The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle states that during his 1018 meeting in Oxford with the leading English ecclesiastical and lay authorities, roughly one year after his accession to the throne in England, Cnut agreed to uphold “the laws of Edgar” during his reign. The ultimate outcome of this and subsequent meetings is the code issued at Winchester in 1020, referred to by editorial convention as I and II Cnut. This code contains, respectively, the religious and secular laws of England promulgated under Cnut. The code is contained in four manuscripts in Old English. The earliest are British Library, Cotton Nero A.i and Cambridge, Corpus Christi College (CCCC) 201, both dated to the mid-eleventh century; the latest, Cambridge, Corpus Christi College (CCCC) 383 and British Library, Harley 55, belong to the early twelfth century. Cnut's code reappears in three twelfth-century Norman Latin tracts intended to acquaint French authorities with English law, the Instituta Cnuti, Consiliatio Cnuti, and Quadripartitus. The Leges Henrici Primi, prepared by the same author as the Quadripartitus, also draws heavily on Cnut's legislation.

I am gratified by Stephen Siegel's generous analysis of my article and its place within the historiography of Gilded Age legal thought. In his comment, Siegel has performed the invaluable task of synthesizing the various strands of revisionist scholarship in this area and examining the growing body of, in his apt words, “revisions of the revision.” It should be noted that Siegel himself is at the forefront of the current wave of scholarship he describes. If Langdell is eventually ousted from his current position as the leading exemplar of late nineteenth-century private law jurisprudence, Siegel's seminal and sophisticated work, to which I am much indebted, will deserve much of the credit.

Kenneth Ledford has provided an insightful commentary on the two articles on Catalonia. He generously notes their contribution to debates on normativity in the history of civil law codification, for which I thank him. More important, Ledford raises several questions that need to be addressed before we can be convinced that “the Catalan experience can be used to refine and reshape assessments of any general European phenomena regarding civil law codification” (Ledford, 390). I shall use this space to briefly address each of his three questions.