Legal Studies 3080

Going Further

The history of the development of our current legal system - especially our criminal law system - can be fascinating to study. Over 1,000 years ago in Anglo-Saxon England, for instance, where the system really started, people accused of crimes were often called upon to defend themselves in ways like the following:

• Trial by Combat. This method of trial involved an armed battle between the accuser and the accused. Women and priests who were involved in disputes could have "champions" fight for them on their behalf. Trial by combat was available only in private matters and could not be used when the Crown was a party to the dispute. It was felt by the participants that those who sanctioned such proceedings that God would intervene to defend the truthful or honest person.
  
  

• Trial by Ordeal . This type of trial was basically an appeal to supernatural powers to assist in the decision-making process. Those accused would subject themselves to some form of ordeal, and if they passed it successfully they were declared innocent. This type of trial could take many forms. Some examples include:
  
  

• Ordeal of Hot Iron. The accused would be given a rod of hot iron and would have to carry it, bare-handed, a distance of nine feet. The hand would then be bound up, and after three days the bandages would be removed. If the wound was unclean and had festered, the accused was pronounced guilty.
  

• Ordeal of Cold Water. This form of trial was based on the idea that a body of water, which was the symbol of purity, would receive the innocent and reject the guilty. Using this logic, people accused of a crime would be immersed in water and if they sank they were innocent, but if they floated they were guilty. Safeguards were implemented to prevent "innocent" people from drowning; however, accidents did occur.
  

• Ordeal of the Cursed Morsel. In this trial the accused was forced to swallow a certain type of morsel; one example was a feather inside some sort of food. If those accused were able to swallow it successfully they were innocent, but if they chocked they were guilty. In another variation of this ordeal, those accused were given dry bread and stale cheese to eat while they answered questions. If they choked this indicated that they had a guilty conscience.