Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

History. allowed champions for the maintenance of their cause. On the day of Trial, the battle endured until one party was either slain, or called for mercy. In the latter case, the recreant, if the combat had been on a civil suit, lost his cause, and further paid a fine: but his fate in a criminal case was variously affected by circumstances. If he had been the appellant, he suffered the punishment due to the crime with which he had charged his adversary. If he had been the person challenged, he was presumed guilty, and of course suffered the consequent penalty of the law. If he had fought as champion, he was liable to have his right hand stricken off; and the principal for whom he had appeared suffered capitally. But the custom of Trial by Combat had an extension, even more singular than its original character, into an appeal against the judges themselves of the Court in which a case had already been fully decided by civil procedure. The unsuccessful suitor, or the convicted criminal, might impeach its members of false judgment and call them into the field. By the Feudal Law of Jerusalem in this case, the appellant was bound to fight all his judges successively; and if he did not vanquish them in one day, he was himself hanged. Those whom he overcame shared the same fate. But the Law of Europe was sometimes more favourable to the appellant: for he might oblige the Peers to declare judgment aloud, and, on the first verdict pronounced against him, give the lie to the utterer. The combat then took place only between that individual judge and the appellant." Of the different Orders of Society of which the Feudal System was composed, some were absolutely created by nder the its Institutions: but the greater number had a preexistence, and were merely engrafted, with modified or additional functions, on its Polity. Thus, the Monarchs The King, of those free military Democracies, which the Barbarian eign Para- Nations presented in their victorious settlements, were only transmuted into Feudal Sovereigns: not so much Kings of their People, as Chiefs of a great territorial Aristocracy, or Lords Paramount of all the Fiefs whereof their Kingdoms were composed. In the strictness of the System under its original form, allegiance from the mass of the Nation was not due to them immediately; and the different paths by which the Kings of France and England reached the summit of their regal power, were equally departures from the spirit of the Feudal constitutions. But these, if they had separated the Monarch from his People, had drawn the bond more closely between the Lord Paramount and his Vassals in chief; and from the first link in the chain of Feudal obligation is derived that principle of Modern Monarchy, which surrounds the Throne with an hereditary Aristocracy, and renders the Crown the legitimate fountain of Chivalric honour.

ORDERS OF SOCIETY

Seudal

system.

↑ Sove

nount.

obility.

reater'

The creation of Nobility in Europe as an institution equally distinct from the Patrician dignities of Republican and Imperial Rome, and the splendid slavery of Eastern Palaces, has been already referred to the establishment of territorial Fiefs, and the conversion of Provincial Governments into such tenures. From these sources sprang the highest class of Nobility: the Dukes, Marquesses, and Counts of France, Germany, and Italy, and their corresponding ranks, the Earls and Royal Barons of England and Scotland. These great ad lesser. Feudatories of the Crown, by their Sub-infeudations,

For a complete body of the rules of Judicial Combat as here abridged, vide Assises de Jérusalem, c. 104, and Beaumanoir, Cous tumes de Beauvoisis, c. 31.

created a secondary order of Nobility under the titles, The Feudal already enumerated, of Vavassors, Castellans, and lesser System. Barons; and, below them again, the continued subdivision of lands produced a third order of Vassals, whose tenure by military obligation, or, as it was familiarly known in England under the title of Knight's service, equally admitted them within the pale of Aristocratic honour. On the Continent, the lowest tenant by military service was fully included in the pretension and privileges of Nobility ;* and, in our own language, the comprehensive title of gentleman recalls in its original significance and extent the same participation. The origin of territorial titles of Nobility has been before alluded to; and it need here only be observed that, imitating the example of the Duke or Count who had affixed the name of his Province or Government to his own, the possessor of every Fief assumed the same style from its principal town or village, or the solitary castle which frowned over his demesne. Hence the land which bristled with fortresses afforded as many titles of Nobility; and every Country was filled with a numerous order of minor Counts, Barons, and Vavassors, the Vassals of the greater Feudatories, the companions of their state, the Peers of their Courts, and themselves each the Chieftain of a train of Knightly dependents. The least of these last, who was bound or entitled to serve his Lord as a horseman or chevalier,—from whence are derived the original distinction, and the very name of CHIVALRY-Was a member of the same Aristocracy as the Duke or Count; and the privileges of that rank were extended even lower: for every military tenant was a gentleman, though he held but the smallest portion of a Knight's fee, and contributed no more than a share to the equipment of a single man-at-arms and his horse.

of this Aris

tocracy.

