history crime and punishment

• First section: policing methods and crime and punishment in the Anglo-Saxon era


  Just a title, not a flash card
• What were tithings in the Anglo-Saxon era?


  Tithings were groups of 10 men over the age of 12 in the tenth century where every member in the group was reapnsible for each other and if one man broke the law, the other men in the tithing would bring him to court.
• What was a hue and cry in the Anglo-Saxon era ?


  It was a system where the victim of a crime had to call a hue and cry where everyone in the village had to stop what they were doing immediately to go and catch the criminal in a hunt. If one person didn't join the hue and cry, everyone in the village had to pay a huge fine.
• What was trial by jury in the Anglo-Saxon era?


  The trial by jury relied on the local community and the jury consisted of men who both knew the accused and the accuser. Both accused and accuser would tell their version of events and the jury decided who was telling the truth. If no clear evidence or eye witnesses emerged, the jury would decided based on their knowledge of the accused and accuser. They would swear an oath if they believed the accused was guilty
• What was compurgation in the Anglo-Saxon era?


  If the jury felt that the accuser was more honest than the accused then they swore an oath called Compurgation to say that the accused was guilty.
• Who was in charge of the policing system in the Anglo-Saxon era?

  The village: everyone looked out for each other in the villages
• What was trial by ordeal in the Anglo-Saxon era?

  Trial by ordeal happened when the local jury could not decide if the accused was guilty or not, leading the Anglo-Saxons to turn to god to help them decide as they were very religious. All ordeals except trial by cold water took place in church and the church was responsible for these ordeals. A priest was always present. The accused had to fast for 3 days and hear mass in preparation.
• What trials by ordeal were taken by men Anglo-Saxon era? (2)


  Trial by cold water: the accused was tried with a knot above the waist and lowered into the water by a rope. If the accused sank below "God's pure water" , then he was innocent but if he floated, he was found guilty as he was rejected.

  Trial by hot water: the accused put his hand into boiling water to pick up an object and the hand was then bandaged for 3 days. If after 3 days the wound was healing, then he was innocent but if the wound was festering, then he was guilty.
• What trial by ordeal was taken by women in the Anglo-Saxon era?


  Trial by hot iron: the accused picked up a red hot iron weight and walked 3 paces with it in her hand. Her hand was then bandaged for 3 days. If after 3 days the wound was healing, then she was innocent but if the wound was festering, then she was guilty.
• What was trial by ordeal did priests take in the Anglo-Saxon era?


  Trial by blessed bread: another priest prayed that the accused would choke on the bread if he lied and the accused ate the bread. If he chocked, he was guilty. If he didn't, he was innocent.
• What was a wergild in the Anglo Saxon era and why was it unfair to certain people?


  A wergild was compensation paid to victims of crimes or to their families. It made further violence less likely and the level of fine was worked out and set through the king's law. It was unfair as prices for killing a noble was 300 shillings but the wergild for killing a freeman was 100 shillings and a peasant was lower and killing a Welshman was even lower. Wergild for physical injuries also varied on the body part: an eye was 50 shillings but a broken arm was only 6 shillings.
• What is the difference between capital punishment and corporal punishment?


  Capital punishment is the death penalty

  Corporal punishment was mutilation and physical punishment
• What was capital and corporal punishment like in the Anglo Saxon era? (Who did it affect?)

  Serous crimes such as treason or betraying your lord resulted in the death penalty as this harsh punishment showed the importance of loyalty to the king who was believed to have been chosen by god. Reoffenders were punished harshly if caught again and corporal punishment was carried out for continued reoffenders to deter them from further offences including mutilation (cutting off an eye or hand or ear or nose)
• Section 2: how far did the Normans change Anglo-Saxon justice?
• Why did the Norman's change crime and punishment and keep other?


  - for control (7000 Norman's and 2 million English)

  - they needed money to rule their new land

  - laws in Normandy were tougher

  - the Norman's were grateful to god for their win so were nicer to the church

  - william the conquerer felt he was the true heir to the Anglo Saxon throne so wanted to show legitimacy and be stricter
• What punishment and policing methods did the Norman's keep the same in Anglo Saxon society?


  - they kept the majority of Anglo Saxon laws as they were. The traditional laws of previous kings were retained

  - local communities were already effective at policing themselves so the Normans kept things like the hue and cry and tithings

  - capital punishment was still used for serious crimes and for reoffenders
• What did the Normans only slight change to Anglo Saxon policing and justice?


