Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776Reilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
If compurgation failed, the defendant was told to go to church
and to take the sacrament only if he was innocent. If he took the
sacrament, he was tried by the process of "ordeal", which was
administered by the church. In the ordeal by cold water, he was given a
drink of holy water and then bound hand and foot and thrown into water.
If he floated, he was guilty beccause the holy water had rejected him.
If he sank, he was innocent. It was not necessary to drown to be deemed
innocent. In the ordeal by hot water, he had to pick up a stone from
inside a boiling cauldron. If his hand was healing in three days, he
was innocent. If it was festering, he was guilty. A similar ordeal was
that of hot iron, in which one had to carry in his hands a hot iron for
a certain distance. In the ordeal of the consecrated morsel, one would
swallow a morsel; if he choked on it, he was guilty. The results of the
ordeal were taken to indicate the will of God.
An archbishop's or bishop's oath was incontrovertible. If they
were accused, they could clear themselves with an oath that they were
guiltless. Lesser ranks could clear themselves with the oaths of at
least three compurgators of their rank or, for more serious offenses,
undergo the ordeal.
The shire and hundred courts were held for free tenants of a
lord and the judges were the tenants themselves. The feudal courts were
held for unfree tenants and the lord or his steward was the judge.
The earl presided over the shire court. He received one-third
of the profits of justice. The judges were the owners of certain pieces
of land. The shire court was held twice a year. There was little
distinction between secular and spiritual jurisdiction. A bishop sat
on the shire court. The shire court fulfilled all three functions of
government: judicial, legislative, and executive.
The courts had no efficient mode of compelling attendance or
enforcing their orders, except by outlawing the offender, that is,
putting him outside the protection of the law, so that anyone might
kill him with impunity. In grave cases, a special expedition could be
called against an offender.
The individual wronged had his choice of payment in money or engaging
in a blood feud. The sums of money of the system of bot, wer, and wite
were enormous, and often could not be paid. Then a man could be
declared outlaw or sold as a slave. If a person was outlawed, he also
forfeited all his goods to the king.
Cases of general importance concerned mayslaying, wounding, and
cattle-stealing.
A person convicted of murder, i.e. killing by stealth or
robbery [taking from a person's robe, that is, his person or breaking
into his home to steal] could be hung and his possessions confiscated.
A man had a self-help right to arrest a thief hand-habbende [a thief
found with the stolen goods in his hands] and a thief back-berend [a
thief found with the stolen goods on his back or about his person].
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account