The privileges accorded by the customs of Feudalism Privileges in common to this Aristocracy of every degree, were sufficient to form an impassable line between their Order and the body of the People. In Ages of violence, during which the profession of arms was unreasonably exalted above all others, they only were permitted to serve on horseback and in complete armour; except Ecclesiastics, they alone were eligible for any offices of importance and honour in the State; and all intermingling between them and the inferior classes of Society by marriage was followed, to a certain degree, by degradation. In Germany, no individual could claim his inheritance of an Imperial Fief, unless both his parents were strictly noble in the highest Order; and in France, though the exclusion was less rigid, the son of a Nobleman by a Plebeian mother forfeited much of the honours of his paternal rank. The child of a high-born woman by an unequal marriage could not inherit his mother's nobility: for gentility, as it was expressively maintained, could come only through the father; and from the mother no higher birth-right than mere freedom might be derived.†

Next to the Nobility, ranked the Ecclesiastical Order; The Clergy, or rather the dignified Clergy were themselves held noble by reason of their territorial Fiefs. For all Prelates and heads of Religious Houses were, by the tenure of the lands of their Sees and Monasteries, completely Feudal Lords. For these, they did homage and

[blocks in formation]

as Feudal Nobles.

History. swore fealty to the Sovereign Paramount; they subinfeuded their estates among Vassals of their own with like ceremonies and upon the usual conditions of military service; they exercised the rights of jurisdiction; and, though not required themselves to perform warlike duties in person, they were under the same obligations as other tenants in chief, to send the stipulated number of men into the field for their Fiefs. Hence, as well as for the defence of their own possessions, arose the common custom for wealthy Monasteries to choose some powerful Nobleman, under the title of Advocate, to protect their lands, and lead their Vassals when summoned to the standard of the Sovereign. The only Church lands not subject to Feudal obligations were those held under the peculiar tenure of Franc-almoigne, which by the saying of masses for the benefit of the souls of the founder and his family, exempted a Chapter or Abbey from all other service.*

Freemen.

Rural tenants,

in France,

Below the Aristocracy the whole population of a Feudal Kingdom may be represented, with sufficient exactitude for our present purpose, as composed of only two classes-the free and the enslaved. By the operation of Feudalism in its pristine state of vigour, it may be suspected that the number of the former underwent Burghers. a continual diminution. The freemen who escaped the yoke were principally, first, the burghers of chartered towns whose privileges emancipated them from the bonds of Feudalism, and whose condition scarcely be longs to the general System; and, secondly, rural tenants of lands subject only to fixed payments without military service. In France, the freemen of this latter class are not easily recognised in the Feudal law books from amidst the mass of enslaved peasantry: though the distinction of their state is admitted in general terms;† and though it is undoubted that, in the Southern Provinces of that Kingdom, at least, they were numerous. But they were exposed to so many oppressive exactions from the Lords to whose territorial jurisdiction they were subject, that their condition was probably in reality little superior to that of the mere Villeins. Of the same Order, but better circumstanced, were the Arimanni of Italy, who appear to have been either actual proprietors, or renters of small farms on free tenure. But, beyond socagers, or all comparison, the most respectable class of freemen yeomanry, during the prevalence of Feudalism, not holding lands of England. on condition of military service, were the Socagers§ of England; whose existence may be traced even so far back as the Saxon period of our History; and who constituted in later Ages that bold and independent race of yeomen, the pride and strength of our national population. They held their lands exempt from all Feudal burthens, except a small rent to the Baron, or Lord of the Manor, to whose jurisdiction they belonged, may be considered as such. They were free in their persons, jurors and suitors in the Courts-Baron, and might alienate their property; and to the existence and rights of such a class of freemen, more perhaps than to any other single cause, is to be ascribed that noble front of liberty which was early stamped upon the English character.

and Italy.

