Chapter 13

“This book beareth witness that Ælfsige bought a woman called Ongyneðel, and her son Gyðiccæl, of Ðurcil for half a pound, at the church-door in Bodmin: and he gave to Ælfsige the portreeve and Maccos the hundred-man, fourpence as toll. Then came Ælfsige who bought these persons, and took them, and freed them, ever sacless, on Petroc’s altar, in the witness of thesegood men; that is, Isaac the priest[427],” etc.

Of all forms of emancipation I imagine this to have been the most frequent, partly because of its convenience, partly because the motives for emancipation were generally of a religious cast, and the sanctions of religion were solemn and awful. Almost all the records which we possess on this subject are taken from the margins of Gospels or other books belonging to religious houses, and the few references in the laws imply emancipation at the altar. Among the Franks this form, in which the freedman was called Tabularius, conveyed only imperfect freedom: the utmost it could do was to confer the privileges of a Roman provincial, to which class the clergy were reckoned: but thetabulariuseven so was not fully free; he still remained in the mund of the church. Wihtræd’s law, so often cited, shows clearly that this was not the case in England; nor could it be, seeing that the clergy among us were national, and the Frankish system ofpersonalrights did not prevail. I am therefore disposed to think that gradually emancipation at the altar was taken to convey all the privileges ofmanumission, and that it was the mode generally, though not exclusively, in use. On this point, the want of documents prevents our attaining certainty. The method was probably this: the man was formally offered up before the high altar, and there declared free in the presence of the officiating clergy and the congregation. A memorandum was then made in some religious book belonging to the church, and the names of the witnesses were recorded. Whether a separate certificate was prepared does not appear.

The full extent of the rights obtained by the freedman, especially in respect of inheritance, is not to be gathered from any existing Anglosaxon document. It is probable that these were limited, as among the Langobards and Franks: his offspring however were free, and his marriage with a free woman, equal: his other rights, duties and privileges, in short his general condition, were in all probability determined by certain arrangements between himself and his lord previous to the act of manumission. In such a case neither party would find much difficulty in settling the terms of a bargain.

NOTE.

The following pedigrees illustrate the care with which the relations of thegebúr, and other dependent cultivators on an estate were recorded. It is probable, nay even certain, that such records were preserved in all lordships: they were the original court-rolls, by copy of which the unfree tenants, perhaps also the poor freemen, held, who were thus the ancient copyholders. The amount of the holdings was undoubtedlysettled by the custom of the county or the manor; and it is probable that one measure prevailed for all tenants of similar grades. A record of descents was necessary to regulate the claims of a lord to the families of hiscoloni, and some extensive system of registration very probably prevailed: it would be impossible without it to secure the due operation of the law ofteám.“Dudda was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and he had three daughters, one was named Deórwyn, the second Deórswýð, the third Golde. And Wulfláf at Hǽðfeld hath Deórwyn to wife, Ælfstán at Tæccingawyrð hath Deórswýð to wife, and Ealhstán, Ælfstán’s brother, hath Golde to wife. There was a man named Hwíta, the beemaster at Hǽðfeld, and he had a daughter Táte, the mother of Wulfsige, the bowman; and Wulfsige’s sister Lulle hath Héhstán to wife, at Wealden. Wifús and Dunne, and Seoloce are inborn to Hǽðfeld. Duding, the son of Wifús, is settled at Wealden; and Ceólmund the son of Dunne, also sits at Wealden, and Æðelheáh the son of Seoloce, also sits at Wealden: and Táte, Cénwold’s sister, Mæg has to wife at Welgun; and Eádhelm, the son of Hereðrýð, hath Táte’s daughter to wife. Wærláf, Wærstán’s father, was a right serf at Hǽðfeld, he held the grey swine[428].”“᛭A man named Bráda was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and Hwíte was the name of Brâda’s wife; she was a gebúr’s daughter at Hǽðfeld. Hwíte was Wærstán’s Wǽðrýð's and Wynburh’s third mother[429]. And Wærstán sits at Wádtún, and hath Wine’s sister to wife, and Wine hath Wærðrýð towife.wife.And Dunne sat at Wádtún, she was inborn to Hǽðfeld: and Deórwyn her daughter hath Cynewald to wife at Munden: and Deórnáð her brother is with Cynewald. And Dudde, Wifús’s daughter sits at Wilmundesleá. Cynhelm, Cénwald’s father, was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and Manna, Cénwald’s son, sits at Wádtún under Eádwald.”“᛭Buhe, Dryhtláfs mother-in-law, was removedfromfromHǽðfeld into Eslingaden: and Æðelwyn, Eádugu and Æðelgyð were three sisters; and Tilwine and Dudda, these were all Buge’s children; and Ealhstán Tilwine’s son, and Wulfsige Eádugu’s son, and Ceólhelm Æðelgyð's son, and Ceólstán and Manwine. This kin came from [Hǽð]feld; Deórwulf, Cyneburh’s son, and his two sisters; and Cyneríc at Clæfring is their uncle. These men are themagasof Táta, the gebúr at Hǽðfeld.” Cod. Dipl. No. 1353.It is probable that all these places are in Hertfordshire, or in Essex. In both counties we find Hatfield and Walden: there is no Clavering in Hertfordshire, that I know of. On the other hand I am not aware of any Munden or Watton in Essex.In 880 Æðelred, duke of Mercia, gave various estates to the bishopric of Worcester. He also gave six persons with their offspring, who had previously beenadscripti glebæat the royal vill of Bensington. “These are the names of the persons who are written from Bensington to Readanora, to the bishopric of Worcester, with their offspring, and the progeny that may come of them to all eternity: Alhmund, Tídwulf, Tídleáh, Lull and Eádwulf[430].”In 902, Beornwulfhomed(gehámette), that is attached, to his manor of Eblesburne, a number of persons, of both sexes. Lufe and her three children, Luha and his six children are named[431].In the time of Eádgár we have the record of several persons establishing by their oaths that their parents had not been serfs orcoloniof the king[432]. AnAppendixto this chapter contains numerous examples of manumissions, of various periods.

