In law-suits among the Anglo-Saxons, the usual kinds of proof were by oath, by witnesses, by cojurors, and by the ordeal of hot iron, or the judgment of God. It was at an early period also customary, in the heathen North, to use by way of proof oaths, cojurors, and witnesses; but instead of the ordeal by hot iron, which was first introduced under Christianity, the old Northmen had quite a different way of deciding their legal disputes, and one which agreed better with their martial spirit, namely, by duel. By some this method was also considered a peculiar kind of God’s judgment; but it should rather, perhaps, be regarded as the subjecting of the original feud, or quarrel, to certain settled forms. This sort of combat was called “_holmgang_,” because the duel generally took place on a small island, or _holm_, where it was conducted according to fixed laws. Both plaintiff and defendant had the right of challenging their adversary. Although this mode of deciding legal disputes might easily be, and indeed sometimes was, abused by evildoers—who did not scruple to take advantage of the weakness and want of warlike skill in others, in order to obtain possession of their estates—still it was far more in favour in the North than the proofs by oath and cojurors. The Normans carried it with them into Normandy; and there can scarcely be a doubt that the Danes and Normans, long before the Norman conquest of England—nay, long before Canute the Great’s time—introduced it into the _Danelag_ in the north of England; where, at least, the word “_Holmgang_,” in its pure Scandinavian meaning, was in use for many generations.