Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law: Being an Essay Supplemental to (1) 'The English Village Community', (2) 'The Tribal System in Wales'Seebohm, Frederic
History
Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law: Being an Essay Supplemental to (1) 'The English Village Community', (2) 'The Tribal System in Wales'
Seebohm, Frederic
Anglo-Saxons; Law, Anglo-Saxon; Law, Medieval; Tribes -- Great Britain
The breaking up of tribal custom thus was not all at once, but by steps.
At first _terra Salica_ was limited to men, then female succession was
allowed, and lastly, in default of kindred, stranger vicini under
certain conditions were admitted to the lapsed inheritance.
IV. THE WERGELDS AND DIVISION OF CLASSES IN THE ‘LEX RIPUARIORUM.’
The customs of the Ripuarian Franks as to wergelds, as might be expected,
do not seem to have varied much from those of the Salic Franks. They were
probably neighbours in close contact with each other, and, judging from
the laws, the population of the district was a mixed one.
[Sidenote: Wergeld of freeman as under the Lex Salica, 200 gold solidi.
That of the official threefold.]
The wergeld of the Ripuarian ingenuus, like that of the Salic Frank
or barbarian living under the Lex Salica, was 200 gold solidi, and 12
co-swearers were required to deny the homicide (Tit. VII.).
Here again official position seems, as under the Salic law, to be
protected by a triple wergeld. The _grafio_ or _comes_, who was a fiscal
judge, had a wergeld of 600 solidi (Tit. LIII.). The payment for one _in
truste regis_ was also 600 solidi (Tit. XI.).
On the other hand, the wergeld of a ‘_homo regis_’ (Tit. IX.), like that
of the ‘_puer regis_’ of the Salic law, was only 100 solidi, and that
of the ‘man’ of the Church the same (Tit. X.), _i.e._ half that of the
Ripuarian ingenuus.
Consistently with this, the triple payment for killing a woman between
childbearing and 40, as also in the Salic Law, was 600 solidi, whilst the
wergeld of the ‘femina regia’ or ‘ecclesiastica’ was only 300 solidi.
There are apparently hardly any indications as to how or to whom the
wergelds were to be paid. There is only one reference to the _parentes_,
and that is not connected with the wergelds. In Tit. LXXXV. it is stated
that he who shall disinter a corpse and rob it shall pay 200 solidi and
be ‘expelled till he shall satisfy the _parentes_.’
The murderer alone seems to be responsible, unless indeed the few words
added to the clauses imposing the triple wergeld of 600 solidi upon the
murderer of a woman may be taken to be of general application. The words
are these:--
‘If the murderer shall be poor, so that he cannot pay at once,
then let him pay _per tres decessiones filiorum_.’
Has it really come to this, that since the Edict of Childeric II.
came into force the parentes are released, and the descendants of the
murderer, for three generations, are to be in slavery till the wergeld is
paid? It may be so, for the penalty in default of payment of the wergeld
probably included his own slavery, which involved with it that of his
descendants.
[Sidenote: The fisc gradually takes the place of the kindred.]
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