A history of feudalism, British and continental;

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Chapter I

iNTBODirGTOST.

VAOl

The Patriarchal System . • • • 2

The Republics of Ancient Greece • • .2

The Republic and Empire of Rome . • 4

Questioiis for Examination . • • .10

CHAPTER II. Origin of thb Fbitdal Stbtbm«

Re-foundation of Cities and Towns as Feudal Boroughs • 25

Influences of Christianity on Early Feudalism • 30

Monastic Establishments of the Early Feudal Ages • 31

The Crusades, their Influence in Modifying Feudalism 34

CHAPTER III. Institutions connectbd with Fbudalish

Feudal Jurisprudence . . • • 37

Feudal Law of Primogeniture • . .40

Judicial Combats— Wager of Battle— Duels • 42

ZIV CONTENTS.

CHAPTER rV.

PAoa

Feudal Titles of Honour and Offices . . 70

Political and Social Privileges of the Feudalry • 74

Chivalry ..... 77

Nature and Origin of Chivalry • . .79

Feudal Castles .... 85

Defensive Armour of the Feudab7 • . .91

CHAPTER V. Feudal Hand Arms, &c. . . . « 94

Feudal Coat Armour . • • • 97

Tournaments, Jousts, &c. . • • « 98

Feudal Minstrelsy . . • « 119

Introduction of Gunpowder . • • 127

Questions for Examination • . .ISO

CHAPTER VI. Fbudalism in England

Historical Notices, Saxon Tenures • • 131

The Normans, their Origin, &c. • • .135

Reigns of William II. and Henry I. . . 142 Questions for Examination .... 159

CHAPTER Vn.

Fbudalish in England.

Reigns of Stephen, Henry II., &o. • . .160

Reign of Henry III., &c. • • • 166

I 'M! i ii ir.Ti i W

90NTENTS. HV

FAOS

Beigns of Richard II. and Henrj lY. . . 171

Beigns of Henry YII. and Henrj Ym. . 178

QuestiaDi for Examination ' • • • 188

CHAPTER Ym.

Feudalism in Enolakd.

English Feudal Tenures . . . . 189

Condition of the People of England during the Middle Ages 196 Questions for Examination . • • 204

CHAPTER IX.

FbTTDALISM IK FSANOB.

Preliminarj. Notices of Early French History • , 205

Origin and Degrees of French Nobility . • 211

Some Historical Notices of the Capetian French £ing8» as

Feudal. Monarchs • • . • 218

CHAPTER X.

Feudalism in Fbancb.

Notices of the Early life and Times of William the Conqueror ...... 237

State of France during the Eleyenth Century . 243

CHAPTER XL

Feudalism in F&anob.

Rise and Progress of the French Municipal System . 259

Feudal Prescription . . • • 263

Continuation of. Select French Annals, a.d. 1031—1 1 25 265

XVI CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XII.

Feudalish in Fbancb.

Reign of Philip lY., and his InunedUte Successors, a.d.

1285—1350 . . • . .309

French Feudal Robbers in the 14th and 1 5th Centuries 317

Rebellions in City and Country, a.d. 1358 • . 324

CHAPTER Xm.

Feudalisk in Feanob.

ReTolt of the Maillotins, a.i>. 1381—2 . . 327

The League, or the TJltra-Romanist Association in France,

Pseudo-Protestant French Feudalry • . , 346

Corruptions and Debaucheries of the French Court and

Feudalry •• ... 348

Sumptuary Laws in France • • . 352

Reign of Louis XIII, . t • « 354

Conclusion • • • • « 359

V s

HISTORY OF FEUDALISM.

Chapter I. Introductory

The teirm FflUBALtSMy in its geneiral ugnification, is but another name for ariHocrctcy, as it existed in Europe, in that peculiar form^ during the middle ages. Like that of the ancient aristocracies, feudal sway was the reign of the few^ for their own exaltation and benefit, to the degradation and disadvantage of the many. The Feudal Ststeh of Western Europe, the subject of our present concern, was a political edifice built over the ruins of the Roman empire ; and it was, like that empire, originally based on violencei spoliation, and murder.

