Definition
An archaic Latin term appearing in old English legal records, denoting either a raft or a cock-boat — that is, a small flat-bottomed vessel or tender used for transport on water. The term is drawn from medieval Latin as used in documentary records and has no continuing function in modern law.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering *coqua* in old English records, particularly those touching on waterways, river rights, ferry grants, customs duties, or riparian disputes, should recognize it as a term of description rather than a term of legal art. Its significance is almost entirely contextual: the word identifies a type of watercraft and, by extension, may bear on questions of what property was transferred, what toll was assessed, or what privilege was granted in a given instrument. Researchers working with medieval and early modern English land records, admiralty documents, or manorial rolls may encounter *coqua* in inventories, conveyances, or customs accounts where the nature of a vessel affects the legal characterization of the transaction. Because the term appears in Latinized record-keeping conventions — not in common-law pleading or statute — its meaning must be reconstructed from documentary context and glossarial sources rather than from case law.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary provides the sole entry in the Law Mind corpus, attributing the definition to Spelman's *Glossarium Archaiologicum*, the standard reference for medieval Latin terms found in English records. Burrill gives two possible meanings — raft and cock-boat — without resolving which was primary or whether both were in simultaneous use. Spelman's authority here is significant: his *Glossarium* remains the foundational source for this class of Latinized documentary vocabulary, and researchers should consult it directly when the precise character of the vessel is material to interpretation. The entry in Burrill also immediately follows a note on *COR* (heart, from Law French, per Kelham), which underscores that these entries are glossarial rather than doctrinal — they record vocabulary, not legal rules.
No other historical dictionary in the Law Mind corpus addresses *coqua*. Its absence from later dictionaries, including those of the nineteenth century, reflects the term's obsolescence well before the modern period. Researchers should not expect to find it in common-law treatises or equity practice manuals.
Jurisdictional Note
The term is specific to old English records and their Latin documentary conventions. It carries no recognized meaning in American, Scottish, or continental legal sources and should be treated as a term of English antiquarian and archival significance only.