<<Interestingly, when I came as a bride to South Carolina in the early 1970s, each time we sold a house my husband had to leave the room so I could sign over my dower rights freely, proving I was not coerced to do so!>> It's always nice to hear of old traditions being kept up. And this is certainly a very old one: medieval manorial court rolls of the sort I am presently working on, from the 14th and 15th centuries, are full of entries recording land sales which begin something like this: "To this court came Robert Rede and Emma his wife and, she having been examined separately in open court by the steward [ie the official presiding over the court], transferred a messuage with crofts, ditches, gardens ..." (from a manor court held at Great Horwood in Buckinghamshire, on 19 April 1401) The point was that a wife had to consent to a sale of the couple's property - if she didn't consent then later she could claim dower in it from the new owner - and wives were always examined separately to ensure that their consent was given freely. This need for separate examination was taken seriously, too. The following entry is from a court held on 22 April 1420: "Isabel Wilkyn widow of John Wilkyn came to this court and sought to be declared the owner of 1 messuage and 1 virgate of land of which she and John had been owners according to the custom of the manor, notwithstanding that John had lately transferred it to Richard their son, which Isabel could not deny, but she produced a copy of the court roll as proof that she and John had owned it jointly. Because she was not examined by the steward, the court decided that she should recover her former interest in the land and tenement notwithstanding her husband's transfer ..." I have seen the court roll which recorded the transfer to the son (15 years earlier, in 1405) and it said that both John and Isabel had come to the court to record the transfer - but did not record that Isabel had been examined separately. So she got the property back. Matt Tompkins Blaston, Leics