Definition
In old English and Roman-derived law, *rectum* is a Latin term meaning "right" or "law" — specifically, the legal right to which a person is entitled, or the administration of justice itself. It appears in medieval legal texts as a near-synonym for *jus* (right, law) in the civil law tradition, while in English common law usage it carried the more particular sense of a person's legal entitlement to have justice done.
The term also appears in the phrase *rectus in curia* (right in court), denoting the restored legal standing of a person formerly outlawed. Once an outlawry was reversed, the offender was said to be *rectus in curia* — standing right before the court, with no charge or objection pending against him.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): The terminal part of the large intestine through which feces pass after exiting the colon, but before leaving the body through the anus or cloaca.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): The terminal part of the large intestine; so named because supposed by the old anatomists to be straight.
The anatomical term and the legal term are unrelated beyond sharing a Latin root meaning "straight" or "right." A researcher encountering *rectum* in a legal manuscript, court roll, or Latin pleading is reading a term about justice and legal standing, not anatomy. The confusion risk is low in professional legal research but real for those new to Latin legal sources.
Common Confusion
*Rectum* is frequently conflated with *jus* or *lex* in translation work, since all three can render as "right" or "law" in English. The distinction matters: *lex* typically refers to written law or statute; *jus* to law as a system or a subjective right; *rectum* in English legal usage carries a more specific connotation of the right or remedy owed to a particular person — the doing of justice in a concrete case. Burrill notes explicitly that this sense was "a term peculiar to the law of England," distinguishing it from the civilian usage of *jus*.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in medieval English legal records — plea rolls, writs, Bracton, Fleta, or early Year Books — will encounter *rectum* in contexts where a modern reader might expect *jus* or *lex*. Translating it generically as "right" or "law" without noting the English common law flavor risks flattening a meaningful distinction.
The phrase *rectus in curia* is the more likely entry point for practical research. It appears in outlawry proceedings and their reversals, and understanding it is essential for reading records involving fugitives, exiles, or persons who had forfeited legal protection. When a medieval record notes that a defendant is *rectus in curia*, it signals the procedural threshold: the person has been restored to legal personality and the court may proceed on the merits.
The Magna Carta connection — Burrill quotes chapter 29's *nulli vendemus, nulli negabimus aut differemus justitiam vel rectum* ("To none will we sell, to none will we deny or delay justice or right") — is significant. That pairing of *justitiam vel rectum* reflects a deliberate distinction between justice as a process and right as an entitlement, and researchers citing or analyzing Magna Carta in its Latin form should be alert to the dual meaning.
Historical Dictionary Support
The three source dictionaries converge on the core meaning — *rectum* as "right" or "law" in old English legal usage — but each contributes differently. Black's is sparse, noting only the dual gloss of "right" and "trial or accusation" with references to Bracton and Cowell. The "trial or accusation" meaning is not developed and is unsupported by Bouvier or Burrill; researchers should treat it as a minority or specialized usage requiring further source verification before relying upon it.
Bouvier omits a standalone *rectum* entry but provides the most useful practical material through the *rectus in curia* definition, grounding the term in procedure: the restored standing of the formerly outlawed. Burrill offers the richest treatment, supplying the Magna Carta quotation, the Bracton reference (*de recto deficere* — to fail of right, to fail in doing justice), and the important editorial observation that *rectum* in this sense was a term peculiar to English law, not a direct civil law import.
What the historical dictionaries collectively miss is a structured account of how *rectum* operated in the writ system — particularly in the Writ of Right (*breve de recto*), which was the foundational real property writ for recovering freehold land in medieval English procedure. That writ takes its name directly from this term, and researchers who encounter *rectum* in the context of land actions may need to pursue that connection through sources beyond the dictionary shelf.
Jurisdictional Note
*Rectum* as a legal term of art is specific to English common law and its medieval Latin sources. Civilian (Roman law) jurisdictions used *jus* where English lawyers used *rectum*. The term does not carry forward into modern statutory systems and is not operative in contemporary U.S., U.K., or Commonwealth law except as a historical reference.