A Sociological Reflection on the Functions of Evidence to Prove Crimes in the Middle Ages

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Asistant Professor, Department of Criminal law and Criminology, law and Political Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

2 MA Student Department of Criminal law and Criminology, law and Political Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Prior to jury being responsible of weighing the accusation, inquisitorial system being dominated in proceeding and bureaucratic judges rule sentence, European countries used compurgation, ordeal and judicial duel to evaluate evidence in law suits. The compurgation mechanism privileged the accused to be acquitted from the charge in some cases by providing a certain number of his oath-helpers in the court and their oath to his integrity. In the grave matters or failure of the accused to provide oath-helpers, the Europeans used to try to discover the god’s will in order to settle the case. Finally in some cases, a judicial duel between plaintiff and defendant would determined the fate of the case. Law professors and historians have always looked down on medieval proofs and considered them as a symbol of criminal barbarism. In this research, the authors, by distancing themselves from the common views about these evidences, have tried to reveal their hidden functions through a sociological framework; ranging from settling the case to maintaining social solidarity and running the judicial system.

Keywords

References

  1. منابع

    الف) فارسی

    1. آشوری، محمد (1400). آیین دادرسی کیفری. ج1، تهران: سمت.
    2. آشوری، محمد (1372). اصل برائت و آثار آن در امور کیفری (مطالعۀ تطبیقی). مجلۀ دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، 29، 39-72.
    3. الهی‌منش، محمدرضا؛ رئیسی نافچی، نیره (1396). تحلیل اوردالی از دیدگاه تاریخ حقوق کیفری و تطبیق آن با قسامه. فصلنامۀ مطالعات حقوق، 1(12)، 23-37.
    4. جوان جعفری، عبدالرضا؛ ساداتی، سیدمحمدجواد (1392). دورکهایم و کارکردگرایی در شناخت کیفر. تعالی حقوق، 5 (3)، 103-124.
    5. جوان جعفری بجنوردی، عبدالرضا؛ ساداتی، سیدمحمدجواد (1394). ماهیت فلسفی و جامعه‌شناختی کیفر؛ تأملی در چیستی و کارکردهای کیفر. چ اول، تهران: میزان.
    6. جوان جعفری، عبدالرضا؛ ساداتی، سیدمحمدجواد (1394). مفهوم قدرت در جامعه‌شناسی کیفری. پژوهش حقوق کیفری، 3 (11)، 9-38 .
    7. دورانت، ویل (1337). تاریخ تمدن. ترجمۀ ابوالقاسم طاهری، ج 4، تهران: اقبال.
    8. زاویه، سعید؛ مافی‌تبار، آمنه (1392). بررسی آیین‌های اساطیری داوری ایزدی در ایران باستان. فصلنامۀ ادبیات عرفانی و اسطوره‌شناختی، 9(30)، 64-83.
    9. ساداتی، سید محمدجواد (1400). روابط معنا-نماد و الهیات مجازات: پدیداری آیین تعذیب. پژوهش حقوق کیفری، 10 (36)، 78-112.
    10. ساداتی، سیدمحمدجواد (1401). جامعه‌شناسی کیفر در دوگانه فرهنگ و قدرت؛ تأملی بر جلوه‌های تعامل فرهنگ و قدرت از منظر جامعه‌شناسی کیفر. پژوهشنامه حقوق کیفری، 13 (2)، 131-161.
    11. علیمردانی، آرمین؛ واحدی، مصطفی؛ بهروزی، محمدرضا (1394). «سیر تحول مفهوم مسئولیت کیفری قبل از قرن هجده میلادی. فصلنامۀ پژوهش در تاریخ، 15، 127-109.
    12. گروسی، پائولو (1399). تاریخ حقوق در اروپا. ترجمۀ بهاءالدین بازرگانی گیلانی، تهران: کویر.
    13. گیرتس، کلیفورد (1402). تفسیر فرهنگ‌ها. ترجمۀ محسن ثلاثی، تهران: ثالث.
    14. مارتینژ، رنه (1392). تاریخ حقوق کیفری اروپا. ترجمۀ محمدرضا گودرزی، تهران: مجد.

