roman empire collapsed - so did their uniform system of
law and order in the 5th century AD
localised/decentralised
Angles, Saxons and Jutes from north Germany took over using more
basic, small scale and local systems
north and east England was largely conquered and
ruled by Danes and Vikings
made their own laws
laws unfair and hard to enforce as they varied from place to place
centralised
9th-10th century authority of Anglo-Saxon kings grew
and they became central in making and enforcing laws
overview
crime
mostly theft of money, food or low value property
violent crimes were a small minority of cases
policing
had to catch criminal
calling out to fellow
villagers in the hue and cry
adult men from age of twelve put into groups of
ten called tithings
if one broke the law had to take him to court
punishments
compensation paid to victims called werguild
(blood price)
government ordered executions and physical
punishments more common by 1100
trials
juries of local people decided innocence or guilt
if couldn't decide used trial by ordeal
God decided if guilty
courts
held twice a year to deal with serious cases
royal courts
shire courts
held by every land owner
village courts
manor courts
community
why was it important?
England divided into regional
groups with smaller towns and
cities which were more closely
knit than the large Roman Empire
communities made up
of generations of
families
didn't want to break close relationships they had
one problem more likely to affect lots of people and be significant
easier to take collective responsibility
for peacekeeping in a small town than
in a large town
remember!!
made up of people from different generations
no official police force or
national government
if community was central, how would this affect
society, law, order and punishment?
everyone protected
more likely to get involved in hue and cry
know people and be aware of suspicious behaviour
less likely to commit crime
against people they know - guilt
tithings discourage people from crime and catch perpetrators quickly
influence punishment and cause biased judgement
church
why was it important?
Christianity wasn't illegal or persecuted
as it had been in Roman Britain
anglo-saxon kings made christianity the official
religion of england in 663AD at Synod if Whitby
played a part in shaping the laws
believed in one God who; -knew everything, -would help them follow right
not wrong, - would judge them on behaviour
church leaders said it was important to
try and reform criminals so their souls
can be saved instead of just punishing
them
clergy could often read and write unlike normal people at the time
new beliefs of christianity caused people to make new definitions of what
a crime was
remember!!
God was all
knowing and
ever present
only one God who everyone
believed in
God was just and decided your
eternal destiny
if god and christianity were central,
how would this affect their actions?
try to do good to get a place in heaven
judge people on behalf of God, who was fair, so
people would be properly convicted
God knew what you did and if
you had committed a crime or not
trial by ordeal was enforced, where God made the decision on innocence or guilt
God could tell if you were lying whilst being judged at trials
God could see if and when you had committed a crime
Important Aspects
werguild was a sum of money used to pay
compensation to the family of anyone you had killed
(accidentally or on purpose)
botguild was a sum of money used to pay compensation to anyone you had physically injured
(not killed) accidentally or on purpose
tithing was a group of men who had to be responsible for each
others' behaviour. if one committed a crime the others had the
responsibility of getting him to court to face judgement.
anyone witnessing a crime had to raise the 'hue and cry' - a shout for
anyone to come and help chase a criminal or sort out a fight or crime.
failure to raise or respond was seen as a great cry
repeat offenders were often punished by amputation of limbs instead of
execution as the church wanted time to save their souls, not just kill them
for punishment
members of the clergy were trained to read and write and were often employed by the king or nobles to keep records
many activities that had not been crimes under the Romans became crimes under the Anglo-Saxons due to the role of the church
eg slander was punished by cutting out the offenders tongue
TRIAL BY ORDEAL
used when jury members could not
agree with each other, usually in
cases of theft or murder when there
was no witnesses and so God is
asked to reveal the truth as, even
though human beings may not know
the truth, God definitely would.
trial by hot water
mainly used to prove innocence or guilt of men accused of crimes
accused put hand into boiling water and had to pick up an object, and the arm was
then bandaged. if in three days it was healing cleanly, the person was deemed to
be innocent
trial by hot iron
mainly used to prove innocence of guilt of
women accused of crimes
accused had to carry a piece of red-hot iron for three metres. her hand was then bandaged and unwrapped three
days later. if the wound was healing cleanly and without festering God was saying the woman was innocent.
trial by cold water
used by both sexes, but mainly men, to prove innocence or guilt.