Free

*Du Cange, vv. Advocatus, Eleemosyna, &c. + Coustumes de Beauvoisis, c. 45.

Muratori, Antiq. Ital. Med. Evi, Diss. xiii. The name of Socages has been variously derived from the Saxon soc, a franchise; and from the same tern in French which signifies a ploughshare. Bracton, lib. ii. c. 35. But see Blackstone, vol. ii. c. 6. p. 80, (Christian's Edition,) in which the latter derivation appears satisfactorily inferred.

Servitude

the mass

the pea

But below the worst franchised class of freemen in The Feud every Feudal Kingdom, the great majority of the rural System. population were held in a state of complete bondage to the soil. Into the origin and growth of slavery among the Barbarian Nations who overthrew the Roman Empire, it were to little purpose to attempt any minute santry. inquiry in this place. Having already in a former Chapter* glanced at this subject, we need not here repeat an enumeration of the general causes which tended to throw the mass of the People in every Country of Europe into a condition of servitude. It may be sufficient to observe that, when Feudalism was fully established, two degrees of bondage prevailed. In the Villeins, better condition, were the Villeins or cultivators, who though attached to the soil, and compelled to remain on it, owed only fixed payments and duties to their Lord, and might hold property of their own. But the most abject class, under the name of Serfs,† were incapable and Serfs of any possession whatever, and were equally in their persons and the fruits of their labour at the unlimited disposal of a master. Over them the power of their Nature of Lord was so absolute that, in the language of a Feudal their re law-book," he might take all they had alive or dead, spective and imprison them when he pleased, being accountable to none but God." From the higher class of Villeins, on the contrary, the same authority declares that the Lord can take nothing but customary payments, though at their death all they have escheats to him. Yet, if it be true that the Villein had no right of redress against spoliation or ill usage from his Lord, it is difficult to conceive wherein his lot could have much practical superiority over that of the complete Serf.

conditions

This distinction, even in term, seems to have had Villeinag existence only in France and in Germany: for in Eng in Enga land there was recognised only one degree of servitude, and that the lowest. The English Villein, like the Serf of the Continent, was himself, together with all he might acquire, the absolute property of his Lord; the services or labour which might be demanded of him were uncertain and unbounded; whatever land he bought or inherited, whatever stock or goods he accumulated, might equally be seized by the Lord; and the same state of servitude was inherent in his blood and entailed upon his children. Moreover, his person might be separated from the land and sold to a stranger: while it would appear that the Villein of the Continent could only be conveyed to a new Lord with the Fief and on the land to which he was bound. The nature of the duties rendered by Villeins was regulated only by their ability for the amount was indeterminate. The services required were those which the agricultural peasant was best competent to perform such as the ploughing and reaping of the Lord's land, the carrying of manure, repairing of roads, felling of timber for him, and other offices of ignoble labour. On such tenures, also, it is worthy of remark, were lands often possessed tenures by the free and even by the noble :¶ for the quality of

See chapter xlix.

+ Du Cange, vv. Villanus, Servus.
Coustumes de Beauvoisis, c. 45.
Du Cange, ubi suprà in voce Villanus.
Co. Littleton, sec. 181.

To such extent was the distinctive quality of lands carried in France that many Noblemen held estates in roture, as it was called, or on ignoble tenure; and roturiers, or plebeians, in the latter Ages of Feudalism, at least, might by purchase, marriage, or bequest, acquire Fiefs on noble tenure. Beaumanoir, c. 48.

The term Roturier for an ignoble person, or synonymously a peasant, is derived from the Latin Rupturarius, colonus, qui agrum seu terram rumpit, proscindit, colit. Du Cange, in voce.

Lands

on Viile

tory. Villeinage appertained to certain estates as well as persons; and the distinction between lands in free and villein tenure existed very early in every Country. There can be little doubt that this difference in the character of lands arose from the condition of the original holders; and as the soil did not change quality with the rank of its occupants, the simple freeman, or the knight, often held estates in Villeinage. In this case, the personal liberty and the movables of the tenant were secure: but he was bound to the performance of arbitrary services in respect of his land; and liable also to be dispossessed by his Lord at pleasure.*

iction

en

re and

te

ry.

