The Statutes Project
@statutes.bsky.social
Opening up Historic British Law and Legislation and digitally deforming it
Reposted by The Statutes Project
I'm actually slightly mystified at how I managed to bypass the palaver, but I have this URL which is working for me without logging in to anything: edinburghuniversitypress.com/pub/media/eb...
November 20, 2025 at 8:04 AM
I'm actually slightly mystified at how I managed to bypass the palaver, but I have this URL which is working for me without logging in to anything: edinburghuniversitypress.com/pub/media/eb...
These rules and calendars mean that assigning an act to a year is inherently fuzzy. So this act can be dated to 1562, 1563, or even 1562-3. It's whatever one chooses.
What stays the same is the regnal citation, 5 Elizabeth 1 c. 16, which is what should always be used to refer to the act.
What stays the same is the regnal citation, 5 Elizabeth 1 c. 16, which is what should always be used to refer to the act.
October 14, 2025 at 10:46 AM
These rules and calendars mean that assigning an act to a year is inherently fuzzy. So this act can be dated to 1562, 1563, or even 1562-3. It's whatever one chooses.
What stays the same is the regnal citation, 5 Elizabeth 1 c. 16, which is what should always be used to refer to the act.
What stays the same is the regnal citation, 5 Elizabeth 1 c. 16, which is what should always be used to refer to the act.
Pickering and Ruffhead both give the year as 1562.
Parliament sat from 11 January, 1562 old style / 1563 new style, to 10 April 1753.
Assent to the act was granted on 10 April 1563. But the custom at the time was to regard acts passed as coming into force with the beginning of the session
2/3
Parliament sat from 11 January, 1562 old style / 1563 new style, to 10 April 1753.
Assent to the act was granted on 10 April 1563. But the custom at the time was to regard acts passed as coming into force with the beginning of the session
2/3
October 14, 2025 at 10:42 AM
Pickering and Ruffhead both give the year as 1562.
Parliament sat from 11 January, 1562 old style / 1563 new style, to 10 April 1753.
Assent to the act was granted on 10 April 1563. But the custom at the time was to regard acts passed as coming into force with the beginning of the session
2/3
Parliament sat from 11 January, 1562 old style / 1563 new style, to 10 April 1753.
Assent to the act was granted on 10 April 1563. But the custom at the time was to regard acts passed as coming into force with the beginning of the session
2/3
Welcome to the wacky world of regnal codes and statute dating!
My source for the text, which gives the year as 1563, can now be found at:
www.scribd.com/document/347...
Statutes of the Realm dates the parliamentary session as 1562-3:
babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ps...
1/?
My source for the text, which gives the year as 1563, can now be found at:
www.scribd.com/document/347...
Statutes of the Realm dates the parliamentary session as 1562-3:
babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ps...
1/?
SMRT 131 Witchcraft and The Act of 1604 PDF | PDF | Witchcraft | Magic (Paranormal)
Scribd is the world's largest social reading and publishing site.
www.scribd.com
October 14, 2025 at 10:33 AM
Welcome to the wacky world of regnal codes and statute dating!
My source for the text, which gives the year as 1563, can now be found at:
www.scribd.com/document/347...
Statutes of the Realm dates the parliamentary session as 1562-3:
babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ps...
1/?
My source for the text, which gives the year as 1563, can now be found at:
www.scribd.com/document/347...
Statutes of the Realm dates the parliamentary session as 1562-3:
babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ps...
1/?
LOL:
"At a time when racial issues are so deeply troubling, Mr. Marmion and the CEO of Hein, William S. Hein, simply felt there was a moral and civic obligation to share this product with anyone, anywhere."
earlyamericanists.com/2016/12/27/p...
"At a time when racial issues are so deeply troubling, Mr. Marmion and the CEO of Hein, William S. Hein, simply felt there was a moral and civic obligation to share this product with anyone, anywhere."
earlyamericanists.com/2016/12/27/p...
Guest Post: Candace Jackson Gray interviews Paul Finkelman
Candace Jackson Gray interviews Paul Finkelman, the John E. Murray Visiting Professor of Law at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
earlyamericanists.com
October 5, 2025 at 8:24 AM
LOL:
"At a time when racial issues are so deeply troubling, Mr. Marmion and the CEO of Hein, William S. Hein, simply felt there was a moral and civic obligation to share this product with anyone, anywhere."
earlyamericanists.com/2016/12/27/p...
"At a time when racial issues are so deeply troubling, Mr. Marmion and the CEO of Hein, William S. Hein, simply felt there was a moral and civic obligation to share this product with anyone, anywhere."
earlyamericanists.com/2016/12/27/p...
Correction: 4 paragraphs (out of 279) mention the OGL.
I think Ancestry are using this as a way of pressurizing NRS to sell access to them and them alone. I wonder how much public domain material Ancestry themselves are restricting access to.
I think Ancestry are using this as a way of pressurizing NRS to sell access to them and them alone. I wonder how much public domain material Ancestry themselves are restricting access to.
September 29, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Correction: 4 paragraphs (out of 279) mention the OGL.
I think Ancestry are using this as a way of pressurizing NRS to sell access to them and them alone. I wonder how much public domain material Ancestry themselves are restricting access to.
I think Ancestry are using this as a way of pressurizing NRS to sell access to them and them alone. I wonder how much public domain material Ancestry themselves are restricting access to.
Thank you, this is very helpful.
September 29, 2025 at 1:49 PM
Thank you, this is very helpful.