0
Trial by ordeal is a form of trial in which the accused is put to a test of strength, ability, will, or even chance, with the decision of innocence or guilt determined by the result. Sometimes the plaintiff is tested at the same time the accused is, as in a case where the two fight to see which wins. Another typical test was having the accused fetch a stone out of a pot of boiling water and observe the condition of the burn after a set time, with festering indicating guilt. And another, less painful, test was to have the accused eat an ounce of bread and cheese that had been blessed for the purpose by a priest, and observing the result, with choking being an indication of guilt.
One advantage of this process is that the determination of innocence or guilt can be made with almost no effort by the judge. Another is that it is completely unnecessary to assemble a jury, attorneys, or witnesses. No testimony has to be considered, no facts weighed, and no conclusions reached. There is almost no expense. Furthermore, judges can be appointed without any regard to experience or education.
You can have your ears hurt by being too close to people when they scream, so my advise is to stick to the bread and cheese method. The only other disadvantage is that there is a complete absence of fairness, but that only matters to people who care about such things.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are some disadvantages of trial by ordeal?
what is the disadcantages of trial by ordeal
What is ordeal?
an extremely severe or trying test, experience, or trial.
What is a trial by ordeal?
As a last resort, and extremely rarely, a medieval trial might be decided by Combat or by Ordeal. In the case of combat, the parties could each appoint a Champion to fight for them. The idea was that, in the combat, God would favour the right. Similarly with the ordeal. A common ordeal was to pick an object, with a bare hand, out of boiling water. Again, the theological basis of the ordeal was that God would give courage to the party in the right - maybe even a miracle. Psychologically, of course, it could work too - as the party in the wrong would be less likely to brave the pain. The reason, however, why such trials are rare is that they were only needed in cases which a Judge could not decide; and in cases so marginal, the difference between right and wrong, even in the minds of the parties, is by definition unclear.
What are some of the advantages of living in ancient Rome?
What are some advantages of living in ancient rome
What were some advantages and disadvantages of being a patrician woman?
none
What are some disadvantages of trial by ordeal?
what is the disadcantages of trial by ordeal
What are some disadvantages of trial of ordeal?
cant theoretically find truth
Was Trial by compurgation used to replace trial by ordeal?
no it was not
Why was all fate decided by trial by ordeal in the middle ages?
The belief then during the Middle Ages was that he who has not done wrong will be protected by the gods and that by doing the trial by ordeal, the innocent ones would survive the ordeal as they will be protected by the gods.
Why did trial by ordeal end?
I do not have any idea sorry
What are some disadvantages to trial by combat?
what are the advantages and disadvantages of trial by combat
When did trial by ordeal in middle ages start?
Trial by ordeal did not originate in the Middle Ages. It probably developed in prehistory, but certainly existed in the earliest historic periods. There is a link below.
What is ordeal?
an extremely severe or trying test, experience, or trial.
What were the three methods of determining innocence in Germanic law?
compensation trial by ordeal oath swearing
What was an ordeal in germanic law?
The "ordeal" in Germanic law was a means of determining guilt. This law was based on divine intervention. All ordeals iinvolved a physical trial of some sort, such as holding a red-hot iron. It was believed that divine forces would not allow an innocent person to be harmed. If the accused person was unharmed after a physical trial, or ordeal, he or she was presumed innocent. SOURCE: WORLD HISTORY TEST BOOK FROM MCGRAW HILL/GLENCO. (COPYRIGHT 2007) Page 287.
What were two methods for deciding the guilt or innocence of accused criminals in the middle ages?
Two methods were: - trial by ordeal, in which the accused had to pass a dangerous test, like thrown into a well, and - trial by combat, in which he had to fight to prove his innocence. The two methods for deciding the guilt or innocence of accused criminals in the early middle ages were trial by combat or ordeal.
What were methods for deciding the guilt or innocence of accused criminals in the Early Middle Ages.?
Two methods were: - trial by ordeal, in which the accused had to pass a dangerous test, like thrown into a well, and - trial by combat, in which he had to fight to prove his innocence. The two methods for deciding the guilt or innocence of accused criminals in the early middle ages were trial by combat or ordeal.
