MR. URBAN, Birmingham, Aug. 15. WILL you allow me to make known to your readers an instance of the utter neglect with which our ecclesiastical edifices are treated, even within these few last years, and by the sanction of those whose duty and pleasure it should be to preserve and beautify them. The publication of such facts will, I trust, tend to render persons more alive to the value of the smallest relic of antiquity, and haply be the means of preserving some time-hallowed monument of our fathers from suffering from the rude hand of innovation, an object which has ever been forwarded by your earnest zeal and influence.

The church of Leominster, co. Hereford, is well known to lovers of architecture by the striking peculiarities of its Norman and Decorated work; the former still remains entire, being confined to the lower stage of the tower and

the north aisle, if I may apply that term to a portion which seems to have been the nave of the original church, (built probably by Henry I. A.D. 1125,)* which is separated from the later ad ditions. The Decorated parts, which are as highly ornamented as the style will allow, have experienced a far dif. ferent fortune. Several windows which were once filled with elegant tracery, as profusely studded with the ballflower as those in the nave of Gloucester cathedral, have been "beautified" by the insertions of new mullions, which are perfectly plain, and evince nocare to attain to elegance even by graceful proportions. In this possibly the crippled funds of our modern restorer may have prevented him from rivalling the magnificence of olden days. But the chief instance of destruction, and that, too, perfectly wanton, to which I wish to call your attention, is the mutilation of the sedilia, by a wall built so

as to form a portion of the south aisle into a vestry; two, together with the piscina, are tolerably perfect, though degraded to unworthy uses, as you will see by the accompanying sketch; the third is destroyed, and this was done in 1840. I have seen instances of similar mutilation at Dursley, (Gloucestershire,) where some fine Decorated sedilia were nearly destroyed to give room for a family pew; and at Ludlow (Salop), where a hideous monument has filled the place of one; but this was done long before the time of our architectural societies-when the revival of Gothic architecture was not even

thought of. The latter church would well repay a most careful examination, and, if it would not be trespassing on your space, I should be pleased to bring some of its features under the notice of your readers at a future time.

Can you give me any account of the arches which are found frequently in the exterior of the south aisle of churches in the Decorated style? I am not aware that their character has been clearly ascertained.

Yours, &c. B. F. W.

Cf. Dugdale's Monasticon, iv. 51.

THE existence of feodality in this country before the Norman Conquest has been denied by most of our bistorians, but they have in no instance entered into the real merits of the question, by an investigation of its details or an appeal to the Anglo-Saxon remains, which, it is obvious, can supply the only evidence on the subject.

Under these circumstances, the following observations, though meagre and incomplete, have been hazarded by the writer under the impression that they may in some degree assist to clear up in the mind of the general reader a point of indisputable interest, not only to English but to European antitiquities in general.

I wish it however to be clearly understood that by feodality I do not mean to assert that, at any period before the epoch I have mentioned, exactly the same regular machinery in this respect (so far as mere details or minor incidents are concerned,) was found in England as in France or in Lombardy; but only that, from a similar application to the fiscal land of this country of a principle common to all the Germanic nations, there was developed a corresponding system, which in its generic and essential characteristics agreed with that which flourished in the before-mentioned coun.. tries, the alleged incunabula of feuds.

It will be proper in the first place to explain what that original principle

*The denial of Mr. Hallam is qualified and guarded. He says, (History of the Middle Ages, Vol. I. c. 2,) The regular machinery and systematic establishment of feuds, in fact, may be considered as almost confined to the dominions of Charle magne, and to those countries which afterwards derived it from thence. In England it can hardly be thought to have existed in a complete state before the conquest." M. Thierry (Recits Merovingiens, vol. I. ch. 5) says, "Le berceau de la feodalité Européenne fut la France, et la Lombardie. Bienqu'il n'y eut dans le système feodale autre chose que le pur developement d'une certaine fase des mœurs Germaniques, ce système ne s'y implanta dans la Germanie que par l'imi tation d'une maniere tardive et incom. plete."

GENT. MAG. VOL. XXII.

was, and then to proceed to the consideration of the land in which it was eventually comprised.

The principle alluded to was vassalage, or simple homage,† the origin and primitive existence of which amongst the ancient Germans it was reserved for the acumen of Montesquieu to discover, and in his hands it furnished

a complete clue to the otherwise inexplicable mazes of feodality.‡

The words of Tacitus, which supplied the authority for this fact, are so familiar that quotation is unnecessary. They express, under the names of princeps and comes the relative and mutual dependence for service and protection of a superior and inferior, i. e. in the language of the feudalists, of a lord and his vassal.§.

This relation was transplanted into Britain by the Jutes, the Saxons, and the Angles. Along with it they also imported the system which had regu, lated the occupation of lands in their native soil.

