Our Legal Heritage: The First Thousand Years: 600 - 1600: King Aethelbert - Queen ElizabethReilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage: The First Thousand Years: 600 - 1600: King Aethelbert - Queen Elizabeth
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
William allowed Jewish traders to follow him from Normandy and
settle in separate sections of the main towns. They loaned money
for the building of castles and cathedrals. Christians were not
allowed by the church to engage in this usury. The Jews could
not become citizens nor could they have standing in the local
courts. Instead, a royal justiciar secured justice for them. The
Jews could practice their own religion. Only Jews could wear
yellow.
William was succeeded as King by his son William II, who imposed
on many of the customs of the nation to get more money for
himself.
The Law
The Norman conquerors brought no written law, but affirmed the
laws of the nation. Two they especially enforced were:
Anyone caught in the act of digging up the King's road, felling a
tree across it, or attacking someone so that his blood spilled
on it shall pay a fine to the King.
All freemen shall have a surety who would hand him over to
justice for his offenses or pay the damages or fines due. Also,
the entire hundred was the ultimate surety for murder and would
have to pay a "murdrum" fine.
William made these decrees:
No cattle shall be sold except in towns and before three
witnesses.
For the sale of ancient chattels, there must be a surety and a
warrantor.
No man shall be sold over the sea. (This ended the slave trade at
the port of Bristol.)
The death penalty for persons tried by court is abolished.
Judicial Procedure
"Ecclesiastical" courts were created for bishops to preside over
issues concerning the cure of souls and criminal cases in which
the ordeal was used. When William did not preside over this
court, an appeal could be made to him.
The hundred and shire courts now sat without a bishop and handled
only "civil" cases. They were conducted by the King's own
appointed sheriff. Only freemen and not bound villeins had
standing in this court.
William held court or sent the justiciar or commissioners to hold
his Royal Court [Curia Regis] in the various districts. The
commissioner appointed groups of local men to give a collective
verdict upon oath for each trial he conducted. A person could
spend months trying to catch up with the Royal Court to present a
case.
William 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.
A dispute between a Norman and an English man over land or a
criminal act could be decided by trial by 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 pick-axes 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.
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