“Dudda was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and he had three daughters, one was named Deórwyn, the second Deórswýð, the third Golde. And Wulfláf at Hǽðfeld hath Deórwyn to wife, Ælfstán at Tæccingawyrð hath Deórswýð to wife, and Ealhstán, Ælfstán’s brother, hath Golde to wife. There was a man named Hwíta, the beemaster at Hǽðfeld, and he had a daughter Táte, the mother of Wulfsige, the bowman; and Wulfsige’s sister Lulle hath Héhstán to wife, at Wealden. Wifús and Dunne, and Seoloce are inborn to Hǽðfeld. Duding, the son of Wifús, is settled at Wealden; and Ceólmund the son of Dunne, also sits at Wealden, and Æðelheáh the son of Seoloce, also sits at Wealden: and Táte, Cénwold’s sister, Mæg has to wife at Welgun; and Eádhelm, the son of Hereðrýð, hath Táte’s daughter to wife. Wærláf, Wærstán’s father, was a right serf at Hǽðfeld, he held the grey swine[428].”

“᛭A man named Bráda was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and Hwíte was the name of Brâda’s wife; she was a gebúr’s daughter at Hǽðfeld. Hwíte was Wærstán’s Wǽðrýð's and Wynburh’s third mother[429]. And Wærstán sits at Wádtún, and hath Wine’s sister to wife, and Wine hath Wærðrýð towife.wife.And Dunne sat at Wádtún, she was inborn to Hǽðfeld: and Deórwyn her daughter hath Cynewald to wife at Munden: and Deórnáð her brother is with Cynewald. And Dudde, Wifús’s daughter sits at Wilmundesleá. Cynhelm, Cénwald’s father, was a gebúr at Hǽðfeld, and Manna, Cénwald’s son, sits at Wádtún under Eádwald.”

“᛭Buhe, Dryhtláfs mother-in-law, was removedfromfromHǽðfeld into Eslingaden: and Æðelwyn, Eádugu and Æðelgyð were three sisters; and Tilwine and Dudda, these were all Buge’s children; and Ealhstán Tilwine’s son, and Wulfsige Eádugu’s son, and Ceólhelm Æðelgyð's son, and Ceólstán and Manwine. This kin came from [Hǽð]feld; Deórwulf, Cyneburh’s son, and his two sisters; and Cyneríc at Clæfring is their uncle. These men are themagasof Táta, the gebúr at Hǽðfeld.” Cod. Dipl. No. 1353.