Though, during the Middle Ages, domestic was no less common than predial servitude, it is the latter form Vil of bondage alone which belongs to our present subject: for the connection of Villeinage with land is in strictness the only link between Feudalism and slavery. And grievous and degraded as was the condition of Feudal Villein age, there were not wanting some characteristic distinctions to elevate it above that total deprivation of rights, with which the slave under other systems of Polity, both ancient and modern, has usually been branded. Slavery, in the Feudal sense, was a relative not an absolute condition for the Villein, though in bondage to his Lord, was free of all other men and in respect to Society at large. He might purchase, inherit, maintain actions in the Courts, and exercise every civil right, saving only the claims of his master upon him. At least such was the law of England;† and though the fact admits not of equal proof, there can be little doubt by the analogy of Feudal customs that it was so in other Countries. In the latter Ages of Feudalism especially, the English law presumed every Villein to be free unless claimed by his Lord; it protected him, as the King's subject, from atrocious injuries even at the hand of his Master; it gave the Nief, or female Villein, an appeal against his brutal violence; and it established the freedom of her child if by a free father, or even if the father, as in a case of illegitimate birth, was unrecognised, for in such case it presumed his freedom.§ This custom of deriving freedom from the father, however, was peculiar to England: for in all other Countries the offspring followed the condition of its mother.

orm

tude,

These distinctions between Feudal and absolute slavery cannot indeed be supposed to have much relieved the unhappy condition of the Villein under a cruel ated or avaricious Lord: but they facilitated and enlarged li- the benefits of manumission which was frequently practhe tised by the more humane; and they are chiefly important to notice for their influence on the gradual abolition of Villeinage. Through what means that remarkable change was slowly effected, and the mass of the people raised from utter degradation, will more properly be considered at that later period of History, at which, among other revolutions in the State of Society, it will be our business to consider the Decline of the Feudal System. It here only remains to conclude our present attempt, with some estimate of the advantages and evils which attended the establishment of that System in its origin and maturity.

To this inquiry, it is necessary that we bring a full

Littleton, sec. 172. Bracton, lib. ii. c. 8. lib. iv. c. 28, &c. + Littleton, sec. 189.

Nief, a nativa, Villeins being styled native, or Natives, of the soil. Blackstone, vol. ii. c. 6. p. 94.

§ Littleton, sec. 187, 188, 189, 190. 194. &c.
Leges Henrici I. c. 75. 77. Littleton, sec. 188.

OF THE AD

recollection of the State of Europe during those Ages The Fendal which immediately preceded the developement of Feu- System. dalism. The value of any System of Polity should ESTIMATE fairly be considered as only relative to the condition of Society unto which it is applied; and in weighing the VANTAGES 1 merits of the Feudal Institutions, we ought to bear in AND EVILS mind the changes which they effected in the previous of the Feucircumstances, no less than their influence upon the dal System. subsequent vicissitudes, of Europe. In this view, it is Its estaimpossible not to attribute to the Feudal System at the blishment outset the most beneficial effects upon the political and primarily moral constitution of Nations. At the Fall of the beneficial. Roman Empire, and during the four or five Centuries which followed that event, and preceded the Feudal settlement, with the exception of comparative order during the reign of Charlemagne, Europe presented a Previous picture of the wildest disorder and rapine, and all the anarchy of bonds of humanity were perpetually violated by actions Europe, of the utmost atrocity and horror.

**

means.

