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
This is in itself a significant reminder that more or less of tribal
custom remained in force behind the screen of the laws from which most
of our evidence has been taken. And yet we seem to be almost forced to
the conclusion that if we try to realise the position of the twelve-hynde
settler we must regard him, at all events for the first few generations,
as in a very different position from that of the Norse odalman in the
old country. Even though as head of his family he may have brought
descendants and dependents with him, he could not in the new country
be at once surrounded by kinsmen and odal-sharers who with himself had
hereditary rights in the land.
[Sidenote: Anglo-Saxon twelve-hynde settler pays gafol and service direct
to the king.]
We thus come round again to the point that so far as he may have been
separated from his kindred the first Anglo-Saxon settler must have found
himself thrown upon the protection of his chief and into a position of
individual service. He becomes, as we have seen according to the scanty
evidence of the Laws of Ine, a king’s gesith, with military and judicial
and administrative duties to discharge, put into a post of service which
he cannot relinquish at pleasure. Service to the king has to some extent
taken the place of the restraints of kindred, and so in a sense, like
the twy-hynde man, he has become a gafolgelda, but paying his gafol and
services direct to the king, and _adscriptus glebæ_, but tied to an
estate and an official position instead of to a yardland.
This view of the position of the gesithcund and twelve-hynde class rests
very much upon the incidental evidence of the Dooms of Ine, but the truth
of it is confirmed by the independent evidence of the precious fragment
already referred to. For its interesting evidence shows that, in addition
to his holding of five hides of land, it was precisely into this position
of gafol-paying and service _direct to the king_ that the ceorl of
ancient custom had to climb in order to earn the gesithcund status and
the twelve-hynde wergeld.
Thus we arrive at a definite and practical mark distinguishing
ultimately, and perhaps more or less from the first, the twelve-hynde and
twy-hynde classes.
The twelve-hynde or landed class paid gafol and did service direct to
the king. The twy-hynde or dependent class paid gafol and did service to
the landed class, who from this point of view were middlemen between the
twy-hynde gafolgelda and the king.
[Sidenote: The holding direct from the king easily becomes a manor.]
We seem, therefore, thus early to arrive at something analogous to
Professor Maitland’s technical definition of the Manor as the fiscal
unit from which gafol is paid direct to the king, while its lord is
the receiver of the payments and services of its tenants. The single
landholder who is not under a manorial lord in the Domesday survey is
said to hold ‘as for a manor’--though he may have no tenants.
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