It is humiliating to civilised man to know that when authentic general history first records the doings of his earliest progenitors, she speaks of his kind as behig nearly all bondmen, if not absolute slaves. Thus, even among the savages* of Polynesia, there is a privileged doss, who lord

* " Feudal service prerails in its amplest details in tliifl singtilar distriet. For example, the country aroand Amblantorre, to the west of Batticaloa, is rich in paddi'land, the whole of which is claimed by the chief of the distoict, 'the Vanniah of Manmone.' According to the custom of the country, he directs its cultivation by the yiUagers ; they acknowledge his authority, and so long as they live on the land, devote their whole time and labour to his service, recdvlng in return a division of tae grain, a share of milk from his cattle, and the certainty of support in periods of mmine and distress. Their houses, gardens, and wetts, though buUt, planted, and dug by themselves, are the proper^ of the chief, who alone can dispose of them.

''According to the report of Mr. Atherton, the government agent of the district, these serfs, whilst they live on the land, are bound to perform every service for the lord of the soil, without pay ; * the^ fence his gardens, cover his houses, carry his ba^^age, perform the work of coolies in balams [canoes], fish fbr him, act as his messengers ; and, when absent from his village, they must provide food for himself Imd his servants. They may, in fact be called his slaves, except that they arc at liberty to quit his service for that of another chief when they choose. But as they sddom do change, it may safely be presumed that the^ are content^ with the arrangement, and their healthy and pleasant faces sufficiently prove that they are well fed and happy.*"— Tkhnkki's CeyUm^ Vol. II. p. 459.

B it over the rest with a rigour scarcely to be paralleled in any community^ civilised or semicivilised, among the nations of olden Europe or modern Asia.

Before entering upon our immediate subject, we think it will be expedient to cast a backward glance at the ancient forms of aristocracy, especially those of Greece and Rome ; for, not to mention that these may have had, and probably did have, some influence in originating or modifying feudalism — ^not to press this consideration, which some may think groundless, it is certainly curious, perhaps profitable, to note the resemblances and differences between them. But anterior to all was

THE PATRIARCHAL SYSTEM.

Of this we need say little, for its nature is best understood, -and its progress most easily traced in the earlier sacred writings of the Old Testament. We there see that to the family, with its paternal head, succeeded the tribe, with its chief ; the ^ latter being, in fact, or in cherished fiction, descended from the patriarch who founded it. In later stages, however, the man with the strongest arm, or most scheming head, would be elected, or step into the ruler's seat. Thus originated, in all probability, the chiefdoms of the Highland elans and Irish sepU, in times nearer our own«

We pass on to a consideration of

THE REPUBLICS OF ANCIENT GREECE.

These were both aristocratical and oligarchical ; the government residing, first, in the few (oi kratoif oi aristoi) who led the limited number of the privileged free; and both controlled the oi poUai, or subservient many. As we do not find that there was ever much difference between the institutions, social or political, of Attica, and those of Sparta, &c., we shall confine our details to the former. The Athenian commonwealth, then, was divided into two classes

INTRODUCTORY. O

of freemen. To those of noble rank, op of large estate, who only were judged fit to command armies, &c., was alone confided (in practice, if not in principle) the care of legislation and religion. This division of powers has been called ** a double democracy ;" which perhaps it was, in the ancient but not in the modern sense of that term. The members of the oligarchy, or directing few, were called archontes. There, was usually a struggle going on between these and the free citizens — meaning the class not servile— as the latter claimed and occasionally exercised powers of deliberation and resistance. The sway of the oligarchs was felt to be encroaching and oppressive by the successive reformers of that day ; for we find from Xenophon, that the poorer freemen, who had to set their slaves to toil, or even work themselves for the rich, were considered as too little regarded by the aristocrats ; and the great historian* urged that they ought to be admitted to the share of power and place they were entitled to by law : more especially as it was they, and not the aristocratic exclusives, who really enriched the state. In his time, it seems that the domains and emoluments of the oligarchs had become hereditary.f As for the people, properly so called, of Attica, no one seemed to consider they had any political rights at all ; though among men of the servile class, in Greece, we find individuals who, by their philosophical and other works, have gained an imperishable fame.

We need scarcely observe that communities, so constituted, were of a very different character from what is now understood by a republic, either like that of France, or those of America ; and still less were they like any imagined to be realisable by day-dreamers who cling to the popular

* The principal historical writings of Xenophon are the " Hellenica" (Grecian History), and the " Anabasis" or Retreat of the Ten Thousand, -which memorable adventure he himself conducted.

