Misplaced Pages

#786213

24-462: In the Anglo-Saxon system of frankpledge , or frith-borh , the headborough presided over the borhsmen in his jurisdiction, who in turn presided over the local tithingmen. Frankpledge was a system that existed to create an incentive for a tithing to police itself, and consequently, the headborough was effectively obliged to police his tithing, as well as dealing with more administrative matters. By

48-559: A manor . The later break-down of the feudal system did not detract from this, as the introduction of Justices of the Peace lead to petty sessions displacing many of the administrative and judicial functions of the manorial courts. By the Reformation , civil parishes had replaced the manor as the most important local administrative concept, and tithings came to be seen as a parish subdivision. Frankpledge eventually evolved into both

72-403: A leader known as the chief-pledge or tithing -man, was then responsible for producing any man of that tithing suspected of a crime. If the man did not appear, the entire group could be fined . While women, clergy, and the richer freemen were exempt, otherwise all men over 12 years of age were organised in the system for mutual surety. The first mention of frankpledge comes in 1114–1118, with

96-430: A recognisable policing role. It is the hundred-constable which originated the term constable , and the parish constable acquired it by comparison; where the term headborough or chief pledge is used in contrast to a constable , the term constable is likely to refer specifically to the role of a hundred-constable. In the sense of parish constable, the term is found in the induction to Shakespeare 's The Taming of

120-510: A separate and wealthy kingdom into the Middle Ages. While Wessex and Mercia eventually grouped their hundreds into Shires , Kent grouped hundreds into lathes . Sussex , which had also been a separate kingdom , similarly grouped its hundreds into rapes . The different choice of terminology continued to the level of the tithing; in Kent, parts of Surrey , and Sussex, the equivalent term

144-555: Is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . This law enforcement –related article is a stub . You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it . Frankpledge Frankpledge was a system of joint suretyship common in England throughout the Early Middle Ages and High Middle Ages . The essential characteristic was the compulsory sharing of responsibility among persons connected in tithings . This unit, under

168-528: The Leges Henrici Primi ; but 12th-century figures like William of Malmesbury were keen to link it to pre-Norman times, and to the laws of Canute the Great . Some historians have indeed seen in the Anglo-Saxon frith-borh (literally "peace-pledge" ) the clear anticipation of frankpledge; others consider the 12th-century commentators were reading back into earlier times the later concept, and that

192-648: The Shrew (written c. 1590–92), when the Hostess of an alehouse, arguing with a drunken troublemaker, declares, "I know my remedie, I must go fetch the Headborough" (Induction, i); and again in Much Ado About Nothing (written c. 1598–9), where the dramatis personae describes Verges as a Headborough, subordinate to Constable Dogberry (Act 3, scene 5). This article related to English law

216-567: The borh system was much less rigid and comprehensive than frankpledge. On this view, William the Conqueror , with the revival of murdrum with respect to the French invaders, played an important role in systematically and universally making the tithing adopt compulsory frankpledge, so as to increase and consolidate the power of the Normans and to establish a more stringent policy. The borh

240-476: The context of the time). Each tithingman was individually responsible for the actions and behaviour of all the members of the tithing, by a system known as frankpledge . If a person accused of a crime was not forthcoming, his tithing was fined; if he was not part of the frankpledge, the whole town was subject to the fine. Unlike areas dominated by Wessex , Kent had been settled by Jutes rather than Saxons , and retained elements of its historical identity as

264-448: The early 16th century, the office had evolved into the position of parish constable , a parochial officer subordinate to a hundred- constable . Although the parish constable and hundred-constable share the term, the two roles had different functions, and origins. While the hundred-constable originated from senior military officers enforcing civil order, the parish constable had a wide range of civil administration functions in addition to

SECTION 10

#1732791259787

288-402: The group: the landless man was worthless as a member of a frith-borh, for the law had little hold over a man who had no land to forfeit and no fixed habitation. So the landless man was compelled by law to submit to a manorial lord , who was held responsible for the behaviour of all his "men"; his estate became, so to speak, a private frith-borh, consisting of dependents instead of the freemen of

