Definition
A Law French term meaning "to think" or "to consider." In historical legal usage, *appenser* carried the sense of deliberate mental engagement — premeditation or forethought applied to an act. It appears principally in older legal texts and pleadings where Law French was the operative language of English courts, and its significance lies in its connection to concepts of deliberation and intent.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encounter *appenser* almost exclusively in medieval and early modern English legal records, Year Books, and treatises composed in Law French — the technical language of English courts from roughly the Norman Conquest through the seventeenth century. Its primary research value is contextual: the word signals that the surrounding text is concerned with mental state, deliberation, or intent, which in turn connects to concepts such as malice aforethought, premeditation, and the distinction between deliberate and impulsive acts.
The critical navigational point is that *appenser* is a building block of compound legal expressions rather than a freestanding doctrine. Researchers who encounter it in manuscript sources or early printed abridgments should look to the full phrase in which it appears, not to the isolated term. Its presence in a passage is a flag that the source is addressing the quality of mind attending an act, not merely the act itself.
Because Law French was largely displaced by English in legal proceedings after the Proceedings in Courts of Justice Act 1731 (4 Geo. 2, c. 26), direct appearances of *appenser* in primary sources are confined to pre-eighteenth-century materials. Nineteenth-century legal dictionaries and abridgments that reference it — including Burrill — do so as historical glosses, not as live operative terms.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary, relying on Kelham's *Dictionary of the Norman or Old French Language* (1779), defines *appenser* simply as "to think; to consider." This is a minimal entry that performs a translation function rather than a doctrinal one. Burrill does not expand on usage, provide illustrative quotations from primary sources, or situate the term within a larger legal framework — which is characteristic of his treatment of raw Law French vocabulary as distinct from developed legal concepts.
Kelham remains the authoritative reference for this class of Norman French legal terminology, and Burrill's reliance on him is appropriate. Researchers seeking broader context for Law French vocabulary in English legal sources should consult Kelham directly, as Burrill's entries for Law French terms are generally derivative and compressed.
No other standard historical legal dictionary in the Law Mind corpus — including Jacob's *Law Dictionary*, Tomlin's, or Bouvier's — appears to carry a dedicated entry for *appenser*, which suggests the term was understood by contemporaries as elementary Law French vocabulary rather than a term of art requiring independent definition.