The History of England - Vols. 1 to 6 (33 page)

Theft and robbery were frequent among the Anglo-Saxons. In order to impose some check upon these crimes, it was ordained, that no man should sell or buy any thing above twenty pence value, except in open market;
c
and every bargain of sale must be

executed before witnesses.d
Gangs of robbers much disturbed the peace of the country; and the law determined, that a tribe of banditti, consisting of between seven and thirty-five persons, was to be called a
turma,
or troop: Any greater company was

denominated an army.e
The punishments for this crime were various, but none of them capital.
f
If any man could track his stolen cattle into another’s ground, the latter was obliged to show the tracks out of it, or pay their value.
g

Rebellion, to whatever excess it was carried, was not capital, but might be redeemed

by a sum of money.h
The legislators, knowing it impossible to prevent all disorders, only imposed a higher fine on breaches of the peace committed in the king’s court, or before an alderman or bishop. An alehouse too seems to have been considered as a PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

132

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1

privileged place; and any quarrels that arose there were more severely punished than

elsewhere.i

If the manner of punishing crimes among the Anglo-Saxons

Rules of proof.

appear singular, the proofs were not less so; and were also the natural result of the situation of those people. Whatever we may imagine concerning the usual truth and sincerity of men, who live in a rude and barbarous state, there is much more falsehood, and even perjury among them, than among civilized nations: Virtue, which is nothing but a more enlarged and more cultivated reason, never flourishes to any degree, nor is founded on steady principles of honour, except where a good education becomes general; and where men are taught the pernicious consequences of vice, treachery, and immorality. Even superstition, though more prevalent among ignorant nations, is but a poor supply for the defects in knowledge and education: Our European ancestors, who employed every moment the expedient of swearing on extraordinary crosses and reliques, were less honourable in all engagements than their posterity, who from experience have omitted those ineffectual securities. This general proneness to perjury was much encreased by the usual want of discernment in judges, who could not discuss an intricate evidence, and were obliged

to number, not weigh, the testimony of the witnesses.k
Hence the ridiculous practice of obliging men to bring compurgators, who, as they did not pretend to know any thing of the fact, expressed upon oath, that they believed the person spoke true; and these compurgators were in some cases multiplied to the number of three hundred.
l

The practice also of single combat was employed by most nations on the continent as a remedy against false evidence;
m
and though it was frequently dropped, from the opposition of the clergy, it was continually revived, from experience of the falsehood

attending the testimony of witnesses.n
It became at last a species of jurisprudence: The cases were determined by law, in which the party might challenge his adversary,

or the witnesses, or the judge himself:o
And though these customs were absurd, they were rather an improvement on the methods of trial, which had formerly been practised among those barbarous nations, and which still prevailed among the Anglo-Saxons.

When any controversy about a fact became too intricate for those ignorant judges to unravel, they had recourse to what they called the judgment of God, that is, to fortune: Their methods of consulting this oracle were various. One of them was the decision by the cross: It was practised in this manner. When a person was accused of any crime, he first cleared himself by oath, and he was attended by eleven compurgators.

He next took two pieces of wood, one of which was marked with the sign of the cross; and wrapping both up in wool, he placed them on the altar, or on some celebrated relique. After solemn prayers for the success of the experiment, a priest, or in his stead some unexperienced youth, took up one of the pieces of wood, and if he happened upon that which was marked with the figure of the cross, the person was pronounced innocent; if otherwise, guilty.
p
This practice, as it arose from superstition, was abolished by it in France. The emperor, Lewis the Debonnaire, prohibited that method of trial, not because it was uncertain, but lest that sacred figure, says he, of the cross should be prostituted in common disputes and controversies
q

PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

133

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1

The ordeal was another established method of trial among the Anglo-Saxons. It was practised either by boiling water or red-hot iron. The former was appropriated to the common people; the latter to the nobility. The water or iron was consecrated by many

prayers, masses, fastings, and exorcisms;r
after which, the person accused either took up a stone sunk in the water
s
to a certain depth, or carried the iron to a certain distance; and his hand being wrapped up, and the covering sealed for three days, if there appeared, on examining it, no marks of burning, he was pronounced innocent; if

otherwise, guilty.t
The trial by cold water was different: The person was thrown into consecrated water; if he swam, he was guilty; if he sunk, innocent.
u
It is difficult for us to conceive, how any innocent person could ever escape by the one trial, or any criminal be convicted by the other. But there was another usage admirably calculated for allowing every criminal to escape, who had confidence enough to try it. A consecrated cake, called a corsned, was produced; which if the person could swallow

and digest, he was pronounced innocent.w

The feudal law, if it had place at all among the Anglo-Saxons, Military force.

which is doubtful, was not certainly extended over all the landed property, and was not attended with those consequences of homage, reliefs,
x

wardship, marriage, and other burthens, which were inseparable from it in the kingdoms of the continent. As the Saxons expelled or almost entirely destroyed the ancient Britons, they planted themselves in this island on the same footing with their ancestors in Germany, and found no occasion for the feudal institutions,
y
which were calculated to maintain a kind of standing army, always in readiness to suppress any insurrection among the conquered people. The trouble and expence of defending the state in England lay equally upon all the land; and it was usual for every five hides to equip a man for the service. The
trinoda necessitas,
as it was called, or the burthen of military expeditions, of repairing highways, and of building and supporting bridges, was inseparable from landed property, even though it belonged to the church or monasteries, unless exempted by a particular charter.
z
The ceorles or husbandmen were provided with arms, and were obliged to take their turn in military duty.
a
There were computed to be 243,600 hides in England;
b
consequently the ordinary military force of the kingdom consisted of 48,720 men; though, no doubt, on extraordinary occasions, a greater number might be assembled. The king and nobility had some

military tenants, who were called Sithcun-men.c
And there were some lands annexed to the office of aldermen, and to other offices; but these probably were not of great extent, and were possessed only during pleasure, as in the commencement of the feudal law in other countries of Europe.