312-420: The local population via the police rate (now a component in council tax ) in the relevant local authority area. Tithing (country subdivision) A tithing or tything was a historic English legal, administrative or territorial unit, originally ten hides (and hence, one tenth of a hundred ). Tithings later came to be seen as subdivisions of a manor or civil parish . The tithing's leader or spokesman

336-458: The other, both served to undermine the local system; as too did greater agrarian differentiation and mobility – a process exacerbated by the impact of the Black Death . Nevertheless, the system survived in places into the 15th century, although increasingly superseded by local constables – the former chief pledges – operating under the justices of the peace : their oversight represented

360-479: The public frith-borhs. These two systems, with many variations, existed side by side; but there was a general tendency for the freemen to get fewer and for the lords to grow more powerful. The tithing eventually became a territorial unit, part of the vill, while the eventual merger of borh and tithing underpinned the Norman frankpledge system. In its ultimate form, if an individual did not appear when summoned to court

384-535: The remaining members of the tithing could swear an oath to the effect that they had no hand in the escape of the summoned man: they would otherwise be held responsible for the deeds of the fugitive and could be forced to pay any fines his actions had incurred. This examination of the members of the tything before the court is the origin of the phrase "view of frankpledge". Frankpledge did not at first take place in Wales or eight Northern and border counties, but elsewhere

408-556: The remains of view of frankpledge . Ultimately, the principle behind frankpledge still remains in force, in England and Wales, with regard to riots . Until the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 , members of each civil parish were, collectively, directly responsible for repaying any damages due to a riot within their area. Under the Act (and its 2016 replacement ), the damages are indirectly levied on

432-445: The tourn, or the private takeover of view of frankpledge by lords or boroughs, were valued privileges; while conversely the 1217 Magna Carta sought explicitly to restrict what the sheriff could legitimately demand of frankpledge. The frankpledge system began to decline in the 14th century. The extension of centralised royal administration on the one hand, and the increasing appropriation of view of frankpledge by private landlords of

456-638: The word ten . In the West Germanic dialects which became Old English , n had a tendency to elide when positioned immediately before a th . The noun is not to be confused with the verb to tithe , its present participle tithing , nor the act of tithing , though they partly share the same origin. The term originated in the 10th century, when a tithing meant the households in an area comprising ten hides. The heads of each of those households were referred to as tithingmen ; historically they were assumed to all be males, and older than 12 (an adult, in

480-493: Was a borgh , borow , or borough (not to be confused with borough in its more usual sense of a chartered or privileged town); their equivalent to the tithingman was therefore a borsholder , borough-holder or headborough . The Norman Conquest introduced the feudal system, which quickly displaced the importance of the hundred as an administrative unit. With the focus on manorial courts for administration and minor justice, tithings came to be seen as subdivisions of

504-412: Was a system of surety whereby individuals – a family member, a master for servants, a lord for dependents – became responsible for producing others in court in event of misdemeanors. At the same time, late Anglo-Saxon society increasingly shared responsibility in legal matters in groups of ten. The group was referred to as a teothung or tything , i.e. a " thing (assembly) of ten men". The tything

SECTION 20

#1732791259787

528-482: Was common in the area under the Danelaw , and in the south and southwest of England . By the time of Edward I, however, the sheriff's tourn also began to appear in shires like Northumberland and Cumberland. The bi-annual view of frankpledge which was carried out by the sheriff involved payment of a tithing penny to the sheriff, as well as other opportunities for profit including fines: for this reason exemption from

552-422: Was known as a tithingman . The noun tithing breaks down as ten + thing , which is to say, a thing (an assembly) of the households who live in an area that comprises ten hides . Comparable words are Danish herredthing for a hundred , and English husting for a single household. Sound changes in the prehistory of English are responsible for the first part of the word looking so different from

576-476: Was under the leadership of a tythingman chosen from among them, with the responsibility of producing in the court of justice any man of their number who was summoned. The first tythings were entirely voluntary associations, being groups formed through the mutual consent of their free members. The aspect of the system which initially prevented its being made universally compulsory was that only landed individuals could be forced to pay any fines which might be put upon

#786213