^ See Potter's " Grecian Antiquities."

error, that " all men are, by nature, created equal."* The mass of the people, in Attica, Sparta, &c., were, in short, house or field slaves. If we want a modern example of a republic which comes the nearest to the Grecian type, we shall find it in the bondage-cursed territories of the United States. Nor are there wanting apologbts for American black slavery, who urge that no "proper republic" can exist, where there is not a governing and enjoying class, one served by a subordinate and rightless herd of toilers — black or white "hewers of wood and drawers of water,*' with broad backs to bear stripes. And certainly, the " political liberty" enjoyed by most of the labouring classes in the American towns, unaccompanied as it is by social equality, or real freedom of act or expression, is purely imaginary ; worse still, while it is illusory as to the possessor, it is daily getting more likely to become subversive of the best institutions of the country. And, of late, the danger has greatly increased by the excessive influx of Irish emigrants. But any evil forecast of this kind belongs not directly to our present subject.

. THE REPUBLIC ANP EMPIRE OF ROME.

/ The first Roman monarchy was abolished "B^SL-SQ^ when a consulate succeeded, by what was called a popular election ; that is, the consuls were elected by the free or ruling class of citizens, convened for the occasion. Romulus, the real or reputed founder of Rome, divided his vagabonds — for such most of his subjects were — into two classes, patri - Ham and plebsians. From the former were selected the law-makers, law-executors, and priests. Under the kings, ■the plebeians had no share whatever in the government, nor in the regulation of religion. But to each member of the privileged class, or patrtdi, were assigned a certain

* Introductory vords of the " Dcclaratioii of Independence of the Thirteen United State«.'' a. d. 1775.

INTRODUCTORY. O

nnmber of the unprivileged freemen, t.e. — persons not servile, to whom he was obliged, or was supposed, „to act as a kind of guardian : to them he was the patron, and they were his cUents,* The patrician class was afterwards divided into the patres canscripti — conscript fathers or senators ; and the ordo equestris, or free members of the community who were rich enough to keep horses; it being understood that the humbler freemen were not entitled, or at lea^t were unable, to do so.f When the class of equestrian rank became very numerous in Rome, through its having been allowed, or having usurped hereditary distinction, their numbers were greatly thinned by a law, which enacted that no freeman could vindicate his rights to be or become a knight, unless he had an estate worth four hundred thousand sesterces —say about £20004 ^^^ ^^ senatorial and knightly rank were distinguished, both in youth and manhood by their dress, from their unprivileged fellow-citizens. They alone wore a ring upon the left hand. These hand rings were at first made of iron, but latterly of gold ; and the right to wear them was called the jiu annidorum ; just as bearing a hawk upon the hand became in feudal times, the distinctive sign of a lord or lady of a castle, or a knight. Under all the Roman kings, the plebeians, or body of citizens not servile, had, as we have seen, no share in the government, either directly or indirectly; but, when the republic was reconstituted, they were allowed to elect tribunes, or defenders of their interests in the national councils. Ultimately, a few chiefs of the state, and leaders of armies, were chosen from their ranks; thus the dictator Sylla was a patrician, while his rival Marius was a plebeian.

* Hence the origin of our name for those whose interests are legally defended.

t As we shall see afterwards, the feudal term ehivalry—'Fr, oheval, a horse; and the German fitters, or mounted knights, had their name from ^o sam^ circumstance.

X See Echard'a " History of Rome.*'

The Roman plebeians were, in the beginning or in the end, divided into two classes : ingenui, or freemen descended from freemen; and lihertini, or plebeians who were themselves enfranchised slaves, or the descendants of such. And the former had, at first, a consideration and privileges which the latter had not : yet ultimately the distinction was little if at all regarded. As for the servile body in Rome, from first to last, tJiey had no rights at all, political or social. Their masters could dispose of them, and what they might earn, at pleasure; for they never had any legal property, not even in their own lives; and were thus, so far, worse ofi^, juridically speaking, than negroes in the hands of a. Carolina planter.*

Social relationships among the Romans do not seem to have been much altered during the sway of the emperors ; so that we need enter into no farther details regarding them.

