FE O

411

f r; o

ed, and the valour w ith which their conquests were defended. Be-sides these feodal grants, however, which were held only on theter,ns of military service above mentioned, there were others calledallodial, which were given upon more enlarged principles. Tothese every freeman had a title; and could not only claim histerritory a", well as the rest, but dispose of it at his pleasure ; andthis freedom was denominated allodiality. These allodials, how-ever,’were not exempted from military service. A part of theirfreedom consisted in liberty to go to the wars; for this, in the barbarons times we speak of, was the only wav to acquire any degreeof renown. Only the slaves were destined to follow the arts of,peax’e ; while every free person was not only at liberty to defendhis country, but under an obligation to do it in case of any urgentnecessity. Thus there was a feodal and a national militia. Thefree people only were allowed to possess.property ; the feudal vas-sals constituted the army, properly so-called; while the nationalmilitia was composed of the allodial proprietors. This allodiality,however, was not confined to landed property, but included like-wise moveable estates or money ; so that proprietors of the latterkind were obliged also in times of danger to bear arms and ap-pear in the field. Between the feodal and allodial proprietors,however, there was this farther difference* that the latter had noconcern with any private quarrels which might take place amongthe lords themselves; so that they were never obliged to appear inthe field unless when called forth by the sovereign againsttheene-mies of the nation at large. This Circumstance we might supposeto be an advantage, but it ultimately operated otherwise ; becom-ing the means of changing the allodial right into a feodal tenure.For some time the bottlers of fiefs had an eminent advantage overtile allodial proprietors. This was owing to the imperfection ofgovernment in those days: so that the nobles had it in their powerto revenge their own quarrels, while the weak were equally ex-posed to tile insults ol both parties. The lord and his vassalstherefore were always formidable; but the allodial proprietors hadscarce any means of deteuding themselves. The reasons of thiswere, 1st, that the law did not allow them to commit any hostili-ties ; and 2dly, they were too distant and unconnected to formanj- proper league for mutual defence ; and hence proceeded thenecessity of converting allodial properly into feudal tenure. Thiswas indeed owing In a great measure to the absurdity and violenceof the times, by which gifts of property, burthened with service,and which might return to the person who granted them, were ren-dered superior in value to the absolute and unconditional posses-sion of a subject. Other considerations likewise contributed toproduce the same effect. As in those dark ages no light existedbut what had its origin in conquest, it thence followed, that thegreatest conqueror was the most honourable person. The king, inwhom the whole exploits of the community centred, as being theirhead, was the most honourable person ; all others derived fromhim that portion of honour which they enjoyed, and which wasmost nicely adjusted in proportion as they approached him. Al-lodial proprietors therefore having no pretensions of this kind, weretreated with contempt as a kind of poltroons. From this disagree-able situation they wished to free themselves, by converting theirallodial property into feudal tenures ; while the princes, supposingtt their interest to extend those tenures as much as possible, discour-aged the allodia! possessions. As the feodists supported the im-portance of the nation and dignity of the monarch, it was notbought proper to allow the allodial proprietors any greater com-pensations than what were given to vassals in similar cases. 'Finisbey were exposed to continual mortifications in the courts of jus-) ce ; they were neglected by the king; denied sufficient protec-ton from:the laws; exposed not only to continual insults, hut to,, ave fbeir property on all occasions destroyed bv the great; so'at they were without resource except, from the feodal tenures,st "Te C even to solicit the privileges, which were be-

owedjin other cases on vassals. In these unhappy circumstances,ey were glad to yield up their lands to any superior whom theyfeot- 1 t'■bd't’eable, and to receive them back from him as ahit r "1 '1 '‘us the landed property was everywhere changed

and -r , a ^ Tnures, and fiefs became universal. See I’eod, Fif.f,Usefi l *' N V RE ‘ l 1 or some time the feodal system was not only„ but honourable in its principles; but this continued

