Legal antiquities : $b A collection of essays upon ancient laws and customsWhite, Edward J. (Edward Joseph)
History
Legal antiquities : $b A collection of essays upon ancient laws and customs
White, Edward J. (Edward Joseph)
Criminal law -- History; Law -- History; Law, Ancient; Punishment -- History
It is rather to be accounted for by the fact that it originated in the
customs of a warlike race, where force and superstition were a part of
the habits and customs of the people. (Lea. “Superstition and Force,” 4
ed. p. 409.)
The Burgundian and Lombard rulers, in accordance with the natural
fighting tendency of their subjects, were brought to recognize the trial
by battle, because it combined the physical joy of battle with the higher
ideals of an approved formal procedure, whereby the virtue known as
justice was supposed to be attained. In other words, the trial by battle
was the natural expression of the inclinations of both ruler and subject
of the period when it was established and crept into the established
procedure of the period, just as naturally as did the superstitions of
the past centuries,—the belief in witchcraft and ghosts,—find expression
along with the gems of literature of the same and a later period. The
institution was a product of the barbarism of the time. And trial by
battle was recognized as a form of ordeal which obtained among the
warlike German tribes from very ancient times, but it was not practiced
by the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons. (I. Pollock and Maitland’s History
English Law, p. 51.)
[11] Neilson, in speaking of the effect of chivalry, upon the trial by
battle, observed: “It reached its legal prime in the early feudal ages
and enjoyed a new era of activity under the auspices of later chivalry.”
Neilson’s “Trial by Combat.” p. 1.
[12] This is _de hors_ the subject at hand, but demonstrates that
chivalry and heroism are still abroad in the land and that these virtues
are confined to no particular class.
[13] 3 Cooley’s Bl. Com. 104; Coke, Litt. 261.
[14] _Ante idem._
[15] Comyns Dig. 252.
Neilson states that private duels succeeded trial by battle, in the
16’ and 17’ centuries, but of course trial by battle was not abolished
in England until the year 1819, and duelling had continued for several
centuries then. (Neilson’s “Trial by Combat,” pp. 18, 328.)
[16] Coke, Litt. 261.
[17] 2 Hawk. P. C. c. 45.
[18] Neilson’s “Trial by Combat,” p. 40.
[19] Coke, III. Inst. 157; I. Russell, Crimes, 495.
That Trial by Battle was introduced into England by the Normans, is now
quite generally conceded. “One ordeal the Normans recognized which had
no place in English law, namely, the ordeal of battle.” I. Pollock and
Maitland’s History Eng. Law, p. 74.
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