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
Throughout Wessex, speaking generally, they seem to have been regarded
as the two prominent classes in practical agricultural life. The general
facts of everyday observation marked off the gesithcundman as belonging
to the ruling class, holding land direct from the King as the King’s
gesith, while the ceorlisc man, speaking generally, in his relation to
land was the gafol-gelda or gebur sometimes probably holding his yardland
on the King’s demesne, but mostly perhaps and more and more often as the
tenant of the gesithcundman. This, it would seem, had become so general
that in King Alfred’s day and perhaps even in King Ine’s, ignoring the
exceptional classes between the gesithcund and the other class, there was
no absurdity in King Alfred’s claiming that equally dear with the Danish
lysing the ‘ceorl who sits on gafol land’ should have a twy-hynde wergeld.
The division into gesithcund and ceorlisc classes was doubtless a
somewhat rough and wide generalisation. There were, we know, men without
land who belonged to the gesithcund class, and ceorls who were not
tenants of yardlands. And even among the tenants of yardlands some paid
gafol only and others both gafol and week-work. But for our purpose the
fact to be noted is that the generalisation was sufficiently near the
truth for it to be made.
[Sidenote: The ceorlisc class would include newly made freedmen.]
We must not infer that these two classes included strictly the whole
population. Judging from Continental evidence, Wessex must have been very
exceptional indeed if there were not everywhere numerous _theows_ or
thralls. From this class Anglo-Saxon wills and other documents show that
there was a constant stream of freedmen or theows who by emancipation
were allowed to creep up into the ceorlisc class, partly as the result of
Christian impulse, and partly probably from the lack of tenants to occupy
the yardlands left vacant by the desolation caused by constant wars.
Thus while, broadly speaking, the gesithcund and the ceorlisc classes
may have corresponded to the twelve-hynde and twy-hynde classes, they
were not absolutely identical. The two lines of distinction had not
the same origin and did not run absolutely parallel. But they may well
have worked in the same direction. The original distinction founded
upon the possession or absence of the perfect kindred and ‘hyndens
of oath-helpers’ was rooted in tribal instincts and never wholly
extinguished throughout Anglo-Saxon history. The gesithcund class, most
perfect in their kindred and nearest in their relation to the King,
influenced perhaps by traditions of Roman land management, naturally
grew up into a twelve-hynde and landed class, while the ceorlisc class,
recruited from outside and from below, just as naturally became their
tenants.
[Sidenote: The gulf between the two classes existed in King Alfred’s
time.]
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