It is probable that all these places are in Hertfordshire, or in Essex. In both counties we find Hatfield and Walden: there is no Clavering in Hertfordshire, that I know of. On the other hand I am not aware of any Munden or Watton in Essex.

In 880 Æðelred, duke of Mercia, gave various estates to the bishopric of Worcester. He also gave six persons with their offspring, who had previously beenadscripti glebæat the royal vill of Bensington. “These are the names of the persons who are written from Bensington to Readanora, to the bishopric of Worcester, with their offspring, and the progeny that may come of them to all eternity: Alhmund, Tídwulf, Tídleáh, Lull and Eádwulf[430].”

In 902, Beornwulfhomed(gehámette), that is attached, to his manor of Eblesburne, a number of persons, of both sexes. Lufe and her three children, Luha and his six children are named[431].

In the time of Eádgár we have the record of several persons establishing by their oaths that their parents had not been serfs orcoloniof the king[432]. AnAppendixto this chapter contains numerous examples of manumissions, of various periods.

323. Page129.

324. Deut. Staatsges. i. 72, § 15.

325.Deutsche Rechtsalterthümer, p. 320, with the numerous examples there given. So Fleta. “Fiunt autem homines servi de iure gentium captivitate: bella enim orta sunt, et captivitates sequutae. Fiunt etiam de iure civili, per confessionem in curia fisci factam.” Lib. i. c. 3. § 3.

326. A whole army may be devoted as victims by the conquerors. “Sed bellum Hermunduris prosperum, Cattis exitiosius fuit, quia victores diversam aciem Marti ac Mercurio sacravere, quo voto equi, viri, cuncta, victa occidioni dantur.” Tac. Annal, xiii. 57. “Lucis propinquis barbarae arae, apud quas tribunos ac primorum ordinum centuriones mactaverant: et cladis ... superstites, pugnam aut vincula elapsi, referebant ... quot patibula captivis, quae scrobes,” etc. Tac. Annal. i. 61.

327. Hist. Eccles. iv. 22.

328. This is confirmatory of the statement in the last chapter, that, strictly speaking, theComescould not marry. One cannot see why the assertion should have been made on any other grounds: his great anxiety was to prove himself not a comes or minister, and as one argument, he states himself to be “uxoreo nexu constrictus.”

329. After a battle between Ragnachari and Chlodowich, in which the former was taken prisoner, the victor thus addressed him: “Cui dixit Chlodoveus, Cur humiliasti gentem nostram, ut te vinciri permitteres? Nonne melius tibi fuerit mori? Et elevata bipenne, in caput eius defixit, et mortuus est. Conversusque ad fratrem eius, ait: Si tu solatium fratri tuo praebuisses, ille ligatus non fuisset! Similiter et ipsum in capite percussum interfecit, et mortuus est.” Gest. Reg. Franc. (Script. Rer. Gall. et Francic. ii. 555.) It was the interest of Chlodowich to put these princes to death, but there must still have been somerightacknowledged in him to do so. He seems however to rest it upon the disgrace which they had brought upon the mǽgburh,gensor family, by suffering themselves to be captured and bound.

330. “Quod Ariovistus ... in eorum finibus consedisset, tertiamque partem agri Sequani qui esset optimus totius Galliae, occupavisset; et nunc de altera parte tertia Sequanos decedere iuberet.” Cæs. Bell. Gall. i. 32. The same proportion of athird, sometimes however in produce, not land, occurs in other cases: Eichhorn, Deut. Staatsges. i. 161seq.§ 23, with the accompanying quotations.

331. This is the condition of the Perioecians in Laconia, with the exception that these were called upon for military service. The Helotae or Penestae were more nearly praedial serfs.

332. This led by degrees to the vast power and influence of all the clergy, who were originally Roman, and who, whatever their nation might be, lived under the Roman law, “per clericalemclericalemclericalem

333. Caesar, Bell. Gall. iv. 3. The Franks imposed a tribute of hides upon the Frisians: we hear also of tribute paid them by the Thuringians, Saxons and Slavic races.

334.A.D.1056. Chron. Manniae. MS. Cott., Jul. A. VII., fol. 32.

