Unlike a modern court, again, the feudal court did not
require the accuser to prove his case by calling witnesses and having them give
testimony. The burden of proof lay on the accused, who had to clear himself of
the charge, if he could do so. In one form of trial it was enough for him to
declare his innocence under oath, and then to bring in several "oath-
helpers," sometimes relatives, but more often neighbors, who swore that
they believed him to be telling the truth. The number of these "oath-
helpers" varied according to the seriousness of the crime and the rank of
the accused. This method was hardly as unsatisfactory as it seems to be, for a
person of evil reputation might not be able to secure the required number of
friends who would commit perjury on his behalf. To take an oath was a very
solemn proceeding; it was an appeal to God, by which a man called down on
himself divine punishment if he swore falsely.
ORDEALS
The consequences of a false oath were not apparent at
once. Ordeals, however, formed a method of appealing to God, the results of
which could be immediately observed. A common form of ordeal was by fire. The
accused walked barefoot over live brands, or stuck his hand into a flame, or
carried a piece of red-hot iron for a certain distance. In the ordeal by hot
water he plunged his arm into boiling water. A man established his innocence
through one of these tests, if the wound healed properly after three days. The
ordeal by cold water rested on the belief that pure water would reject the
criminal. Hence the accused was thrown bound into a stream: if he floated he
was guilty; if he sank he was innocent and had to be rescued. Though a crude
method of securing justice, ordeals were doubtless useful in many instances.
The real culprit would often prefer to confess, rather than incur the anger of
God by submitting to the test.