To the rise and insensible growth of the Feudal In- mitigated stitutions was Europe indebted for the first mitigation by its of this universal anarchy and misery. Political Society, by the breaking up of its greater masses, might seem, indeed, resolved into its original elements, when the Lord of every petty district exercised the sovereign attributes of warfare and jurisdiction. But amidst this apparent destruction of order, and the certain aggrava tion of popular suffering through the hostility of Feudal Chieftains, the basis of a strong and lasting form of Polity was in reality laid. The very turbulence of the Feudal Aristocracy suggested the necessity of a close union between themselves and their dependents for mutual safety; and, at the same period when the Monarchical office, through the imbecility of the Carlovingian Dynasty, had fallen into general contempt, a new bond of association, between the King and the highest order of his subjects, was found in the Feudal obligations of homage and allegiance. The descending scale of such duties made it the interest of every great Nobleman to recognise those terms in his compact with his Sovereign, which he desired to enforce upon his own Vassals; and the Feudal principle, becoming interwoven through the whole surface of Society, served to connect and keep together its discordant parts precisely at a juncture, when, in the general and rude dismemberment of the Carlovingian Empire, every other restraint had been violently burst asunder.

Thus, both politically and morally, the establish- Its political ment of the Feudal System may be regarded, as not the ruin, but the revival of civilization. Politically, because in the universal anarchy of Europe, it was the Feudal Institutions alone which preserved a common relation to the Throne among the Aristocracy of every Country; which inculcated the mutual obligations of men of the same land towards each other; and

*It has been a common inaccuracy with Historians to confound Feudalism with the state of anarchy which preceded its establishment, and to impute to the System the very evils which it served in a great degree to correct. A remarkable proof of this misconception is to be found even in so learned and philosophical a writer as Robertson, who (Charles V. sec. 1.) describing the miseries of Society in the Dark Ages as having proceeded throughout from what he calls "the Feudal anarchy," states, that "the disorders of the Feudal System, which had gone on increasing during a long course of years, seemed to have attained their utmost point of excess towards the close of the eleventh Century." This, in fact, was pre cisely the period at which, by the complete establishment of Feudalism, the disorders of the previous anarchy began to subside!

History. which cherished the sense of duty to a common Country and King. But for the influence of these salutary feelings and ties, it would be difficult to find any cause which could have preserved the Monarchies of France and Germany from annihilation; or prevented the whole Continent of Europe from falling under the absolute dominion of the first fortunate conqueror who might have sprung out of the convulsion of Society. So also is it owing solely to the Feudal Institutions, that the spirit of personal freedom was kept alive in the Barbarian Monarchies; and the Feudal Law is the basis of all rational liberty in Modern Europe. Before the foundations of that Jurisprudence were laid, the mass of Alodial proprietors had already by desuetude lost their original rights, had ceased to appear in the general assemblies of each Nation, and were capable neither of associated efforts nor collective strength to resist the tyranny of the Throne. Such a popular power, though in an Aristocratic instead of a Democratic form, was created anew by the Feudal System. For, through all its gradations, that Polity breathes the spirit of honourable and mutual obligation between the superior and his free dependents; and it is impossible to peruse the various Feudal law books without recognising, in the careful definition of the limited services which might be claimed from a Vassal, and of the rights which he might assert against his Lord, all the first principles of public liberty and private immunity. Not the least valuable among the received and customary provisions of Feudalism were those which secured to each man the privileges, in judicial matters, of trial by his Peers, and, in legislative affairs, of a voice in every measure of general concernment. It was the existence of these franchises throughout the martial array and long descending ranks of the Feudal Aristocracy, that, while the body of the People were without concert or power, opposed the only barrier to the aggressions of tyranny, and saved Europe equally from exhibiting the aspect either of uncontrolled anarchy or of Oriental despotism.

and moral

services to

Society.

In a moral point of view, the Feudal Institutions, as engrafted upon the condition of Europe during the Dark Ages, were even more beneficial. The virtues which they inculcated were those, of which the previous state of Society had most need: the crimes which they denounced to infamy were precisely such, as the depravity of the times had most rankly engendered. The Feudal System revived those principles of personal faithfulness and mutual regard between man and man, without which no laws of humanity can be sacred: the Feudal Code of fidelity and honour held in abhorrence all violation of faith and promise, all mean dereliction of engagements, all breaches of truth, duty, and gratitude. And these had been the especial vices of Nations who, in a transitional state of Barbarism, had imbibed the corruptions of half civilized, without losing the ferocity of savage life. The bond of defined and reciprocal obligation between Lord and Vassal in every degree was singularly calculated to instil into each man the consciousness of personal dignity, the jealousy of personal right, and the pride of personal honour. Moreover, from these lofty qualities also flowed more generous and disinterested feelings of duty and devotion to others; and the Feudal relation peculiarly called forth in defence either of a revered superior or a faithful dependent, some of the noblest emotions and energies which nature has implanted in the human breast. Hence arose both

