Item gif ony myne of golde or siluer be fundyn in ony lordis landis of the realme and it may be prowyt that thre halfpennys of siluer may be fynit owt of the punde of leide The lordis of parliament consentis that sik myne be the kingis as is vsuale in vthir realmys

This is the oldest Act still in force in Scotland, usually referred to as the Royal Mines Act 1424 (passed during the reign of James I (1406-1437)), and I think it might as well be in a different language. The Act is translated as:

Item, of any gold and silver mines that are found in any lord's lands of the realm, and it may be proved that three halfpennies may be refined of silver from a pound of lead, the lords of the parliament consent that such mines shall be the king's, as is the custom in other realms.

Basically, this means that gold and (certain) silver mines are the property of the Crown as regalia minora (not by Royal Prerogative as in England and Wales, but by statute).

The above text follows the version printed in The Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, 1424–1707, vols 2–11, which were published between 1814 and 1824. Thomas Thomson, the editor (and one of the Records Commissioners), made conscious decisions regarding the sources he used when editing the text. He relied heavily on The Actis and Constitutiounis of the Realme of Scotland (Robert Lekprevik 1566) which was the first printed edition of the Acts of Parliament. He also used two fifteenth century manuscripts as "useful correctives". Despite the fact that the printed edition contained errors, "Thomson judged: a) That the fifteenth-century manuscripts were of secondary value as compared to a sixteenth-century printed text. b) That he should reproduce the 1566 acts, silently correcting obvious errors, but giving the whole a fifteenth-century appearance by adopting, ad hoc, the language and orthography found in the fifteenth-century manuscripts."

The 1566 printed edition presented the Act as follows:

ITEM Gif ony myne of gold or siluer be fundin in ony Lor∣dis landis of the Realme, and it may be preuit that thre half pennyis of siluer may be fynit out of the pund of leid: ¶ The Lordis of Parliament consentis, that sic myne be the Kingis, as is vsuall of vther Realmes.

There are minor differences in spelling, but the meaning is the same as the one in Thomnson's edition (and which is on legislation.gov.uk). While the two fifteenth century manuscripts were older than the printed edition, these also contained errors and ommissions. The problem is that there are no authoritative sources as the original records of these early Acts no longer exist. It seems likely that even the 1566 printed edition was not based on an original fifteenth century manuscript (the official register must have been long lost or destroyed prior to 1566), rather it attempted to provide "the definitive crown version of the fifteenth-century acts as they were perceived in the late sixteenth century." The Acts have been revised a number of times in the fifteenth century and it is likely that the 1566 edition is based on these revised Acts.

While the 1424 Act might not be particularly important anymore, the editors of The Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707 (St Andrews 2007-2018) note that "in some instances Thomson went so far as to invent phrases, alter the original terminology and rearrange the order of material in an effort to ‘tidy up’ or ‘correct’ what he considered to be errors." Not to mention that new material has come to light since Thomson's edition. If you look at The Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707, then you'll note that different manuscripts have slightly different versions of the text. Instead of "gif ony", you can have "Alsua gyf any", in place of "thre halfpennys" one manuscript denotes this by "iii1/2 d" and another one by "iii halfpenneis". These are fairly minor variations, but in one of the manuscripts you'll find "and it may be provit at iii halfpenneis may be fundin [not fynit] of silvir out of the lib' of led", while another one completely omits "of silvir" – which does change the meaning of the sentence.

​

While gold and silver mines belong to the Crown, landowners have a statutory right under the Mines and Metals Act 1592 (also nearly in a different language as far as I'm concerned) to obtain a grant of the mines within their lands. The Crown Estate Scotland manages "the rights to naturally occurring gold and silver (known as Mines Royal) across most of Scotland". (Contrary to what they state, the term "Mines Royal" is not commonly used in Scotland – but that's probably another story).

The Act, as you have no doubt noted, refers specifically to mines, but it remains to be seen whether "mine" limits the Crown’s claim to gold or silver obtained by mining as there is no court case on this point. There is some ambiguity (in my view), for example, whether gold panning is considered as mining.

​

​

Sources

I mainly relied on the excellent The Records of the Parliaments of Scotland to 1707:

Gillian H MacIntosh, Alastair J Mann and Roland J Tanner, Editorial Introduction

Notes on the Sources for the Parliaments of Scotland, 1424-1466

​

See also:

Irene E O'Brien, The Scottish Parliament in the 15th and 16th centuries (PhD thesis, University of Glasgow 1980)

​

(Edit - spelling, formatting and clarity)

The law introduced by the Norwegian king Magnus the Law-mender in 1274 was based on the originally oral laws of the ancient regional parliament-courts. It remained the law of Norway until it was replaced by the Danish king in 1688.

By the 1500's, this was already a serious problem - norse was effectively a dead language by the 1550's, the province of antiquarians and a few interested clerics. The amateur translations into Latin, Danish and Middle Norwegian were full of errors and misinterpretations, and were in any case based on a manuscript tradition that had diverged as early as the 1350's.

One reason this could go on for as long as it did may be that the parliament-courts still relied more on a combination of oral traditions and a sense of the spirit of the law than the actual law book. The people passing judgement were the body of respected men of the parish that would evolve into the jury, while the official that would become the judge simply acted as a secretary, taking down a report for the Royal Court.

As the kings of Denmark-Norway consolidated their power in the process that would culminate in the autocracy, this secretary would take on more and more authority, and their needs formed part of the justification for a series of reformed laws, written in the language of the royal court and administration, Danish. The standard written language of Norway continued to be Danish until the 19th century. The Norwegian constitution is still written in early 19th century Dano-Norwegian, and historical linguists have to be consulted to get the spelling and grammar right when reforms and amendments are made.