    ب) انگلیسی

    1. Wendell Holmes, O. (1923). The Common Law, Boston: Little, Brown.
    2. Robertson, W. (1856). History of The Reign of The Emperor Charles The Fifth, 1, PHILADELPHIA: J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY.
    3. Pollock, F., & Maitland, W. (2010). The history of English Law Before the Time of Edward I. Indiana: Liberty Fund.
    4. Emmison, Frederick G. (1973). Elizabethan life: morals & the church courts. Chelmsford: Essex County Council.
    5. Bellamy, J. G. (1973). Crime and public order in England in the later Middle Ages.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    6. Ho, H. L. (2004). The Legitimacy of Medieval Proof. Journal of Law and Religion, 19 (2), 259-298.
    7. Campbell Black, H. (1893). Antiquities of the Law of Evidence—Compurgation. American Law Review, 27, 498-518.
    8. Perldeiner, J. (2016). Juror Purgators: The Evolution of Compurgation and Jury Nullification Notes. Connecticut Law Review, 48 (5), 1641-1664.
    9. Searle Holdsworth, W. (1922). A history of English law. 1, London: Methuen.
    10. Colin, M. (1975). Judicium Dei: The Social and Political Significance of the Ordeal in the Eleventh Century. Studies in Church History 12, 95-111.
    11. Bigelow, Melville M. (1880). History of Procedure in England from the Norman Conquest. Boston: Little, Brown, and company.
    12. Helmholz, R. H. (1983). Crime, Compurgation and the Courts of the Medieval Church. American Society for Legal History, 1 (1), 1-26.
    13. Laughlin, J. L.e (1876). The Anglo-Saxon Legal Procedure. in Essays in Anglo-Saxon Law, Boston: Little, Brown, and company.
    14. Amon, I. (2020). The Timeless Quest for Truth in a World of Doubt: Re-Examining Modes of Proof in the Medieval Era. Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review, 11, 139-159.
    15. Gross, C. (1902). Modes of Trial in the Mediæval Boroughs of England., Harvard Law Review, 15 (9), 691-706.
    16. Lea, H. C. (2016). the Duel and the Oath, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    17. Shack, W. A. (1979). “Collective Oath Compurgation in Anglo-Saxon England and African states. European Journal of Sociology, 20 (1), 1-18.
    18. Beckerman, J. S. (1992). Procedural Innovation and Institutional Change in Medieval English Manorial Courts. Law and History Review, 10 (2), 197- 252.
    19. Anand, S. (2005). The Origins, Early History and Evolution of the English Criminal Trial Jury. Alberta Law Review, 43 (2), 407- 432.
    20. Levy, L. W. (1999). the Palladium of Justice. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee.
    21. Green, T. A. (1985). Verdict According to Conscience. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
    22. Thayer, J. B. (1891). The Older Modes of Trial. Harvard Law Review, 5 (2), 45-70.
    23. Leeson, P. T. (2012). Ordeals. The Journal of Law & Economics, 55 (3), 691-714.
    24. Palmer, R. C. (1989). Trial by Ordeal. Michigan Law Review, 87 (6), 1547- 1556.
    25. Groot, R. D. (1982). The Jury of Presentment before 1215.The American Journal of Legal History, 26 (1), 1-24.
    26. Miller, W. I. (1988). Ordeal in Iceland. Scandinavian Studies, 60 (2), 189-218.
    27. Kerr, M. H; Forsyth, R. D., & Plyley, M. J. (1992). Cold Water and Hot Iron: Trial by Ordeal in England. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (4), 573- 595.
    28. Howland, A. C. (1898). Ordeals, compurgation, excommunication, and interdict, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    29. Hudson, R. (1911). The Judicial Reforms of the Reign of Henry II. Michigan Law Review, 9 (5), 385-395.
    30. Gibson, W. S. (1846). On some Ancient Modes of Trial, especially those in which Appeal was made to the Divine Judgment through the Ordeals of Water, Fire, and other Judicia Dei. Archaeologia, 32 (2), 263-297.
    31. Bosanquet, Geoffrey trans. (1965). Eadmer’s History of recent events in England, Pennsylvania: Dufour.
    32. Bartlett, R. (1986). Trial by Fire and Water, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    33. Plucknett, Theodore F. T. (1948). A Concise History Of The Common Law. London: Butterworth and Co.
    34. Eidelberg, S. (1980). Trial by Ordeal in Medieval Jewish History: Laws, Customs and Attitudes. Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, 46, 105-120.
    35. Nielson, G. (1891). Trial by combat, New York: MacMillan and Co.
    36. Elema, A. (2012). Trial by Battle in France and England, (PhD thesis), Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto.
    37. Russell, M. J. (1980). trial by battle and the appeals of felony., The Journal of Legal History, 1 (2), 135-164.
    38. Leeson, P. T. (2011). Trial By Battle. Journal of Legal Analysis, 3 (1), 341-375.
    39. Truman, B. C. (1884). The field of honor: being a complete and comprehensive history of duelling in all countries; including the judicial duel of Europe, the private duel of the civilized world, and specific descriptions of all the noted hostile meetings in Europe and America. New York: Fords, Howard, & Hulbert.
    40. Lipson, L.; & Wheeler, S. ed. (1987). Law and The Social Sciences. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
    41. Hudson, B. A. (2003). Understanding justice an introduction to ideas, perspectives and controversies in modern penal theory, 2nd edition, Philadelphia: Open university Press.
    42. Baker, J. (2019). An Introduction to English Legal History, 5th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    43. Kane, S. M. (1982). Holiness Ritual Fire Handling: Ethnographic and psychophysiological Considerations.Ethos, 10 (4), 369-384.
    44. Roberts, J. M. (1965). Oath, Autonomic, Ordeals and Power. American Anthropologist, 67 (6), 186-212.
    45. Thomas, K. (1971). Religion and the Decline of Magic New York: Scribner.
    46. White, S. D. (1995). Proposing the Ordeal and Avoiding It: Strategy and Power in Western French Litigation. I050-III0. in Cultures of Power, ed. Bisson, Thomas N. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    47. Brown, P. (1975). Society and the Supernatural: A Medieval Change. Daedalus, 104 (2), 133-151.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics