The Law Magazine and Review for August, 1872, contained, under the head ing, "A Plea for a New Print of Bracton," an article dwelling strongly on the fact that there was no reliable text of the chief mediaeval treatise on English law. Since then the Twiss edition has ap peared in six bulky volumes, presumed to contain the original text with a translation, side by side. "Of the pres ent 'standard edition' of Bracton, it is difficult for any one who has worked with it to speak with patience. It was undertaken as part of the Rolls Series, a national work; a presumably learned and certainly titled editor purported to have labored at it; and the result is merely a reprint of Tottell's edition with nearly all the old corruptions, a few misprints, and many new and ingenious mistranslations."3 Another reviewer sarcastically remarks that "the result has been the production of something rarely equaled in the history of learn'Law Qr. Rev. I, 426.