335. “Servos conditionis huius per commercia tradunt, ut se quoque pudore victoriae exsolvant.” Germ. xxiv. The last member of the sentence is a bit of imaginative morality which we shall acquit the Germans of altogether. The very wordcaeterisin the next sentence shows clearly enough that if they did sell some slavesconditionis huius, they kept others for menial functions.

336. “Caeteris servis, non in nostrum morem, descriptis per familiam ministeriis, utuntur. Suam quisque sedem, suos penates regit. Frumenti modum dominus, aut pecoris, aut vestis, ut colono, iniungit; et servus hactenus paret.” Germ. xxv. This amounts to no more than the description of a certain class of our own copyholders, of the Slavonic holder in Bohemia or Galicia, and the peasant on anoble sessionin Hungary.

337. This is the obvious meaning of the passage, which has however been disputed, in defiance of sense and Latin: see Walther’s edition, vol. iv. 58. The general rule in the text is true, but where there were slaves they were used in the house, under the superintendence of the family. This of course applies more strongly to later historical periods, when the slaves (domestics) had become much more numerous, and the ladies much less domestic.

338. Deut. Rechtsalt. p. 305.

339. “Servi alii natura, alii facto, et alii empcione, et alii redempcione, alii sua vel alterius dacione servi, et si quae sunt aliae species huiusmodi, quas tamen omnes volumus sub uno servitutis membro constitui, quem casum ponimus appellari, ut ita dictum sit, servi alii casu, alii genitura.” Leg. Hen. I. lxxvi. § 3.

340. “Si quis ingenuus ancillam alienam sibi in coniugium sociaverit, ipse cum ea in servitutem inclinetur.” Lex Sal. xiv. 11. “Si ingenua femina aliquemcunque de illis (i. e. raptoribus non ingenuis) sua voluntate secuta fuerit, ingenuitatem suam perdat.” Lex Sal. xiv. 7.

341. Lex Rip. lviii. 18.

342. Lex Burg. xxxv. 2, 3.

343. Hist. Dan. lib. v. p. 85.

344. The following proverbs are founded upon this legal custom:—“Trittst du meine henne, so wirst du mein hahn.”“Die unfreie hand zieht die freie nach sich.”“En formariage le pire emporte le bon.”

344. The following proverbs are founded upon this legal custom:—

“Trittst du meine henne, so wirst du mein hahn.”“Die unfreie hand zieht die freie nach sich.”“En formariage le pire emporte le bon.”

“Trittst du meine henne, so wirst du mein hahn.”

“Die unfreie hand zieht die freie nach sich.”

“En formariage le pire emporte le bon.”

345. Such may also have been malefactors, who sought an asylum in church or other privileged lands, and who sometimes formed a very considerable number of dependants or retainers: thus, “Contraxit universam iuventutem Houlandiae[Holland in Lincolnshire]strenuissimus comes Algarus, ... unà cum cohorte Croylandiae monasterii, videlicet CC bellatoribus robustissimis, eo quod maxima pars illorum de fugitivis fuerat.” Hist. Ingulf, p. 865.

346. “Si liber homo spontanea voluntate vel forte necessitate coactus, nobili, seu libero, seu etiam lito, in personam et in servitium liti se subdiderit.” Lex Fres. xi. 1. “Ut nullum liberum liceat inservire ... quamvis pauper sit, tamen libertatem suam non perdat nec hereditatem suam, nisi ex spontanea voluntate se alicui tradere voluerit, hoc potestatem habeat faciendi.” Lex Bajuv. vi. 3. The Anglosaxon law gave this power of voluntary surrender to a boy of thirteen. See Theod. Poenit. xxix. Thorpe, ii. 19.

347. Gregor. Turon. vii. 45.

348. “Interea fames dira ac famosissima vagis ac nutabundis haeret, quae multos eorum cruentis compellit praedonibus sine dilatione victas dare manus, ut pauxillum ad refocillandam animam cibi caperent.” Hist. Brit. cap. xvii.

349. “Ealle ða men ðe heónon heora heáfod for hyra mete on ðám yflum dagum.” Cod. Dip. No. 925. The instance is, I believe, a solitary one in our records, but the cases must have been numerous.