Jjj e - 6 er .than w hile the importers of it into Europe adhered toriginal simple anti noble maxims. During that period, the

lord exercised his bounty to thfi vassal, which the latter repaid byacts of gratitude : so that the intercourse betwixt them was of themost affectionate kind ; and this gave rise to what are called theFeodal Incidents. The expectants of fiefs were educated in thehall of the superior, while the tenures were precarious, or only forlife : and even when they became hereditary, the lord took care ofthe son and estate of his deceased vassal; not only protecting hisperson, but taking charge of his education, and directing the ma-nagement of his affairs. lie took pleasure in observing his ap-proach to maturity; and when he came of age, never failed to deli-ver to him the lands, with the care of which had lie been entrusted,and which he had been careful to improve. This was called theincident of wardship. The incident of relief was founded uponthe gratitude of the vassal; who, upon entering on his fief, broughta present to his lord, as an acknowledgment of his care of himduring the early part of his life, and in order to conciliate his fu-ture regard. The incident of marriage proceeded also upon theprinciple of gratitude on the part of the vassal. The latter, con-scious of the favours he had received, did not choose to ally him-self with a family inimical to his chief: while the superior himself,ambitious to aggrandise and augment the importance of his family,sought the most advantageous match for his vassal. Sometimesthe superior himself was reduced in his circumstances by war orother accidents: but from whatever cause bis distress proceeded,even though it had arisen from his own extravagance or prodi-gality, or when only destitute of means to support his ambition orgrandeur, his vassals were bound to support and relieve him ac-cording to their circumstances; and this was called the incident ofaid. The incident of escheat took place on the part of the vassal,when, through cowardice, treachery, or any remarkable misbe-haviour, he rendered himself unworthy of his fief. In that case,the taking of it from him, and giving ft to one more worthy, wascalled an escheat. While the lords and vassals thus vied with oneanother in mutual acts of friendship and benevolence, universalhappiness, liberty, and activity, were diffused through the society.The vassals behaved courteously towards the retainers, who wereimmediately below them ; while they again were courted by thelords as constituting their importance and strength ; the fords,lastly, giving a like importance and dignity to the sovereign him-self. Thus a regular, powerful, and compact system of govern-ment took place ; an unanimity and attention pervaded the variousdepartments of stale ; so that while the subjects were free, the na-tion at large was formidable. During this happy state of affairs, themembers of the national assembly in every country in Europe ap-peared there in arms, whether they came personally, or by theirrepresentatives. Such particularly was the case under the Anglo-Saxon government; and the happiness they at that time enjoyedmade the oppression and tyranny of the Normans appear the moreintolerable. In process of time, the state of society began to suf-fer a remarkable alteration. The high and disinterested notions,from which the happiness above mentioned, took its origin, de-clined ; the romantic ideas of chivalry ceased ; and much moreinterested notions of property came in their stead. The separa-tion of the interest of the lords from their vassals was the first steptowards the destruction of the feodal system. Thus the incidents,which had hitherto promoted their happiness, now did the very re-verse. Property being looked upon as a distinction superior topersonal merit, introduced the most mercenary views. In conse-quence of these, the infant ward, the care of whom was wont to beconsidered as a sacred and honorary trust, was now only lookedupon as a mean of procuring emolument to the superior. Thelatter regarded the profits of his vassals as so many diminutions ofhis own wealth. Instead of taking care to improve the state of hisward as formerly, he impoverished it; not only neglecting the edu-cation of file heir, but offering insults to himself; insomuch thatthe relations of the unfortunate vassal were often obliged to ransomfrom the avaricious superior both his person and effects. By mer-chandise of this kind the coffers of princes were filled, and ward-ships let out to strangers, who might exercise their rapacity withgreater freedom. When the vassal at last attained the years ofmaturity, he came to the posscs-iob of his lands without any ofthat joy and fcslivity which usually took place on the occasion,lie received an inheritance wasted and impoverished, while newgrievances daily presented, to augment the honors of his situation,j All the incidents, which formerly were so many expressions of| gratitude