The revenue of the king seems to have consisted chiefly in his Public revenue.

demesnes, which were large; and in the tolls and imposts which he probably levied at discretion on the boroughs and sea-ports, that lay within his demesnes. He could not alienate any part of the crown lands, even to religious uses, without the consent of the states.
d
Danegelt was a land-tax of a shilling a hide, imposed by the states,
e
either for payment of the sums exacted by the Danes, or for putting the kingdom in a posture of defence against those invaders .
f

The Saxon pound, as likewise that which was coined for some

Value of money.

centuries after the conquest, was near three times the weight of PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

134

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1

our present money: There were forty-eight shillings in the pound, and five pence in a shilling,
g
consequently a Saxon shilling was near a fifth heavier than ours, and a

Saxon penny near three times as heavy.h
As to the value of money in those times, compared to commodities, there are some, though not very certain, means of computation. A sheep by the laws of Athelstan was estimated at a shilling; that is, fifteen-pence of our money. The fleece was two-fifths of the value of the whole sheep;
i
much above its present estimation; and the reason probably was, that the Saxons, like the ancients, were little acquainted with any clothing but what was made of wool. Silk and cotton were quite unknown: Linen was not much used. An ox was computed at six times the value of a sheep; a cow at four.
k
If we suppose, that the cattle in that age, from the defects in husbandry, were not so large as they are at present in England, we may compute, that money was then near ten times of greater value. A horse was valued at about thirty-six shillings of our money, or thirty Saxon shillings;
l
a mare a third less. A man at three pounds.
m
The board-wages of a child the first year was eight shillings, together with a cow’s pasture in summer, and an

ox’s in winter.n
William of Malmesbury mentions it as a remarkably high price that William Rufus gave fifteen marks for a horse, or about thirty pounds of our present

money.o
Between the years 900 and 1000, Ednoth bought a hide of land for about 118

shillings of present money.
p
This was little more than a shilling an acre, which indeed appears to have been the usual price, as we may learn from other accounts.
q
A palfrey

was sold for twelve shillings about the year 966.r
The value of an ox in king Ethelred’s time was between seven and eight shillings; a cow about six shillings.
s

Gervas of Tilbury says, that in Henry I.’s time, bread which would suffice a hundred men for a day was rated at three shillings, or a shilling of that age; for it is thought that soon after the conquest a pound sterling was divided into twenty shillings: A sheep was rated at a shilling, and so of other things in proportion. In Athelstan’s time

a ram was valued at a shilling, or four-pence Saxon.t
The tenants of Shireburn were obliged, at their choice, to pay either sixpence or four hens.
u
About 1232, the abbot of St. Albans, going on a journey, hired seven handsome stout horses; and agreed, if any of them died on the road, to pay the owner 30 shillings a piece of our present

money.w
It is to be remarked, that in all ancient times, the raising of corn, especially wheat, being a species of manufactory, that commodity always bore a higher price, compared to cattle, than it does in our times.
x
The Saxon Chronicle tells us,
y
that in the reign of Edward the Confessor there was the most terrible famine ever known; in so much that a quarter of wheat rose to sixty pennies, or fifteen shillings of our present money. Consequently it was as dear as if it now cost seven pounds ten shillings. This much exceeds the great famine in the end of queen Elizabeth; when a quarter of wheat was sold for four pounds. Money in this last period was nearly of the same value as in our time. These severe famines are a certain proof of bad husbandry.

On the whole, there are three things to be considered, wherever a sum of money is mentioned in ancient times. First the change of denomination, by which a pound has been reduced to the third part of its ancient weight in silver. Secondly, the change in value by the greater plenty of money, which has reduced the same weight of silver to ten times less value, compared to commodities; and consequently a pound sterling to the thirtieth part of the ancient value. Thirdly, the fewer people and less industry, which were then to be found in every European kingdom. This circumstance made even the thirtieth part of the sum more difficult to levy, and caused any sum to have PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

135

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1

more than thirty times greater weight and influence both abroad and at home, than in our times; in the same manner that a sum, a hundred thousand pounds for instance, is at present more difficult to levy in a small state, such as Bavaria, and can produce greater effects on such a small community, than on England. This last difference is not easy to be calculated: But allowing, that England has now six times more industry, and three times more people than it had at the conquest and for some reigns after that period, we are, upon that supposition, to conceive taking all circumstances together, every sum of money mentioned by historians, as if it were multiplied more than a hundred fold above a sum of the same denomination at present.

In the Saxon times, land was divided equally among all the male-children of the deceased, according to the custom of Gavelkind. The practice of entails is to be found

in those times.z
Land was chiefly of two kinds, bookland, or land held by book or charter, which was regarded as full property, and defended to the heirs of the possessor, and folkland, or the land held by the ceorles and common people, who were removeable at pleasure, and were indeed only tenants during the will of their lords.