>Scholars like Alain Boureau and Albrecht Classen have shown that references to prima nocta are literary, polemical, or satirical, not legal or administrative.
>The Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe (1486) is often cited as banning the practice, but it likely addressed rumors rather than an actual right.
>No medieval law codes or court records confirm its existence as a formal custom.
>So while a few historians have speculated about its reality, the overwhelming consensus is that prima nocta was a symbolic construct, used to dramatize feudal oppression or critique aristocratic power.
You literally only submitted one document. Meanwhile, there are 20-30 source documents citing blood libel. Are you retarded, weeaboo?