Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 3, Page 383

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 3, Page 383

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] if she could show that Isabella was not the wife of the same Thomas she would
[002] then recover all the land Isabella held in the name of dower, and the tenant sine die.
[003] Thus there will be a plea in court christian between the two women-demandants,
[004] that she may obtain who shows that she is the lawful wife. On this subject there is
[005] matter [in the roll of Michaelmas term] in the seventh year of king Henry before
[006] Martin in the bench [the case] of Gunnora the wife of John son of Hugh,¹ who claimed
[007] against Matilda de Berneres dower in the third part of the third part of two carucates
[008] of land with the appurtenances in Tedmerse as her dower whereof the aforesaid
[009] John had endowed her etc. Matilda answered that she holds that land in dower of
[010] the gift of the aforesaid John, who was her husband and not Gunnora's, as to which
[011] she says that Geoffrey, the son and heir of the aforesaid John, who is in the wardship
[012] of such a one through the lord king, is the warrantor of her dower, and as to which she
[013] vouches him to warranty. Gunnora says that she ought not to have a warrantor
[014] thereof, because Matilda never was the spouse of the aforesaid John, through whom²
[015] Geoffrey her son ought to be the warrantor of the dower of the said Matilda, but
[016] that Gunnora was herself his spouse, and that he had issue by her, namely, one
[017] Juliana who is present etc. And this she is prepared to prove as the court shall award.
[018] And Matilda to the contrary, that she was his spouse, not Gunnora, and that she,
[019] Matilda, was with the aforesaid John when he died. And if Gunnora ever was with
[020] him, it was in adultery, because she was not married to him, and this she is prepared
[021] to prove etc. And therefore without a day. And let Gunnora have a writ to the bishop
[022] of Winchester in whose diocese she was married. The form of the writ is below.³

To a certain woman claiming dower it was objected that another woman had dower by reason of the same man and that it was not to be granted to two women.

[024] ⁴The same Gunnora claimed against the guardian a third part of the two parts of
[025] the two carucates of land with the appurtenances in the same vill, as her dower,
[026] whereof the aforesaid John, her late husband had endowed her etc. And Peter, who
[027] was the guardian, answered and said that the aforesaid Matilda has her dower
[028] therefrom in full by order of the lord king, and he asks judgment whether he ought
[029] to supply dower to two women. And because Gunnora is claiming her dower against
[030] the same Matilda, let the plea against Peter remain sine die until it is known what is
[031] done in the case between Gunnora and Matilda.⁵ To the same intent [a case] before
[032] Martin in the bench in the eighth year of king Henry,⁶

Notes

1. Supra 362, n. 6

2. ‘per quem’

3. Infra 384; bishop found for Gunnora: B.N.B., no. 1649; C.R.R., xi, no. 1037 (‘De dote’ written above entry): Mich. 7-8; B.N.B., nos. 1120, 1176 (coram rege)

4-5. B.N.B., no. 1573 (Hil. 7); C.R.R., xi, no. 54

6. B.N.B., no. 1564 (Mich. 6-7); no roll extant