Old French 'legs'

I am struggling with Pothier's Traite des Fiefs. (1776) More particularly his use of one word: 'legs'.

In his treatise (Tome II, 63) he constantly refers to 'legs'.

E.g.: "Que si legs a un terme ou une condition qui n'échet qu'après la mort du testateur, la propriété n'est transférée en la personne du légataire, qu'à l'échéance du jour ou de la condition."

Could anyone please help me out? What does 'legs' in Old French mean? Thank you so much.

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Neil Coffey on September 1, 2011 at 10:51am

It means "legacy", "bequest", "inheritance"-- i.e. whatever is bequeathed via a legal will.

(Incidentally, language from the 1700s would still usually be considered to be "modern" French: it's old, but linguistically speaking not that old!)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Laubscher on September 1, 2011 at 2:26pm

I had a tinge of conscience after posting - having the temerity of assuming the meaning of a term of art such as OF.

Rather embarrassed on another front. Now found it in two of my hard copy dictionaries which somehow eluded discovery when initially consulted. Apols.

Thnks hugely Neil.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jackie Cann on September 4, 2011 at 12:07am

I am intrigued by this sentence about the legs! What does the whole sentence mean, please?

Thank you!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Laubscher on September 4, 2011 at 3:36am

From my pidgeon knowledge of French I supply this at your risk. The book (Vol II) has Pothier write, inter alia, on the 'rachat' of the fief. I should be grateful for Neil's correction.

"If a legacy has a term or a condition that has not vested (note: in Roman law of inheritance, dies cedit) at the time of the death of the testator, the property (the fief) should not be transferred to the person of the legatee, before the arrival (expiry) of the day (note: in Roman law of inheritance, dies venit) or the condition."

BTW: I failed to find 'legs' in the dictionaries as I thought it was in the plural.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pete Laubscher on September 4, 2011 at 3:55am

In explication of the last bit: I looked for 'leg', not 'legs' and could not find it.