FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130  
131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   >>   >|  
uncertain; so that if so be that this man is guiltless, that book which we hold in our hands shall [in revolving] follow the ordinary course of the sun; but that if he be guilty that book shall move backwards." There were other forms of procedure, in some of which, as in the trial of the cross and the touching of the bier, the supposed criminal was confronted with his victim. Ordeals were abolished in England in the year 1219; but the tradition did not die, and in the time of the Commonwealth, Hopkins, the notorious witchfinder, ridiculed in "Hudibras," employed the cold-water ordeal for the conviction of witches. "The suspected person," says Sir Walter Scott, "was wrapped in a sheet, having the great toes and thumbs tied together, and so dragged through a pond or river. If she sank, it was received in favour of the accused; but if the body floated (which must have occurred ten times for once, if it was placed with care on the surface of the water) the accused was condemned." That the issue of the ordeal might be arranged appears to have been recognized even in the Middle Ages. Thus, fifty Englishmen, it is said, having been ordered by William Rufus to be tried by the hot iron, every one of them escaped unhurt. Thereupon the King announced that he would try them again by the judgment of his court and not abide by the so-called judgment of God, "which was made favourable or unfavourable at any man's pleasure." By the Assize of Northampton (1176) suspected persons, who had been acquitted by the water ordeal, were liable to banishment, though again acquitted by the "judgment of God." Trial by battle, though obviously based on the same principle, was technically distinguished from the ordeal or judgment. The former appears to have arisen in the countries of the North, where it was known as the _holmgang_, the combats taking place on islands. Among the English this mode of settling differences was not much in favour either before or after the Norman Conquest; and the statutes of William I. contain provisions whereby the natives were permitted to substitute the more familiar ordeal for the trial by battle. "It was also decreed there that if a Frenchman summon an Englishman for perjury or murder, theft, homicide, or 'ran'--as the English call evident rape, which cannot be denied--the Englishman shall defend himself as he prefers, either through the ordeal of iron or through wager of battle. But if the Englishman be in
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130  
131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
ordeal
 

judgment

 

Englishman

 

battle

 

English

 

accused

 

William

 

appears

 

acquitted

 
favour

suspected

 
persons
 

evident

 
Assize
 

Northampton

 

liable

 
murder
 

perjury

 

homicide

 
pleasure

banishment
 

defend

 
announced
 

Thereupon

 

prefers

 
unfavourable
 

favourable

 

called

 

denied

 

familiar


differences
 
settling
 

unhurt

 

Norman

 

Conquest

 

natives

 

permitted

 

substitute

 
provisions
 

statutes


decreed

 
arisen
 

countries

 

distinguished

 

technically

 
principle
 

summon

 

Frenchman

 

islands

 

taking