  - trial by ordeal was still kept but they also introduced trial by combat where the accused fought the accuser until one of them was killed or unable to fight on. If the accused won, they were innocent but if the accused lost, they were guilty. The loser was hanged as god had judged one to be guilty.

  - fines were still used for lesser crimes but instead of wergilds, fines were paid to the kings officials, not the victim/victims family
• What did the Normans change about Anglo-Saxon justice and punishment?


  - although Anglo Saxons gave women equal rights as men in law, Norman laws were much harsher on women and the Normans believed women should be under the authority of men.

  - William introduced the much hated forest laws where trees could no longer be cut down for fuel or building materials and people in forests could no longer own dogs or bows and arrows. It changed legal activities to serious offences. Anyone caught hunting deer would be punished by having their first two fingers chopped off and repeated offenders were blinded. However people in communities were willing to turn a blind eye to people hunting/chopping wood as they thought it was unfair.

  -England became a safer place after the Norman conquest.

  -the Normans introduced church courts and were separate courts for churchmen and tended to be more lenient.

  - Norman- French became the official language for court procedures and all records were in Latin which most English people understand neither
• What happened if you killed a Norman and why did some English do it?


  As Normans built many castles to control land that destroyed homes of Anglo Saxons to make room, there was much anger and some Saxons fought back, killing Norman soldiers. If a Norman was murdered, the entire region had to join together to pay an expensive murdrum fine.
• Section 3: how did kings change justice during later medieval England?
• How did policing methods change during later mediaeval England?


  - hue and cry was kept the same

  - the parish constable was the leader of a hue and cry and was elected every year. They were unpaid but looked out for crime

  - coroner was informed if the hue and cry didn't work and was reported to about unnatural deaths. They would confirm events with the accuser and speak to a royal official.

  - the sheriff was informed by the coroner and was a royal official and each sheriff was a sheriff of a county.

  - a posse was organised by the sheriff to track down a criminal. A posse was a group of men of any age over 12.
• How did trials change during the later medieval England?

  - sanctuary. Sanctuary could be claimed by a criminal if they went to a church. The sheriff couldn't get them there and the criminal had a choice either to stand trial for his crime or leave the country within 40 days.

  - jury. The jury was a group of people who knew the accused and accuser and decided on who was guilty, taking an oath. Like Anglo Saxon juries

  - trial by ordeal was abolished in 1215

  - scribes. Scribes were at the court and wrote down everything on parchment during the trial

  - the trial by the benefit of the clergy- if you could read a verse of the bible, you could claim benefit of the clergy where you would be trialed by the church courts who never executed people.

  - royal court. The royal court dealt with the most serious crimes with 5 judges dressed in fine robes

  - you could buy a pardon from the king
• How did punishments change during later medieval England?


  -Pillory. Pillories were wooden frames with holes to hold head and hands and was used for lesser crimes like being drunk.

  - stocks. Stocks were used that were wooden frames with holes for feet. For public humiliation and used for lesser crimes.

  - whipping was used

  - execution was used (hanging)

  - boiling cauldrons of water

  - if there was a war, you could fight in the army instead of being executed.
• What was sanctuary in church medieval England and did it help or hinder justice?


  It hindered justice as criminals that were able to reach church would claim sanctuary which meant they could either face trial or leave the country within 40 days.
• What was trial by ordeal in church medieval England and did it help or hinder justice?


  It hindered it as it was based on luck rather than guilt or innocence. This was used if the jury could not reach a verdict.
• What was church courts in church medieval England and did it help or hinder justice?


  It helped as it gave people who could read an alternative to death and it helped juries with workload. It dealt with moral offences. However it was not fair as others who couldn't read received capital punishment
• What was benefit of the clergy in church medieval England and did it help or hinder justice?


  It hindered justice as it was really only for members of church. However it did allow people to be tried more leniently (many people learned the verse required from the bible, it was called the neck verse)
• Section 3: what was crime and punishment like in early modern England 1500-1700? And what factors affected crime and punishment in 1500-1700 and what was the consequence?
• What was the result of crime rate increasing between 1500-1700?

  This resulted in an increased fear of crime. By the 1600's, crime was falling but people still believed it was rising. So, by the 1860's, punishments became harsher, the use of the death penalty increased and even minor crimes resulted in execution .
• What was the result of population growth for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?