350. “And eác heó hafað gefreód ða men ða heó þingede æt Cwæspatrike;” And she hath also freed the men whom she interceded for with Cospatrick. Cod. Dip. No. 925. Marculf gives the Frankish formulary, as follows; it is the case of one who has been redeemed from capital punishment: “Et ego de rebus meis, unde vestra beneficia rependere debuissem, non habeo; ideo pro hoc statum ingenuitatis meae vobis visus sum obnoxiasse, ita ut ab hac die de vestro servitio penitus non discedam.” Form. Marculf. ii. 28.

351. The wife, by the act of the husband, I think very doubtful, in point of right. In point of fact this case may have occurred much more frequently than our records vouch.

352. The illegitimate offspring of his own wife, a husband was not likely to spare. An old German tale records this fact. Her lord returning from a long absence and finding a child which could not be his own in the house, was told by the faithless mother, that when walking in the fields a flake of snow had fallen into her bosom and impregnated her. Afterwards the husband took the child to Italy and sold him there, excusing himself to the mother by the assertion that the heat of the sun had melted the snow-child:—“De nive conceptum quem mater adultera finxit;Hunc dominus vendens liquefactum sole retulit.”

“De nive conceptum quem mater adultera finxit;Hunc dominus vendens liquefactum sole retulit.”

“De nive conceptum quem mater adultera finxit;

Hunc dominus vendens liquefactum sole retulit.”

353. Lingard (A. S. Church, i. 45) accuses the pagan Saxons of selling their children into foreign slavery. I am not sure that this is not asserted too strongly by this estimable author, who appears unjustly to depreciate the Saxons, in order to enhance the merit of their convertors. I admit the probability of the fact, only because the right is a direct corollary from the paternal power, and because Archbishops Theodore and Ecgberht (the first a Roman missionary) recognize it; but I cannot suppose its exercise to have been common.

354. Tac. Annal. iv. 72.

355. Theodori Arch. Cant., Liber Poenitentialis, xxviii. Thorpe, A. S. Laws, ii. 19.

356. Confessionale Ecgberhti Arch. Ebor. xxvii. Thorpe, ii. 153.

357. The only way of getting rid of this strange contradiction is, either to assume the passage to be a later interpolation, which there is no ground for, save the contradiction itself; or to take the passage in connection with Theodor. Poen. xlii. § 3, 4, 5, which refer to sale of a Christian among Jews or Heathens, and generally to fraudulent or illegal sale. But then, one cannot understand why the words “infantem suum proprium, vel proximum suum cognatum” should have been introduced by Ecgberht, though omitted by Theodore. Perhaps we may reconcile the passages, by assuming Ecgberht to refer to an illegal sale, viz. when the child was above seven years old, but still in the same category as those for whose safety Theodore provides by the same ecclesiastical penalty. The child or very near relation were precisely those who were most liable to be in “alteram regionem seducti, furati,” etc.

358. Leg. Eádw. § 9.

359. Eád. and Guð. § 7.

360. Leg. Visig. ix. § 1, 2.

361. Leg. Bajuv. i. § 11.

362. D. Rechtsalt. p. 329.

363. Cod. Dip. No. 601.

364. Ibid. No. 1296.

365. Lib. Poenit. xvi. § 3. Thorpe, ii. 9.

366. Thorpe, ii. 9, note 4.

367.Supra, p. 200, note 2.

368. Lib. Poenit. Theod. xlii. § 4. 5. See also xxiii. § 13.

369. Theod. Poen. xvi. § 33. Ecgb. Poen. xxv.

370. Deut. Rechtsalt. p. 324.

371. Ibid. p. 324.

372. Sachs. iii. 73.

373. Leg. Hen. I. lxxvii. § 1, 2.

374. Commend. cap. xlii.

375. Lib. i. cap. 3. § 2.

376. “Sunt autem nativi a prima nativitate sua; quemadmodum si quis fuerit procreatus ex nativo et nativa, ille quidem nativus nascitur.Idem est si ex patre libero et matre nativa.Sed si ex matre libera et patre nativo, idem est dicendum quantum ad status integritatem.” Lib. v. cap. 6. But the passage in italic is wanting in some manuscripts, and may possibly have been the gloss or addition of a civilian.

