The Saxons in England, Volume 2 (of 2): A history of the English commonwealth till the period of the Norman conquest — John Shaqi
The Saxons in England, Volume 2 (of 2): A history of the English commonwealth till the period of the Norman conquestKemble, John Mitchell
History
The Saxons in England, Volume 2 (of 2): A history of the English commonwealth till the period of the Norman conquest
Kemble, John Mitchell
Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066
For in fact the king was the authority to be resorted to in the last
instance; not because he could introduce a system of jurisprudence
founded upon Roman Decretals or Alaric’s Breviary,—which his favourite
advisers would probably have liked much better than his ealdormen,
præfects and people,—but because he could lend the aid of the state to
enforce the judgments of the several courts, or even compel the courts
to give judgment, by reason of the central power which he wielded as
king. As long however as the courts themselves were willing to decide
causes brought before them, which the people assembled in the gemóts
did, under the presidency and direction of the customary officers, the
king had no right to interfere: and even to appeal to the king until
justice had been actually denied in the proper quarter was an offence
under the Saxon law, punishable by fine[63]. In short, under that law,
the people were themselves the judges, and helped the geréfa to find the
judgment, be the court what it might be. The king’s authority could give
no more than power to execute the sentence. It is remarkable enough that
while Asser speaks of the instruction and correction which Ælfred
administered to his judges, he does not even insinuate that their
decisions were reversed,—a fact perfectly intelligible when we bear in
mind that these decisions were not those of judges in our sense of the
word, and as the Mirror plainly understood them, but of the people in
their own courts, finding the judgment according to customary law. It
would have been a very different case had the courts been the king’s
courts; and in those where the class called king’s thanes stood to right
either before the king himself, or the king’s geréfa, it is possible
that Ælfred may have interfered. This he had full right to do, inasmuch
as these thanes were exclusively his own sócmen, and must take such law
as he chose to give them[64]. Indeed the words of Asser seem
reconcileable with the general state of the law in Ælfred’s time only on
the supposition that he refers to these royal courts or þeningmanna
gemót; for the king could never have been expected to be present at
every shire- or hundred-mót, and yet Asser says he diligently
investigated such judgments as were given when he was not present,
almost all over his region. This only becomes probable when confined to
the administration of justice in the several counties in his own royal
courts, and by his own royal reeves, in whose method of proceeding he
was at liberty to introduce much more extensive alterations at pleasure,
than he could have done in the customary law of the shires or other
districts.
-----
Footnote 63:
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