CROWNER
Part 5: Trial by Ordeal, Injuries & Outlaws
By Fire & Water
For the first decades of his renewed existence, the medieval Coroner had to be present at some
curious and barbaric rites connected with the law. These were the various "ordeals," a semimagical method of determining guilt or innocence which goes right back to pre-historic times
through many cultures prior to the coming of the Anglo-Saxons. For example, guilt could be
tested by the ordeal of fire, where the suspect had to carry a bar of red-hot iron in his hands while
he walked nine marked paces. In the unlikely event of no burns appearing on his hand, he was
judged innocent. Otherwise, he was promptly hanged. A variation was licking red-hot iron with the
tongue or, sometimes, the suspect had to run barefoot over nine red-hot ploughshares. Then
there was, of course, the ordeal of water, where the accused was thrown into water and if they
sank, they were declared innocent, but if they floated, they were guilty and taken out and hanged
- a sort of no-win situation! The Coroner was always present to record these happenings, again
with an eye on the forfeiture of the felon's goods. In 1215, though, the practices were forbidden
by an Edict of the Lateran Council.
The Bier
A less excruciating but, eventually, equally fatal ordeal was that of the bier. It was an ancient
belief that the slain dead could indicate their killer. There were various ways of testing this, but, in
England, it was usual for the accused to be made to approach the bier on which the corpse lay. In
view of witnesses, including the Coroner, who stood there with his pen and Rolls, the wounds of
the victim were observed to see if they began to bleed again. Of course, this is well recorded by
Shakespeare in Richard III:
"O gentlemen see, see! Dead Henry's wounds
Open their congealed mouths and bleed afresh!"
And it was the Coroner's job was to record all these events.
By Combat
Ordeal by combat and battle was also witnessed and recorded by the Coroner. Here the
aggrieved party claimed the right to fight the alleged offender - or to pay a champion to fight for
him. This usually arose through an "appeal" which, in those days, meant a private prosecution
organised by the Coroner. Though this died out effectively in the 13th Century, it was forgotten
rather than legislated against and, as late as 1818, it was found not to be illegal for a man,
charged with murder, to claim the right of combat with his accuser. This case then led to its formal
abolition in the early 19th Century.
The Coroner as Police Surgeon
Some of the functions of the Coroner fell into abeyance in the 13th Century, but in some areas
they survived for a long time. In rape, for example, the woman ravished had to raise the hue-andcry and wherever possible produce some evidence of the rape, such as bloodstained or torn
clothing or a flow of blood from her body. These had to be shown to the men of the neighbouring
townships, to the Bailiff of the Hundred and to the Coroner himself, who acted (almost like a
modern police surgeon) as a corroborator of the ravishment. In Lincolnshire in 1202, for instance,
the Coroner visited the victim of an alleged rape two days after the event and wrote in his Rolls
that "she was bloodstained and disgracefully treated...".
The Coroner's para-medical functions were also displayed in cases of non-fatal wounding, where
he had to view the injuries, count the wounds, measure their length and breadth and record on
his Rolls exactly where on the body they were situated. In cases of wounding, the mere presence
of blood was not enough to satisfy the coroner, as it could be too easily fabricated - he would
have to testify to actual breaches of the skin. The person accused of a non-fatal wounding was
not arrested or imprisoned before trial. He had to find four people to stand surety for him and put
up "bail money". The Coroner carefully recorded all this and if the miscreant vanished long before
the trial, he ensured the forfeiture of the securities and often imprisonment of the four luckless
bondsmen.
When a citizen brought an appeal of wounding, the Coroner had to decide what was to be done
with the culprit. If the wound looked as if it might be fatal - a common result in those days of
primitive therapeutics - then the suspect was kept in custody until it was clear as to whether the
victim was going to survive or die. If he died, the prisoner was held until the Judges came, when
hanging was the inevitable sequel, unless he could break jail and get sanctuary. If the victim
lived, then the Coroner would take securities to try to ensure the appearance of the culprit at trial.
Outlaws
Due to escapes and sanctuary, there was great difficulty in getting cases to trial in medieval
England. The Coroner was involved in an elaborate process to try to enforce the appearance of
parties at court - and, of course, in those days, much of his work was nothing to do with the
present Coroner's obsession with dead bodies. A lot of the original Coroner's work was really
administrative. When the time came at the County Court for the parties to surrender their bail,
four calls of the accused's name were made, one at each consecutive hearing. If he did not
appear at the fourth call, he was declared "outlawed", unless two men pledged themselves, with
further financial bonds, to present him at the next (the fifth) County Court - which, unlike the
General Eyre, was held quite often. If he failed to appear then, the two men lost their money and
the man was outlawed, and as usual the Coroner had to be present at all such "declarations of
outlawry" to record it on his Rolls.
In the Middle Ages to be outlawed was like being dead. The outlaw had no legal existence, being
"outside the law". All men's hands were against him and he could be legally killed on sight by
anyone who came across him. Outlaws were said to have "wolves' heads" which could be cut off
by anyone. In Richard the Lionheart's time, five shillings were paid for every such head, rather
like the squirrel bonus of the present day.
By the 14th century, the Coroner had to hold inquests on slain outlaws and send the law officers
responsible for the killing to the court, where they were automatically acquitted for justifiable
homicide. Captured outlaws were hanged, after the Coroner had attended proceedings to prove,
from his Rolls, that a promulgation of outlawry (called the "exigent") had formally been recorded
at some prior date. Many outlaws were later pardoned, usually by having fought in the army or
otherwise helped the King's service. They could also buy their pardons and all these had to be
reinstated into the law by the Coroner. Many outlaws seem to have ignored the "exigent" and
carried on their lives as before. Even Coroners were occasionally outlawed. Amazingly, in 1445,
the Sheriff of Sussex was ordered to replace John Veske, who had continued in office as County
Coroner despite, apparently, having long been outlawed
Approver's Appeal
One type of appeal, namely a private prosecution, has already been mentioned. The other was
the "approver's appeal", which was the same as turning King's evidence, or Queen's evidence
today. If a felon was able to implicate enough of his fellow criminals, so that they were convicted,
he might escape a hanging and either be imprisoned for life or be allowed exile abroad. Very few
of these appeals succeeded. The approver first had to confess his own guilt to the Coroner in the
presence of a witness. When the case came to court, the approver had to plea for a Coroner to
be assigned to him and the latter had to hear and record all the incriminating evidence against the
man's confederates. Many others turned approver in prison after sentence. Almost all these
appeals were merely ruses to delay execution, to give more time to escape or bribe the jailers.