377. Of course (except under circumstances which the Christian clergy, and probably even the heathen priesthood,—and if neither of these, yet the universal human feeling—would condemn,) the issue of such marriage could not have been treated as unfree, during the life of the father. But a question might arise after death, and on subsequent inheritance by third parties. And cases might occur where the public right rendered it necessary to take care that the unfree should not enjoy the advantages of freedom.

378. Co. Litt. § 187, 188.

379. Take an instance, though with a wider application, from Shakspeare, King John, act i. sc. 2.

380. Lib. i. cap. 3. § 2.

381. That is, if the serfs of two different lords, then the child to follow the mother.

382. In the event of there being no marriage. The case of a marriage is very different, and provided for in the next sentence.

383. Mr. Allen in his valuable notes upon the law of Henry the First (published by Thorpe in his Anglosaxon Laws, i. 609-631) has some remarks upon the whole subject, as considered by our Norman jurists. His conclusions coincide generally with mine, and he says (p. 628), “The Mirror [Sachsenspiegel] makes the marriage of the parents an essential condition to the liberty of the offspring,” etc.

384. Tac. Germ. xxv.

385. “Si faemina, furore zeli accensa, flagellis verberaverit ancillam suam, ita ut infra diem tertium animam cruciatu effundat, et quod incertum sit, voluntate an casu occident; si voluntate, vii annos; si casu, per quinquennii tempora, ac legitima poenitentia, a communione placuit abstinere.” Poen. Theod. xxi. § 13. “Si quis servum proprium, sine conscientia iudicis, occiderit, excommunicatione vel poenitentia biennii reatum sanguinis emundabit.” Ibid. § 12. Even as late as the seventeenth century in France, it appears that it was usual to flog the valets, pages and maids, in noble houses. Tallemant des Réaux mentions a riot which arose in Paris from a woman’s being whipped to death by her mistress, in August 1651. See hisHistoriettes, viii. 80; x. 255, etc.

386. The compensation for a flogging was called hídgeld.

387. Leg. Æðelst. iii. § 6. Thorpe, i. 219.

388. Cod. Dipl. Nos. 311, 1079.

389. Ibid. No. 311. The serfs mentioned in this document were at first attached to the royal vill of Bensington; but were now transferred to the land of the church at Radnor, with their offspring, and their posterity for ever.

390. Tac. Germ. xxv.

391. Bed. H. E. iv. 13.

392. Leg. Wihtr. § 9, 10. Ini, § 3. Edw. Guð. § 7. Æðelr. viii. § 2.

393. Leg. Ini, § 3.

394. Cnut, Leg. Sec. § 45.

395. Cod. Dipl. Nos. 716, 721, 722, 782, 788, 919, 925, 931, 946, 947, 957, 959, 981.

396. Leg. Ælf. § 43. Æðelred (viii. § 2) permits the serf to labour on his own account, three days before Michaelmas. Theodore (Poen. xix. § 30) and Ecgberht (Poen. Addit. § 35) forbid the lord to rob his serf of what he may have acquired by his own industry. It was nevertheless held by some that the serf could not purchase his own freedom.

397. This is true only of the Saxon, not of the Norman period. Glanville expressly denies that the serf could redeem himself. “Illud tamen notandum est, quod non potest aliquis, in villenagio positus, libertatem suam propriis denariis suis quaerere. Posset enim tunc a domino suo secundum ius et consuetudinem regni ad villenagium revocari;quia omnia catalla cuiuslibet nativi intelliguntur esse in potestate domini sui, [per] quod propriis denariis suis versus dominium suum a villenagio se redimere non poterit.” Glanv. lib. v. cap. 5.

398. Cod. Dipl. Nos. 933, 934, 935, 936, 981 (the 31st paragraph).

399. Ibid. No. 981 (the 28th paragraph).

400. Ibid. No. 975.

401. Leg. Æðelr. v. § 2; vi. § 9. Cnut, Leg. Sec. § 3.

402. The Romans used to slay their infirm and useless serfs, or expose them in an island of the Tiber. Claudius made several regulations in their favour. “Cum quidam aegra et affecta mancipia in insulam Aesculapii taedio medendi exponerent, omnes, qui exponerentur, liberos esse sanxit, nec redire in ditionem domini, si convaluissent; quod si quis necare mallet quem quam exponere, caedis crimine teneri.” Suet. in Claud. 25.