The so called republic (senatorial oligarchy) of Rome, virtually ceased after the battle of Pharsalia, B.C. 47 ;t though historians assign the date of the empire which succeeded to that of the battle of Actium, B.C. 474 ^^^ struggle between the patrician parties, that of Caesar against Pompey, Cato, &c., and between Augustus his nephew, against Brutus, Cassius, &c., were simply contests between aristocrats for the means of- coercing and controlling the people: the "liberty" they fought for, really meant power i and privilege for themselves and for their class. The desperate efforts of Pompey, &c. as they ended in their own

* For a proof of this, read in Plntarch {vit. Cat.) the brutal conduct of " the godlike Cato" (of Utica) to a bondsman, just before he killed himself. The almost as divine Washing^n was also a slave owner and breeder. Worse still Jefferson, that pattern democrat, is accused of having sold his own coloured ofl^pring !

i The battle on the plains of Pharsalia was fought between Julius CsBsar and Pompey. It decided the fate of Pompey, who, after a total defeat, fled into Egypt, and was shortly after betrayed b:^^ Ptolemy whose protection he had sought, and assassinated. Lucan's Epic Poem, in which he gives an account of the civil wars of CsBsar and Pompey, bears the name of Pharsalia.

t This was a naval action between the forces of Augustus and Mark Antony. In it, by the decisive victory of Augustus, the fortunes of his opponent were utterly mined. Antony retired into Egypt, where he destroyed himself in despair.

INTBODUCTOBY. 7

perdition, would, had tbey succeeded, have been of no benefit whatever to the millions. On the contrary, the latter are usually more practically free under the sway of one great despot, even though he be a tyrant, than under the more closely compressing domination of many small ones.

Nevertheless, it must be owned, that the establishment of a universal or inordinate grea^ empire usually degrades and debases the human species. That of Napoleon, for instance, seemed to deprive several of the continental populations, for a time, of their moral manhood ; besides suspending to a great extent, while it lasted, the march of European civilisation. To some amount Roman tyranny was acted over again by the French ; in so far that by the latter as by the Romans, the vanquished nations were virtually disarmed ; the conquerors in both cases, first pillaged and then overawed them by armies of occupation, or corps of observation. The latter were also, like the subject states under the Romans, given up as a prey to rapacious govemora, who plundered them with impunity, and drained them of their wealth by exorbitant taxes. In each instance, the vanquished nations were deprived of their most enterprising citizens, who resorted to a distant capital in quest of preferment, or of riches; and were accustomed to look up to an alien superior, and tamely receive his commands.

There are many causes assigned for the decline and ignominious end of the Roman empire. The t yomQat efficient, usually given, are, — it s ny^ f- ^^tenai^ ^ » and the xeiaoval of the central government to Byzantium, by Constantine, dating fc(^_^j[2^.28^ Among the least operative causes we class the ^^ luxury" of the later Romans ; unless we restrict the term to the sybaritic habits of the titled and opulent, the sight or knowledge of which self-indulgence, on their part, truly, was not likely to make the degraded and impoverished masses have much of that sometimes noble, at other times unreasoning and purblind feeling, called ''patriotism/' When '< Rome's annals waxed dirty/' as Byron phrases it, ] fully two-thirds of the people had been forced, or had slid, into a servile condition. " When the Franks began to settle in Gaul, the Roman population might number seventeen or eighteen millions, of whom five hundred heads of families, at the most, paid the capitation tax ; which fact proves that full two-thirds of the whole people were in a state of slavery or serfage. In this case, as in all others, mastership paid the penalty of its encroachments and oppressions, for invasion by free-men, however rude, or ill armed, or imperfectly disciplined, were at first perilous, and then fiital, to the independence of the millions, who had nothing left in their native country worth fighting for."* The fiict is, the aristocratical and propertied classes of Rome and its dependencies, like those in some modem European communities, which we need not name, had become exorbitantly rich, while the masses were miserably poor. And so far are "luxuries,*' enjoyed to such a limited extent as could ever be attainable by the majority, from emasculating the body, hurting the health, or depressing the spirit of man, that they do just the very reverse. A few, indeed, die from excess, with us : but multitudes perish from inanition and privation of proper comforts. The first inroads of the barbarians into the Empire, proceeded rather fi*om the love of plunder than from the desire of founding new settlements. Roused to take up arms, by some enterprising leader, they sallied out of their forests, and broke in upon the Roman fi*ontier provinces with irresistible violence; put all who opposed them to the sword; carried off most of the valuable eiSects of the inhabitants ; dragged along multitudes of captives in chains ; wasted all before them with fire and sword, and returned in triumph to their wilds and fastnesses. When little was left, through

• Ouizot's " Etudes Hlstoriques/'

