Offer an alternative explanation for how these patterns of criminal activity and violence affected constitutional law and political freedom.
Having effectively established an early version of
Parlament
, the Anglo-Saxons created a "warlike" system founded on family bonds,
aggricultral
success, acquisition of funds and property, and control through legal means. (Roth, 2005) Crime was a serious matter as this could effect an individual's financial status/land holdings, family and personal reputation, and life. As each
kindship
/kingdom had their own laws; however, your "value" as a human would determine
werdild
(blood price) and options for punishments. (BBC, 2016) Blood
fueds
and vengeance based retaliations occurred. There were no police forces; however, there were "
tithings
" (groups of 10 to 12 men) who were responsible for each other and held accountable for each other's actions. (Roth, 2005) Therefore, if you were accused of
theift
, you and your tithing would appear before a community jury to hear a sentence of death or a fine; however, should you not appear you would then be stripped of your humanity/value and executed. (Roth, 2005)
If the Saxons were known for their death penalty, then the Norman's were known for verdicts of mutilation and forming the class system. (Roth, 2005) Unlike the Saxons, the Norman's legal system did establish a police system that was loyal to the monarch instead of the community or
kinship
. (Roth, 2005) Taking the power away from communities and families to uphold and
despence
the law,
constables
handed everything from "tax collection, arresting
malfectors
, transporting prisoners, and serving legal papers" to maintaining curfew and monarch regulations. (Roth, 2005) Instead of having to survive an ordeal, a
theft
would have to battle to prove his/her innocence or appoint someone to battle for them if the defendant was a woman, child, elderly, or ill individual. (Roth, 2005) If a woman stole an apple, her brother might have to battle the shop keepers.
However, the two systems were vastly different. In the Anglo-Saxon world, the kingdoms experienced more personal and kingdom based freedoms. Even though the death penalty was widely utilized, no positions existed that would be seeking out infractions or looking to punish someone (like a constable). A thief might loose his family and personal honor, face the wrath of his tithing, or have to endure his victim's family claiming their blood price. However, value and worth were placed on family honor, deeds, and contributions to the community. In the United States, this is similar to what we experienced before the civil war. The states had more power than the federal government over their laws and regulations; however, like the Saxons, there were major
inconsistencies
among states regarding policies, sentences for crimes, and even social attitudes towards certain crimes. The Anti Federalist movement in the United States is founded o.
Offer an alternative explanation for how these patterns of criminal .docx
1. Offer an alternative explanation for how these patterns of
criminal activity and violence affected constitutional law and
political freedom.
Having effectively established an early version of
Parlament
, the Anglo-Saxons created a "warlike" system founded on
family bonds,
aggricultral
success, acquisition of funds and property, and control through
legal means. (Roth, 2005) Crime was a serious matter as this
could effect an individual's financial status/land holdings,
family and personal reputation, and life. As each
kindship
/kingdom had their own laws; however, your "value" as a human
would determine
werdild
(blood price) and options for punishments. (BBC, 2016) Blood
fueds
and vengeance based retaliations occurred. There were no
police forces; however, there were "
tithings
" (groups of 10 to 12 men) who were responsible for each other
and held accountable for each other's actions. (Roth, 2005)
Therefore, if you were accused of
theift
, you and your tithing would appear before a community jury to
hear a sentence of death or a fine; however, should you not
appear you would then be stripped of your humanity/value and
executed. (Roth, 2005)
If the Saxons were known for their death penalty, then
the Norman's were known for verdicts of mutilation and forming
the class system. (Roth, 2005) Unlike the Saxons, the Norman's
legal system did establish a police system that was loyal to the
2. monarch instead of the community or
kinship
. (Roth, 2005) Taking the power away from communities and
families to uphold and
despence
the law,
constables
handed everything from "tax collection, arresting
malfectors
, transporting prisoners, and serving legal papers" to
maintaining curfew and monarch regulations. (Roth, 2005)
Instead of having to survive an ordeal, a
theft
would have to battle to prove his/her innocence or appoint
someone to battle for them if the defendant was a woman, child,
elderly, or ill individual. (Roth, 2005) If a woman stole an
apple, her brother might have to battle the shop keepers.
However, the two systems were vastly different. In the Anglo-
Saxon world, the kingdoms experienced more personal and
kingdom based freedoms. Even though the death penalty was
widely utilized, no positions existed that would be seeking out
infractions or looking to punish someone (like a constable). A
thief might loose his family and personal honor, face the wrath
of his tithing, or have to endure his victim's family claiming
their blood price. However, value and worth were placed on
family honor, deeds, and contributions to the community. In the
United States, this is similar to what we experienced before the
civil war. The states had more power than the federal
government over their laws and regulations; however, like the
Saxons, there were major
inconsistencies
among states regarding policies, sentences for crimes, and even
social attitudes towards certain crimes. The Anti Federalist
movement in the United States is founded on the premise that
we as citizens should not allow the Federal Government
3. to reduce state freedoms and rights in favor of a singular federal
control and legislation. (
Llyod
, 2016) While the Federalist argument supports the Norman's
concepts of Federal regulation keeps peace, reduces death
sentences, and keeps unified standards that are generalized
across the entire unit being controlled. However, Roth (2005)
states that this lead to overly harsh micro control
punishments
such as
curfew
violations. (p 30) Therefore, does absolutely power corrupt
absolutely
? Does giving state power up eventually leave the individual at
the mercy of the perceived
peacekeeper
. These are the debates started by the Saxons and Normans that
are still argued by Federalist and Anti Federalist today. Even in
our two party system, Republicans and Democrats, the argument
is still the same. Therefore, the Saxons and the Normans still
effect our political system and government today.
BBC. (2016) Anglo Saxons: Kings and Law. Retrieved from
http
://
www
.
bbc
.co.
uk
/schools/
primaryhistory
/
anglo
_
saxons
