| This dissertation is an exploration of the jurisprudence and intellectual development of Sir Edward Coke from 1578-1616. Despite his reputation as a leading common law thinker and proponent of parliamentary and individual liberty, the existing historiography of his life and intellectual development during this period is incomplete and unsatisfactory.;The central argument of this dissertation is that Coke developed his jurisprudence, with its insistence upon the common law's protection of individual rights, in response to the deep uncertainty and susceptibility to misuse of the English legal system of the period. Coke perceived that the danger to individual liberties grew from individuals who sought to manipulate the law as a violent instrument to exploit or oppress others or even violently attempted to destroy the law.;Coke's career before 1616 should therefore be placed within the context of legal change and instability from which his efforts to establish legal protections emerged. This dissertation explores the context that produced this uncertainty, with close attention to the radical changes in the common law during the sixteenth century and the structure of the Tudor-Stuart state that depended on delegating many of its functions to otherwise private individuals. There were other sources that acutely influenced Coke, such as the effect on Coke's jurisprudence of Protestant historiography, the debate over the certainty of the common law within and outside the profession, and continental developments in customary law.;The project makes three major contributions. It remedies a gap in the study of Coke by exploring early influences on his jurisprudence and how his jurisprudence was formed within the context of legal uncertainty. Second, the project expands the analysis of political conflict in my field by arguing that "constitutional" instability can arise from "below" in popular legal behavior as well as from "above" at the level of political theory. Finally the project attempts to problematize the idea of the "law" that is often used transparently by historians in my field, emphasizing its violent aspect as individuals exploited it against each other. |
