The circuit system was an important institution in medieval Europe, especially for the strengthening of the monarchy, but its origins are highly debated, with some arguing that it originated in the Frankish kingdom of continental Europe, which was the center of the centralized system of European power.
It is also believed that it originated in The Great England, across the strait from the Frankish Kingdom, and others believe that it originated in the Tradition of England, but the formal system was introduced from the Frankish Kingdom and took root in English land with the Norman Conquest. All three views are undoubtedly reasonable, but more people agree with the third, in favor of its comprehensive character.
The itinerant trial system in England was formally formed during the reign of Henry I of the Plantagenet dynasty, and the circuit judges were appointed by the king to hear cases throughout the kingdom, with the chief judges having great power, including finance, taxation and justice, and could be called all-round officials, and the specially appointed circuit officers were mainly responsible for judicial-related cases.
The emergence of the circuit trial system was the result of the king's demand for the strengthening of the royal power, but at the same time limited the scope of the royal power, and in the process of the implementation of the circuit trial system, the royal power deeply felt the suppression from the local lords and the church forces, which also strengthened the confidence and resistance to the expansion of the royal power.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="7" >, the formation of the medieval British circuit trial system</h1>
1. Henry I and the formal formation of the circuit trial system
The circuit trial system was formally formed in the time of Henry I, but long before that, a system similar to the circuit trial system appeared in England, involving a wide range of contents, not only judicial trials, this type of system can be traced back to the Norman dynasty.
In 1066, William I and his army achieved the Norman Conquest, basically eliminating the original Anglo-Saxon nobles rooted in England, and a new Norman nobleman was created, which constituted the main force of the future feudalization of England. After the conquest of William I, the first task was to strengthen the monarchy, which was also a requirement engraved in the blood of the Franks.
The Norman Conquest was actually a conquest of the upper classes and nobles of England, mainly limited to areas such as London, so the conquest of England was also necessary for William I to truly rule England.
William I recalibrated the structure of the local administration and judiciary, retaining the power of the sheriff to control the court, and gradually appointing some knights of lower social status or knights who obeyed the royal family as the presiding officers of the court.
Similar to the itinerant trial system, there was also the famous land inventory, which resulted in the Book of The Last Judgment, in which the king sent local officials to achieve his specific purposes.
During the reign of Henry I, the circuit system was formally formed, henry I sent judges to the whole country, specifically responsible for handling judicial cases, these judges are the prototype of circuit judges, this group of judges is called "all England judges", judges are appointed by the king, have a certain term limit, and are specifically responsible for dealing with cases of concern to the king.
Henry I extended the royal power to the localities by establishing circuit judges and circuit courts, which was undoubtedly beneficial to the strengthening of the royal power. Nevertheless, the circuit courts were not yet complete under Henry I, for example, the specific functions of the circuit judges were not clear, resulting in a variety of judges' affairs and inefficiency, a phenomenon that occurred mainly during the term of office of the general circuit.
2. Henry II and the further development of the circuit trial system
The period of Henry II was a period of further development of the circuit trial system in medieval England, and Henry II, while succeeding his grandfather Henry I, also restored the circuit trial system that had been interrupted for decades, which had a lot to do with the judicial reforms carried out during henry II's reign.
Henry II's judicial reforms were partly due to the trampling of central authority during the Civil War, the loss of reverence for the king by the great nobility and local lords, and equally important, the loose laws of England were no longer able to protect the interests of the people, causing the people to be disillusioned with the monarch and instead thrown into the arms of the lords.
John Hudson emphasized in The Formation of English Common Law: Law and Society in England from the Norman Conquest to the Common Law Period: "Many great nobles despised the royal family, built castles, supported their own troops, attacked annexation, and disrupted the townships, resulting in the effectiveness of the central and local administrative and judicial systems, and the failure of government decrees and income. ”
The emergence of these phenomena was undoubtedly unacceptable to Henry II, who had always wanted to strengthen the monarchy, so judicial reform was imperative. Henry II established a system of itinerant judges, who acted as the king's direct representatives to administer justice in all regions of the country.
Henry II not only increased the number of circuit judges, but also defined the judicial areas for which the various circuit judges were responsible, and through this system, the jurisdiction of the royal court was expanded, and the people could see both the king's representatives and the king could hear the voice of the people, and the old situation in which the lords and the church controlled the place was gone.