INTRODTJCTORT. 9

succeeding ravages, to plunder in the nearer provinces, they began to settle in them. These settlements were soon contended for by other intruders, of nomadic habits, or tribes in quest of a home; who came in wandering armies, with their families and flocks. Separately or together, various roving or partially-settled peoples — their ranks ever recruited by new adventurers, as they were successively allured by the scent of Roman spoils — plundered and seized the cities and lands of Thrace, Pannonia, Gaul, Spain, Northern Africa, and all Italy, including Sicily, and other dependencies.*

* It may be convenient, for the sake of reference, to append to onr text a few chronologrical notices of the origin and profession of the " barbarian irmptionB :"— These began before the Christian era. The condition of the countries and the historical antecedents of the intruders, were nearly as little known to the Romans as they are by us. The name of Ooths first appears in the Roman annals about ▲.D. 200. It was given to the aggressive populations of little-known or unexplored regions around or near the Baltic sea. Thus a southern portion of meridional Scandinavia is still called Gothland. The term Visiffotht applied, more especially, to the race which invaded Oaul and Spain ; that of Ostrogoths to those of Pannonia. About A.D. 260, the Vandals first appear. These, too, were only a section of the Gothic races. Having invaded and tried to establish themselves in Pannonia. the latter were resisted and defeated by the Roman forces, a.d. 271. In 274, the ^ankSf a Germanic race, made a descent into Gaul, and the year after, were joined by the Vandals (the aboriginal or early " Prussians,") and the wandering warriors of another tribe called the Burghunds ; the name of the latter BtiU surviving in that of the province which they conquered and long kept, named Burgundy, About a.d. 286, we find the people of the sea-board of northern Germany and lower Scandinavia— ^mmmw, Jtites, and J.n^fe«— commencing a systematic course of piracy. Between A.n. 825 and 335, Constantine nearly cleared the imperial territories oi the Goths and other barbaric intruders ; but their incursions soon recommenced.

Another band, called the Allemanni, (" All-men,") or Germans, invaded and plundered parts of Gaul, a.d. 851. They and the Franks, ("Freemen," free, at least, as far as making free ^es,) together ravaged several Gallic provinces, a.d. 355-6. There was an invasion of the empire by the Goths and ITunSf the latter a Tartaric race, a.d. 395, &c. They devastated Italy, conjointly, in 401, and again, in 407 ; but at the latter period, they were driven out with great slaughter. Next year, (408,) the Huns, headed by their king or chief, Alaric, besieged Rome, but were bribed to desist for a short time. As might have been foreseen, they returned and took the city by assault, a.d. 409 ; when a dreadful scene of murder, spoliation, and destruction ensued. Four times afterwards, was Rome taken and similarly treated. In 433, Attila, who called himself the plague or scourge sent from heaven I with an immense host of Huns, first invaded Italy. During the next eighteen years, he did his best to turn central and southern Europe into one great desert ; but he was once beaten by Aetius, a.d. 451 ; the latter headed a force of rival Goths, &c. who had settled in the dominions they "previously wrested from the Romans. Attila died in 455. Meantime the '^Hsigoths had founded a kingdom in southern Gaul, which subsisted f^om a.d. 412 till 520. The Vandals, who first invaded Sicily in 440, were expelled from it in 464. But next year, under Genseric, they ravaged the rest of Italy, Greece, &c. a.d. 474, the Saraoens, a Tartar race, first appear as conquerors of Western Asia. Afterwards, the Visigoths and they long contended for the dominion of Spain ; whence the latter were driven out by the Moors. But long before, the Western Roman empire fell; when Odoacre, a barbarian chief, of unknown origin, established himself as ** King of Italy," a.d. 476.

The misery and humiliation of the once .proud city of Rome, caused by friend and foe — for even Belisarius, while in garrison, ruined many of its monuments— lasted three hundred years ; that is, from the invasion of Italy, or rather, from the retaking of Rome, by Belisarius, a.d. 636, till the coronation of Charlemagne, in the year 800.

QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.

1. What modem institutions are supposed to have been derived from the Patriarchal system?

2. What was the condition of the mass of the people in ancient Attica and Sparta?

3. When was the first Roman monarchy abolished ?

4. What form of government succeeded it ?

5. What were the two classes into which the Boman people were originally diyided?

6. What relation did these bear to each, other?

7. How was the patrician class afterwards divided ?

8. How were men of Senatorial and KnighUy' rank distinguished from others ?

9. What political power had the plebeians when the republic was constituted?

10. What was the distinction between ingenui and libertini?

11. Between whom were the batties of Pharsalia and Actiuxu fought ?

12. What are assigned as the two principal causes of the decline of the Roman empire ?

13. To whom was the name of Goihs given?

14. What did Attila call himself?

CHAPTER 11.