the beautiful, the gentler spirit of Chivalry; and the The Feudal reverential, though manly, sentiment of Loyalty. It is System. by its fostering influence upon such qualities, in Ages of anarchy when they appeared nearest extinction, that Especially in inculcat. Feudalism bequeathed its most valuable legacy to ing princi later Times: and we sum up its best title to estimation ples of faithwhen we consider, that the Monarchies of Europe owe fulness and primarily to its institutions those principles of Chivalric honour. honour and integrity towards his fellow-citizens, and of Loyal devotion to his Sovereign, which distinguish and adorn the character of the Modern Gentleman.

Evils of the

System.

The evils which resulted from the Feudal System are readily exposed. The most odious concomitant to its existence was doubtless the servitude in which the mass of the peasantry were bound. But this, if rightly considered, formed no part of the Feudal tenures. It had only been continued from the Roman constitution of Servitude of Society, and was established among all the Barbarian the peasan Nations long before the rise of Feudalism. Under both try; the Roman and Barbarian jurisprudence, it was a condition of far more hopeless and absolute slavery, than the Villeinage which had relation only to a Feudal superior, and in practice, at least, left the peasant a free labourer towards all other men. The slave who culti vated the soil for the exclusive profit of his master might even consider the change a happy one, which rendered him the Serf of the glebe; and, with the excep tion of customary services and duties to his Lord, left him the fruits of his toil and the residue of the produce which he raised on his land. Nor should it be forgotten, that Vassalage was the degree by which the lower orders of the People were raised from the servitude of antiquity to modern enfranchisement. A more unquestionable vice of the Feudal System was the unrestrained license of Private War. The desolation, to which not Private only the border Country of hostile nations, but almost Wars; every internal district, was liable from the deadly feuds of so numerous and turbulent an Aristocracy, must have had a most pernicious effect in paralyzing the efforts of agricultural industry. Moreover, by its temptation to habits of rapine in Feudal Chieftains, this scourge interrupted the operations of commerce, prevented the accumulation of wealth, and discouraged the improve thereby ment of those peaceful arts, which can flourish only with engendere the security of property and the increase of capital.

and habits

of rapice

In these respects, the continuance of the Feudal CONCLU System could be no otherwise than adverse to the peace, SUN the civil subordination, and the prosperity of Society. But here, as throughout the Moral Government of the Universe, the inquirer may reverently trace the healing interposition of Omnipotent Wisdom and Goodness. The Feudal System, in the severity of its original aspect, was permitted to exist no longer than was necessary to repair the previous dissolution of Political Order, and the inveterate corruption of National Manners, by a new and symmetrical organization of the Social elements. When Feudalism had thus fulfilled its purposes, it was suffered silently to give way before the birth of better principles of Civilization; and slowly to yield to the simultaneous growth of commercial enterprise and municipal freedom. The secondary causes through which an impulse was given to this salutary course of transition are readily discernible to Human intelligence: the primary design is only generally revealed in the mysterious and benignant operations of a Divine Providence.

HISTORY.

History.

From

A. D.

888.

to

A. D.

ITALY at the leposition

he Fat.

CHAPTER LXVII.

ANNALS OF ITALY, FRANCE GERMANY, AND SPAIN, FROM THE DISSOLUTION OF THE CARLOVINGIAN EMPIRE TO THE END OF THE Xth CENTURY.

FROM A. D. 888. TO A. D. 1000.