In 1166, the Clarendon Ordinance was promulgated, which was seen as a sign of the restoration of the Circuit Court, and the Northampton Ordinance of 1176 reinforced the Clarendon Ordinance and gave the Circuit Judges greater powers.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="7" > second, the impact of the circuit trial system</h1>
1. The influence of the circuit trial system on the royal power
Strengthening the king's power was the original intention of the King of England to establish a circuit trial system, and judging from the implementation of the circuit trial system, this purpose of the king was achieved to a certain extent, but at the same time, the king's judicial power or the royal family's judicial power was also limited at the local level.
In other words, through the circuit system, the royal court, the court of lords, and the court of the church achieved a clear division of judicial power, and the three were limited to each other and coexisted in the Judicial System of England, which was not changed until the later Tudors henry vii and henry viii established the star court and the Reformation.
On the one hand, the King of England, through circuit judges, took back the judicial power that had previously belonged to the magistrates' courts into the hands of the King. In expanding judicial power, Henry II, against the background of strength, stipulated through legal form the cases that the king's court could accept, the court of lords and the state and county courts had the right to accept.
The nature of the case determines which court is competent to accept it, and once a case of this nature is accepted by a certain court, similar cases will be accepted by this court thereafter, which also lays the foundation for the Anglo-American trial according to precedent.
On the other hand, the King of England's provision for different types of courts to hear different cases is in fact a constraint on the courts themselves. For the royal court, it can only hear the cases in the regulations, such as the crime of deception that threatens the king's life, the case of the noble land, etc., so the power of the king is invisibly limited.
The royal courts of England were not as capable of trying almost all cases as the rulers of ancient China, and the restriction of royal power in the circuit trial system also laid the foundation for the later British aristocratic councils and later parliaments to limit the royal power, because it showed the popular consensus that the royal power was not unlimited, but also subject to the judiciary.
2. Attitude of the British people towards the circuit trial system
The circuit system refers to a top-down system that stems primarily from the needs of the king, so what kind of existence is it in the minds of the people? On the one hand, the circuit trial system has heard a large number of headless public cases, which has caused some people to be wronged, so this system is beneficial to the rehabilitated victims, and it combats the suppression of ordinary people by the lords;
On the other hand, the circuit trial system has caused endless trouble to non-parties in some cases, because every time the circuit trial is conducted, the circuit judge has to collect a large fine, which is a huge burden for the ordinary people, so many people are reluctant to file a lawsuit.
In addition, during the hearing, the public will also be required to attend the court, the number of appearances is so frequent that it disturbs the production and life of the people, and the people may also be punished for wrongdoing during the hearing, mainly fines, so many scholars regard the circuit trial system as an obscure way for the king to encroach on property.
More seriously, the circuit courts are directly subordinate to the king, and if wrongly judged, it will be a fatal blow to the people, losing the opportunity for upward promotion.
As a result, the circuit trial system was actually more troublesome for the idle ordinary people, so many people did not welcome the arrival of the circuit court, but were more enthusiastic about the trial of the lord's court or the ecclesiastical court, which the king and his circuit judges did not expect.
The attitude of the people towards the circuit court was clearly influenced by the local judiciary and the judicial power of the lords, and coupled with the fact that the king was farther away from the people geographically and psychologically, the people were more inclined to rely on and obey the orders of the court of lords.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="7" >3</h1>
The medieval English circuit trial system originated from the Norman conquest, and William I not only promoted the feudalization of England, but also opened a door for the development of the English judicial system. Henry I established a self-appointed general circuit throughout the country, so that the circuit trial system was implemented in practice, and the promulgation of the Clarendon Decree was often regarded as a sign of the formal establishment of the circuit trial system.
Henry II of the Plantagenet dynasty then refined the circuit trial system, and the official and circuit areas were also clearly divided, which is why the circuit trial system can continue to develop.
The officials in the British circuit trial system are very similar to the ancient Chinese "Chincha Ministers", not only to hear cases, but also to review local finances, public security, etc., the things involved are very complex, which requires that the circuit officer must be experienced, so many circuit officers have received certain professional training.
The itinerant trial system stemmed mainly from the need to strengthen the royal power, so its rise and fall was also closely related to the royal power. In Britain, although the itinerators are highly powerful, they must only be led by the king, and more importantly, many of these itinerators are not welcomed by the people and regard them as jackals.
bibliography
The Influence of the Medieval English Circuit System on the King's Judicial Authority
The Formation of English Common Law: Law and Society in England from the Norman Conquest to the Common Law Period
Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition
The Itinerant Trial System in Medieval England
The Circuit Trial System and the Formation of the Common Law in england