Collective Oath Compurgation in Anglo-Saxon England and African states

Abstract

Social historians and historians of jurisprudence have, on occasion, drawn attention to the close resemblances between Anglo-Saxon society at the time when it is said to have been dominated by kinship relationships and the large kingdom states in Africa. The truth of the matter is not so easily come by, however, since the content of pre-medieval social relationships linking persons of different station was inadequately recorded by early writers. The faulty character of early records becomes evident in the area of jurisprudence, especially whenever attempts are made to assess the extent to which kinbased social relationships invaded the legal principles in Anglo-Saxon society in matters of dispute and settlement. This notwithstanding, it seems an instructive sociological task to reconsider comparatively with African state societies, wherever possible, certain of those legal ideas that allegedly formed the basis for judicial decision-making in early English courts before the introduction of trial by jury. The interpretation of these early ideas, set against the background of rights, duties, and obligations that obtained between persons of set status, should define more clearly than before whatever general agreement exists between these legal principles and those that obtain in African state societies. A more ambitious treatment of the subject than is attempted in this essay would extend beyond Anglo-Saxon society. But, because of the faulty character of early records, I limit this literary exercise to the period before William the Conqueror crossed the Channel.