Crime and Punishment in the Middle Ages - Research Paper Example

Number] Crime and Punishment in the Middle Ages – The Anglo-Saxon and Norman Period The kind and extent of crimes committed and the specific punishments for such crimes directly reflect a society’s cultural and moral standings. Earlier when there was not much general public awareness about their rights and no media to highlight the shortcomings of the law formulated by the monarchical or ecclesiastical authorities, the crimes and punishment had a total different perspective to it as compared to the modern times. The early medieval era had laws inherited from the vicious tribes which were later modified as the mankind became more civilised, as well as humanised. The Middle Ages have been regarded as the time of severe punishments and intense torture for committing criminal activities. The harsh criminal justice system of the age went through several stages and was influenced by different cultures, civilizations and people. Since early medieval England had a monarchical or feudal system governing the people, law of that particular era was much rigid and brutal than the later era. The powerful kings, lords, barons and priests had the hold of all judicial matters and they resolved the matters the way which best suited their authorities1. William the Conqueror, crowned in 1066, believed in making an example of the ones who dared to disobey by maiming him for the rest of his life rather than simply executing them. He introduced three goals to make change in the crime and justice scenario. The first one was to firmly establish his power as England ruler, second was the restoration of peace and stability within the Kingdom and the third was getting support for the crown through taxes collection. He also introduced ten decrees for the welfare of the English people and established Christianity as state religion2. The people were given right to justice according to their status; slaves and poor were the ultimate victims of this system. Due to serfdom, the poor people were the most down-trodden and were harshly treated by the landlords; therefore, theft was the most common crime committed to get hold of the basic necessities of life in those times. Theft, on the other hand, was the most condemned crime of the era since honesty was regarded as the basic aspect of male honour3. The first written law for the English people was brought forward in Anglo-Saxon era which included crimes as petty as “seizing a man by the hair” to the hideous crime of murder and accordingly punishments were described for each relative crime. Though these jurisdictions were harsh but it is also a fact that they the Anglo Saxon law provide justice to the people by creating some fair principles for it. Since the monarchs, priests and other nobles with authority at their disposal were always concerned about retaining their place and hold in society and the up rise among the serfs and less privileged population against them, the most sought after and brutally punished crimes were treason, disloyalty against the king in any form, disobeying religious orders or customs etc.4 Unlike capital punishment administered in Anglo-Saxon era, the Norman era under the reign of William I implemented mutilation of the criminals in order to keep the population fearful of the authorities and discourage any scope of transgression against the kings and landlords. Those guilty of theft had their hand cut off, women guilty of murder were strangled and then burned, those guilty of hunting in parks under the jurisdiction of royalty had their ears cut off and the punishments for petty crimes continued to become brutal and cruel. The system of criminal justice established by William I act a guiding benchmark for the succeeding rulers. Later Henry I, son of William the Conqueror, brought forward the role of exchequer, which collected the “taxes, dues and rents” and also acted as judges and ruled the decisions of different disputes accordingly. The exchequers eventually became the first national courts and started to keep records of the trials and rulings5. Henry II improved the judicial system and made it more reachable to the general population for which he is also known as great justice and administrator of the justice system. The judges appointed by the king were sent all over the English county to resolve the cases including the civil ones. Those who were accused had to go through one of the three ordeals to prove their innocence. Ordeal by fire involved holding of hot iron bar and taking three steps. The burned hand was bandaged and was inspected after three days. The healing hand proved one innocent while a non-healing hand proved the accused as guilty. Ordeal by water involved throwing the accused person in water after tying his arms and legs. If he floated on the water he was proved innocent, while his sinking proved otherwise. Ordeal by combat was usually implemented for the nobles and aristocrats of the society to resolve their cases. The accused and accuser had to fight each other; whoever won was proved innocent.6 In 1215, it was decided that the church will not be taking part in decisions through ordeals as the church administration observed that the lives of fellowmen are not according