Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: henry_thefirst
Rule of law can really be said to have reemerged in England in 1066 with the Norman invasions.

I'd argue with that, if I may. The laws of Alfred and Ine predate the Norman Conquest by centuries. Alfred himself codified the usages and customs of English law in the Liber Judicialis.

Granted, the use of these laws was disrupted by the Danish invasions, but you can't really claim that England was occupied by a bunch of lawless barbarians only saved from themselves by the arrival of the Normans! Prior to the Conquest, Anglo-Saxon society was cultured and well-ordered and had been for a long time.

31 posted on 01/05/2006 12:30:32 PM PST by Da_Shrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Da_Shrimp

I have to agree with you on the fact that the later Saxons did have a form of Law (why,even Wikipedia says that), but to then point out that Common law, which is the basis of British law even to this day, only emerged in the Norman period. Everything prior (i'm talking about Law here) really did not matter to such great extent, only that some parts of it were assumed into the Norman law code.

Also, I wouldn't say to any degree that England at this time was a civilized place. Yes, Alfred and his son unified the land, but it was still a back water, barbarous place. Edward the Confessor can be seen as a truely civilized king to large extent, but it again must be noted the norman influence upon his court.


37 posted on 01/05/2006 12:42:48 PM PST by henry_thefirst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson