yet to see how gradually William won, how sternly yet how wisely he ruled, the land which he had conquered. We have to see how, one by one, the native chiefs of England were subdued, won over, or cut off, and how the highest offices and the richest lands of England were parted out among strangers. We have to see the Conqueror in all his might; we have to see him, too, in those later and gloomier years, when home-bred sorrows gathered thickly round him, and when victory at last ceased to wait upon his banners. At last, by a cycle as strange as any in the whole range of history, we shall follow him to his burial as we have followed him to his crowning, and we shall see the body of the Conqueror lowered to his grave, in the land of his birth and in the minster of his own rearing, amid a scene as wild and awful as that of the day which witnessed his investiture with the royalty of England.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Adams, A Political History of England, 1066-1216, pp. 1-10. Ramsay, Foundations of England, Vol. II, chaps. i-x. Round, Feudal England, for controversial chapters on the battle of Hastings.

CHAPTER II

ANGLO-NORMAN FEUDALISM

As a result of the Norman Conquest, the old English landlords -earls and thegns were displaced, and the lands of England with the peasants dwelling on them divided out among the followers of William, the latter quite naturally retaining a large share for himself. In addition to the lands, the new masters received certain governmental powers over their tenants, such as the right to do justice and punish offenders. The terms on which the lands were held and the powers which the lords enjoyed were destined to be the subject of innumerable disputes between kings and vassals during many centuries, for the kings often sought to lay enormous burdens on the lands and to have justice administered by their own officers, especially in order that they might enjoy the profits arising from fines. Sometimes these disputes even broke out into civil war, and sometimes they led to compromises in the form of documents such as the Great Charter. It is therefore of fundamental importance that the student should examine as carefully as possible the conditions on which these lands were held.

§ 1. Position of William as Conqueror and Sovereign1

In 1066 the Anglo-Saxon commonwealth was suddenly invaded by a war band of Normans, led by William, Duke of Normandy. These invaders, originally from the north, had in the previous century settled on the soil of France and adopted the French language and customs. In their Norman home they had also developed under Frankish influences a military and administrative system of their own, and after their conquest of England they

1

Adapted from Gneist, History of the English Constitution, chap. viii. By permission of G. P. Putnam's Sons, Publishers.

naturally carried some of their ideas into practice so far as was necessary to secure their position as the dominant class under the sovereignty of William the Conqueror.

The Duke of Normandy was recognized as king of England by a formally summoned National Assembly. The old controversy whether William the Bastard conquered England or under what other title he acquired control of the country may be considered as decided by the Conqueror himself, who declared that he had entered upon the possession of the country as the designated testamentary heir and legitimate successor of King Edward. This was the only manner in which the new monarch could gain the permanent obedience of his new subjects and make a stand against immoderate pretensions on the part of his followers. It was therefore not the tribe of the Normans but Duke William who had got possession of the country with a title from the pretended will of Edward, with the consent of the highest authority in the Church, and with the consent of the National Assembly. As a matter of fact, as well as of right, it was possible to treat the country in this way as a personal acquisition, as the "Seigneury," "Dominion," terra regis Anglica, terra mea a designation frequently found in the records.

The mutual relations of the Saxons and the Francigenæ, however, remained hostile for many generations. The conquered people repaid the haughtiness of the victors by attempts at rebellion; and when these failed, by silent animosity towards the new lords and their French customs.

§ 2. Organization of the Military System and Government on a Basis of Land Tenure

The best way of considering the Norman settlement is therefore to regard it as a permanent military occupation which (with its numerous fortifications and maintenance of a paid soldiery) led to a thoroughly new military organization. But this change also corresponded to the actual needs of the country, because the Anglo-Saxon commonwealth had fallen through internal dissension, a defective organization of its military array, and a faulty distribution of the military burdens. In order to regain the lost unity and strength, the system of resting military service upon popular levies and personal vassalage had to be abolished and the entire landed property, so far as it had to bear the burdens of military charges, took the form of property held on condition that the

specified military services should be discharged. This marks the period of the feudal system, which may be said to date from the time when the feature of military burdens became predominant in landed property, and the grants, to which the character of payment of military services was attached, gave the warrior a permanently dependent position. England is the only state in which through special circumstances there was possible a systematic application of this principle which made the State, represented in the person of the king, the sole proprietor, hence permitting a fresh redistribution of all the land on the clear basis of dependent and derivative tenure.

estates.

It was the position taken by William as the legitimate successor to King Edward which settled this question for England. In treating as rebels King Harold and those who fought on his side, as well as the Saxons who afterwards rebelled or opposed William, a legal justification was found for a general confiscation of landed The inheritance of Edward and the possessions of the family of Harold were immediately seized as royal demesnes. By virtue of grants the leaders of the conquering host entered into the possessions of the defeated Saxons. The great vassals of William could either immediately furnish their own contingents charged upon their land grants or do so by subinfeudation, by which means a portion of the Saxon thegns, who had not been compromised in the war, could remain as undervassals upon their old estates. In a like manner the possessions of the churches and monasteries were retained and even increased.

The object that the royal administration now pursued for a century was to impose on the whole mass of new and old possessors the obligation to do military service and bear the burdens of the state. The unit of land, known as the knight's fee, on which a specific obligation rested, tended to be the five-hide holding of the Anglo-Saxon period, yet with a stricter rating according to the value of the product of the particular unit. The charge resting upon this military land unit was the furnishing at royal command of one heavily-armed horseman for forty days' service in the year (servitium unius militis).1

The exact period at which this universal systematization took place is a matter of controversy, but it seems highly probable that William the Conqueror did most of it in his day. Although it is an error to regard the system as rigid at any particular time

On tenure by knight's service and tenure in general, see Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, Vol. I, Bk. II.

or incapable of infinite modifications by private arrangements, there are certain general legal incidents marking the relations of lord and vassal in this complex land-holding system.

83. The Legal Incidents of the Feudal System

1. Conditional Hereditability of the Grant. - According to Norman-French custom, conditional hereditability has been regarded as the rule also in Anglo-Norman fiefs. Yet the form of the grant of the land, dedi et concessi tibi et heredibus tuis, only means a concession amounting to continuous payment for military service rendered. The enfeoffment of the heir only took place conditionally upon his being a man capable of fighting, and that of the heiress. only where there was a failure of males and in order that she might marry a warrior acceptable to the military chief. Accordingly it was natural that the feoffee could neither sell nor mortgage the estate, nor make it a security for his debts, nor dispose of it by will; and hence followed the further legal incidents.

2. The Relevium, Relief. As an acknowledgment that the vassal possessed the estate on condition of doing military service, a certain quantity of weapons and accoutrements or a sum of money was rendered by Norman custom, when a change of the person bound to service took place. Out of this change proceeded a fixed payment in recognition of the conditional tenure. In a certain sense the prima seisina, primer-seizin, is in addition to this. For greater security the king as lord of the fee could take possession of the estate after the death of the vassal until the successor proved his title, or, where necessary, pleaded and obtained his right and bound himself to pay the relevium. According to old feudal custom, the lord could in this way claim a whole year's income.

3. Feudal Wardship and Marriage. As it is an act of favor on the part of the feudal lord to give the fee to one personally incapable of performing military service, so he can take back the estate when the heir is a minor, exercise in person or through a custos the rights belonging to it, and continue this wardship, enjoying the profits, until the completion of the heir's twenty-first year, without rendering any account. As tutor legitimus of the ward's person he might also give the heir in marriage when the latter had arrived at a proper age and on such an occasion could exact money payments a custom which arose under circumstances when the nearest agnate was wont to drive a bargain con