This system of primitive law recognised the collective nation as the proprietor of the territory which it occupied, and the whole of the corn-lands were public. From this rule were excepted only the cabin and surrounding plot of ground of each freeman. T

The occupation of Britain in the fifth century presents in a general view many points of intimate resemblance to that of Gaul by the Franks.** Unlike Burgundy, there was no compact or convention, which should to some extent respect the rights of the old inhabitants; but both the before-men

tioned countries were subjugated, and the conquerors became lords of the soil. They, therefore would seize so much as their necessities or their caprice required, and those estates retaining the characteristics which had appertained to them in the hands of the Romano-Britons, placed the barbarian in the new condition of an extensive allodial proprietor-a condition, however, which his mind was capable of apprehending and appreciating, from the experience of his home in Germany.

But, notwithstanding those seizures and appropriations of individual estates, by private persons, a larger proportion of good and available territory remained unoccupied and unappropriated by the barbarians.

This land the nation itself stepped in and claimed to hold as its own property, subject to the ancient and still existing laws of Germany, and it then appears in English history distinguished as public and fiscal land.

In Germany it had been an annual custom that the ealdormen should allot the corn-lands, for the space of one year, to those members of the tribe whose turn it was to remain peaceably at home, whilst the others were engaged in war. Annexed to this temporary possession was a condition to contribute towards the subsistence of their militant brethren.†

*

The practical exposition of such condition is, that the annual occupier of the soil paid to the state a rent in kind.

Both these principles of the temporary holding of public land, and the obligation of certain services to be rendered to the state for it, were re

* Cæsar, de B. G. 1. 6, c. 22. "Neque quisquam agri modum certum aut fines habet proprios, sed magistratus ac principes, in annos singulos gentibus cognationibusque hominum qui una coierunt quantum et quo loco visum est agri attribuunt, atque anno post alio transire cogunt."

Ibid. 1. 4, c. 1. "Suevorum gens est longe maxima et bellicosissima Germanorum omnium. Hi centum pagos habere dicuntur, ex quibus quotannis, singula millia armatorum bellandi causa ex finibus educunt. Reliqui qui domi manserint, se utque alios alunt."

tained and introduced by the barbarians into their British settlements, though, owing to the large formation of allodial estates, the territory to which these principles were applied was not so extensive as the public land of their native Germany.

The public land of Britain was applied by the invaders for the benefit of the nation, in two distinct ways, viz. it was either cultivated by coloni or farmers, who paid to the state certain rents for the occupation, or it was dispensed in precarious or life assignments to the comites of the chieftain who had led the expedition into Britain, as the inducement and condition for further services in war.

A most important change however occurred after the barbarians had abandoned their old country and acquired a new one. The leader of the expedition had been converted into a king, and the assignments of all the public lands were now transferred from the ealdormen to the former, who had become the permanent communis magistratus; and when his permanence was established, it would appear also that the assignments which were made by his sanction, were prolonged over the same term, i. e. from an annual existence they became for life.

This point brings us back to a circumstance attending the ancient German vassalage, which is of considerable importance, in its bearing upon the institution of feudalism.

The chieftain in Germany, besides affording subsistence to his comites, rewarded and encouraged them by the occasional present of a horse or a framea.§ His armoury in the early ages formed the only fund from which his retainers could, by the possibility of things, be rewarded. But when the same chieftain had put on the character of a king, he then, as we have seen, was invested with the same right of disposition over the public land which had formerly belonged to the

Vide an article which appeared in the Magazine for May last, under the title, "On the Developement of the Anglo-Saxon Ealdordom."

§ Tacit. de M. G. c. 14. "Exigunt enim principis sui liberalitate illum bellatorem equum, illam cruentam victricemque frameam."

ealdormen collectively. Instead, therefore, of the limited means of his former condition, he found in the public land of the conquered country a copious fund for the reward and incitement of the comites who had followed him from Germany. The customs of his native country allowed of larger grants of the public land to persons more dignified or worthy than the multitude, and such, in his judgment, would be his own comites.*

Moreover, in consequence of the extensive occupation of allodial property, the claims for temporary allotments from the state would not be made so largely as of old.

But, notwithstanding all these changes of circumstances, the ancient rule was still observed in one great point, though it was departed from in another, and the assignments of public land were not prolonged beyond the life of the grantee, on whose death they immediately reverted to the fisc; resembling in this the fate of the warlike implements or heregeate, which were returned to the lord when the vassal was dead.t

I have described circumstances which must actually have occurred in Great Britain after its invasion in the fifth century, for each Jutish, Anglic, or Saxon chieftain brought with him, in addition to the general horde of warriors who followed him through the influence of his military fame, a selecter body of dependents engaged by oath to maintain and defend their lord, and even to merge their own glory into his. And these persons, the courtiers of later times, when each Gothic sovereign had assumed the habits of the Byzantine empire, demanded and received from their lord

*Tacit. de M.G. c, 26, "Agri pro numero cultorum ab universis per vices occupantur, quos mox inter se secundum dignationem partiuntur."