I. DURING the weak rule of the Carlovingian dynasty ITALY had been less affected by misgovernment than any other portion of the Empire; and the reign of Louis II., a brave and virtuous Prince, may be considered a season of absolute prosperity. Long, however, before the death of Charles the Fat, the Regal authority had become disregarded, through the imbecility of those 1000. by whom it was administered; and on his deposition, 1. State of the chief Lords of Italy were well prepared to dispute the Crown, according to the measure of their force. of Charles The two most powerful Feudatories at that time were Berenger, Marquis of Friuli, and Guido, Duke of Spoleto; no distinction of rank being implied, as in later usage, by their respective titles, but that of the former simply denoting that his possessions lay upon a March or Frontier. Each claimed descent by the female line from Charlemagne; a point of no small moment, on account of the still surviving prestige of that great Monarch's glory, notwithstanding the deterioration of his posterity. Berenger was the issue of a daughter of Louis the Debonnaire; Guido, of a daughter of his elder brother Pepin; so that the two Princes stood in equally near relation to the Imperial House, as Greatgrandsons of its founder: a pretension well deserving of respect, amid the crowd of bastard or remote scions who started forward to enrich themselves with some fragment of the shattered Empire. And here, on account of the close intermixture of conflicting interests among the leading European Kingdoms, it may be convenient to state, that at the commencement of the period upon a brief sketch of which we are now entering, Eudes Count of Paris obtained the Crown of France; Arnulf, a natural son of Carloman of Bavaria, that of Germany; Louis, son of Boson, that of Arles; and that a new Kingdom, comprising nearly the modern Swisserland, was formed by Rodolph,* of the same Family as Eudes, under the title of Transjurane Burgundy. The particular Histories of most of these respective States will occupy separate portions of the present Chapter; our attention in the first instance being more especially directed to the Annals of Italy.

[blocks in formation]

Italy.

From

A. D.

888.

to

A. D.

1000.

received the undisputed Crown of Italy from the hands Annals of of the Archbishop of Milan;* according to a compact between the two Princes before the death of Charles the Fat. Nor was it till Guido, disappointed in his original hope, returned to Italy, that he avowed himself a competitor for that Kingdom. His ill success in France is ascribed by Luitprand to a petty cause strikingly illustrative of National character: and, however much we may be inclined to treat as fabulous many of the most amusing portions of Secret and Minute History in later times, we see little reason, in this instance, (or indeed in most others, notwithstanding Muratori's bitter antipathy,) to reject the authority of the honest and wellinformed Bishop of Cremona. On advancing near Metz, Guido sent before him his Sewer (Dapifer) to make necessary arrangements for his reception; and the Bishop of that City provided a superb Banquet after the French manner. "Make me a present but of a horse," observed the Sewer upon remarking the costliness of the entertainment, " and I will engage that my Master shall be satisfied with a third part of your preparation." The speech appeared sordid to the Bishop, and judging of the disposition of the Prince by that of his attendant, he answered, "It is not fit that we should have a King who likes a scurvy, tenpenny dinner;"† and spreading abroad an unfavourable representation of the Pretender he stopped all rising in his behalf.

The Trebia witnessed a bloody engagement between Guido and the rivals, which terminated in the defeat of Berenger, who sought refuge in the Court of Germany, while the Conqueror obtained the titular Imperial dignity and Crown, from the fears or the good will of Pope Stephen VI. During two campaigns, Guido baffled the arms of the King of Germany by whom his opponent was supported; and on his death, his sceptre passed to Lambert his son Lambert already associated with him in Govern- Emperors. says Luitprand; invisus et inauditus da i suoi Franzesi, come scrive Erchempetro, writes Muratori in a similar strain.

*On the Iron Crown of Lombardy, a coveted possession even in our own days, the reader may consult a lengthy Dissertation by Muratori at the close of his IId volume of Anecdota ex Bibliotheca Ambrosiana. Its history is most obscure, and little is to be obtained from Muratori's proverbial diligence; excepting that the Crown is of gold with an inner rim of iron made, as was said, of a nail of the true Cross; that the origin of its usage is unknown; Archbishop of Milan, either at Milan itself, or at Monza, a consiand that it was always placed on the heads of the Kings by the

derable town on the Lambro. Otho the Great received it at the former place, most of his successors at the latter.

Non decet talem super nos regnare Regem qui decem drachmis vile sibi obsonium præparat. Luitprand, i. 6.

3 P

« ElőzőTovább »