ORIGIN OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM.

We have entered upon the foregoing particulars, in which we have expressed ourselves as briefly as we could, for reasons already given, and because out of the chaos, social and political, which supervened upon the fall of the western Roman empire arose the Feudal System:* a polity of

* The etpaailogy of the -words feud, feudal^ if correctly rendered by some English antiquaries, give ns a pretty clear indication of the system they apply to. The old Saxon word fehod meant price, or a reward ; but according to Selden, Xtkib low Latin noun substantive is a word of Teutonic origin made up off eh, feo, or ffh, which term sijpiified a salary or stipend, or sum of periodical pay ; and of hade, head, or hwd, implying qnahty or kind : t. e. in a stipendiary way, with the acknowledgment of a superior, and a condition of returning some aerviee for a benefit or donation ; on the nefflect of the duties connected with such feud, or fiif which it came to be called, (as in the case of it^feoffed or i^feuded land,) the latter became rerertible to the superior.

So far, so well ; but it is really a curious instance of the uncertainty of philology, that the true derivation of the word /«tM2« is yet to seek for. Sir Francis Palsgrave doubts if there ever were such a word in Latinity, high or low, as feodum, Cowel derives it from the "FreaalL feoff or fi^; i.e. "predium beneficiarum." Allodium, another doubtful low Latin word, he renders " non-feu land," Feudum simplex, unentailed feu land ; taliatum, unentailed.

The following is a concise and yet comprehensive summary of the state and treatment of the people of Europe, m boUi me middle and the preceding ages, and immediately before and after the rise of the feudal system : — "Where men are poor they are compelled to select such soils as they can cultivate, not such as they would. Although gathered round the sides of the same mountain range, they are far distant from eadi other. They have no roads, and thev are unable to associate fast self-defence. The thin soils yield small returns, and the little tribe embraces some who would prefer to live by the labour of others rather than by their own. The scattered people may be plundered with ease, and half a dozen men, combined for the purpose, may rob in succession all tiie members of the little community. The opportunity makes the robber. The boldest and most determined becomes tne leader di the gang. One by one, the people who use spades are plundered by those who carry swords, and who i>a8s their leisure in dissipation. The leader divides the sixiil, taking the largest share himself, with which, as the community increases, he hires more followers. He levies black mail on those who work, taking such portion as suits his good pleasure. With the gradual increase of the little community he commutes with them for a certain share of their produce, which he caHs rent, or tax, or taille. Population and wealth grow very slowly, because of the large proportion which the non-labourers bear to the labourers. The good soils are very slowly improved, because the people are unable to obtain axes or spades with which to work, or to make roads into the dense forests. Few want leather, and there is no tanner on the si)ot to use their hides. Few can aflbrd shoes and there is no shoemaker to eat their com while making the few that can be bought. Few have horses, and there is no blacksmith. Combination of effort bM scarcely an existence. By very slow degrees, however, they are enabled to which, as there never had been before a perfect example, 80« says Montesquieu, its like will never be seen again. " A system of social relations appeared, in a moment as it were, in every part of Europe ; comprehending laws which were

reduce to caltiyation better lands, and to lessen the distance between fhemselyeB and the neighbouring settlement, where rules another little sovereign. Each chief, however, now covets Uie power of taxing, or collecting rents from the subjects of his neighbour. War ensues. Each se^ plunder, and calls it * glory.' Each invades the domain of the other, and each endeavours to weaken his opponent by murdering his rent-payers, burning their houses, and wasting their little farms, while manifesting the utmost courtesy to tiie chief himself. The tenants fly to the hills for safety, being there more distant from the invaders. Bank weeds grow up in the rich lands thus abandoned, and the drains fill up. At the end of a year or two peace is made, and the work of clearing is again to be commenced. Population and wealth have, however, diminished, and the means of recommencing the work have again to be created. Meanwhile the best lands are covered with shrubs, and the best meadows are under water. With continued peace the work, however, advances, and after a few years population and wealth and cultivation attain the same heisht as before. New wars ensue, for the determination of the question which of the two chiefs shall collect all the— so-caUed rent. After fprea^ waste of life and property one of them is killed and the, other falls his heir, having thus acquired both glory and plunder. He now wants a title bv which to be distingaished from those by whom he is surrounded. He is a little king.