Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776: June 2011 (Sixth) EditionReilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776: June 2011 (Sixth) Edition
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
The Conquerer's Royal Court was called the "Curia Regis". When the
Conquerer wished to determine the national laws, he summoned twelve
elected representatives of each county to declare on oath the ancient
lawful customs and law as they existed in the time of the popular King
Edward the Confessor. The recording of this law was begun. A person
could spend months trying to catch up with the Royal Court to present a
case. Sometimes the Conquerer sent the justiciar or commissioners to
hold his Royal Court in the various districts. The commissioner
appointed groups of local men to give a collective verdict upon oath for
each trial he conducted. The Conquerer allowed, on an ad hoc basis,
certain high-level people such as bishops and abbots and those who made
a large payment, to have land disputes decided by an inquiry of
recognitors. Besides royal issues, the Curia Regis heard appeals from
lower court decisions. It used English, Norman, feudal, Roman, and canon
law legal principles to reach a decision, and was flexible and
expeditious.
A dispute between a Norman and an English man over land or a criminal
act could be decided by trial by combat [battle]. Each combatant first
swore to the truth of his cause and undertook to prove by his body the
truth of his cause by making the other surrender by crying "craven"
[craving forgiveness]. The combatants used weapons like pickaxes and
shields. Presumably the man in the wrong would not fight as well because
he was burdened with a guilty conscience. Although this trial was
thought to reflect God's will, it favored the physically fit and adept
person. After losing the trial by combat, the guilty person would be
punished appropriately.
London had its own traditions. All London citizens met at its folkmote,
which was held three times a year to determine its public officers, to
raise matters of public concern, and to make ordinances. Its criminal
court had the power of outlawry as did the county courts. Trade, land,
and other civil issues were dealt with by the Hustings Court, which met
every Monday in the Guildhall. The city was divided into wards, each of
which was under the charge of an elected alderman [elder man]. (The
election was by a small governing body and the most wealthy and
reputable men and not a popular election.) The aldermen had special
knowledge of the law and a duty to declare it at the Hustings Court.
Each alderman also conducted wardmotes in his ward and decided criminal
and civil issues between its residents. Within the wards were the guilds
of the city.
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