† Notwithstanding these new means of rewarding the comites, the heregeate or hereots, though no longer given by the lord, continued to be paid, for they could not be returned to him on the death of his vassal.

Tacit. de M. G. c. 14, "Illum defendere, tueri, sua quoque fortia facta gloriæ ejus assignare, præcipuum sacramentum est."

and sovereign all that the generosity or extravagance of a barbarian would prompt him to bestow.

The names under which the two divisions of land which I have mentioned were known to the AngloSaxons were folcland and bocland,§ the former being the terra fiscalis, or beneficiary land, and the latter the allodium of the continent, held of no superior, and subject to no service or charge.

The folcland, whilst it continued such, strictly speaking, i. e. when it was merely fisc or royal demesne, and before any beneficiary assignment had been made, was incumbered with services and dues rendered to the king by its occupiers.

In what the latter consisted the Anglo-Saxon laws do not disclose, but the information which they withhold is to be found in the Diplomata, where folcland, by the concurrent act of the monarch and his witan, is enfranchised into an estate of bocland.

The following services and dues occur therein as incident to folcland, (Kemble's Diplomata, vol. ii.) Secularia tributa et vectigalia, opus regale

Fiscalia tributa, pastus episcoporum,
principum et exactorum, pœnales
res, et furis comprehensio
Regalia tributa, principalis dominatio,
poenales conditiones, furis com-
prehensio

Secularia tributa et vectigalia.
Regalia et principalia tributa et vi
exacta opera, sive poenales causæ,
furis comprehensio
Regale servitium .

Regale opus intus et foris
Regale opus

Regalia tributa et vi exacta opera, pœnales res, principalis dominatio, furisque comprehensio

Regalis subjectio. Regalia debita.

242

246

253

258

260

264

269

281

ib.

295

300

But from all these services and dues, the beneficiary assignment or fief, which the Anglo-Saxons would appear to have called thegnland, was exempted in the same manner as the absolute estate of bocland.* For, although we have no direct evidence to show precisely on what terms the thegnland was granted, yet the analogy between it and the Frankish benefice, and the base and onerous nature of the charges I have enumerated, would lead to the strongest presumption. These services were due only when the folcland was still in the king, but actually occupied by farmers (the fiscalini of the Continent), and before it had been converted into a benefice or thegnland. They were the renders of the tenants in demesne.

On the death of each beneficiary the thegnland reverted to the state, and was either regranted in that character or remained under farm as demesne or terra regis.

Of this fact we find the clearest proof in England, even in the ninth century, feodality not having yet advanced beyond the first stage of its developement. The Ealdorman Alfred, in his last will (executed between the years 870 and 889), after giving to his son three hides of his bocland, adds, "And gif se cyning him geunnan wille thæs folclande to thæm boclande, thonne hæbbe and bruce."+

We see, by this will, that the dying beneficiary could not bequeath his folcland, nor did it descend like his estates of bocland; but, in the prospect of death, he recommended his son to the bounty of his lord, in whose discretion it would be to continue the benefice in the same family, or grant it afresh to another vassal. Yet in

*Allen's Rise and Progress, p. 159. + Kemble's Diplomata, vol. ii. 317.

this recommendation of the father we may see a small advance towards the inheritance of fiefs. It could not have been uncommon in this age that the benefices of the father should be continued over to the son; and, as I have before remarked, from this state of circumstances, to the regular transmissibility of feodal property, there was but a short and easy step.

I have been unable to ascertain in what form the Anglo-Saxon benefices were granted or guaranteed to the persons who were favoured with this usufruct of the fiscal property. The term bocland, applied distinctively to the Anglo-Saxon allodium, would lead to the belief that no book or deed was

employed in the conveyance of a benefice, and, therefore, the grant being oral, that recourse must have been had to the same sort of testimony to prove the title where the possession was disputed. In whatever cases it may be supposed that the right of the beneficiary could be questioned, there was no absolute necessity for written evidence. So long as the benefice was determinable on a life, the remote title was in the crown; and the disturbed beneficiary being, as we shall aftertribunals, would lay his complaint wards see, released from the ordinary before the court of the king, who would necessarily be, as the grantor, in full possession of the real facts of the case. The unjust possessor either of bocland or folcland was mulcted in the same penalty. Vassalage, having so great an influence in the institution of feodality, necessarily supplied it with its principle of military service. This feature, however, equally belonged to bocland, and, whether in France or England, cannot be considered the peculiar characteristic of the one more than of the other. But, though this general milispecies of land, yet the mode of exacttary service was required from both ing it, and the application of it to each as a condition or incident of tenure, were totally different. This leads us to the consideration who were the beneficiaries in England during the

Laws of Edward the Elder, c. 2. "Eac we cwædon hwæs se wyrthe wære, the othrum rihtes wyrnde athor oththe on boclande oththe on folclande hwonne he him rihte worhte beforan tham gerefan."