Reasoning and reconciliation in twelfth-century Anglo-Norman legal writing.

This article explores legal reasoning and reconciliation of sources in late twelfth-century legal writing, focusing on four Romano-canonical procedural treatises ('Olim edebatur editio', the ordo of Ricardus Anglicus, Actor et reus and the Ordo Bambergensis) and the English common law treatise known as Glanvill. Through a comparative lens, the study highlights how these works addressed conflicts between legal authorities while reflecting broader intellectual trends of the twelfth century. The ordines employ rhetorical techniques, such as contrasting old and new law and learned opinion, to guide legal practitioners through complex legal landscapes. Each text showcases distinct approaches to balancing practical legal knowledge with theoretical discourse. Meanwhile, Glanvill engages more extensively with dilemmatic methods, using questions as a foundational tool for systematic inquiry. Ultimately, these works reveal the authors' efforts to reconcile diverse legal traditions, highlighting the role of rhetorical strategies in shaping legal reasoning and the broader evolution of legal thought during this period.