Editing Frankpledge (section)

==Anglo-Saxon sureties==
The borh was a system of surety whereby individuals – a family member, a master for servants, a lord for dependents – became responsible  for producing others in court in event of misdemeanors.<ref>G. O. Sayles, ''The Medieval Foundations of England'' (London 1967) p. 188</ref> At the same time, late Anglo-Saxon society increasingly shared responsibility in legal matters in groups of ten.  The group was referred to as a ''teothung'' or ''[[Tithing (country subdivision)|tything]]'', i.e. a "[[Thing (assembly)|thing]] (assembly) of ten men".<ref>Cf. Stubbs (1906:12–13). It is probable that the households of the men were also to be included, and the tything could thus be seen as a "thing of ten households". Cf. Pearson (1867:250–1). To aid in the effort of administration, [[Canute the Great|King Canute II]] the Great of [[Denmark]] and [[England]] (d. 1035) declared that men be organized into [[Hundred (administrative division)|hundreds]], a system of division which subsequently became common in the area under the [[Danelaw]], from [[Essex]] to [[Yorkshire]], while the tything remained common in the south and southwest of England.</ref>

The tything was under the leadership of a [[Tithing (country subdivision)|tythingman]] chosen from among them, with the responsibility of producing in the court of justice any man of their number who was summoned.<ref>Stubbs (1906:12–13). Above the tythingman was the borhsman, with the next above being the [[borough-head]] or head-borough. Cf. White (1895:200).</ref> The first tythings were entirely voluntary associations, being groups formed through the mutual consent of their free members. The aspect of the system which initially prevented its being made universally compulsory was that only landed individuals could be forced to pay any fines which might be put upon the group:

{{Blockquote|the landless man was worthless as a member of a frith-borh, for the law had little hold over a man who had no land to forfeit and no fixed habitation. So the landless man was compelled by law to submit to a [[lord of the manor|manorial lord]], who was held responsible for the behaviour of all his "men"; his estate became, so to speak, a private frith-borh, consisting of dependents instead of the freemen of the public frith-borhs. These two systems, with many variations, existed side by side; but there was a general tendency for the freemen to get fewer and for the lords to grow more powerful.|[[Albert Pollard|Albert F. Pollard]]|''The History of England: A Study in Political Evolution''}}

The tithing eventually became a territorial unit, part of the vill, while the eventual merger of borh and tithing underpinned the Norman frankpledge system.<ref>G. O. Sayles, ''The Medieval Foundations of England'' (London 1967) p. 188</ref>  In its ultimate form, if an individual did not appear when summoned to court the remaining members of the tithing could swear an oath to the effect that they had no hand in the escape of the summoned man: they would otherwise be held responsible for the deeds of the fugitive and could be forced to pay any fines his actions had incurred.<ref>Stubbs (1906:13).</ref> This examination of the members of the tything before the court is the origin of the phrase "view of frankpledge".<ref>Smith (1857:230).</ref>