  This increased crime rate and since there was a bigger population, it was harder to find work which meant many people were unemployed, resulting in crime increase.
• What was the result of economic changes for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?


  England became wealthier as a country and some people were getting richer. However the majority of the population was still poor and were vulnerable to rising prices (due to bad harvests). It led to unemployment and hardships for many.
• What was the result of printing for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?

  More people could read and the pamphlets spread fear of crime like witchcraft and vagabonds which was a popular topic.
• What was the result of religious turmoil for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?

  Changes made by Henry VII caused unrest and confusion. This was followed by a period of religious upheaval as the country switched from Protestant to catholic monarchs a lot. Both sides accused the other of being in league with the devil and this increased people's belief in evil and supernatural explanations for events.
• What was the result of political change for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?


  This period saw the greatest rebellion of all- the English civil war (1642-49) in which parliament fought and beat the kings forces which resulted in King Charles I's execution. This created a massive feeling of uncertainty and fear lasting decades.
• What was the result of landowners' attitudes for crime and punishment during 1500-1700?


  Landowners during this time were becoming richer and growing in influence. They encouraged laws that defended their rights, power and property against those they regarded as a threat. Increasingly, landowners viewed the poor with suspicion. They were nervous by their growing numbers and wanted to keep them in their place. They wanted harsher punishments on people who threatened their property.
• What continuities were there in punishments in 1500-1700 compared to the past?

  - pillories was used for humiliation for crimes such as cheating at cards, persistent swearing. If the crowd didn't like the crime, they would pelt them with stones maybe even to death (sexual criminals)

  - fines used commonly for minor offences

  - whipping was used as a corporal punishment intended to cause great pain where there was a crowd watching for humiliation. Used for variety of crimes like vagabondage

  - prisons used for people awaiting trial and nothing more
• What changes were there in punishments in 1500-1700 compared to the past?


  - women who argued/disobeyed their husbands could be convicted as scolds and the punishment was the ducking stool in the nearby river/pond . Women who argued in public/swore could be punished the same way

  - from the 1600's, thousands of criminals were transported to American colonies miles away. Transportation for life was used for murderers who escaped the death penalty and once there, some prisoners suffered conditions close to slavery though it was viewed as a soft option compared to the death penalty

  - carting was used which was when you were paraded around the streets on a cart for humiliation and was used for vagabonds, people who committed adultery or running a brothel

  - late 1500's had towns building houses of correction to punish and reform offenders. These were known as bridewells after the first one in London. Vagabonds, unmarried mothers and repeat offenders were sent to Bridewells. Inmates were sometimes whipped but also made to do hard labour to mend their ways
• What changes were there in policing and law enforcements?


  - town watchmen were employed in larger towns to patrol the streets day and night. They were payed poorly and were little use. Expected to arrested drunks/vagabonds and could peer into windows

  - sergeants were employed to enforce market regulation by weighing goods and collecting fines if traders behaved badly

  - hebeas corpus act was passed

  - rewards were offered to catch criminals and for serious crimes, could be equivalent to a years income for a middle class family

  - the system of the justices of the peace had been set up in the Middle Ages but they became a important in the Tudor times. JP's were people of local importance for the prestige it offered and JP's judged manor court cases. They could fine and whip people and assisted the constable.

  - Manor courts dealt with minor local crimes but four times a year, JP's with meet with other JP's in the county to judge more serious crimes. Royal judges visited each county twice a year called county assizes
• What were continuities to policing in 1500-1700?

  - relied on the local community and citizens were expected to deal with crimes themselves, like it was their responsibility to get an arrest warrant from a magistrate to track down criminals and deliver them to the constable

  - hue and cry was still used

  - most cases and trials were dealt at a local level though changes were made to make it more efficient

  - benefit of the clergy was still in use but they changed it so that the benefit of the clergy could not be claimed from serious crimes

  - parish constables were still part time men who were the main defence against crime. They had no weapons or uniform or patrolled but were in charge of the suspect, keeping them in prison until their trial. They could whip vagabonds but usually just dealt with everyday matters
• What was the Habeas Corpus Act?


  • means you have the body

  Was passed in 1679

  Prevented authorities from locking up a person indefinitely without charging them with a crime

  Anyone arrested had to appear in court within a certain time or be released.

  provided guarantees against unjust arrest but didn't stop the government from making up evidence at a trial to lock up critics