History of the FranksGregory, Bishop of Tours, Saint
History
History of the Franks
Gregory, Bishop of Tours, Saint
France -- Church history -- To 987; France -- History -- To 987; Franks -- History -- To 768
[EG] P. =186=, c. 47. This feud, the sequel of which is given in Book
IX, c. 19, is of some interest in the study of the criminal law of
the period, but is told by Gregory in a somewhat tangled way, so that
it seems best to summarize the main points in a note. A company who
were celebrating Christmas were invited by a priest “to go to his
house, to drink.” Evidently they had been drinking too much already,
for one of them, Austrighysel, drew his sword and killed the priest’s
slave who brought the message. Thereupon the feud began. Another
of the company, Sichar, “who was on terms of friendship with the
priest,” attacked Austrighysel at the church door, but the latter was
forewarned and his party, killing Sichar’s servants, made off with
his gold and silver and other property, Sichar himself escaping in
the confusion. The case came before a court of citizens (_in judicio
civium_) which gave judgment against Austrighysel, who was to pay
the fine for homicide and for taking property without warrant. But
Sichar, in the true spirit of a feudist, did not wait for this
judgment. Learning where the property was kept, he took an armed
band, murdered all in the house where the treasure was, and even
carried off the flocks and herds. “On hearing this,” says Gregory,
“we were greatly vexed and in conjunction with the judge we sent
messengers to them to come to our presence and make a reasonable
settlement and depart in peace, that the quarrel might not breed
greater trouble.” Gregory even offered to advance the church’s money
to pay the fine of the guilty one, if the latter had not money
himself. But Chramsind, the representative of the family Sichar had
murdered in the last incident, refused to accept settlement, and
hearing later a false report that Sichar had been killed by one of
his own slaves, he took up the feud anew, “summoned his kinsmen and
friends,” plundered Sichar’s house, and killed all the slaves on his
estate. The settlement of this tangled feud is extremely interesting,
since it shows how the courts of the period were straining every
effort to overcome the time-honored custom of the blood feud. “Then
the two parties were summoned before the judge in the city and
pleaded their causes, and the verdict was found by the judges that
he [Chramsind] who had been unwilling to accept a money payment
before and had burned the houses, should lose half of the award which
[otherwise] would have been adjudged to him,--this was done contrary
to the law if only peace could be restored--but Sichar was to pay
the other half of the fine. Then the church gave money to the amount
of the verdict; Sichar paid his fine and received a receipt for it,
each party swearing to the other that at no time should one party go
muttering things against the other. And thus the strife ended.” It
did not end, however, as the nineteenth chapter of the ninth book
shows.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account