to the religious teachings. Since the ordeals could not be administered without the ecclesiastical presence, the ordeals ceased to be implemented altogether. However, such criminal cases were later went under trial in presence of civil jury and, thus, laid foundation for the trial juries7. Dungeons and torture chambers were an essential part of the all the noble domains, where the accused whether guilty or not were kept under degrading conditions. The fate of these people solely depended upon the nobility and especially the kings and queens preferences and desires. The punishments and torture for all sorts of crimes were only implemented for the suppressed people and surfs while the noblemen had the privileged of unanswerable authority. There were unlimited options of torturing methods and instruments and were applied according to the extent the accused offended the nobility8. All the punishments had the same underlying objective of making it an example for the maximum population to abstain from defying and conspiring against the authorities. Therefore, all the capital punishments of hanging or executing the accused prisoner were done in public. However, the crimes involving the general population were usually settled by paying the fine to the victim. The fines prescribed to be paid for the layman whereas the commoner was way too low as compared for the nobility. In other words, the life of a noble man was worth six times as compared to the peasants9. Keeping law and order under control was quite difficult in this era where the feudal system had the responsibility of making the laws and orders It was also oppressive to the extremes of making the suppressed desperate for the mere trivialities of life. Sometimes, such desperation also evoked not only the peasants to rebel but also raised the rate of crimes among the population as the economy was also in control of the oppressors. Religious blasphemies were also common as people were unsatisfied with the religious representatives who took their proper share in exercising unjustified authority. Also the numerous upheavals among the slaves kept the medieval era full of turbulence.‎ Under such circumstances, the oppressors were left with the only option of inflicting torture on the guilty ones and even the innocent just to prove their supreme authority. Punishments were designed in a way that imposed maximum pain and suffering to the accused in order to encourage submissiveness among the people and discourage any untoward circumstances. During this era, thrashing, branding, maiming as well as disfiguring and forced to be presented disgracefully in public were the chief punishments next to capital punishment like death. However, the punishments were altered or adjusted according to the class and status of the guilty ones. The clerics had the immunity granted by the church as “the benefit of clergy” and so were exempted from almost all punishments especially that of the capital punishments10. The rich and noblemen could compensate their capital punishments by paying a certain amount of fines also the property and the rich class itself was protected by the law as those who attacked them or their property were inflicted with severe punishments as compared to the poor class. Slaves, however were the most affected from this system of law and were sentenced to severest punishments including that of torturous capital punishment for the most trivial of crimes committed. The punishments for the crimes committed during the medieval era were revised with the advent of each new monarch or authority. Eventually, the crime and punishment criteria have been generalised over time by keeping in mind the equal access to justice for all. This has been a slow process with an extensive number of people sacrificed in the due course. However, judicial system still requires a lot of revising and considerations for the less privileged by keeping the process transparent and punishments effective to reduce the overall crime rates. Reference List Briggs, John, Christopher Harrison, Angus McInnes, and David Vincent. Crime and Punishment in England, 1100-1990: An Introductory History. America: UCL Press, 1996. Crick, Julia and Elisabeth van Houts. A Social History of England, 900-1200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Donnelly, Mark, and Daniel Diehl. The Big Book of Pain: Torture & Punishment through History. Stroud: History Press, 2008. Du, Cane E. F. The Punishment and Prevention of Crime. London: Macmillan and Co, 1885. Gardner, Thomas and Terry Anderson. Criminal Law. London: Cengage Learning, 2011. Hanawalt, Barbara and David Wallace. Medieval Crime and Social Control. Minnesota‎ : University of Minnesota Press, 1999. Hostettler, John. A History of Criminal Justice in England and Wales. London: Waterside Press, 2009. Janin, Hunt. Medieval Justice: Cases and Laws in France, England and Germany, 500-1500. NJ: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004. Jones, Karen. Gender and Petty Crime in Late Medieval England: The Local Courts in Kent, 1460-1560. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2006. Roth, Mitchel P. Crime and Punishment: A History of the Criminal Justice System. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. Read More