403. Seesupra, p. 38, note 1.

404. Thorpe, A. S. Laws, i. 432, and a later edition by Dr. H. Leo of Halle, 1842.

405. This is theRobotof Slavonic countries, theOperatioof our Norman law; a mere labour-rent, necessary in countries where there is no accumulated capital, and wealth (for want of markets) consists only in land, and limbs wherewith to till it.

406. Cod. Dip. No. 1079.

407. The compounds ofbǽrdecannot denote anything but a permanent condition or quality: they are nearly equivalent to the compounds ofcund, excepting that they are necessarilypersonal.

408. Thorpe, Analecta.

409. Lib. v. cap. 5.

410. Lib. i. cap. 7, § 7, 8.

411. The slaves who fought on the Athenian side at Arginusae were manumitted and enrolled among the Plataeans, being thus admitted into the πολίτευμα. We learn this from a fragment of Hellanicus, preserved in the Scholiast on Arist. Ran. 694: the words are, τοὺς συνναυμαχήσαντας δούλους Ἑλλάνικός φησιν ἐλευθερωθῆναι, καὶ ἐγγραφέντας ὡς Πλαταιεῖς συμπολιτεύσασθαι αὐτοῖς. See also Niebuhr (Hare and Thirlwall), p. 204. The Langobards upon a somewhat similar occasion manumitted their serfs. “Igitur Langobardi, ut bellatorum possint ampliare numerum, plures a servili iugo ereptos, ad libertatis statum perducunt. Utque rata eorum haberi posset libertas, sanciunt, more solito, per sagittam, inmurmurantes nihilominus, ob rei firmitatem, quaedam patria verba.” Paul. Diac. de Gest. i. 13.

412. “Si qui vero velit servum suum liberum facere, tradat eum vicecomiti,” etc. Leg. Wil. iii. § 15. “Qui servum suum liberat, in aecclesia, vel mercato, vel comitatu, vel hundreto,” etc. Leg. Hen. I. 1, § 78.

413. For example Wilfrið's, at Selsey; see above, p. 211.

414. Leg. Wihtr. § 8.

415. Wulfwaru in her will directs her legatees to feed twenty freolsmen or freedmen. Cod. Dipl. No. 694. Ketel commands that all the men whom he has freed shall have all that isunder their hand,—probably all they had received as stock, or had been able to gain by their industry. Cod. Dipl. No. 1340.

416. Leg. Will. Conq. iii. § 15.

417. “Qui servum suum liberat, in aecclesia, vel mercato, vel comitatu, vel hundreto, coram testibus et palam faciat, et liberas ei vias et portas conscribat apertas, et lanceam et gladium, vel quae liberorum arma sunt, in manibus ei ponat.” Leg. Hen. I. lxxviii. § 1. Hence the manumitted serf is calledfreo ⁊ færewyrð,free and fareworthy, that is, having the right to go whither he chooses.

418. Leg. Rotharis, Langob, Reg. cap. 225.

419. Leg. Roth. Langob. Reg. cap. 226.

420. Leg. Wiht. § 8.

421. “Per omnes terras suas, de triginta hominibus numeratis, tredecim manumisit, quemadmodum eum sors docuit,ut in quadrivio positi pergerent quocunque voluissent.” Hist. Ram. 29.

422. See Eichhorn, i. 333. Such a person resembles the Langobardic freedmanper impans. Ibid. p. 331. I imagine the principle upon which thewergyldwent to the king, to be this: the freedman either never had a free mǽgð, or they had forfeited the mǽgsceaft by suffering him to be reduced to serfage. Compare Leg. Eádw. § 9.

423. Leg. Hen. I. lxxviii. § 3. That is, that he is no longer liable to corporal punishment like a serf.

424. “Qui vero per chartam ingenuitatis dimissi sunt liberi,” etc. Capit. Bajuvar. an. 788. cap. 7 (Georgisch. p. 548). Eichhorn, i. 332.

425. Cod. Dipl. 1350.

426. Every lawyer knows the value of thead ostium aecclesiae, at any rate in matters of dower. It implies perfect publicity.

Back to Index Next