people believed the water was pure and so would reveal truth. accused was lowered into a river or pond (as close to the church as possible) on the end of a rope
which was knotted around the waist. if the person sank and the knot went below the surface, the person was innocent as the 'pure' water was willing to accept this
person beneath its surface. if he and the knot floated, this rejection by the water proved his guilt.
trial by consecrated bread
taken by priests to prove their innocence or guilt
priest had to pray he would choke on bread if he lied, and then he
had to eat a piece of consecrated bread. if he choked, he was guilty
as God would not allow a sinner to eat consecrated bread.
seemed lenient, but was in fact seen as the most effective derivative of trial by ordeal as God was sure to punish a dishonest priest
whichever kind was used, a careful religious ritual was
followed. the accused had to fast for three days
preceding a trial and hear mass in a church. all the trails,
except trial by cold water, were conducted in a church.
TRIAL BY JURY
decided innocence or guilt based on evidence but if
there was not conclusive evidence, judgement was
made based on the character of the accused/accuser
compurgation = oath sworn by jury members to say
accused was guilty based not upon evidence, but on the
character of the accused/accuser
Saxon Courts
royal courts, judged by king, attended by king accused and
lords and dealt with crimes that were serious/involved lords
shire courts, judged by local
noblemen, attended by local noble
men all landowners a
representative from each village
and the accused, dealt with
serious case e.g. murder
hundred courts, attended by freemen, dealt with less serious crimes
private courts, judged by landowner, attended by worker who had not done enough work on lord's land/ slaves
who had tried to run away (=accused) and the landowner, dealt with people who had broken local rules
The Blood Feud
when victims of crimes were legally
allowed to punish criminals
themselves. the right that the family
of a murdered victim to track down
and kill the murderer.
PROS; -harsh punishment that could act as source of revenge and a deterrent,
-cheap for the king/government as it removed need for police force.
CONS; -it often lead to more violence as people banded together to take revenge for an attack
(leading to another attack), -did not protect people who did not want to use violence against those
who had harmed them
Werguild (blood price) and Botguild (body payment)
later Saxon kings (eg King Ethelbert of Kent 603) abolished the blood feud and
introduced fines instead-werguilds and botguilds
the king decided on the level of compensation. the level of compensation was
higher for crimes against nobles that it was for crimes against freemen
noble killed=300 shillings
freeman killed=100 shillings
benefits = no lives are lost in punishment, punishment ends straight away (is discontinued) and it does not result in an on-going
cycle of violence. compensation remained a deterrent but was logically decided and implemented.
flaws = it was unequal and compensation differed due to status in society and so certain people were left worse off
Capital and Physical Punishment
Prisons were not used as a punishment, but instead only to hold people
before trial. they were seen as expensive, especially as taxes were usually
only collected in emergencies e.g. war.
capital punishment was used when people had committed treason against the king, arson or had betrayed their lord
physical punishment was used for reoffenders who were punished honestly if they were caught
show that society was quite lenient as physical punishments were only used for reoffenders so people got a second chance. However, both were harsh punishments.
Shows importance of loyalty to authority due to the crimes that were punished by execution. Outlawing shows brutality as no-one now cared for the criminal.
OUTLAW=someone who no longer had protection of law and could be killed by anyone as punishment. People would be
outlawed if they were the accused person in a criminal case and they did not show up to court.
COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY=where a group of people
are responsible for each other.
tithing system began in 10thC AD before which people had to rely on family and
friends to help them catch criminals. it included all males over 10 and aimed to
ensure people were caught and punished and the victim got what he deserved
without having to catch the criminal themselves.
STENGTHS = deterrent/more criminals punished/hard to get away with crime as
tithing know you well/more organised and fairer than old system as doesn't
depend on strength of family/cheap as no policeforce to be paid
WEAKNESSES = whole tithe could be blamed for one persons
actions/whole tithe could be corrupt and could therefore hold them to
account
EG punishments
minor crimes eg petty theft = fines
major crimes or repeat offences = fines/confiscation of property/beatings and floggings
reoffenders (first time was a fine)
stealing = cutting off hands or feet
alander = cutting out tongue
more serious crimes eg arson, treason = execution most commonly hanging but
sometimes beheading, stoning, burning or drowning
most serious crimes eg treason = execution by beheading, burning or hanging